Suchergebnisse

In Canada, three distinct models of federalism govern different social programmes: classical federalism, with programmes run exclusively by one level of government; shared costs federalism, with the federal government financially supporting provincial programmes; and joint-decision federalism, where formal approval by both levels of government is mandatory before any action can take place. Each of these models creates different decision rules, altering the mix of governments and ideologies at the bargaining table, redistributing power among those who have a seat at the table, and requiring different levels of consensus for action. The result has been three separate kinds of interactions between institutions and policy during the postwar era of welfare state expansion. As in the era of expansion, the new politics of social policy in the 'silver age' had to flow through the three distinctive institutional filters created by federal institutions, helping to explain the uneven impact of retrenchment in Canada. Exclusively federal programmes were unprotected by intergovernmental relations and fully exposed to shifts in national politics, with dramatic cuts especially in unemployment benefits. In contrast, joint-decision federalism helped protect contributory pensions from radical restructuring; while sharedcost federalism made it possible to preserve the basic model of the health care system, at least in respect of hospital, physician and diagnostic services, if not always in respect of the generosity of funding. ; Drei unterschiedliche Föderalismusmodelle charakterisieren Kanadas Sozialpolitik: Politikverflechtung, klassischer (dualer) Föderalismus und 'shared costs federalism'. Jedes dieser Modelle generiert unterschiedliche Entscheidungsregeln, Akteurs- und Machtkonstellationen sowie Konsensschwellen für politisches Handeln und hat folglich sowohl die Expansion des kanadischen Wohlfahrtsstaates als auch dessen Rückbau unterschiedlich beeinflusst. Während die Politikverflechtung auf dem Gebiet der beitragsfinanzierten Renten sowohl den Programmausbau als auch den –rückbau gebremst hat, wurden die ausschließlich vom Bund regulierten Programme sowohl in der Expansionsals auch in der Konsolidierungsphase maßgeblich von den politischen Kräfteverhältnissen auf der nationalen Ebene bestimmt. Der in der Gesundheitspolitik praktizierte shared costs federalism bot in der Expansionsphase Raum für sozialpolitische Innovationen auf der Provinzebene, die einem sozialdemokratischen Gesundheitssystem Vorschub leisteten. Dieses Modell blieb in seinen Grundzügen in der Rückbauphase zwar bestehen, gleichzeitig zog sich Ottawa jedoch aus der Finanzierung des Gesundheitswesens zurück.

The past 30 years have witnessed a dramatic change in the way Western democracies deal with ethnic minorities. In the past, ethnic diversity was often seen as a threat to political stability, and minorities were subject to a range of policies intended to assimilate or marginalize them. Today, many Western democracies have adopted a more accommodating approach. This is reflected in the widespread adoption of multiculturalism policies for immigrant groups, the acceptance of territorial autonomy and language rights for national minorities, and the recognition of land claims and self-government rights for indigenous peoples. We refer to these policies as 'multiculturalism policies' or MCPs. The adoption of MCPs has been controversial, for two reasons. The first is a philosophical critique, which argues that MCPs are inherently inconsistent with basic liberal-democratic principles. Since the mid-1990s, however, this philosophical debate has been supplemented by a second argument: namely, that MCPs make it more difficult to sustain a robust Welfare State (hereafter WS). Critics worry that such policies erode the interpersonal trust, social solidarity and political coalitions that sustain a strongly redistributive WS. This paper reviews the reasons why critics believe that MCPs weaken political support for redistribution, and then examines empirically whether the adoption of MCPs has, in fact, been associated with erosion of the WS. This examination involves two steps: we develop a taxonomy of MCPs and classify Western democracies as 'strong', 'modest' or 'weak' in their level of MCPs. We then examine whether the strength of MCPs is associated with the erosion of the WS during the 1980s and 1990s. The evolution of the WS is measured through change in four indicators: social spending as a percentage of GDP; the redistributive impact of taxes and transfers; levels of child poverty; and the level of income inequality. We find no evidence of a consistent relationship between the adoption of MCPs and the erosion of the WS. Our analysis has limits, and we hope it stimulates further research. Nevertheless, the preliminary evidence presented here is clear: the case advanced by critics of MCPs is not supported. The growing ethnic diversity of Western societies has generated pressures for the construction of new and more inclusive forms of citizenship and national identity. The evidence in this paper suggests that debates over the appropriateness of multiculturalism policies as one response to this diversity should not be preempted by unsupported fears about their impact on the WS.

