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.


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.


Author(s):  
Ido de Haan

One of the most striking features of Europe's postwar history is the emergence of the welfare state. Even though the first social policies had already been introduced in the 1880s, and while many of the organisational forms that became entrenched after 1945 were initiated in the first half of the twentieth century, the size and impact of the postwar welfare state was unprecedented. Even more remarkable was the widespread consensus with which structural social and economic reforms were implemented. The deep political and social rifts of the 1920s and 1930s and the lack of trust in democratic means to overcome these confrontations had been replaced by the acceptance of an interventionist state and parliamentary democracy as the way to solve conflicts about the way in which this state distributed social goods. The swift and consensual growth of the welfare state is also remarkable because most western European countries were governed by conservative governments, or coalition governments in which Social Democrats had to share power with conservative Christian Democrats and Liberals.


Author(s):  
Philip Manow

The explanatory model behind Esping-Andersen’s ‘three regime’-typology points to the variance in ‘political coalition building in the transition from a rural economy to a middle-class society’, particularly to whether or not farmers and workers were able to form coalitions during this transition. The article reconsiders the relation between party systems and welfare state regimes. It highlights the systematic variation among European party systems with respect to the electoral success of communist parties. The electoral strength of communist parties is argued to be related to the intensity of past conflicts between the nation state and the Catholic Church in the mono-denominational countries of Europe’s South. These conflicts rendered a coalition between pious farmers and the anticlerical worker’s movement unthinkable and furthered the radicalization of the left. The article argues that the split on the left explains much of what is distinctive about southern Europe’s postwar Political Economies.


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.”


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document