Dopo la poderosa espansione delle pensioni nei Trente Glorieuses 1945-75, dai primi anni Novanta una lunga serie di riforme prevalentemente sottrattive ha radicalmente trasformato l'architettura previdenziale italiana. L'articolo adotta pertanto una prospettiva intergenerazionale al fine di valutare come e in quale misura è mutato lo scenario previdenziale per le giovani generazioni, individuando nell'equità intra-generazionale il tallone d'Achille di un sistema che prevede requisiti di pensionamento severi – e di fatto regressivi – e penalizza fortemente i lavoratori con carriere frammentate anche per effetto di un cattivo 'incastro' tra previdenza pubblica e complementare. ; After the remarkable expansion of pensions during the Trente Glorieuses (1945-75), a long series of reforms has radically transformed the Italian pension architecture. The article therefore adopts an intergenerational perspective in order to assess how, and to what extent, the pension scenario for the young generations has changed. It concludes that equity represents the Achilles' heel of a system which presents tight—even regressive— eligibility conditions, and strongly penalizes workers with fragmented careers also due to a bad correlation between the public and supplementary pension systems.
A latecomer to supplementary funded pension provision, Italy's multi-pillarisation plan was launched in the 1990s under extremely adverse conditions. Supplementary schemes were expected to achieve universal coverage relying primarily on second pillar occupational pension funds. Twenty-five years after its launch, the comprehensive plan can hardly be called successful with respect to both coverage and the relative importance of second and third pillar institutions. Extreme variation in coverage rates between occupational categories and across economic sectors suggests, however, that these developments cannot be merely interpreted as a consequence of institutional resilience and path-dependent dynamics. The article applies an 'actor-centred institutionalist' framework to respond to three main questions. What explains the still limited coverage of supplementary pillars in Italy? What factors account for the prominent role played by third pillar pension schemes in contrast to policy-makers' original intentions? Which factors allow us to understand the significant variation in coverage across both occupational categories and economic sectors? ; Le plan italien en matiere de pension a plusieurs piliers, qui marque une entree tardive du pays dans la logique des pensions complementaires, a ete´ adopte´ dans les anne´es 1990 dans des conditions extremement defavorables. Les regimes complementaires etaient censes fournir une couverture universelle en se basant essentiellement sur le second pilier des fonds de pension professionnelle. Vingt-cinq ans plus tard, le plan dans son ensemble peut difficilement etre qualifie´ de succes, tant en termes de couverture que d'importance relative des institutions du second et du troisieme pilier. Les differences considerables dans les taux de couverture selon les categories professionnelles et les secteurs economiques suggerent toutefois que ces evolutions ne peuvent etre simplement interprete´es comme la consequence d'une resilience institutionnelle, et de dynamiques propres au chemin suivi. L'article applique un cadre « institutionnaliste centre´ sur l'acteur » pour repondre a trois questions essentielles: qu'est-ce qui explique la couverture encore limitee des piliers complementaires en Italie ? Quels facteurs expliquent le role essentiel jouè par les regimes de pension du troisieme pilier, a` rebours des intentions initiales des decideurs politiques? Quels facteurs nous permettent de comprendre les variations considerables de couverture entre categories professionnelles et entre secteurs economiques?
The «pension package» included in the 2017 Stability Law includes several measures which mark discontinuity vis à vis the austerity driven reforms of the period 2009-11. The new measures only expand old age expenditure, but they are also apparently innovative in their design and goals. By relying on the equity principle and promoting redistribution, the new reform actually aims at tackling the most severe social consequences produced by the combination of previous interventions with prolonged economic stagnation. The article assesses to what extent adopted measures may be considered effective, and may represent a first step towards the construction of a sustainable, adequate, and equitable pension system in Italy.
Pension policy in Italy presented diverse traits in two different phases. Until the early-1990s, policies were mostly expansionary and distributive; after 1992 retrenchment interventions were accompanied by measures aimed at prompting a transition towards a multipillar system. The article argues that these changes affected the very nature of pension policy making, which actually split in two different arenas respectively regarding the first pension pillar and supplementary funded schemes. While in the former traditional actors government, parties and social partners – remained central, the latter was characterized by the emergence of a «new politics» of pensions. Institutional transformations and the prominence of regulatory issues have thus radically modified the constellation of actors involved, by opening the pension policy making primarily to groups representative of financial institutions.
