Abstract In 2008, the world underwent one of its worst economic and financial crises, whose consequences are still visible in some countries. This paper aims to analyse the impact of the crisis within the long-term care systems of Germany, England, Sweden and Spain from a comparative perspective. The time period analysed spans from the outset of the crisis in 2008, up to 2017. This article starts off from the thesis of the divergent impact of the economic crisis in these countries and the convergence between the impact of the crisis and long-term care contractions in the most afflicted countries. The outcome highlights the power of economic and financial pressures in order to explain the contractions within the care policies. Equally, it emphasizes the contradictions between the formal development level of the care systems and their practical institutional implementation in the field.
{"title":"Impact of the economic crisis and contractions within the European long-term care systems","authors":"Esther Albesa Jové","doi":"10.1017/ics.2020.35","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1017/ics.2020.35","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract In 2008, the world underwent one of its worst economic and financial crises, whose consequences are still visible in some countries. This paper aims to analyse the impact of the crisis within the long-term care systems of Germany, England, Sweden and Spain from a comparative perspective. The time period analysed spans from the outset of the crisis in 2008, up to 2017. This article starts off from the thesis of the divergent impact of the economic crisis in these countries and the convergence between the impact of the crisis and long-term care contractions in the most afflicted countries. The outcome highlights the power of economic and financial pressures in order to explain the contractions within the care policies. Equally, it emphasizes the contradictions between the formal development level of the care systems and their practical institutional implementation in the field.","PeriodicalId":38249,"journal":{"name":"Journal of International and Comparative Social Policy","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-02-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1017/ics.2020.35","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"44553056","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Abstract Over two decades ago, Korpi and Palme (1998) published one of the most influential papers in the history of social policy discipline, in which they put forward a “paradox of redistribution”: the more countries target welfare resources exclusively at the poor, the less redistribution is actually achieved and the less income inequality and poverty are reduced. The current paper provides a state-of-the-art review of empirical research into that paradox. More specifically, we break down the paradox into seven core assumptions, which together form a causal chain running from institutional design to redistributive outcomes. For each causal assumption, we offer a comprehensive and critical review of the relevant empirical literature, also including a broader range of studies that do not aim to address Korpi and Palme’s paradox per se, but are nevertheless informative about it.
{"title":"Two decades after Korpi and Palme’s “paradox of redistribution”: What have we learned so far and where do we take it from here?","authors":"Dimitri Gugushvili, Tijs Laenen","doi":"10.1017/ics.2020.24","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1017/ics.2020.24","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract Over two decades ago, Korpi and Palme (1998) published one of the most influential papers in the history of social policy discipline, in which they put forward a “paradox of redistribution”: the more countries target welfare resources exclusively at the poor, the less redistribution is actually achieved and the less income inequality and poverty are reduced. The current paper provides a state-of-the-art review of empirical research into that paradox. More specifically, we break down the paradox into seven core assumptions, which together form a causal chain running from institutional design to redistributive outcomes. For each causal assumption, we offer a comprehensive and critical review of the relevant empirical literature, also including a broader range of studies that do not aim to address Korpi and Palme’s paradox per se, but are nevertheless informative about it.","PeriodicalId":38249,"journal":{"name":"Journal of International and Comparative Social Policy","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-01-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1017/ics.2020.24","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"43545564","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Abstract The purpose of this study is to analyse determinants of resources devoted to public employment services (PES). It has proven difficult to disentangle ‘carrots’ (placement and services) from ‘sticks’ (sanctions and monitoring) when tracking the development of PES spending. This has contributed to ambivalence concerning the role of partisan politics, especially since welfare states have been argued to increasingly emphasize the ‘sticks’ aspect of the PES, irrespective of ideological orientation. This suggests that the role of partisan politics should be analysed together with ‘demanding’ activation, which is made possible with novel data on unemployment benefit conditionality. The analysis includes 16 welfare states and results indicate that left and secular centre-right parties are associated with increased resources devoted to PES, but that effects of partisan politics are contingent on the form and extent of benefit conditionality. Increased conditionality is associated with higher PES spending, thus nuancing the cost-containment argument for activation.
