WELFARE IDEOLOGY, THE MARKET AND SOCIAL SECURITY: Towards a Typology of Market-Oriented Reform

The global shift towards the market in the provision of social security is typically associated with the values of the New Right, but we take issue with this view. An examination of the main welfare ideologies that have influenced the development of contemporary social security systems suggests that the market and individualism have a role to play in a range of approaches to reform. Whilst some approaches unreservedly endorse the market – in a way which accords with the ideas of the New Right – other approaches adopt a pragmatic orientation based on a recognition of two public policy dilemmas, “market failure” and “state failure.” This attempt to define a middle way typifies many of the recent social security reform initiatives. Drawing upon Esping‐Andersen's recent work on de‐commodification, we construct a typology of normative approaches to the provision of social security which may be used to contextualise market‐oriented social security reform initiatives. This we argue is necessary to avoid the over‐simplified dichotomy between individualism and collectivism which is typical of so much recent work on social security reform.     

Do Welfare State Regimes Determine Public Sector Reforms? Choice Reforms in American,Swedish and German Schools

The idea that modern welfare states can be grouped into distinct regimes dominates contemporary studies of welfare state restructuring, and several studies have concluded welfare state reforms to be correlated with regime structures. These studies build, however, on analyses of only cash-benefit programmes whereas social services are almost neglected in current welfare state research. Thus, the aim of this article is to test the explanatory capacity of the welfare state regime perspective in relation to reforms in the service dimension of advanced welfare states – normally termed 'public sector reforms'. For this purpose, the author has conducted a focused comparison of the degree to which archetypical examples of the liberal regime (United States), the social democratic regime (Sweden) and the conservative regime (Germany) have introduced vouchers and parental choice into their public primary schools. Schools and education have ranked high on the public sector reform agenda since the 1980s, while the school choice issue signifies core aspects of the rationale of the reform movement: re-arranging public provision of services into quasi-markets. The article identifies, however, a clear lack of correlation between adoption of the school-choice policy and welfare state regimes. Instead, the reforms undertaken in all three countries seem closely related to the institutional rules of political decision making.     

Debating Food Security Policy in Two Different Ideational Settings: A Comparison of Australia and Norway

Food security has emerged as a relatively new policy issue in agricultural policy making in developed countries. This policy problem is addressed within an institutional landscape in which agricultural ideas and institutions are well‐established. In this article, food security policy making in Australia and Norway is compared. In Australia, agricultural normalism (agricultural markets and production are considered to be similar to those of other economic sectors) has been dominant since the mid‐1980s, while Norwegian agricultural policy making has been dominated by agricultural exceptionalism (agriculture is considered a unique economic sector with special market and production conditions). It is demonstrated in the article how these two opposing institutionalised ideational foundations have influenced the nature of the food security debate in the two countries. In Australia, the debate emphasises the positive role of the market and trade in providing global food security. In Norway, the debate highlights the need to regulate market forces and restrict trade in order to allow countries to develop their own agricultural sectors.     

Housing as a Social Right: Implications for Welfare State Theory

The article contributes to two central and interrelated discourses in welfare state theory and housing policy. One concerns the meaning of a 'right to housing' , and the other concerns the meaning of the dichotomy 'universal'–'selective' in housing policy . The right to housing is best seen as a political 'marker of concern' pointing out housing as an area for welfare state policy. The more precise meaning of the idea is always defined socially, in a specific national context of relations between state, citizen, and markets in housing provision. Two alternative interpretations of a right to housing are suggested, each related to a certain logic of housing provision. In a selective housing policy, the state provides a 'protected' complement to the general housing market, and the right to housing implies some legalistic minimum rights for households of lesser means. In a universal housing policy, the state provides correctives to the general housing market in order to make housing available to all types of households, and the right to housing is best seen as a social right in Marshall's meaning of an obligation of the state towards society as a whole. The concepts of 'universal' and 'selective' may be applied to either the political discourse or the social outcome of policies. Furthermore, they may refer to different political levels (e.g. welfare state level, sector level, and policy instrument level). If the dichotomy is not specified in those two respects, the distinction between a universal and a selective policy will always be seriously blurred.     

