The New Politics of the Welfare State

1996 ◽  
Vol 48 (2) ◽  
pp. 143-179 ◽  
Author(s):  
Paul Pierson

This essay seeks to lay the foundation for an understanding of welfare state retrenchment. Previous discussions have generally relied, at least implicitly, on a reflexive application of theories designed to explain welfare state expansion. Such an approach is seriously flawed. Not only is the goal of retrenchment (avoiding blame for cutting existing programs) far different from the goal of expansion (claiming credit for new social benefits), but the welfare state itself vastly alters the terrain on which the politics of social policy is fought out. Only an appreciation of how mature social programs create a new politics can allow us to make sense of the welfare state's remarkable resilience over the past two decades of austerity. Theoretical argument is combined with quantitative and qualitative data from four cases (Britain, the United States, Germany, and Sweden) to demonstrate the shortcomings of conventional wisdom and to highlight the factors that limit or facilitate retrenchment success.

2001 ◽  
Vol 21 (2) ◽  
pp. 153-172 ◽  
Author(s):  
DANIEL BÉLAND

This article challenges Paul Pierson's account on the (supposedly declining) role of labor unions in the ‘new politics of the welfare state’. More specifically, the text compares labor's influence on the French and the American politics of pension reform since the 1980s. The analysis of recent reforms undertaken in both countries demonstrates the impact of institutions and managerial settings on labor's political strategies. These institutional variables explain the fact that French unions have a much more direct influence on public pension reform than their American counterparts. In France, labor unions have an ideological ‘veto point’ derived from their integration into the management process. Their strong influence on the ‘new politics of the welfare state’ is undeniable: labor still matters.


2000 ◽  
Vol 33 (1) ◽  
pp. 7-36 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sylvia Bashevkin

Since the mid–1990s, comparative research on welfare state evolution has contrasted the contours of postwar social policy expansion with the parameters of contemporary programme retrenchment. Paul Pierson's 1994 account of pension, housing and income support policies in the United Kingdom and the United States during the Thatcher and Reagan years proposed two core arguments with this literature: first, welfare state expansion and contraction were governed by fundamentally different dynamics; and second, even conservative, ideologically committed political executives found it hard to impose radical social policy changes. Because “the welfare state has proved to be far more resilient than other key components of national political economies.” Pierson has maintained, “retrenchment is a distinctive and difficult political enterprise.”


2020 ◽  
Vol 30 (Supplement_5) ◽  
Author(s):  
◽  

Abstract Populist radical right (PRR) parties have been steadily expanding, not only in the number of supporters they gain and the seats they win in governments, but more importantly they have been increasingly elected into governmental coalitions as well as presidential offices. With the prominence of these authoritarian, nationalistic and populist parties, it is often difficult to discern what kind of policies they actually stand for. Particularly with regards to the welfare state and public health, it is not always clear what these parties stand for. At times they call for a reduction of health-related welfare provision, despite the fact that this goes against the will of the “ordinary people”, their core supporters; they often promote radical reductions of welfare benefits among socially excluded groups - usually immigrants, whom are most in need of such services; and finally they often mobilize against evidence-based policies. The purpose of this workshop is to present the PRRs actual involvement in health care and health policies across various countries. As PRR parties increase and develop within but also outside of the European continent it is necessary to keep track of their impact, particularly with regards to health and social policies. Although research surrounding PRR parties has significantly expanded over the last years, their impact on the welfare state and more specifically health policies still remains sparse. This workshop will present findings from the first comprehensive book connecting populist radical right parties with actual health and social policy effects in Europe (Eastern and Western) as well as in the United States. This workshop presents five country cases (Austria, Poland, the Netherlands, the United States) from the book Populist Radical Right and Health: National Policies and Global Trends. All five presentations will address PRR parties or leaders and their influence on health, asking the questions “How influential are PRR parties or leaders when it comes to health policy?” “Do the PRR actually have an impact on policy outcomes?” and “What is the actual impact of the health policies implemented by PRR parties or leaders?” After these five presentations, the participants of the workshop will be engaged in an interactive discussion. Key messages As the number of PRR parties increase worldwide and their involvement in national governments become inevitable, new light must be shed on the impact these political parties have on public health. Politics needs to become better integrated into public health research. The rise of PRR parties in Europe might have serious consequences for public health and needs to be further explored.


