Suchergebnisse

Die sogenannte "dritte Generation" der komparativen Sozialpolitikforschung verwendete Daten zu Wohlfahrtsstaatsvariationen, die für Verteilungseffekte von Bedeutung sind, sowie Daten zur Einkommensungleichheit, welche Primäranalysen vergleichbarer Mikrodatensets zulassen. Die vorliegende Studie kann aufgrund ihres Fokus auf programmspezifische Informationen zu Wohlfahrtsstaat und Ungleichheit innerhalb verschiedener Bevölkerungsgruppen als Weiterführung dieses Ansatzes betrachtet werden, wobei sie eine "vierte Generation" komparativer Studien zu internationalen Ungleichheitsvariationen begründet. Ihr Ziel ist es, über das laufende Forschungsprogramm "Changing institutions and outcomes: Welfare states in a comparative perspective" am "Swedish Institute for Social Research" zu berichten. Um die Verteilungsmechanismen genauer darzustellen, bezieht sich die Analyse auf Institutionen und deren Wirkungen für einzelne Bevölkerungsgruppen. Zur Illustration werden drei Fälle dargestellt: (1) Familienpolitik und Kinderarmut, (2) Arbeitslosenunterstützung und Armut im erwerbsfähigen Alter sowie (3) Altersrenten und Altersarmut. Die international vergleichenden Analysen dokumentieren den Einfluss der politischen und institutionellen Rahmenbedingungen auf das nationale Armuts- und Ungleichheitsprofil. Allerdings lässt sich neben einer intendierten Umverteilung von Reich zu Arm auch eine unintendierte Umverteilung von Arm zu Reich beobachten. (ICI2).

Die sogenannte "dritte Generation" der komparativen Sozialpolitikforschung verwendete Daten zu Wohlfahrtsstaatsvariationen, die für Verteilungseffekte von Bedeutung sind, sowie Daten zur Einkommensungleichheit, welche Primäranalysen vergleichbarer Mikrodatensets zulassen. Die vorliegende Studie kann aufgrund ihres Fokus auf programmspezifische Informationen zu Wohlfahrtsstaat und Ungleichheit innerhalb verschiedener Bevölkerungsgruppen als Weiterführung dieses Ansatzes betrachtet werden, wobei sie eine "vierte Generation" komparativer Studien zu internationalen Ungleichheitsvariationen begründet. Ihr Ziel ist es, über das laufende Forschungsprogramm "Changing institutions and outcomes: Welfare states in a comparative perspective" am "Swedish Institute for Social Research" zu berichten. Um die Verteilungsmechanismen genauer darzustellen, bezieht sich die Analyse auf Institutionen und deren Wirkungen für einzelne Bevölkerungsgruppen. Zur Illustration werden drei Fälle dargestellt: (1) Familienpolitik und Kinderarmut, (2) Arbeitslosenunterstützung und Armut im erwerbsfähigen Alter sowie (3) Altersrenten und Altersarmut. Die international vergleichenden Analysen dokumentieren den Einfluss der politischen und institutionellen Rahmenbedingungen auf das nationale Armuts- und Ungleichheitsprofil. Allerdings lässt sich neben einer intendierten Umverteilung von Reich zu Arm auch eine unintendierte Umverteilung von Arm zu Reich beobachten. (ICI2)