The Resistible Rise of Rupert Rigsby

SINCE 1986 the number of UK households renting privately has increased from 1.85 million to 5.3 million. This private landlord renaissance has been supported by buy to let investment, tax concessions, subsidies, light touch regulation, the right to buy scheme and housing benefit. However, private landlordism makes only a small contribution to new housing supply, characterised by low quality, adds to state expenditure, increases social inequality and has a negative impact on family life. Following the stark revelation of ‘two Englands’ in the Brexit vote, ways to curb the sector's growth need to have a higher place on the political agenda.     

Welfare-State Expansion and Conflicts in the Nordic Countries: The Case of Occupational Health Care

The development of occupational health Services in the Nordic countries varied considerably in terms of coverage, content and conflicts during the period 1980–90. The focus is on differences in conflicts resulting from state intervention into the sphere of private employers analysed from three perspectives: policy ambitions, institutional arrangements and employer reaction. The main finding is that the high level of conflict in Norway is related to higher state ambitions, more fragmented institutions and more direct economic costs to the employers than those found in the other Nordic countries. The higher policy ambitions and resulting adversary processes in providing occupational health Services seem to be fundamentally rooted in specific egalitarian values inherent in the Norwegian welfare state in general and the trade union movement in particular.     

Globalisation and the (Non‐) defence of the welfare state

This article explores the relationship between globalisation and the development of the British and Norwegian welfare states. Focusing on the welfare state policies of the British and Norwegian labour parties and their relationships to the European Union (an important indicator of the impact of globalisation on West European nation‐states), it argues that despite the growing importance of global dynamics and pressures, national‐level forces were the predominate factors in the development of the British and Norwegian welfare states and relations to the EU in the 1980s and 1990s. Consequently, globalisation does not lead to welfare state convergence, but to divergence, interwoven with national‐level dynamics.     

The effects of state R&D tax credits in stimulating private R&D expenditure: A cross‐state empirical analysis

This is a cross‐state empirical study which examines the effects of state research and development (R&D) tax credits on private R&D expenditure in the states. Other explanatory variables include federal R&D subsidies, public services in higher education and R&D‐targeted programs as well as other control variables. The statistical result shows that the establishment of state R&D credit programs is effective in stimulating more industrial R&D expenditure. In addition, state services in higher education and R&D‐targeted programs also matter in private decision of R&D investment. This policy assessment sends a positive message to state policymakers because it shows the great potential in using R&D policy instruments to promote innovation‐based economic development. © 2005 by the Association for Public Policy Analysis and Management     

The post‐Stalinist present and the Australian past

Abstract

Since 1979, housing reforms in China have been seen as successive state efforts to improve urban governance. The idea is that the state has all along failed to deliver housing efficiently and equitably through the work units and that it is believed that only through the recommodification of housing could the housing problem be ultimately resolved. The housing monetarization policy (HMP) was thus launched in 1998 to replace the long-standing in-kind housing subsidy under the old welfare housing system. The policy aims at providing workers with cash subsidies as part of their wage package to enable them to buy or rent their homes from the market. The purpose of this paper is to explain the implications of the HMP through a neoliberal urbanization perspective. Through the case study of Guiyang, it is argued that while the HMP is successful in improving certain historical housing inequalities, it does not primarily aim at eradicating housing inequalities. HMP has in fact led to more rather than less horizontal inequities. In addition, it is argued here that a market housing system is leading towards increasing urban poverty, greater social polarization and spatial segregation. To improve governance, China needs to keep neoliberal urbanization in check and pay serious attention to its adverse consequences during economic transformation.     

Creating an enabling environment for housing: Recent reforms in Mexico

Abstract

A recent World Bank policy statement on housing advocates the reform of government policies, institutions, and regulations to enable housing markets to work more efficiently. The policy statement identifies several instruments that governments can use to address housing market constraints, and to improve the performance of the housing sector as a whole, while paying particular attention to the needs of the poor.

In recent years, the government of Mexico has employed many of the enabling instruments described in the World Bank's housing policy statement. This article reviews the role of housing in the Mexican economy and the major reforms that the Mexican government has implemented to improve the operation of the housing market so that private lenders and home builders can play an expanded role in addressing the country's housing needs. The World Bank has supported the government's reform program, and since 1985 it has lent more than $1.2 billion to Mexico for low‐income housing projects.     

