Taking social policy personally: How does neuroticism affect welfare state attitudes?

The role of the “Big Five” personality traits in driving welfare state attitudes has received scant attention in social policy research. Yet neuroticism in particular—a disposition to stress, worry, and get nervous easily—is theoretically likely to be an important driver of welfare attitudes precisely because welfare states deliver social “security” and “safety” nets. Using cross-sectional data from the German Socio-Economic Panel, we study three distinct attitude types (dissatisfaction with the social security system, feelings of personal financial insecurity, and preferences for state provision) and multiple social need contexts (including unemployment, ill health, old age, and nursing care). Controlling for established explanations such as self-interest, partisanship, and socialization, neuroticism does not systematically affect support for state provision. But it robustly increases general dissatisfaction with social security, as well as financial insecurity across various need contexts. Neurotic people are thus less happy with welfare state programmes across the board, yet they also appear to need these programmes more. This trait may be an important deeper layer driving other social attitudes.     

Protective legislation: The “third pillar” of the welfare state

Welfare states are built upon three central social policy pillars: (1) income programs, including an assortment of income maintenance and security benefits; (2) social services, comprising a diverse constellation of provisions, which furnish care such as health care and education, and “in kind” benefits; and (3) protective legislation, encompassing a dense web of proactive and preventative laws, rights, and entitlements, such as health and safety legislation, minimum wage laws, child protection acts, rent controls, and laws governing evictions and foreclosures. Despite its centrality to the welfare state and to our well‐being, this third pillar has received considerably less attention in comparative social policy research. The dominant welfare state typologies have focused almost exclusively upon income measures and, more recently, on social services, to construct their welfare state categories or “worlds” of welfare while largely neglecting this crucial third pillar. A greater focus on protective welfare legislation can help sharpen the distinctions among welfare states within and across the welfare worlds, which is particularly valuable in light of the ongoing erosion of the other two pillars over the past few decades.     

The hidden welfare state, tax expenditure and social policy A comparative overview

This article describes, discusses and presents information about tax expenditure and its relation to social policy. It stresses that the hidden welfare state strongly influences social policy and that only looking at the direct provision of welfare goods may be misleading when making comparisons between countries. The article presents new figures on tax expenditure in relation to social policy and does so in a comparative perspective. It is argued that tax expenditure seems to have an upside down effect, but further research is needed to substantiate this. It concludes that tax expenditure strongly influences the provision, financing and delivery of social policy, and tax expenditure therefore has to be more fully integrated into the analysis of the welfare state.     

Social investment effects of public education,health care,and welfare service expenditures on economic growth

The purpose of this study is to theoretically and empirically examine whether public spending in education, health care, and welfare service operates as a fruitful investment in welfare states, which has been implied in the literature of social investment arguments. Based on comprehensive review of existing literature, this study suggested a tripartite mechanism of social investment effect of such spending, that is “enhancement of human capital,” “support for labor force participation,” and “job creation.” To find the empirical evidence, a pooled time‐series cross‐section analysis was conducted with the data of 15 advanced welfare states from 1980 to 2015 using estimation technique of fixed‐effect model. The results confirmed that public spending in education, health care, and welfare service had a positive medium‐term as well as long‐term effect on economic performance, while cash‐type welfare spending had an obscure or no visible effect on economy. Government consumption that is a proxy and control variable of size of the welfare state showed a positive effect on real GDP in the medium term but a negative effect in the long run. In conclusion, this study suggests that reinforcing social services should be recognized and dealt with as essence of social investment strategy.     

Social investment,social service and the economic performance of welfare states

This article begins with an examination of the role of social services as the key instrument of social investment strategy, presenting an empirical analysis of its impact on economic performance. A pooled time series, cross‐section analysis was conducted with the data of 15 welfare states from 1990 to 2007 under the ‘social investment hypothesis’ that more social service orientedness brings about a greater positive effect on the economy. The results show that a larger share of social service spending in the total social expenditure – more social service orientedness – contributes to economic growth and labour market performance, whereas a larger aggregate size of the welfare state may have a negative effect on employment. In conclusion, this study suggests that the relatively ambiguous welfare strategy of social investment could be clarified as a ‘transition from income security to livelihood security’ in which emphasis is placed on social service. Key Practitioner Message: ● This study suggests that the key instrument of social investment strategy is social service; ● The results show that more social service orientedness contributes to economic growth and labour market performance.     

