The Netherlands: A Passive Social Democratic Welfare State in a Christian Democratic Ruled Society

2019 ◽  
pp. 551-573
Author(s):  
Kees Van Kersbergen ◽  
Uwe Becker
1999 ◽  
Vol 17 (4) ◽  
pp. 52-73 ◽  
Author(s):  
Wolfgang Schroeder ◽  
Rainer Weinert

The approach of the new millennium appears to signal the demiseof traditional models of social organization. The political core ofthis process of change—the restructuring of the welfare state—andthe related crisis of the industrywide collective bargaining agreementhave been subjects of much debate. For some years now inspecialist literature, this debate has been conducted between theproponents of a neo-liberal (minimally regulated) welfare state andthe supporters of a social democratic model (highly regulated). Thealternatives are variously expressed as “exit vs. voice,” “comparativeausterity vs. progressive competitiveness,” or “deregulation vs.cooperative re-regulation.”


Author(s):  
Sven Schreurs

Abstract In academia and beyond, it has become commonplace to regard populist parties – in particular, those on the radical right – as the archetypical embodiment of politics of nostalgia. Demand-side studies suggest that nostalgic sentiments motivate populist radical-right (PRR) voting and welfare chauvinist attitudes, yet systematic analyses of the nostalgic discourse that these parties promote have not been forthcoming. This paper seeks to fill that lacuna by analysing how the Freedom Party of Austria, the Dutch Party for Freedom and the Sweden Democrats framed the historical fate of the welfare state in their electoral discourse between 2008 and 2018. It demonstrates that their commitment to welfare chauvinism finds expression in a common repertoire of “welfare nostalgia,” manifested in the different modes of “reaction,” “conservation” and “modernisation.” Giving substance to a widespread intuition about PRR nostalgia, the paper breaks ground for further research into nostalgic ideas about social policy.


Author(s):  
Patricia Gómez-Costilla ◽  
Carmen García-Prieto ◽  
Noelia Somarriba-Arechavala

AbstractThe European population is aging and their declining capacity makes older Europeans more dependent on the availability of care. Male and female health needs at older ages are different, yet there are contradictory results on the study of gender inequalities in health among the older European population. The aim of this article is twofold: first, we study whether there is a general gender health gap at older ages across Europe. Secondly, we analyze the existence of an increasing or decreasing universal association between the gender health gap and age among the older European population or whether, by contrast, this depends on the type of welfare state. To achieve these goals, we use data from the Survey on Health, Ageing and Retirement in Europe (SHARE) for respondents aged 50 and over in 2015, and we carry out several multilevel random intercept logistic regressions for European countries. Our results show that when we split European countries into groups according to the type of welfare state, we only find a significant gender health gap in older people in Southern and Social Democratic countries. Some differences have been found in the links between the gender health gap and age among European countries. Old women report worse health than men at all ages in Southern countries while in Social Democratic states it is only true for women aged 80 and over. In Bismarckian states there are barely any gender differences, while the gender health gap has no clearly defined bias. Between the ages of 60 and 79, men from Eastern European countries report poorer health, while after 80 it is women who report poorer health. In general, we found the widest gender inequalities in health for the oldest population group, especially in Southern and Eastern European countries.


2011 ◽  
Vol 45 (4) ◽  
pp. 430-444 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mara Yerkes ◽  
Romke van der Veen

2015 ◽  
Vol 21 (4) ◽  
pp. 577-595 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kosta JOSIFIDIS ◽  
John B. HALL ◽  
Novica SUPIC ◽  
Emilija BEKER PUCAR

This paper examines the nature of changes within the EU–15 welfare states affected by the 2008 crisis. We try to answer the question of whether the differences that exist among different welfare state regimes, according to prevailing welfare state typologies, lead to different responses to the consequences of the crisis. Welfare state regimes are the result of different institutional perceptions of social risks hence it is realistic to expect specific responses to the effects of crisis among different welfare state regimes, and similar responses among the countries that belong to the same welfare state regimes. In order to recognize convergent vs. divergent processes, we perform a comparative analysis of the dynamics of the key welfare state determinants of the EU–15 countries, grouping according to welfare state regimes, in the pre-crisis and crisis periods. The results indicate that institutional rigidity and inherent inertia has remained a key factor of convergent welfare state processes in countries that belong to the Social Democratic and Corporatist welfare state regimes. Deviations from such a course are the most evident in the Mediterranean welfare state regimes, especially in Greece and Portugal where austerity measures have been formulated under the strong influence of the Troika.


2018 ◽  
Vol 17 (3) ◽  
pp. 745-765 ◽  
Author(s):  
Stefan Svallfors ◽  
Anna Tyllström

Abstract In this article, we analyse the striking resilience of for-profit care and service provision in what has often been seen as the archetypical social democratic welfare state: Sweden. We focus on the strategic discursive activities of private companies and their business organizations as they try to influence perceptions, organize actors and facilitate communication to defend profit-making in the welfare sector in the face of increasing conflict and opposition. We argue that taking such organized action into account changes dominant perceptions about the characteristics of the Swedish political economy, and carries important lessons for analyses of changes in the organization of the welfare state in general.


Author(s):  
Martin Lodge ◽  
Kai Wegrich

Decisive fiscal squeeze might surprise observers of the German political system, insofar as party political dynamics, welfare state complexity, and intergovernmental financial arrangements are commonly said to inhibit decisive reforms. This chapter traces the fiscal squeeze carried out in post-unification Germany in the 1990s and 2000s and highlights how the politics of fiscal squeeze had damaging political consequences for the Social Democratic Party. Squeeze at the federal government level was largely about ‘natural wastage’ in staff numbers and targeted cutbacks. The welfare state witnessed considerable reform as a result of cumulating pressures resulting from unification, triggering significant political consequences. Finally, squeezing at the level of the intergovernmental fiscal transfers reflected attempts to contain fiscal pressures on local governments, and wider pressures within the system of German federalism, leading to the creation of a constitutional ‘debt brake’ on public budgets.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document