Norway's Full-Employment Oil Economy - Flexible Adjustment. or Paralysing Rigidities?1

Two stones may be told about Norwegian macroeconomic management since 1973. The first one is the flexible-adjustment story: Norway defended full employment using oil revenues to manage structural change. to keep manpower in the primary sectors and create new employment opportunities in the welfare state. The second is the paralysing-rigidifies story: Norway used oil revenues to shelter its manufacturing industries and low-productivity agriculture from competition, and to expand the welfare state which created numerous crowding out mechanisms. The first section below reviews some strong statements of these stories. while the following two sections review contemporary debates on the notions of flexibility and rigidity, relating also to the question of Norway's ‘democratic corporatism’. The final two sections attempt to take a more detached look at the events about which the two stories are told. Five phases are distinguished, and the two ‘consumption booms’ (1973-77 and 1984-86) and the following austerity phases (1977-81, 1986-) are compared.     

‘Marx’ or the Market? Intra-party Power and Social Democratic Welfare State Retrenchment

Differences in the intra-party balance of power explain variation in social democratic responses to the economic crisis of the late 1970s. This article evidences this claim by analysing the case of welfare state retrenchment by social democratic parties. Welfare state retrenchment is electorally risky for social democrats and often contrary to their principles. Therefore cases of welfare state retrenchment by social democrats provide an excellent case study of the difficult trade-offs parties have to make between office, policy and vote pay-offs. The article claims that leadership-dominated parties advance office-seeking strategies and are therefore responsive to economic conditions and public opinion. Conversely, activist-dominated parties advance policy-seeking strategies and therefore support traditional social democratic policy platforms or seek more radical solutions. By comparing seven social democratic parties (Denmark, France, Germany, the Netherlands, Spain, Sweden and the UK) between 1980 and 2005, this article explains variation in when social democrats introduced welfare state retrenchment.     

Long‐term care reform and the role of housing finance

Abstract

The Clinton administration's recently announced home and community‐based care proposals have potentially important implications not only for long‐term care policy, but also for housing policy in the United States. This article attempts to draw out some of those implications. The first section examines problems inherent in the current “medical/welfare” system of financing long‐term care, which constrains consumer choice by limiting the supply of providers to control costs and by increasing medical professionals’ control over the types of services provided in the name of quality control. The medical/welfare dominance of long‐term care policy has resulted in an overreliance on nursing homes as providers, resulting in both escalating costs and continued consumer dissatisfaction.

The second half of the article looks at recent market and policy developments in response to consumer demand for lower cost alternatives to nursing homes. These alternatives promote more consumer autonomy and control in supportive housing arrangements. A more comprehensive services and housing policy could promote these developments in an approach that combines the security of public financing of supportive services with the benefits of consumer choice, market competition, and legal protections that characterize housing markets. In such a scenario, housing finance institutions—including government agencies, lenders, developers, and investors—could play a pivotal role in the long‐term care debate not only by unlocking substantial financial resources but, equally important, by transforming the provision of long‐term care services to promote consumer choice and autonomy.     

Balancing Governance Capacity and Legitimacy: How the Norwegian Government Handled the COVID-19 Crisis as a High Performer

This essay addresses how the Norwegian government has handled the coronavirus pandemic. Compared with many other countries, Norway has performed well in handling the crisis. This must be understood in the context of competent politicians, a high-trust society with a reliable and professional bureaucracy, a strong state, a good economic situation, a big welfare state, and low population density. The Norwegian government managed to control the pandemic rather quickly by adopting a suppression strategy, followed by a control strategy, based on a collaborative and pragmatic decision-making style, successful communication with the public, a lot of resources, and a high level of citizen trust in government. The alleged success of the Norwegian case is about the relationship between crisis management capacity and legitimacy. Crisis management is most successful when it is able to combine democratic legitimacy with government capacity.     

How Pro‐social Motivation Affects Job Satisfaction: An International Analysis of Countries with Different Welfare State Regimes

Employees' pro‐social motivation has been shown to be positively related to job satisfaction, especially when the perceived usefulness of the job to society and other people is high. There is, however, a lack of analyses which include both public and private employees, and it has not yet been studied whether the relationships are robust across welfare state regimes. This study therefore examines the moderated relationship between pro‐social motivation and job satisfaction. Using data from the cross‐national 2005 ISSP survey (14 countries, N = 10,630), it confirms that the relationship between pro‐social motivation and job satisfaction is moderated by perceived usefulness of the job for society and other people. Usefulness again depends on the individual's employment sector (public versus private), and this public–private difference in perceived usefulness also varies between different welfare state regimes. This indicates that sector differences in how pro‐social motivation affects job satisfaction depends on the broader institutional context, and the article therefore contributes with important knowledge for the recruitment and retention of motivated and satisfied employees in a period of changing public–private responsibilities in the provision of welfare services.     

