Social Origins Theory: Untapped Potential and the Test by the Pandemic Crisis

IF 2.2 Q2 PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION Nonprofit Policy Forum Pub Date : 2022-12-13 DOI:10.1515/npf-2022-0029
Vladimir Benevolenski, Natalya Ivanova, L. Jakobson
{"title":"Social Origins Theory: Untapped Potential and the Test by the Pandemic Crisis","authors":"Vladimir Benevolenski, Natalya Ivanova, L. Jakobson","doi":"10.1515/npf-2022-0029","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract The paper examines the explanatory potential of the social origins theory advanced by L. Salamon and H. Anheier. This examination follows two tracks. The first track is a comparative investigation of the conceptual affinity between the social origins, on one hand, and the theories of welfare regimes and varieties of capitalism, on the other. We argue that the conceptual affinity between these three theories lies in the fact that they explore what could be referred to as vertical and horizontal interactions between state and market. Vertical interactions are based on the legitimate coercion by government authorities, while horizontal relations develop at the initiative of their autonomous members. The social origins approach introduces yet another essential dimension, that of civic self-organization, into the analysis of vertical and horizontal interactions embodied in state/market relationships. Similarity of underlying conceptual foundations might suggest that all three theories would generate similarly strong academic interest in reexamining their analytical tools and applying their approaches to the diversity of new social and economic realities. The literature indicates that both the welfare regimes and varieties of capitalism have generated robust academic discussions, whereas the conceptual and analytical potential of the social origins remains relatively less explored. It has become particularly evident in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic which gave rise to a number of studies that apply the frameworks of the welfare regimes and varieties of capitalism to examine cross-country differences in government social welfare policies. However, the social origins theory seems not to have generated comparably rich research testing its explanatory power in the new conditions triggered by the pandemic challenges. To address this gap, the paper follows a second track which investigates pandemic-induced transformations in nonprofit sectors of Germany, Austria, UK and USA – countries representing three “basic” nonprofit regimes immediately corresponding to Esping-Andersen’s welfare state typology: welfare partnership, social democratic and liberal. Applying the analytical lens of the social origins approach, we look at how the impact of the pandemic moved the measurable parameters of nonprofit sectors: the scope of the third sector, the volunteer share of the workforce, the extent of nonprofits’ engagement in the provision of social services, and the share of government financial support for the sector. We further look at the pandemic-induced changes in the composition of the “tool kit” employed in government-nonprofit cooperation. Thus, testing the explanatory potential of the social origins approach, we observe that responses to pandemic challenges have contributed to a degree of convergence of both liberal and social democratic nonprofit regimes with the welfare partnership pattern. However, path dependency, which is suggested by the regimes’ “moorings” embedded in the social origins approach, remains strong enough to explain the observed viability of the core features typical of “basic” nonprofit regimes in times of the pandemic crisis.","PeriodicalId":44152,"journal":{"name":"Nonprofit Policy Forum","volume":"108 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.2000,"publicationDate":"2022-12-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Nonprofit Policy Forum","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1515/npf-2022-0029","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Abstract The paper examines the explanatory potential of the social origins theory advanced by L. Salamon and H. Anheier. This examination follows two tracks. The first track is a comparative investigation of the conceptual affinity between the social origins, on one hand, and the theories of welfare regimes and varieties of capitalism, on the other. We