Search results

For a long time, the discussion about the impact of economic globalisation on the full employment/generous welfare state policies pursued by social democratic governments was characterised by doom and gloom. Glib neo-liberal arguments about the impossibility of maintaining social democratic policies, that were presumably hindering competitiveness through excessive wages and taxes in the new international environment were difficult to counter, because social democrats could not resort to an equally elaborate and internally consistent economic doctrine that could substitute for evidence, and the evidence was not yet in to counter these arguments on empirical grounds. Recently, careful and comprehensive comparative studies have provided evidence that, despite undeniable problems posed by economic internationalisation, social democratic welfare states and employment regimes have proven to be highly resilient (Scharpf and Schmidt, 2000; Huber and Stephens, 2001). Indeed, some kinds of traditional social democratic policy, such as an emphasis on labour mobilisation through active labour market policy and social services that make it possible to combine labour force participation with raising children, and an emphasis on human capital formation have facilitated adaptation to the new economic conditions. Moreover, newly available data on skill distribution (OECD/HRDC, 2000) and income distribution (LIS) suggest that the egalitarian thrust characteristic of social democratic policy has made an important contribution to raising literacy skills at the bottom, which in turn facilitates the integration of the entire labour force into productive activities that are competitive in high-quality markets.

The nature & implications of recent developments in Latin American welfare states are discussed, with a particular focus on Chile, Brazil, Argentina, & Costa Rica. Social policy in Latin America is currently divided between the neoliberal model, characterized by market-driven forces, privatization, individualism, & expansion of inequality, & the social democratic model, which emphasizes market control, public provision of services, & increased equality. Although all of Latin America experienced a similar economic crisis during the 1980s, different countries adopted vastly diverse social & economic policies in reaction. Chile pursued the most radical neoliberal strategies resulting in a short-term improvement in capital markets & long-term threats to the social & economic security of a rapidly expanding poor &/or unemployed population. Brazil implemented a selective mix of neoliberal & social democratic policies, while Costa Rica moved toward a universalistic welfare state. Despite the advantages & necessity of welfare-oriented development strategies, it is suggested that these policies cannot succeed without increased state revenues. The specific requirements of a Latin American welfare strategy are briefly reviewed. 8 Tables, 63 References. T. Sevier

This article examines the crisis of the social democratic model in the four countries (Austria, Norway, Finland, and Sweden) in which social democracy was most successful in maintaining and even extending its two central achievements—full employment and the institutional welfare state—through the end of the 1980s. Four major conclusions emerge from the analysis. First, supply side measures, more so than demand management, were central to the employment and growth models pursued by social democracy prior to the early 1970s. Second, the increasing trade openness contributed little to the recent problems of social democracy. By contrast, financial internationalization and deregulation and the multinationalization of capital undermined important features of the supply and demand sides of the models. Third, changes in the international and domestic economies have weakened centralized bargaining. Fourth, governments in the three Nordic countries made serious mistakes in economic policy, which greatly aggravated their difficulties.

Drawing on a framework developed by Geoffrey Garrett in his recent book Partisan Politics in the Global Economy, I examine the "policy space" that is available for the social democratic project in the UK. Garrett is optimistic about the possibilities for reformism: he emphasizes the ability of an "encompassing" labor movement to exchange wage restraint for reformist policies. Given the absence of such an encompassing labor movement in the UK, his conclusion apparently offers little support to those seeking reformist measures in these circumstances. I discuss three reasons why Garrett's model may still be applicable in the British context. First, social democrats may be able to offer policies desirable to capital. Second, wage moderation may be possible without the existence of an encompassing labor movement. Third, & most ambitious, it may be possible to develop an encompassing labor movement within the UK. My tentative conclusion is that a variant of the Garrett model is potentially a plausible one for a reformist party in the UK. 2 Tables, 50 References. Adapted from the source document.