{"title":"Determinants of public employment services: exploring the relationship between benefit conditionality and partisan politics","authors":"Daniel Fredriksson","doi":"10.1017/ics.2020.34","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1017/ics.2020.34","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract The purpose of this study is to analyse determinants of resources devoted to public employment services (PES). It has proven difficult to disentangle ‘carrots’ (placement and services) from ‘sticks’ (sanctions and monitoring) when tracking the development of PES spending. This has contributed to ambivalence concerning the role of partisan politics, especially since welfare states have been argued to increasingly emphasize the ‘sticks’ aspect of the PES, irrespective of ideological orientation. This suggests that the role of partisan politics should be analysed together with ‘demanding’ activation, which is made possible with novel data on unemployment benefit conditionality. The analysis includes 16 welfare states and results indicate that left and secular centre-right parties are associated with increased resources devoted to PES, but that effects of partisan politics are contingent on the form and extent of benefit conditionality. Increased conditionality is associated with higher PES spending, thus nuancing the cost-containment argument for activation.","PeriodicalId":38249,"journal":{"name":"Journal of International and Comparative Social Policy","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2020-12-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1017/ics.2020.34","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"45067686","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Abstract International organizations such as the International Monetary Fund and the World Bank raise concerns about the financial sustainability issues of pension systems. These issues have attracted increasing attention because of the challenges presented by lower growth and financial market volatility, making it harder for governments to fulfil their promises on pension policies (Ebbinghaus, 2011). In order to tackle these challenges, it is not uncommon that governments reform pension schemes with an emphasis on individual responsibility (Yeh et al., 2018). They particularly stress the earnings-related pension measures as an important means to assist people to accumulate pension income (Foster, 2014). Employees are the target group for measures relating to earnings-related pension measures. The amount of pension income accumulated through these measures is highly related to employees’ earnings.
国际货币基金组织和世界银行等国际组织对养老金制度的财务可持续性问题表示关切。由于增长放缓和金融市场波动带来的挑战，这些问题引起了越来越多的关注，使政府更难履行其养老金政策承诺（Ebbinghaus，2011）。为了应对这些挑战，政府改革养老金计划，强调个人责任，这并不罕见（Yeh et al.，2018）。他们特别强调与收入相关的养老金措施是帮助人们积累养老金收入的重要手段（Foster，2014）。员工是与收入相关的养老金措施的目标群体。通过这些措施积累的养老金收入与员工收入高度相关。
{"title":"The government’s responses to incompatibility challenges to women: the case studies of Hong Kong and Taiwan","authors":"S. Yu, C. Chau, Sze-Man Li, Mei-Yin Lee","doi":"10.1017/ics.2020.33","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1017/ics.2020.33","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract International organizations such as the International Monetary Fund and the World Bank raise concerns about the financial sustainability issues of pension systems. These issues have attracted increasing attention because of the challenges presented by lower growth and financial market volatility, making it harder for governments to fulfil their promises on pension policies (Ebbinghaus, 2011). In order to tackle these challenges, it is not uncommon that governments reform pension schemes with an emphasis on individual responsibility (Yeh et al., 2018). They particularly stress the earnings-related pension measures as an important means to assist people to accumulate pension income (Foster, 2014). Employees are the target group for measures relating to earnings-related pension measures. The amount of pension income accumulated through these measures is highly related to employees’ earnings.","PeriodicalId":38249,"journal":{"name":"Journal of International and Comparative Social Policy","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2020-12-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1017/ics.2020.33","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"47522121","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Abstract In academia and beyond, it has become commonplace to regard populist parties – in particular, those on the radical right – as the archetypical embodiment of politics of nostalgia. Demand-side studies suggest that nostalgic sentiments motivate populist radical-right (PRR) voting and welfare chauvinist attitudes, yet systematic analyses of the nostalgic discourse that these parties promote have not been forthcoming. This paper seeks to fill that lacuna by analysing how the Freedom Party of Austria, the Dutch Party for Freedom and the Sweden Democrats framed the historical fate of the welfare state in their electoral discourse between 2008 and 2018. It demonstrates that their commitment to welfare chauvinism finds expression in a common repertoire of “welfare nostalgia,” manifested in the different modes of “reaction,” “conservation” and “modernisation.” Giving substance to a widespread intuition about PRR nostalgia, the paper breaks ground for further research into nostalgic ideas about social policy.