Confronts the critical position that multiculturalist policies -- any policies that officially recognize & accommodate racial/ethnic diversity -- make it difficult to sustain a robust welfare state. Cross-national data are drawn on to investigate how well those countries adopting a strong multiculturalist policy regime have fared with respect to welfare provision relative to nations that have not adopted such regimes. Three main arguments against multiculturalist policies are addressed: (1) crowding out effect, (2) corroding effect, & (3) misdiagnosis effect. It is contended that none of these arguments is self-evident. Western democracies are classified as "strong," "modest," or "weak" in their enactment of multiculturalist policies, & then the strong states are compared to the modest & weak in terms of their welfare state performance. No evidence of a consistent relationship between the adoption of multiculturalist policies & the erosion of the welfare state is found. J. Zendejas

The impact of neoconservative ideas has varied considerably among Western nations. This paper examines some of the factors at work by exploring Canadian experience. Despite the election of conservative governments at the federal level and in several provinces, the conse quences for social policy have been more limited than elsewhere. The reasons for this pattern are embedded in distinctive features of the polit ical economy of the Canadian welfare state. Most importantly, the inten sity of linguistic and regional divisions within the fragile federal system, and the country's marginal position in the international trading regime constrain a radical neoconservative agenda. Studies of neoconservatism in states that are relatively large and integrated on the territorial dimension risk taking these factors for granted.

A travers une etude surtout du systeme de transferts fiscaux, nous tentons de comprendre le r6le redistributeur de 1'Etat canadien dans les annees contemporaines. Nous faisons l'inventaire des facteurs qui ont module la structure des politiques sociales diveloppee disle debut des annees soixante‐dix. Nous evaluons les modes de pression majeurs au cows des dix dernikres annCes en vue d'un changement dans les outils de redistribution, pourensuite mesurer I'impact de ces pressions sur la substance des politiques sociales et surle r d e redistributeur de I'Etat. Dans notre article, nous identifions un mouvement evident vers une plus grande inCgalitC dans les revenus du marche. Cependant, aucune des pressions structurelles ou ideologiques recentes sur I'Etat indique clairement une attCnuation des buts redistributeurs; les reactions ont CtC plut6t multi‐directionnelles et ont tendu vers un accroissement. Au milieu des annees quatre‐vingts, les changements de politiques n'avaient pas vraiment altC:C I'impact global des systkmes de transferts fiscaux, qui continuaient i neutraliser I'inPgalitC croissante au niveau des revenus du marche, suite i la plus profonde crise Cconomique des dernikres decennies. On est force de conclure quetoute interpretation des politiques sociales comme instruments de stabilite socio‐politique a encore force de loi au Canada.This paper examines the redistributive role of the Canadian state in the contemporary period, focussing in particular on the tax‐transfer system. The paper surveys the factorsthat shaped the structure of social policy that had developed by the early 19705, examines the major pressures for change in redistributive instruments during the last ten years, and then analyses the impact of those pressures on both the substance of social policy and the overall redistributive role of the state. The paper identifies clear movement towards greater inequality in market incomes. However, none of the structural or ideological pressures on the state in recent years points unambiguously towards a dramatic retreat from redistributive goals, and the policy response has tended to be multi‐directional and for the most part incremental. At the mid‐point of the 19805, policy changes had not significantly altered the overall impact of the tax‐transfer system, which continued largely to neutralize the growing inequality in market incomes inherent in the deepest economic crisis in over four decades. This evidence suggests that interpretations of social policy as an instrument of social and political stability in Canada retain considerable force.

AbstractThis article examines the failure of Canadian public policy in addressing racial economic inequality directly. Our analysis contends that Canada's key policy regimes were established in the postwar era, when approximately 96 per cent of Canadians were of European descent. As a result, the frameworks, problem definitions and policy tools inherited from that era were never intended to mitigate racial economic inequality. Moreover, this policy inheritance was deeply shaped by liberal universalism, which rejected racial distinctions in law and policy. These norms were carried forward into the more racially diverse Canada of today, where they have steered attention away from the use of racial categories in policy design. As a result, racial inequality was not a central priority during major policy reforms to core policy regimes in recent decades. In theoretical terms, our analysis contributes to Canadian Political Development through a sustained consideration of the intersecting roles of ideational frameworks, path dependency and policy inertia.