We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
To save content items to your account,
please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies.
If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account.
Find out more about saving content to .
To save content items to your Kindle, first ensure coreplatform@cambridge.org
is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings
on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part
of your Kindle email address below.
Find out more about saving to your Kindle.
Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations.
‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi.
‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.
This article analyzes the attitudes of Dutch employers toward social policy in the early twentieth century. Recent literature has evolved from an emphasis on power to an emphasis on preferences. Moving away from the traditional view that unions and social democrats forced social laws on employers, recent scholars suggest that firms saw specific advantages in the introduction of social laws. However, I show that the attitudes of Dutch business representatives, rather than seeking these specific advantages, merely reflected a willingness to consult, inspired by their macroeconomic view. Employers expressed the wish to attain an organized form of capitalism and accepted regulated forms of codetermination. Once the consultative platforms were in place, employers pursued strategic goals, such as labor peace and disciplining the unions. This paved the way for accepting welfare state expansion. In sum, mid-twentieth century business interests were strongly oriented toward coordinated capitalism.
Poverty, inequality and climate change are profoundly interconnected issues and represent grave threats to the future of our planet and civilization. Failure in one will result in failure in the other; thus, government responses to such threats must be meticulously coordinated, especially across environmental and welfare state programs. In recent years, a growing body of research has examined the links between these two domains, lauding the eco-welfare state as a viable path forward. As the literature on the eco-welfare state is at an early stage, this study proposes two essential theoretical and empirical contributions. First, it examines the most prominent theoretical interpretations of the concept of eco-welfare state and proposes a refined understanding. Second, using model-based cluster analysis for 42 countries, this study empirically unveils a global shift towards and the existence of an eco-welfare state.
This chapter explore Churchill’s contribution to the development of the British welfare state from the moment he entered the Cabinet in 1908 to his retirement as prime minister in 1955. It begins by examining the attitudes that shaped Churchill’s approach to social policy – a strong sense of the electoral salience of welfare, a desire to promote personal responsibility and self-help and a paternalistic concern for the ‘left-out millions’ – and then traces how these views shaped his policy and rhetoric from the Edwardian period onwards. It argues that Churchill played an important role in establishing social insurance and the ‘national minimum’ as defining concepts for the British welfare state, though the meaning of these concepts became more conservative over time – a shift which echoed Churchill’s own journey from ‘new Liberal’ firebrand to stalwart Conservative. Though Churchill’s interest in social questions was sporadic by the time he became prime minister, his focus on consumption and employment chimed with the instincts of many other Britons, and helped to shape the distinctive policy settlement which emerged during the 1940s and 1950s.
Since 2000, literature on West (EU15) and East-Central European (EU8) welfare states has focused on a set of ‘new social risks’ including insecure employment and income, population ageing, unsustainable social security systems, and large-scale international immigration. Our State-of-the-Art (SOTA) article brings Russia into the dialogue on ‘new social risks’. We show that broadly similar structural changes in industrial economies, labour markets and demographic patterns ended the post-World-War-Two (WWII) ‘Golden Age’ of welfare expansion in both the EU15 and communist states. Shared new social risks rose to the top of policy agendas. Governments responded mainly, though not exclusively, with liberalising, privatising and exclusionary policies. The SOTA compares their policy responses, specifically pension system reforms, demographic (pro-natalist and family) policies, and integration of immigrants. We find both convergence and divergence based on states’ differing welfare legacies. The conclusion considers path-departing ‘emergency Keynesian’ responses to the COVID-19 crisis, and renewed attention to Beveridge welfare models.
The degree to which disability benefit programs provide an adequate standard of living to those with work-limiting disabilities has long been overlooked in social policy research. This paper presents a framework for assessing disability-related decommodification and then applies that framework to an analysis of the Social Security Disability (SSD) programs in the United States. The paper draws on survey data from the Health and Retirement Study linked to administrative records from the Social Security Administration, and further compares the U.S. estimates to those from 27 other countries. The results indicate that more than 50 percent of older adults of working-age with work-disabilities in the U.S. do not receive SSD benefits, though rates of benefit receipt are higher than the average across other high-income countries. Those that receive SSD benefits, moreover, experience greater difficulty achieving an adequate standard of living, as measured by an index of financial security, than those with similar characteristics in the U.S. who do not receive disability benefits. The paper thus provides a framework for future policy research on benefit adequacy, while evaluating the availability and generosity of disability benefits in the U.S.
