scholarly journals Welfare State Regime Life Courses: The Development of Western European Welfare State Regimes and Age-Related Patterns of Educational Inequalities in Self-Reported Health

2010 ◽  
Vol 40 (3) ◽  
pp. 399-420 ◽  
Author(s):  
Clare Bambra ◽  
Gopalakrishnan Netuveli ◽  
Terje A. Eikemo

This article uses data from three waves of the European Social Survey (2002, 2004, 2006) to compare educational inequalities in self-reported health (good vs. bad) and limiting longstanding illness in six age groups based on decade of birth (1930s–1980s) in 17 countries, categorized into four welfare state regimes (Anglo-Saxon, Bismarckian, Scandinavian, Southern). The authors hypothesized that health inequalities in these age groups would vary because of their different welfare state experiences—welfare state regime life courses—both temporally, in terms of different phases of welfare state development (inequalities smaller among older people), and spatially, in terms of welfare state regime type (inequalities smaller among older Scandinavians). The findings are that inequalities in health tended to increase, not decrease, with age. Similarly, inequalities in health were not smallest in the Scandinavian regime or among the older Scandinavian cohorts. In keeping with the rest of the literature, the Bismarckian and Southern regimes had smaller educational inequalities in health. Longitudinal analysis that integrates wider public health factors or makes smaller comparisons may be a more productive way of analyzing cross-national variations in health inequalities and their relationship to welfare state life courses.

2012 ◽  
Vol 34 (6) ◽  
pp. 858-879 ◽  
Author(s):  
Matthias Richter ◽  
Katharina Rathman ◽  
Saoirse Nic Gabhainn ◽  
Alessio Zambon ◽  
William Boyce ◽  
...  

2017 ◽  
Vol 51 (9) ◽  
pp. 1425-1454 ◽  
Author(s):  
Marie Østergaard Møller ◽  
Helena Olofsdotter Stensöta

In frontline bureaucracy research, the dominant view holds that frontline workers resist managerial pressure to “blame the poor” by bending the rules based on moral considerations, a practice labeled “citizen agency.” We suggest that frontline responses to managerial pressure are filtered through welfare state regime type. Based on in-depth study of caseworker reasoning in Sweden and Denmark, we find a “structural problem explanation” that sees reasons for clients seeking support as rooted in the structures of society—not in the individual client. We find and present two narratives hitherto not problematized in frontline bureaucracy research: the “statesperson” and the “professional.”


2018 ◽  
Vol 38 (11/12) ◽  
pp. 956-972
Author(s):  
Arnaud Dupray ◽  
Anne-Marie Daune-Richard ◽  
Hiroatsu Nohara

Purpose The purpose of this paper is to explore the patterns and determinants of the division of household tasks within couples in countries under different welfare-state regimes. Design/methodology/approach The paper investigates data on “urban middle- and upper-class” couples living in New York, Paris or Tokyo area, from a 2007 international comparative time-budget survey carried out at the initiative of the Rengo-Soken Research Institute. Each partner was interviewed separately, offering a unique statistical source for analysing the organisation of domestic time. Findings The results shed light on the degree of proximity among the three populations in their housework-sharing arrangements. Greater parity in partners’ housework time is found for the New York couples, regardless of their occupational activity. In Paris and especially in Tokyo, other demands on the partners’ time and the contribution each makes to the household income both impact the actual division of household labour. Research limitations/implications The partners’ gender ideology was not elicited, and inclusion of lower-class couples could change certain results. However, the findings attest to the strong role that welfare-state regime plays in shaping housework time allocation. Originality/value Unlike other international comparisons, the survey used enables us to ensure strong comparability of measures. The welfare-state regime and family model frameworks clearly highlight the interplay between individual determinants and the institutional context.


2009 ◽  
Vol 17 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Else-Karin Grøholt ◽  
Espen Dahl ◽  
Jon Ivar Elstad

This issue of the Norwegian Journal of Epidemiology is based on the research conference Health Inequalities and the Welfare State at the Soria Moria Conference Center in Oslo, Norway, October 10-11 2006. The main purpose of the conference was to support, stimulate, disseminate and contribute to research in Norway on social inequalities in health. Nine papers are included in this issue, in addition to this introduction. One paper is based on one of the keynote lectures, while the other eight papers demonstrate some of the themes and approaches in current Norwegian research on socioeconomic health inequalities. Most of the articles have been authored by researchers who are working on a doctoral thesis or have recently attained their doctoral degree. The papers cluster into four groups. One cluster has a common denominator in intervention and policies to reduce health inequalities. A second focuses on marginalised groups, whereas a third cluster draws attention to the possible impact of the social context on individual health. The last paper addresses health inequalities among adolescents. The main focus of the Soria Moria conference was how and why social health inequalities continue to exist in the Norwegian society with a long tradition of a social democratic welfare model. We are pleased to note that health inequalities are becoming a prioritised health policy issue in Norway, and hope this issue of the Norwegian Journal of Epidemiology will contribute to a sharper focus on monitoring of, research on, and interventions to reduce social inequalities in health.


2014 ◽  
Vol 30 (3) ◽  
pp. 217-230 ◽  
Author(s):  
Curt J. Pankratz

This paper argues that the concept of the liberal welfare state within welfare state regimes discourse fails to account for some important aspects of the historical development of liberalism. It is argued that two key aspects of liberalism have been neglected. First, that liberalism essentially arose in opposition to ascribed status, seeking to replace it with a form of “achieved” status. Second, that a major stream of historical liberalism sought to equalize individual opportunity by suggesting that the state should provide some basic social and economic supports to individuals in need. This paper uses OECD health data to identify welfare state clusters based on the measurement of welfare (rather than neo)liberalism. The emerging cluster model is then compared with other welfare state regime typologies with regard to its ability to predict important social and political outcomes. The paper concludes that the emerging “welfare-liberal” typology may be a better predictor of certain social and political outcomes than other regimes configurations, indicating the usefulness of considering alternative aspects of liberalism when examining welfare state regimes.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document