{"title":"Those were the days: welfare nostalgia and the populist radical right in the Netherlands, Austria and Sweden","authors":"Sven Schreurs","doi":"10.1017/ics.2020.30","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1017/ics.2020.30","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract In academia and beyond, it has become commonplace to regard populist parties – in particular, those on the radical right – as the archetypical embodiment of politics of nostalgia. Demand-side studies suggest that nostalgic sentiments motivate populist radical-right (PRR) voting and welfare chauvinist attitudes, yet systematic analyses of the nostalgic discourse that these parties promote have not been forthcoming. This paper seeks to fill that lacuna by analysing how the Freedom Party of Austria, the Dutch Party for Freedom and the Sweden Democrats framed the historical fate of the welfare state in their electoral discourse between 2008 and 2018. It demonstrates that their commitment to welfare chauvinism finds expression in a common repertoire of “welfare nostalgia,” manifested in the different modes of “reaction,” “conservation” and “modernisation.” Giving substance to a widespread intuition about PRR nostalgia, the paper breaks ground for further research into nostalgic ideas about social policy.","PeriodicalId":38249,"journal":{"name":"Journal of International and Comparative Social Policy","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2020-11-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1017/ics.2020.30","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"43732993","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Katharina Zimmermann, Urban Boljka, Tatjana Rakar, Maša Filipovič Hrast
Abstract The universal basic income (UBI) has found its way into public debates and has prominent advocates across almost all political camps. In many debates, it is presented as a solution for the consequences of a large variety of current societal challenges, such as unemployment, over-education, ecological crises, gender inequality and issues related to digitalization and automatization. While UBI has been discussed broadly from an expert position, we know very little about the population’s perceptions of UBI. Thus, to shed light on the public legitimacy of UBI as a radically different concept of social justice and citizenship, our contribution uses data from large group discussions where participants explicitly refer to the UBI as an option for a future welfare state. By comparing debates in Slovenia and Germany, we unearth that the perspective adopted by the participants towards a UBI is strongly shaped by the welfare institutions of the countries in which they live and the social justice principles embodied in those institutions.
{"title":"The social legitimacy of the universal basic income from a social justice perspective: a comparative analysis of Germany and Slovenia","authors":"Katharina Zimmermann, Urban Boljka, Tatjana Rakar, Maša Filipovič Hrast","doi":"10.1017/ics.2020.29","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1017/ics.2020.29","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract The universal basic income (UBI) has found its way into public debates and has prominent advocates across almost all political camps. In many debates, it is presented as a solution for the consequences of a large variety of current societal challenges, such as unemployment, over-education, ecological crises, gender inequality and issues related to digitalization and automatization. While UBI has been discussed broadly from an expert position, we know very little about the population’s perceptions of UBI. Thus, to shed light on the public legitimacy of UBI as a radically different concept of social justice and citizenship, our contribution uses data from large group discussions where participants explicitly refer to the UBI as an option for a future welfare state. By comparing debates in Slovenia and Germany, we unearth that the perspective adopted by the participants towards a UBI is strongly shaped by the welfare institutions of the countries in which they live and the social justice principles embodied in those institutions.","PeriodicalId":38249,"journal":{"name":"Journal of International and Comparative Social Policy","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2020-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1017/ics.2020.29","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"43271894","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Joe Chrisp, Ville-Veikko Pulkka, Leire Rincón García
Abstract Recently, the idea of a universal basic income has received unprecedented attention from policymakers, the media and the wider public. This has inspired a plethora of surveys that seek to measure the extent of public support for the policy, many of which suggest basic income is surprisingly popular. However, in a review of past surveys, with a focus on the UK and Finland, we find that overall levels of support for basic income can vary considerably. We highlight the importance of survey design and, by employing new survey data in each country, compare the levels and determinants of support for varied models of basic income. Our results point to the importance of the multi-dimensionality of basic income and the fragility of public support for the idea. The findings suggest that the ability of political actors to mobilise the public in favour of basic income will eventually depend on the precise model they wish to implement.
