New Global Challenges and Welfare State Restructuring in East Asia: Continuity and Change

Author(s):  
Gyu-Jin Hwang
Author(s):  
Timo Fleckenstein ◽  
Soohyun Christine Lee

The welfare states of Japan, South Korea, and Taiwan were built by conservative elites to serve the project of late industrialization, and for this reason the East Asian developmental welfare state focused its resources on those who were deemed most important for economic development (especially male industrial workers). Starting in the 1990s and increasingly since the 2000s, the developmental welfare state has experienced a far-reaching transformation, including the expansion of family policy to address the post-industrial challenges of female employment participation and low fertility. This chapter assesses social investment policies in East Asia, with a focus on family policy and on the South Korean case, where the most comprehensive rise of social investment policies were observed.


2003 ◽  
Vol 174 ◽  
pp. 537-538
Author(s):  
Dafydd Fell

Taiwan studies suffer from an overemphasis on cross-straits relations and national identity, making Christian Aspalter's Democratization and Welfare State Development in Taiwan a refreshing change. After his previous comparative publication, Conservative Welfare States in East Asia, Aspalter offers readers the first English language book-length publication explaining the development of Taiwan's welfare state.


2014 ◽  
Vol 13 (2) ◽  
pp. 301-315 ◽  
Author(s):  
John Hudson ◽  
Stefan Kühner ◽  
Nan Yang

This article rounds off the themed section by reviewing broader debates within welfare state modelling relevant to Greater China. More specifically, it examines the now well-established literature around the East Asian ‘model’ of welfare, and related debates on the notion of a ‘productive welfare’ model. In so doing, it challenges simplistic classifications that present the region as representing a single model of welfare and, instead, highlights the diversity of welfare provision found within both Greater China and East Asia more generally. Building on the authors’ earlier published work comparing East Asian welfare systems with those found across the OECD, it also challenges claims that the region is home to a distinct ‘productive’ model of welfare. The article ends by highlighting some key drivers that will shape future debates.


2011 ◽  
Vol 66 (7) ◽  
pp. e23-e23 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ying-Chih Chuang ◽  
Kun-Yang Chuang ◽  
You-Rong Chen ◽  
Bo-Wen Shi ◽  
Tzu-Hsuan Yang

1968 ◽  
Vol 9 (1) ◽  
pp. 1-11 ◽  
Author(s):  
C. D. Cowan

That view of the history of maritime South East Asia which fixed a rigid dividing line in 1511 or 1600, and regarded the assertion of European dominance in the area as marking the frontier between traditional and modern history, has long ago been discredited and discarded. It led to the treatment of the earlier history of Malaya and Indonesia as a mere prelude to the coming of the Europeans, or at least as an era without relevance to later events, to which special criteria must be applied. The later history was treated predominantly as the story of European activities and rivalries, and purely western criteria were applied even to indigenous themes. All this is now regarded as unscientific, and labelled ‘Europe-centric’. Few, if any, contemporary historians would challenge this judgment so far as the internal history of Malaya and Indonesia and their component parts are concerned, and, though there is still ample room for discussion as to its application in practice, this paper does not seek to re-open the debate. It is concerned not so much with the development of maritime South East Asian society, or with the history of individual states within what are now Malaysia and Indonesia, as with the relations of these states with each other.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document