Drawing on a framework developed by Geoffrey Garrett in his recent book Partisan Politics in the Global Economy, I examine the 'policy space' that is available for the social democratic project in the United Kingdom. Garrett is optimistic about the possibilities for reformism: he emphasises the ability of an 'encompassing' labour movement to exchange wage restraint for reformist policies. Given the absence of such an encompassing labour movement in the United Kingdom, his conclusion apparently offers little support to those seeking reformist measures in these circumstances. I discuss three reasons why Garrett's model may still be applicable in the British context. First, social democrats may be able to offer policies desirable to capital. Second, wage moderation may be possible without the existence of an encompassing labour movement. Third, and most ambitious, it may be possible to develop an encompassing labour movement within the United Kingdom. My tentative conclusion is that a variant of the Garrett model is potentially a plausible one for a reformist party in the United Kingdom.

This article analyses key positions of the critique of the social-democratic economic model. The critique is associated with the excessive role of the state, with planning, with increasing obstacles in the way of conducting business, and with the ineffectiveness of the educational system. Using as an example the functioning of the Scandinavian economic system, which in recent decades has made significant advances in constructing a just and resilient society of universal well-being, the author presents counter-arguments in defence of the effectiveness of socialdemocratic methods of administering the economic system. The work concludes that when subjected to deeper analysis, the critique of the social-democratic model in many cases lacks objectivity, while the results of the functioning of this system have been extremely positive. The successes of the social-democratic model in the Scandinavian countries have been particularly evident in the qualitative parameters of the development of society (the development of human potential, the quality and scope of medical and educational services, and the care shown by the economic system for the environment).

Abstract The social welfare system in Brazil can be compared with the European social democratic model in three historical periods, despite the specificities and differences. The period of 1930-1964 will address the importance of the concept of citizenship regulated to the definition of social rights in Brazil and compare it with the development of national citizenship and the role of trade unions in the welfare state in Europe. The period of 1964-1985 will present the structure of the military regime's social policy while in Europe there was a democratic environment with universal social rights and social participation as the basis for the system of social welfare. The period after 1985, with emphasis on the second phase of social reform initiated after the Real Plan (1994), will highlight the more generous and universalizing vision of social rights. This period will be important to compare as Europe, at that time, questioned the material foundation and the design of the welfare state while aiming to review some grounds to keep it as a pattern of social solidarity. Key words: Citizenship - Rights - Equality - Democracy - Inequality. ; Resumo O regime de bem-estar social no Brasil pode ser comparado com o modelo social-democrata europeu em três períodos históricos, apesar das especificidades e diferenças que aqui adquiriu. No período 1930-1964, serão abordadas a importância da concepção de cidadania regulada para a definição de direitos sociais no Brasil e a comparação com o desenvolvimento da cidadania nacional e o papel dos sindicatos no welfare state na Europa. No período 1964-1985, será apresentada a forma como se estruturou a política social do regime militar, enquanto, na Europa, havia um ambiente democrático, com direitos sociais universais e participação social como bases do regime de bem-estar social. No período após 1985, com ênfase na fase da segunda reforma social iniciada pós-Plano Real (1994), será destacada a visão mais generosa e universalizante de direitos sociais. Para esse período, será importante apontar como, na Europa, nesse momento, se questionaram as bases materiais e a concepção do welfare state, visando, ao mesmo tempo, revisar alguns fundamentos para mantê-lo como padrão de solidariedade social.Palavras-chave: cidadania; direitos; igualdade; democracia; desigualdade. AbstractThe social welfare system in Brazil can be compared with the European social democratic model in three historical periods, despite the specificities and differences. The period of 1930-1964 will address the importance of the concept of citizenship regulated to the definition of social rights in Brazil and compare it with the development of national citizenship and the role of trade unions in the welfare state in Europe. The period of 1964-1985 will present the structure of the military regime's social policy while in Europe there was a democratic environment with universal social rights and social participation as the basis for the system of social welfare. The period after 1985, with emphasis on the second phase of social reform initiated after the Real Plan (1994), will highlight the more generous and universalizing vision of social rights. This period will be important to compare as Europe, at that time, questioned the material foundation and the design of the welfare state while aiming to review some grounds to keep it as a pattern of social solidarity.Key words: Citizenship - Rights - Equality - Democracy - Inequality