{"title":"Snowballing or wilting? What affects public support for varying models of basic income?","authors":"Joe Chrisp, Ville-Veikko Pulkka, Leire Rincón García","doi":"10.1017/ics.2020.28","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1017/ics.2020.28","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract Recently, the idea of a universal basic income has received unprecedented attention from policymakers, the media and the wider public. This has inspired a plethora of surveys that seek to measure the extent of public support for the policy, many of which suggest basic income is surprisingly popular. However, in a review of past surveys, with a focus on the UK and Finland, we find that overall levels of support for basic income can vary considerably. We highlight the importance of survey design and, by employing new survey data in each country, compare the levels and determinants of support for varied models of basic income. Our results point to the importance of the multi-dimensionality of basic income and the fragility of public support for the idea. The findings suggest that the ability of political actors to mobilise the public in favour of basic income will eventually depend on the precise model they wish to implement.","PeriodicalId":38249,"journal":{"name":"Journal of International and Comparative Social Policy","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2020-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1017/ics.2020.28","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"48665024","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"ICS volume 36 issue 3 Cover and Back matter","authors":"","doi":"10.1017/ics.2020.32","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1017/ics.2020.32","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":38249,"journal":{"name":"Journal of International and Comparative Social Policy","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2020-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1017/ics.2020.32","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"43827705","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Abstract In this special issue, authors present and discuss the findings of a series of recent national and EU cross-national empirical studies on public support for basic income. As such, the special issue offers new and innovative insights on such support and its individual and contextual drivers. The articles employ heterogeneous data and methods and therefore, as a whole, navigate the multi-dimensional nature of (opinions on) basic income. Three of the contributions use unique survey data to study the levels of support for basic income among various European populations and the complex ideological and social divides that explain such support. The other two contributions use qualitative data, from democratic fora, focus groups and in-depth interviews, to explore how citizens interpret basic income and what types of arguments they use in favour or against the implementation of the policy.
{"title":"The social legitimacy of basic income: a multidimensional and cross-national perspective. An introduction to the special issue","authors":"Joe Chrisp, Tijs Laenen, Wim van Oorschot","doi":"10.1017/ics.2020.27","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1017/ics.2020.27","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract In this special issue, authors present and discuss the findings of a series of recent national and EU cross-national empirical studies on public support for basic income. As such, the special issue offers new and innovative insights on such support and its individual and contextual drivers. The articles employ heterogeneous data and methods and therefore, as a whole, navigate the multi-dimensional nature of (opinions on) basic income. Three of the contributions use unique survey data to study the levels of support for basic income among various European populations and the complex ideological and social divides that explain such support. The other two contributions use qualitative data, from democratic fora, focus groups and in-depth interviews, to explore how citizens interpret basic income and what types of arguments they use in favour or against the implementation of the policy.","PeriodicalId":38249,"journal":{"name":"Journal of International and Comparative Social Policy","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2020-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1017/ics.2020.27","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"42353706","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Abstract In this study, we analyse the relationship of participation in the Finnish basic income (BI) experiment and people’s attitudes towards a BI. The experiment, implemented in 2017–2018, aimed to improve citizens’ employment and well-being by reducing the eligibility conditions of basic social benefits and by increasing monetary incentives to find employment. The data on attitudes come from responses to a survey carried out during the experiment. Identical questions were posed to the treatment (receiving the BI) and the control group of the experiment. The contributions of this paper are (1) an estimation of the relationship between participation and opinions on BI, (2) an analysis of the heterogeneity of the relationship and (3) an estimation of the relationship between participation and people’s ability to express their opinions on BI. Our findings indicate that participation in the experiment significantly explains people’s support for a BI and their ability to express opinions.
{"title":"Speaking to those who know it best: Does participation in an experiment explain citizens’ attitudes to basic income?","authors":"Miska Simanainen, O. Kangas","doi":"10.1017/ics.2020.14","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1017/ics.2020.14","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract In this study, we analyse the relationship of participation in the Finnish basic income (BI) experiment and people’s attitudes towards a BI. The experiment, implemented in 2017–2018, aimed to improve citizens’ employment and well-being by reducing the eligibility conditions of basic social benefits and by increasing monetary incentives to find employment. The data on attitudes come from responses to a survey carried out during the experiment. Identical questions were posed to the treatment (receiving the BI) and the control group of the experiment. The contributions of this paper are (1) an estimation of the relationship between participation and opinions on BI, (2) an analysis of the heterogeneity of the relationship and (3) an estimation of the relationship between participation and people’s ability to express their opinions on BI. Our findings indicate that participation in the experiment significantly explains people’s support for a BI and their ability to express opinions.","PeriodicalId":38249,"journal":{"name":"Journal of International and Comparative Social Policy","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2020-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1017/ics.2020.14","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"41250955","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：