A Delphi technique was used to gather the opinions of animal welfare experts on the most appropriate measures for welfare assessment of farm animals. The experts were asked to consider measures that were directed towards the animal (animal-based), rather than measurement of their environment. This systematic approach was designed to achieve a degree of consensus of opinion between a large number of experts. Two rounds of postal questionnaires were targeted at people with expertise in one or more of the species of interest. The respondents suggested measures based upon observations of health status, behaviour, and examination of records. These measures reflect the animal's welfare state — in other words, how the animal is coping within the environment and husbandry system in which it lives. The measures for cattle, pigs and laying hens were categorised into 22, 23 and 28 aspects, respectively, with the highest ranking of importance being given to observation of lameness in dairy cattle and pigs and to observation of feather condition in laying hens. This Delphi study was the basis for the development of a series of protocols to assess the welfare state of dairy cattle, pigs and laying hens.
We study the extent and nature of Christian engagement in morality policy implementation by means of a comparative case study in Germany. In particular, we observe that the nature of engagement varies between unconnected and corresponding types of activities, and we explain this variation with the policy-specific goal congruence between religious organizations (ROs) and the state. Goal congruence, in turn, can be linked to Catholic and Protestant moral doctrines that tell us about ROs' position on morality issues. The study contributes to the literature on faith-based welfare by highlighting the role of moral doctrines as drivers of ROs' social engagement.
Social policy developed as a research field and academic discipline to ensure protection from social risks in the era of emerging capitalism and industrialization. While welfare states have successfully increased their citizens’ wellbeing, they have also contributed to the ecological crisis, while the shared scientific understanding of exceeded planetary boundaries and worsening climate change scenarios has not (yet) reshaped mainstream social policy research. In this article, we suggest that the established traditions in social policy research can nevertheless provide a solid ground for responding to the climate emergency and facilitating the sustainable transformation of society and the economy. With a focus on four of the research fields that are central in social policy scholarship – risks, citizenship, welfare regimes, and wellbeing – we develop an ecosocial research agenda. By discussing the classic and climate-adjusted understandings of these fields, we open future pathways for social policy research and invite scholars to engage with our proposed research agenda.
Despite growing interest in proposals for a universal basic income, little advance has been made in implementation. Here we explore policy options for an Australian Basic Income. Our analysis responds to concerns that Basic Income is both too expensive and too radical a departure from existing welfare state structures to be a feasible policy option. Drawing on policy and Basic Income scholarship we identify changes to Australia’s current means-tested benefits structures that move substantially towards Basic Income while remaining consistent with historic policy norms, which we call ‘affluence testing’. Using microsimulation we explore fiscal and distributional trade-offs associated with the implementation of an affluence-tested Basic Income. Our results suggest Basic Income has the potential to significantly reduce inequality and poverty while also requiring taxes to rise substantially. Placing these trade-offs in international context we find the policy would reduce inequality to levels similar to Nordic welfare states while increasing overall taxation to approximately the OECD average.
The recent economic crisis was a test case for many advanced countries to determine the capacity of their socio-economic model to cope with the challenges of globalisation and financial crash. From this perspective, the aim of this article is to explore whether the expansion of the welfare state should be seen as a barrier to economic growth and competitiveness, as ‘neoliberal’ economists often argue, or whether increasing public social provision might contribute to enhancing real income. After a comparative discussion of the evolution of different welfare models in developed countries, we advance our argument that public social spending is not a drain on competitiveness or an obstacle to economic efficiency. On the contrary, we explore the possibility that increasing welfare expenditure can stimulate economic growth along with lowering inequality, while the so-called ‘efficiency thesis’ (according to which globalisation needs to be accompanied by the retrenchment of welfare states in order to promote external competitiveness) produces worse economic performance and higher inequality. As a test of this hypothesis, we analyse empirical data on 34 Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development countries from 1990 to 2013. We use econometric analysis to indicate that the so-called ‘compensation thesis’ (a process whereby globalisation is regulated through expansion of welfare states) may contribute to real income dynamics, while greater income inequality may inhibit per capita gross domestic product growth.