Die Europäische Kommission propagiert seit einigen Jahren ein Programm der "Modernisierung" des Sozialen mit drei Kernelementen: (1) Reform der Rentensysteme und Pflegevorkehrungen; (2) ein besser austariertes Gleichgewicht der Geschlechter; und (3) eine Flexibilisierung des Arbeitslebens. Bisher hat die EU die Sozialpolitik im Wesentlichen den Mitgliedsstaaten überlassen. Ein paar Ausnahmen bestätigen diese Regel - eine betrifft den Schutz von Wanderarbeitern, eine andere resultiert aus Urteilen des Europäischen Gerichtshofs vor allem zur Gleichberechtigung der Geschlechter. Im Gefolge der Agenda von Lissabon ist als neue Spielart einer vermittelten europäischen Politikgestaltung die sogenannte "offene Koordinierungsmethode" (Open Method of Coordination, OMC) eingeführt worden, die helfen soll, neue Wege für das Vorantreiben gemeinsamer sozialpolitischer Ziele zu verbessern. Der Beitrag zeigt vor diesem Hintergrund, dass man streng genommen von verschiedenen europäischen Sozialmodellen sprechen muss. Der Aufsatz beschränkt sich darauf, die sich gegenwärtig vollziehenden Wandlungen in den sozialpolitischen Modellen und die laufenden Reformagenden zu erörtern, um etwas Licht auf das Wesen und die Zukunft der verschiedenen europäischen Sozialmodelle oder gar eines "Europäischen Sozialmodells" zu werfen. (ICA2)

While the Swedish welfare state has undergone an intensified market orientation and a number of cutbacks since 1990, it has maintained many of its universal characteristics. It still provides all residents with a rather extensive system of benefits from the cradle to the grave. This chapter contributes to a systematic and detailed analysis of eligibility criteria and conditions for accessing social benefits in five core policy areas of the Swedish social security system. As universalism continues to be a cornerstone of the Swedish welfare state, nationality or the immigration status of a person does not condition his/her entitlement to social security benefits. More recently, however, a political debate has emerged regarding immigration and the welfare system, both in terms of the benefit system being a magnet that attracts migrants and concerning the capacity of the system to cope with large-scale immigration. By discussing the main features of the Swedish welfare regime and key patterns and policy developments in the field of migration, the chapter seeks to account for recent developments, trends and directions in the access to social protection for residents, non-national residents and non-resident nationals.

Despite its broad usage, universalism as a concept is not always clearly defined. In this article, a multidimensional definition of universalism in social policy is developed, based on four policy characteristics: inclusion, financing, provision, and the adequacy of benefits. In the empirical part of the article, the feasibility of this definition is tested by an analysis of recent changes in the Swedish welfare state, which is typically described as universal but has undergone substantive reforms since 1990. Four social policy areas are examined: pensions, social insurance, health care, and family policy. The results indicate that Swedish welfare policies retain their universalistic character in some dimensions but have become less universalistic in others. This demonstrates that a multidimensional approach is best suited to capture in full the nature and implications of welfare state reform.

This working paper provides an overview and basic descriptive analysis of key indicators of national labour markets and welfare states in the European Union (EU). The overview of labour market indicators uses standard variables and "off-the-shelf" data provided by Eurostat and the OECD. Our discussion of national welfare states draws on a range of indicators specifically coded for the REMINDER project and compiled into a new dataset called "Social Protection in Europe Database" (SPEUDA). The aim of the deliverable is to support two different work packages within the larger REMINDER research project by providing institutional and other indicators to be used in subsequent analyses. Work package 7 investigates the role of variations in formal and informal national institutions (specifically labour markets; welfare states; and normative attitudes to welfare, work, Europe, and immigration) in explaining divergent national policy positions among EU countries on reforming the current rules for the free movement of labour in the EU (see Ruhs and Palme 2018).2 Work Package 4 investigates the fiscal effects of EU mobility and the consequences of differences in national institutions (see Nyman and Ahlskog 2018).

Published online: 27 Jun 2018 ; The Member States of the European Union (EU) have been engaged in highly divisive debates about whether and how to reform the rules for the 'free movement' of EU workers and their access to national welfare states. While some countries have argued for new restrictions on EU workers' access to welfare benefits, many others have opposed policy change. What explains EU Member States' different policy positions on this issue? Existing accounts have focused on populist political parties and the media. In contrast, this article provides a theoretical institutional analysis of how cross-country differences in the regulation of national labour markets and welfare states can contribute to divergent national policy responses to free movement. We argue and explain how labour market and welfare state institutions can affect national policy actors' positions on free movement directly, and/or indirectly via inter-actions with normative attitudes and the characteristics of EU labour immigration.