This paper explores the potential for "environmental" (green) and "social" (red) European NGOs and trade unions to jointly mobilize, pursuing synergies between ecological/environmental and social goals, as well as to drive bottom-up policy change at the European Union level. The main research question is thus the fol-lowing: do European NGOs and trade unions conflict or cooperate on 'eco-social' challenges? To answer such question, the research focuses on the case of the 'Right to Energy for All Europeans' coalition. The coalition is an advocacy-oriented alliance of European social and green NGOs, as well as trade unions, aimed at eradicating energy poverty in Europe, mostly by exerting influence EU' institutions concern-ing the "Clean Energy for All Europeans" legislative package. From a methodo-logical point of view, we rely on literature review and qualitative research methods, notably document analysis complemented by several semi-structured interviews with the members of the Coalition. We draw two main conclusions. First, bottom-up coordination is undermined by structural constraints (such as limited resources and compartmentalized policymaking), as well as by interest groups' commitment to specific and potentially divergent interests. Indeed, coalition-building is always a strategic move and it is more likely to take the form of ad-hoc cooperation, than formalized coordination. Nevertheless, European green and social NGOs and trade unions display a cooperative attitude towards each other. This is coherent with our second finding, according to which these organizations have an incentive to cooperate, since they frequently endorse a 'just transition' paradigm. Con-trasting both powerful economic interests and the approach followed by Europe-an institutions, NGOs and trade unions are promoting a vision for Europe where social and environmental goals are harmoniously combined. Green-red alliances can thus be seen as bottom-up actions aimed to effectively mainstream 'just transi-tion' into policy demands and political strategies, hence giving their members an incentive to join.
Nei paesi del Sud Europa, tradizionalmente, la distribuzione della spesa sociale tendeva ad essere significativamente sbilanciata a favore degli anziani. L' articolo introduce la nozione di ricalibratura intergenerazionale allo scopo di individuare, e di analizzare, le riforme volte a ri-bilanciare il profilo generazionale del welfare state italiano attraverso l'espansione degli schemi di assistenza sociale – sia in termini di servizi che di trasferimenti monetari – e di riforme sottrattive nel settore pensionistico. In seguito, compara le traiettorie di policy in questi due settori-chiave rispettivamente per i «genitori» e per i «figli» nel periodo che va dalla metà degli anni novanta al 2016. L'analisi porta in primo luogo a sottolineare come l'investimento a favore dei 'figli' non abbia sufficientemente bilanciato i tagli e le sottrazioni nel settore pensionistico e, in secondo, a mettere in discussione sia l'idea che gli incentivi di politica interna volti a espandere le misure a favore dei figli siano necessariamente deboli sia il ruolo «facilitante» delle pressioni esterne rispetto alla ricalibratura intergenerazionale. ; Traditionally, Italy displayed remarkably elderly biased social policy arrangements. This article introduces the notion of intergenerational recalibration to capture reforms aimed at rebalancing the generational profile of the Italian welfare states via the expansion of family policy and social assistance schemes— both monetary benefits and care services—and retrenchment in the field of pensions. Then, it elaborates theoretically on the political dimension of this policy strategy to advance the hypotheses that domestic politics would prevent the realization of such an agenda, whereas the latter would be favored by a major role of supranational actors, especially the European Union. To test these hypotheses, we systematically analyze policy trajectories in the field of pensions and social assistance in Italy between the mid‐1990s and 2016. This allows, first, to argue that investment in "pro‐children" measures has not adequately balanced the reduction of pro‐parents expenditure and, second, to question the idea that domestic political incentives to expand "pro‐children" policies are necessarily too weak as well as the "enabling" role of external pressures in pursuing intergenerational recalibration.
Several studies in comparative welfare state research have emphasized the absence of a proper anti-poverty strategy and especially the lack of a minimum income scheme (MIS) in Italy; others focused on the failed attempt to introduce a national MIS in the late 1990s; while some scholars investigated the existence of several (yet often meagre) local anti-poverty programs. The Pirandellian title One, No One and One Hundred Thousand looks therefore as a suitable metaphor able to capture the nature of the Italian anti-poverty policy scenario. Against this backdrop, though constrained by austerity measures and permanent lack of resources, social assistance gained more salience over the last years and a closer look at its transformation reveals that, albeit timidly, things are moving both at the national and regional level. Building on this framework, the paper has a twofold purpose. First, it aims at presenting the developments occurred in the Italian anti-poverty strategy during the last two decades. Second, the paper provides an overview of the latest trends in terms of poverty and material deprivation in comparative perspective, that—in the light of the current economic crisis—call for a rapid modernisation of the national social safety net of last resort.