Australian social policy has seen apparently contradictory developments over the period of economic restructuring. Social spending has increased based on a highly redistributive model while inequality has grown. This article explores the relationship between Australia’s experience of economic restructuring and the political dynamics of an emerging ‘dual welfare state’. Importantly, the article argues that Australian reformers did not reject the state per se, nor egalitarianism as an objective. Instead, reform sought to combine greater competition with compensation, generating larger inequalities in market incomes alongside growing social spending. The article explores how Labor combined neoclassical ideas about competition with a commitment to a ‘small state’ version of social democracy. This did moderate inequalities through the period of restructuring, but it also altered the dynamics of political contestation. The article provides two typologies to understand this political dynamic, arguing forms of marketisation opened the door to a political contest over the nature, rather than the extent, of public provision, while the model of targeting reinforced paternalist tendencies inherent in neoliberal reform.
Traditionally, older people have been the key targets of Australia’s targeted welfare state. Flat rate pensions and widespread home ownership have ensured relative equality in older life. However, in response to perceived fiscal pressures generated by population ageing, Australia has increasingly shifted its policy settings, encouraging private savings over public risk pooling. Private savings are increasingly supported by public subsidy through tax policy. This has led to overlapping policy priorities, as public subsidies are used both as incentives to promote savings and as social policy instruments to promote adequate living standards in retirement. This conflict is evident in recent policy reviews of taxation, public spending and pension policy. This article explores the development of this conflict and how it manifests in proposals for reform. We argue that the conflation of welfare and taxation goals increasingly creates a dual welfare state that promotes private provision at the expense of both equity and efficiency. We suggest that more explicit identification of the roles of tax policy, and the welfare implications of tax changes, would help to improve policy design.
This article analyses the development of Italian health policies in the post-Second World War period. Shortly after the setting up of the ‘Beveridge model’ and the creation of the British National Health Service, Italy also introduced a new approach to health, which became part of the Constitution. However, the implementation of the necessary reforms was delayed due to resistance from the country's institutions and government parties. The introduction of a radical health reform became possible only in 1978 through pressure generated from social conflicts, trade unions and left-wing parties. The implementation of the National Health Service encountered a number of obstacles due to the specific conditions of Italy, but also owing to changes at the international level. The neoliberal policies started in the 1980s introduced restrictions in health spending, the regionalisation and privatisation of services, and a new selective approach to health. In spite of these limitations and contradictions, the Italian healthcare system has been considerably successful, leading to strong improvements in health and to a life expectancy at birth among the longest in Europe. The recent developments – and the experience of the pandemic – confirm the important impact of a public, universal health service and, at the same time, the persistent policy efforts aimed at weakening its reach.
This chapter covers the development of social policies and the modern Welfare State. Welfare states represent recognition that the key welfare needs of the country will be met by the state through the provision of income transfers and key public services. Their development has been closely associated with the expansion of citizenship and human rights. In the UK the Poor Law was a long-lasting historical core on which the nation’s welfare state was built, and was associated with the important infrastructure of local authorities, health systems, and education along with the provision of payments in times of need. A well-functioning welfare state is important for the wellbeing of the population and has valuable redistributive roles. They provide social investment in children’s early lives and guard against social risks such as unemployment and poverty. They have the potential to assist economic growth and to provide the infrastructure and support for human capital, such as through the creation of a ‘healthy workforce’. Generally, the more egalitarian states perform better on a range of well-being measures. They remain a central pillar of the maintenance and improvement of the quality of life of people with disabilities associated with mental health conditions.
