Suchergebnisse

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.

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.

Norström T, Palme J. Public pension institutions and old‐age mortality in a comparative perspectiveInt J Soc Welfare 2010: ••: ••–••© 2010 The Author(s), Journal compilation © 2010 Blackwell Publishing Ltd and International Journal of Social Welfare.The aim of the study was to estimate the impact of changes in pension rights on old‐age mortality. We made a distinction between two dimensions of pension benefits, one of providing basic security (BASIC), and the other of providing income security (INCOME). Analyses were based on data for 18 OECD countries during the post‐war period. The outcome comprised old‐age excess mortality, defined as the ratio of the mortality rate 65+ to the mortality rate in the age group 30–59 years. The latter was regarded as a proxy for unobserved factors potentially related to old‐age mortality as well as pension rights. The pooled cross‐sectional time series data were analysed through fixed effects modelling. The results suggest that BASIC (but not INCOME) has a beneficial impact on old‐age excess mortality, which was statistically significant. We interpret the results in terms of the poverty‐reducing effects of pension entitlements with a basic security orientation.

Esser I, Palme J. Do public pensions matter for health and wellbeing among retired persons? Basic and income security pensions across 13 Western European countriesInt J Soc Welfare 2010: ••: ••–••© 2010 The Author(s), Journal compilation © 2010 Blackwell Publishing Ltd and International Journal of Social Welfare.Mortality rates suggest that elderly people in the advanced welfare democracies have experienced dramatically improved health over the past decades. This study examined the importance of public pensions for self‐reported health and wellbeing among retired persons in 13 Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development countries in 2002–2005. New public pension data make it possible to distinguish between two qualities of pension systems: 'basic security' for those who have no or a short work history, and 'income security' for those with a more extensive contribution record. For enhanced cross‐national comparison, relative measures of ill‐health and wellbeing were constructed to account for cultural bias in responses to survey questions and heterogeneity among countries in the general level of population health. Overall, better health is found in countries with more generous pensions, although the results are gendered; for women's health, high basic security of the pension system appears to be particularly important. Women's wellbeing also tends to be more dependent on the quality of basic security.

The Nordic welfare states offer some lessons in a development context. A main achievement has been sustainable poverty reduction. Another important lesson is that, while democratization often leads to greater pressures for social policy expansion, social policy can also contribute to democratization. The Nordic countries further demonstrate that is possible to unify social protection with a competitive and growth‐oriented economy. In a number of policy areas, particularly in relation to social services and labor market policy, the Nordic countries have also become leading modernizers. The women‐friendly dual‐earner model not only combats poverty among families with children, but also enables women to participate in the labor market. The future sustainability of the Nordic model of social policy hinges on the number of taxpayers that can be mobilized. In order to be successful in this, governments need to take a combined, or holistic, approach, and consider both micro motives and macro considerations.

In the 1990s Sweden went through a deep economic recession accompanied by a massive increase in unemployment and a rapidly growing budget deficit. The crisis had large repercussions for the welfare of many citizens and it generated cutbacks in virtually all social policy programmes. This halted a welfare‐state expansion that had been going on for decades. It also caused great concern about the state of welfare of the nation. In 1999 the Swedish Government appointed a 'Welfare Commission', a team of academic researchers who were assigned the task of drawing up a balance sheet for the development of welfare in the 1990s. The Commission delivered its final report in October 2001. This article is a condensed account of one of the more central issues for the Commission; namely, how the unemployment crisis affected already socially and economically vulnerable groups. Looking at the development over the entire decade, three groups stand out as particularly disadvantaged in terms of individual welfare resources: young adults, immigrants and single mothers. The downturn for these groups was especially accentuated in terms of employment and income. Young people and immigrants trying to get into the labour market during the crisis years faced the problems of newcomers to the systems of social protection. The poor economic development for single mothers could essentially be attributed to the shortage of work in general and of full‐time work in particular that followed from the unemployment crisis. As a consequence, the importance of selective benefits increased and the relative size of all public transfers – despite rationing measures – stayed fairly unchanged. The results highlight the great influence of macroeconomic conditions and policy making for the welfare of vulnerable groups in society.