La spesa pensionistica più elevata d'Europa, limitate risorse destinate alla tutela delle famiglie, dei bambini e dei disoccupati, pochissime misure di contrasto alla povertà. Dopo due decenni di riforme lo sbilanciamento "funzionale" – verso il settore previdenziale – e la distorsione "distributiva" – a favore degli occupati/insider rappresentano ancora temi sensibili nell'attuale dibattito sulla riforma dello stato sociale in Italia. Ma quando è emerso l'assetto di welfare che è oggi sotto la lente dei policy-makers? Quali sono state le tappe fondamentali che hanno portato al consolidarsi del "welfare all'italiana", e quali dinamiche e fattori ne hanno rappresentato la spinta propulsiva? A partire dagli anni Ottanta, un'articolata letteratura politologica e sociologica ha messo in luce le anomalie comparative del welfare "all'italiana": manca però una sistematica ed analitica ricostruzione storica che chiarisca sia il timing preciso sia le ragioni genetiche di quella doppia distorsione che caratterizza il nucleo centrale del welfare all'italiana. In questa direzione, il volume mira a indagare, e successivamente interpretare, le radici del welfare state italiano tramite un'analisi storico-evolutiva dalla fine del XIX secolo agli anni Settanta del XX. Più in dettaglio, il presente lavoro si propone tre obiettivi: i) caratterizzare sulla base di dati quantitativi e qualitativi sia la natura che l'entità degli squilibri funzionali e distributivi; ii) tracciare la loro genesi nel tempo individuandone i fattori che ne sono stati responsabili; iii) formulare, sulla scorta di una discussione critica della letteratura comparata sullo sviluppo del welfare state, ipotesi esplicative, proponendo infine un'interpretazione in chiave storico-istituzionalista capace di rendere conto delle scelte effettuate dagli attori politici italiani negli snodi evolutivi in cui la doppia distorsione si è formata e consolidata. Il volume si articola su tre parti ed è composto da sette capitoli. Nella prima parte vengono poste le basi per l'analisi empirica sia mettendo a fuoco la peculiarità del welfare italiano in prospettiva comparata e tratteggiando il framework analitico (capitolo 1) sia illustrando le tappe di sviluppo della protezione sociale in Italia dalle origini alla II Guerra Mondiale (capitolo 2). La seconda e la terza parte sono invece dedicate allo studio del periodo che è considerato lo "snodo critico" per l'emersione del welfare all'italiana: gli anni Cinquanta (parte Due) e gli anni Sessanta (parte Tre). Entrambe le sezioni si aprono con l'analisi e l'interpretazione della traiettoria evolutiva del settore pensionistico e del Tfr (capitoli 3 e 5), per poi concentrarsi (cap. 4 e 6) sulla tutela della disoccupazione e i carichi famigliari, settori rimasti relativamente "atrofici". Il capitolo 7 conclude. L'argomento centrale del volume è che, sullo sfondo di una policy legacy già favorevole all'emergere di squilibri funzionali e distributivi, fattori cognitivi e soprattutto le peculiari caratteristiche della competizione politica – nel contesto di "pluralismo polarizzato" e "democrazia bloccata" degli anni Cinquanta-Sessanta – abbiamo giocato un ruolo decisivo nell'orientare verso lo squilibrio il welfare state italiano.
The aim of this study is to analyse the situation in the EU as regards poverty and social exclusion and to explore the solutions currently debated for mitigating the risk of existing and increasing poverty and social exclusion, in particular through adequate standards of minimum income. The study addresses these issues in two main sections. Firstly, it analyses the issue of poverty and social exclusion from a theoretical perspective – assessing the relevant concepts – and an empirical perspective – discussing the limitations of different indicators and data with reference to EU countries. Secondly, it focuses on national and EU-level policies dealing with poverty and social exclusion, in particular, on minimum income schemes, presenting 6 country case studies and evaluating the feasibility of an EU minimum income framework.
In recent years the increased electoral relevance of populist anti-establishment parties in several European democracies has steered scholar attention to these "new" parties' positions on redistribution, the functioning of the economy and, last but not least, the welfare state. Nonetheless, with the exception of few recent studies on Radical Right parties, the programmatic options and welfare preferences of diverse "populist" right parties have remained largely under-researched. This paper therefore analyses how the radical right parties' discourse on the welfare state developed over time in five Western countries: Germany, France, Italy, the UK, and the US. The analysis is based on the content of political manifestos in national elections since the 1990s and it looks at all the main social policy fields - from pensions, to health care and family policies. The goal of the paper is to identify how much these parties differ from one another in relation to their approach to welfare state issues and whether there is a policy field effect. In particular, the paper tries to answer the following questions: What are the welfare preferences of new populist right parties? Do welfare state settings – i.e. universalistic vs occupational vs means-tested – and/or policy fields – health care, pensions, unemployment, education and anti-poverty fields - contribute shaping these parties' welfare preferences?
The paper addresses a topic still largely under-researched in comparative welfare state literature: the role of right parties in the reform of last resort safety nets. More precisely, the study investigates minimum income schemes' reforms promoted during the Great Recession (2008–2013) by centre-right governments in three countries belonging to the European periphery: Italy, Portugal and Latvia. Despite common political orientation and increased problem pressure, these countries have gone through distinct reform trajectories in their social safety nets that may be labelled expansion (Latvia), retrenchment (Portugal), and continuity (Italy). Against this backdrop, the paper suggests that right parties display substantially different positions and pursue different reform strategies in anti-poverty policies. These differences can be explained by the diverse types of right parties and varying competition and coalition dynamics in the three countries.