Putting Neoliberalism in its Place

Neoliberalism is not as popular as its opponents seem so much to fear; in democratic politics it nearly always hides behind other ideologies and policy types, as its essential message that we should pursue no goals that cannot be achieved through the market is intrinsically unattractive to the majority of people. Its power lies in the wealth of its key supporters, and in the difficulty of raising coordinated opposition to it among post‐industrial populations that have little sense of their political interests. The main base for hope of change in this comes from the as yet unrealised potential of women's movements.     

Explaining Petroleum Policy in Britain and Norway, 1962-90

Petroleum policy in Britain and Norway provides comparativists with an opportunity to study policy formation, stability, and transformation on a cross-national basis. This study explains why British and Norwegian officials decided to intervene in the North Sea, why offshore policy in the two countries went through periods of stability and change, and why they adopted similar offshore systems in the 1960s and 1970s but diverged markedly in the 1980s. We develop an explanatory framework using insights from state-centric, group politics, rational choice, and institutional models of policy-making. The framework identifies three decision-making contexts in which petroleum policy-makers operate simultaneously: an oil context, a domestic political context, and an international context, Each context establishes objectives for policy-makers, indicates an acceptable degree of government intervention, and narrows policy options. Rational decision-making within each context, however, may yield conflicting results. These must be worked out through intrastate and/or state-society bargaining. The decision-making contexts in Britain and Norway produced similar policies in the 1960s and 1970s, but the similarities hid deeper differences. Norwegian officials consistently favored state intervention offshore, and Norwegian interest groups successfully lobbied the state for offshore favors, while British officials intervened more reluctantly and paid less attention to societal interests. Differences in decision-making contexts finally produced a major divergence in offshore policies in the 1980s when the Thatcher government dismantled the state's offshore participation policy.     

Globalisation, Marketisation and Power: The Swedish Case of Institutional Change

Globalisation is often thought to threaten the autonomy of national policymaking and generous welfare policies. This article examines two decades of policy change in Sweden, often viewed as a prime example of a fully fledged welfare state. The analysis is focused on reforms within the welfare sector, which is compared with three other important areas – credit markets, the labour market, and infrastructure policy. These areas can all be seen as crucial aspects of the Swedish social democratic model.  The findings can be summarised in three parts. First, seeing the credit–market deregulation as the first phase of the internationalisation of capital in Sweden lends some support to the idea of globalisation as the result of political decisions rather than a structural change caused by technical change. Second, during the last two decades, there have been signs of marketisation of the Swedish public sector. However, this analysis does not give support to the simple hypothesis of globalisation. There are quite large variations both between and within policy areas, variations that are not easily related to international integration. Third, marketisation involves a shift in political power. An overall effect is that the government has lost some of its former direct influence. However, behind the façade of the invisible market we find the same actors as before influencing policy. Globalisation can have tremendous effects on power. Whether or not this will be the case is first and foremost the result of political decisions and individual desires.     

Welfare-Ideological Change in Scandinavia: A Comparative Analysis of Partisan Welfare State Positions in Four Nordic Countries, 1970–2003

During the 1990s, the Nordic welfare states, notably Finland and Sweden, faced serious challenges that triggered a number of welfare restructuring processes. This article focuses on the political determinants of these processes, or, more exactly, it analyses changes in partisan welfare policy positions in Denmark, Finland, Norway and Sweden between 1970 and 2003. The main goal of the article is to chart possible changes in party positions on social policy. Has there been a decline in pro‐welfare attitudes during the period 1970–2003, and if so, how are these changes related to ideological and institutional factors? The data analysed in the article consists of election programmes, and more specifically, textual utterances concerning the welfare state. The results indicate a relatively high degree of stability in partisan support for welfare state expansion and investments in social justice, while market‐type solutions to social problems, on the other hand, have become more salient among parties, especially in the Right. The findings suggest that parties still differ from each other as to welfare‐political positions, indicating that Social Democratic and left‐wing parties remain the foremost defenders of the ‘Nordic Welfare Model’, whereas the Right has become more hesitant towards welfare state expansion.