Here we examine governmental policies that affect how people with mental health conditions are treated in society. The development of UK mental health services has been closely associated with the evolution of social policies, the increasing role of the state in the provisions for the population’s well-being, and the ‘Welfare State’. The provision of poor relief, dating from the Elizabethan Poor Law to its Victorian revision, has dominated the care of people with mental health conditions, both within and outside of institutions. Until the nineteenth century, the British state played a minimal role in the care of mental ill-health, and the 1800s witnessed a substantial growth in publicly funded asylums. These County Asylums were Poor Law institutions and remained so into the twentieth century. The UK’s modern mental health services arose from the Beveridge welfare state reforms but carried with them much of the baggage of the Victorian Poor Laws. The close relationship between the welfare state and mental health services illustrates the importance of social policy provision relating to income, employment, housing, education, health, and personal social services, to the broader provision of services for people with mental health conditions and the running of effective mental health services.
This Element details how elites provide policy concessions when they face credible threats of revolution. Specifically, the authors discuss how the Bolshevik Revolution of 1917 and the subsequent formation of Comintern enhanced elites' perceptions of revolutionary threat by affecting the capacity and motivation of labor movements as well as the elites' interpretation of information signals. These developments incentivized elites to provide policy concessions to urban workers, notably reduced working hours and expanded social transfer programs. The authors assess their argument by using original qualitative and quantitative data. First, they document changes in perceptions of revolutionary threat and strategic policy concessions in early inter-war Norway by using archival and other sources. Second, they code, for example, representatives at the 1919 Comintern meeting to proxy for credibility of domestic revolutionary threat in cross-national analysis. States facing greater threats expanded various social policies to a larger extent than other countries, and some of these differences persisted for decades.
Chapter 1 introduces the central puzzle of implementing primary education in northern India, a least likely setting for programmatic service delivery. Despite having the same formal institutions and national policy framework for primary education, implementation varies remarkably across northern Indian states. After reviewing existing explanations, the chapter outlines the main argument, anchored around variation in informal bureaucratic norms, and foreshadows the theoretical contributions to comparative politics and development. It then presents the research design and methods, based on multilevel comparisons in four Indian states (Uttar Pradesh, Himachal Pradesh, Uttarakhand and Bihar). Using multiple field research methods, I trace the implementation process from state capitals down to the village primary schools, drawing on two and a half years of field research: participant observation inside bureaucracies; village ethnography; and 853 interviews and 103 focus group discussions. I conclude with an overview of the book’s remaining chapters.
Chapter 8 extends the book's argument to cases beyond northern India. It considers how bureaucratic norms shapes the delivery of primary education in four cases--the southern Indian state of Kerala, along with country cases of China, Finland and France, based on a close reading of secondary literature on bureaucratic development and education. The Kerala case demonstrates how deliberative bureaucracy has emerged in the historical context of social movement politics and private provision of schooling, yielding higher quality government services within India. The study of China offers insights on deliberative bureaucracy operates in a nondemocratic context, highlighting the adaptative capabilities of Chinese bureaucracy. The comparison of school education in Finland and France offers suggestive evidence for the divergent impacts of deliberative and legalistic bureaucracy across these advanced economies. Although the chapter's findings are provisional, the study of bureaucratic norms and services across a wide spectrum of sociopolitical contexts suggests the wider reach of the book's theoretical framework.
Liberal democracy arguably requires a sense of equal membership in a shared society, and in today’s world, this “shared society” is inextricably linked with ideas of nationhood. Defenders of majoritarian nationalism worry that this sense of membership in a shared national society is being eroded by multiculturalism, and argue that we must instead reaffirm the centrality of shared national identities, perhaps through “majority rights.” In this chapter, I argue that while the idea of a shared society is indeed important for liberal democracy, and that it will inevitably reflect ideas of nationhood, this is in fact an argument for strengthening, not weakening, multiculturalism and minority rights. The fact that membership claims are filtered through the lens of nationhood creates a series of formidable “membership penalties” for minorities. A robust commitment to multiculturalism and minority rights can be seen, not as a threat to the ideal of equal membership in a shared society, but as a remedy for membership penalties, and as a way of building a more inclusive ethics of membership.