argue that the conceptual affinity between these three theories lies in the fact that they explore what could be referred to as vertical and horizontal interactions between state and market. Vertical interactions are based on the legitimate coercion by government authorities, while horizontal relations develop at the initiative of their autonomous members. The social origins approach introduces yet another essential dimension, that of civic self-organization, into the analysis of vertical and horizontal interactions embodied in state/market relationships. Similarity of underlying conceptual foundations might suggest that all three theories would generate similarly strong academic interest in reexamining their analytical tools and applying their approaches to the diversity of new social and economic realities. The literature indicates that both the welfare regimes and varieties of capitalism have generated robust academic discussions, whereas the conceptual and analytical potential of the social origins remains relatively less explored. It has become particularly evident in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic which gave rise to a number of studies that apply the frameworks of the welfare regimes and varieties of capitalism to examine cross-country differences in government social welfare policies. However, the social origins theory seems not to have generated comparably rich research testing its explanatory power in the new conditions triggered by the pandemic challenges. To address this gap, the paper follows a second track which investigates pandemic-induced transformations in nonprofit sectors of Germany, Austria, UK and USA – countries representing three “basic” nonprofit regimes immediately corresponding to Esping-Andersen’s welfare state typology: welfare partnership, social democratic and liberal. Applying the analytical lens of the social origins approach, we look at how the impact of the pandemic moved the measurable parameters of nonprofit sectors: the scope of the third sector, the volunteer share of the workforce, the extent of nonprofits’ engagement in the provision of social services, and the share of government financial support for the sector. We further look at the pandemic-induced changes in the composition of the “tool kit” employed in government-nonprofit cooperation. Thus, testing the explanatory potential of the social origins approach, we observe that responses to pandemic challenges have contributed to a degree of convergence of both liberal and social democratic nonprofit regimes with the welfare partnership pattern. However, path dependency, which is suggested by the regimes’ “moorings” embedded in the social origins approach, remains strong enough to explain the observed viability of the core features typical of “basic” nonprofit regimes in times of the pandemic crisis.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
社会起源理论:未开发的潜力和大流行危机的考验
摘要本文考察了Salamon和Anheier提出的社会起源理论的解释潜力。这种检查遵循两个方面。第一个轨道是对社会起源与福利制度和各种资本主义理论之间概念亲和力的比较调查。我们认为,这三种理论在概念上的相似之处在于,它们都探讨了国家与市场之间的纵向和横向相互作用。纵向互动是基于政府当局的合法强制,而横向关系是在自治成员的主动下发展的。社会起源方法引入了另一个基本维度,即公民自组织,来分析体现在国家/市场关系中的纵向和横向互动。潜在概念基础的相似性可能表明,这三种理论在重新检查其分析工具和将其方法应用于新的社会和经济现实的多样性方面将产生同样强烈的学术兴趣。文献表明,福利制度和各种资本主义都产生了强有力的学术讨论,而社会起源的概念和分析潜力仍然相对较少探索。在2019冠状病毒病大流行的背景下,这一点变得尤为明显,这导致了一些研究,这些研究应用福利制度和资本主义各种框架来研究政府社会福利政策的跨国差异。然而,社会起源理论似乎没有产生相当丰富的研究来检验其在大流行挑战引发的新条件下的解释力。为了解决这一差距,本文沿着第二条轨道研究了德国、奥地利、英国和美国的非营利部门的大流行引起的转变,这些国家代表了与埃斯平-安德森的福利国家类型直接对应的三种“基本”非营利制度:福利伙伴关系、社会民主主义和自由主义。运用社会起源方法的分析视角,我们研究了大流行的影响如何影响非营利部门的可衡量参数:第三部门的范围、志愿者在劳动力中的份额、非营利组织参与提供社会服务的程度,以及政府对该部门的财政支持份额。我们进一步研究大流行病引起的政府-非营利性合作中使用的"工具箱"组成的变化。因此,在测试社会起源方法的解释潜力时,我们观察到,对流行病挑战的反应促成了自由主义和社会民主主义非营利制度与福利伙伴关系模式的一定程度的趋同。然而,社会起源方法中嵌入的制度“系泊”所表明的路径依赖性仍然足够强大,足以解释在大流行危机时期观察到的“基本”非营利制度典型核心特征的可行性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Nonprofit Policy Forum
Nonprofit Policy Forum PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION-
CiteScore
2.80
自引率
18.80%
发文量
23
审稿时长
7 weeks
期刊最新文献
Avoiding Burnout with Compassionate Accompaniment: A Novel Approach to Training, Selecting, Managing, and Regulating Frontline Workers Nonprofit Disaster Response and Climate Change: Who Responds? Who Plans? The Rise of Learning Pods: Civil Society’s Expanding Role in K-12 Education in the United States Rereading Salamon: Why Voluntary Failure Theory is Not (Really) About Voluntary Failures Frontmatter
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1