2005 ◽  
Vol 70 (6) ◽  
pp. 921-948 ◽  
Author(s):  
David Brady ◽  
Jason Beckfield ◽  
Martin Seeleib-Kaiser

Previous scholarship is sharply divided over how or if globalization influences welfare states. The effects of globalization may be positive causing expansion, negative triggering crisis and reduction, curvilinear contributing to convergence, or insignificant. We bring new evidence to bear on this debate with an analysis of three welfare state measures and a comprehensive array of economic globalization indicators for 17 affluent democracies from 1975 to 2001. The analysis suggests several conclusions. First, state-of-the-art welfare state models warrant revision in the globalization era. Second, most indicators of economic globalization do not have significant effects, but a few affect the welfare state and improve models of welfare state variation. Third, the few significant globalization effects are in differing directions and often inconsistent with extant theories. Fourth, the globalization effects are far smaller than the effects of domestic political and economic factors. Fifth, the effects of globalization are not systematically different between European and non-European countries, or liberal and non-liberal welfare regimes. Increased globalization and a modest convergence of the welfare state have occurred, but globalization does not clearly cause welfare state expansion, crisis, and reduction or convergence. Ultimately, this study suggests skepticism toward bold claims about globalization's effect on the welfare state.


1997 ◽  
Vol 14 (2) ◽  
pp. 231-255 ◽  
Author(s):  
Alan Wolfe ◽  
Jytte Klausen

Motivated by a deep sense that injustice and inequality are wrong, liberals and reformers in the Western political tradition have focused their energies on policies and programs which seek inclusion: extending the suffrage to those without property; seeking to treat women the same as men, and blacks the same as whites; trying to ensure that as few as possible are excluded from economic opportunity due to lack of resources. Under current conditions, such demands for inclusion take two primary forms, especially in the United States. One is a commitment to using the state to equalize the life chances of individuals. The other is a call for treating groups which have experienced discrimination with full respect. The former leads to the welfare state, while the latter is produced by, and in turn produces, what is commonly called identity politics, the politics of recognition, or the politics of presence.


2006 ◽  
Vol 30 (4) ◽  
pp. 479-500
Author(s):  
J. C. Herbert Emery

Some studies that address the decline of fraternal sickness insurance conclude that fraternal insurers were crowded out of the market by increasing government and commercial competition. This line of reasoning reinforces beliefs that government and commercial insurers were superior to fraternal providers and that voluntary insurance arrangements were deficient for addressing household income risks before the rise of the welfare state. This article shows that this interpretation is problematic. The largest sickness insurer in the United States, the Independent Order of Odd Fellows, dismantled its sick benefit arrangements between the 1860s and the 1920s not because of an inability to compete with the government and commercial insurers that were not in the market until well after 1920 but rather because of declining demand for the insurance within the membership.


1987 ◽  
Vol 8 (x) ◽  
pp. 263-275
Author(s):  
Richard Balme ◽  
Jeanne Becquart-Leclercq ◽  
Terry N. Clark ◽  
Vincent Hoffmann-Martinot ◽  
Jean-Yves Nevers

In 1983 we organized a conference on “Questioning the Welfare State and the Rise of the City” at the University of Paris, Nanterre. About a hundred persons attended, including many French social scientists and political activists. Significant support came from the new French Socialist government. Yet with Socialism in power since 1981, it was clear that the old Socialist ideas were being questioned inside and outside the Party and government—especially in the important decentralization reforms. There was eager interest in better ways to deliver welfare state services at the local level.


2016 ◽  
Vol 1 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Θεόδωρος Σακελλαρόπουλος ◽  
Χαράλαμπος Οικονόμου

The reforms of social protection and employment policies that took place in Greece over the past three decades were dictated mainly by domestic priorities and needs. Contrary to international tendencies, social protection reforms in Greece obeyed mainly to the need for expansion of the welfare state in new areas, in order to fill the structural and historical social deficits. Policies and initiatives of European inspiration were succesfull only in so far as they pointed towards a direction of further strengthening of the welfare state


Author(s):  
Zoltan J. Acs

This chapter traces the history of philanthropy and shows the extent to which it is woven into the very fabric of the American entrepreneurial experiment. In order to understand philanthropy as a viable system for recycling wealth and creating opportunity, it is worth probing the dynamics that have sustained philanthropic giving and the conditions under which it has prospered and wavered. After providing a historical background on philanthropy in the United States, the chapter considers the Giving Pledge, an idea put forth by Bill Gates and Warren Buffett that commits billionaires to give away one-half of their wealth in their lifetimes. It then looks at the origins of American generosity, along with volunteerism, associations, and self-reliance. It also discusses mass philanthropy, the welfare state and the persistence of philanthropy, political philanthropy, and the rationale behind philanthropy and charity.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document