L'intensité des débats à propos de l'investissement social montre que celui-ci est un concept inabouti. L'un des enjeux cruciaux est de préciser ses fondements normatifs afin de dépasser une vision purement productiviste, qui le réduit à l'amélioration du capital humain et des compétences des travailleurs. Toutefois, si l'investissement social est mis en perspective avec la théorie des capabilités d'Amartya Sen, il peut redonner du sens aux notions de citoyenneté sociale et de progrès social, qui ont légitimé le développement de la protection sociale durant des décennies. L'approche par les capabilités donne les lignes directrices pour définir de nouvelles politiques ou des institutions capables de favoriser les ressources des individus et accroître leur liberté, mais aussi de hiérarchiser les priorités à donner aux politiques sociales et les évaluer.

In an era of 'permanent austerity' (Pierson, 2001) and financial crisis, the issue of financing welfare state provision is topical. Moreover, the future of welfare state funding in countries with ageing populations is no doubt raising increasing interest in scholarly as well as policy circles. Yet the financing side of welfare provision has traditionally been given little attention and remains somewhat of a black box of the welfare state. The fact that some of the financing mechanisms have remained 'hidden' has added to the confusion about existing policy alternatives. In this chapter we start by discussing the main determinants of the financing needs of welfare systems. We then turn to the different sources of revenue and patterns of welfare state funding in the advanced industrial nations. The third section analyses the politics of taxation and financing trends in the mature welfare states. In particular, we address the impact of the different financing techniques on employment and economic growth and on the political legitimacy and reform possibilities of the different social protection systems. The fourth section addresses the issue of the redistributive impact of the different financing techniques and underlines the importance of analysing the dynamics between how the financial resources are raised and spent. Finally, the chapter discusses the current and future challenges to welfare state financing in the face of increased globalisation and ageing populations. In the conclusion, we summarize the key lessons to be learnt from the analysis of welfare state financing.

In an era of 'permanent austerity' (Pierson, 2001) and financial crisis, the issue of financing welfare state provision is topical. Moreover, the future of welfare state funding in countries with ageing populations is no doubt raising increasing interest in scholarly as well as policy circles. Yet the financing side of welfare provision has traditionally been given little attention and remains somewhat of a black box of the welfare state. The fact that some of the financing mechanisms have remained 'hidden' has added to the confusion about existing policy alternatives. In this chapter we start by discussing the main determinants of the financing needs of welfare systems. We then turn to the different sources of revenue and patterns of welfare state funding in the advanced industrial nations. The third section analyses the politics of taxation and financing trends in the mature welfare states. In particular, we address the impact of the different financing techniques on employment and economic growth and on the political legitimacy and reform possibilities of the different social protection systems. The fourth section addresses the issue of the redistributive impact of the different financing techniques and underlines the importance of analysing the dynamics between how the financial resources are raised and spent. Finally, the chapter discusses the current and future challenges to welfare state financing in the face of increased globalisation and ageing populations. In the conclusion, we summarize the key lessons to be learnt from the analysis of welfare state financing.

In an era of 'permanent austerity' (Pierson, 2001) and financial crisis, the issue of financing welfare state provision is topical. Moreover, the future of welfare state funding in countries with ageing populations is no doubt raising increasing interest in scholarly as well as policy circles. Yet the financing side of welfare provision has traditionally been given little attention and remains somewhat of a black box of the welfare state. The fact that some of the financing mechanisms have remained 'hidden' has added to the confusion about existing policy alternatives. In this chapter we start by discussing the main determinants of the financing needs of welfare systems. We then turn to the different sources of revenue and patterns of welfare state funding in the advanced industrial nations. The third section analyses the politics of taxation and financing trends in the mature welfare states. In particular, we address the impact of the different financing techniques on employment and economic growth and on the political legitimacy and reform possibilities of the different social protection systems. The fourth section addresses the issue of the redistributive impact of the different financing techniques and underlines the importance of analysing the dynamics between how the financial resources are raised and spent. Finally, the chapter discusses the current and future challenges to welfare state financing in the face of increased globalisation and ageing populations. In the conclusion, we summarize the key lessons to be learnt from the analysis of welfare state financing.