Denmark: Universal or Not So Universal Welfare State

This article questions whether or not Denmark is still a universal welfare state. It does so by first offering a comparative‐based analysis of the Nordic countries on central welfare state parameters. Second, the article utilizes a case‐based analysis in respect of three core areas of the Danish welfare state—pensions, unemployment and early retirement benefit—to assess the distinctiveness of the Danish model. The article concludes that, notwithstanding the Danish model is more mixed today than it used to be, it continues to be distinct in areas such as equality, full employment, a high level of spending on social security and an active labour market policy.     

The effects of social and political openness on the welfare state in 18 OECD countries

Studies examining the relationship between globalisation and the welfare state tend to focus on the effects of economic dimensions of globalisation, the extent to which a country is part of the world market. Globalisation also has social and political dimensions and the effects of these on welfare states – in terms of social security transfers and generosity – are studied in this article. Data from the KOF Index of Globalisation , the OECD Historical Statistics and the Comparative Welfare Entitlements Dataset are used to analyse the effects of social and political openness on the welfare states of 18 countries of the Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development between 1970 and 2000. The analyses show that social security transfers and generosity have increased less in countries with the highest increase in social openness and that the welfare state is not affected by political openness.     

When 'Choice' and 'Choice' Are not the Same: Institutional Frameworks of Choice in the German Welfare System

The creation and strengthening of welfare markets in Germany means that citizens can increasingly choose among competing providers of welfare goods and services. However, the conditions under which citizens may exercise choice in various fields of social policy are quite different. A major reason for these differences can be found in the public institutions that frame citizens' choice in welfare markets. This article analyses welfare markets in German health care, long-term care, pensions and employment policies, paying special attention to the respective public institutional frameworks. It will be argued that differences between frameworks of choice can be categorized by means of four parameters representing different aspects of public involvement in welfare markets. Depending on the kind and the degree of public involvement, welfare markets may be compatible with 'traditional' notions of public responsibility for citizens' social security.     

Revisiting the effectiveness of the employment‐oriented welfare state: Considering the quality of employment achievement

The purpose of this study was to examine the effectiveness of an employment‐oriented welfare state. While previous studies have focused on employment growth, this study considers the quality of employment, especially its mediating impact between public social expenditure and fiscal soundness. Three‐step mediated regression analysis was conducted on a data sample from 19 developed countries from 1991 to 2013. The results show that while public social expenditure negatively affects fiscal soundness, if it promotes total and part‐time employment, it can positively affect fiscal soundness. However, when the incidence of involuntary part‐time employment is high, public social expenditure and its impact on employment performance no longer guarantee fiscal soundness. This study addresses the importance of promoting not only employment growth but also employment quality to secure fiscal soundness.     

The impact of the use of the social welfare services or social security benefits on attitudes to social welfare policies

Muuri A. The impact of the use of the social welfare services or social security benefits on attitudes to social welfare policies
Int J Soc Welfare 2010: 19: 182–193 © 2009 The Author(s), Journal compilation © 2009 Blackwell Publishing Ltd and the International Journal of Social Welfare. This article investigates the attitudes of citizens and clients to social welfare services and social security benefits. The data come from a Finnish national survey conducted at the end of 2006. First, the article overviews the previous welfare‐state studies relating especially to the theoretical perspectives of self‐interest and legitimacy. The empirical analysis indicates (i) that a different operation of self‐interest can only weakly explain the differences in attitudes between services and benefits; (ii) that there is general support for Finnish social welfare services and social security benefits, which, however, is mixed with growing criticism among women and pensioners who are supposed to benefit most from the welfare policies; and (iii) that such determinants of attitude as gender, use and, to some extent, lifecycle have become as important as class‐related factors such as income and education.     

Choosing Welfare or Losing Social Citizenship? Citizens' Free Choice in Recent Italian Welfare State Reforms

In the past fifteen years, the Italian welfare state has gone through various important reforms. Almost all social policy fields have been significantly challenged by the presence of both national and European constraints, and in different policy fields some fundamental principles of the welfare state have been questioned and changed. The purpose of this article is to present an analysis of the most recent arguments used for welfare state reforms in Italy, focusing in particular on one key question: have the reforms been formulated and implemented in order to increase the freedom of choice of Italian citizens with respect to social protection? After a brief introduction and conceptual clarification, each section of the article will focus on one social policy field (employment, pensions, health care) and discuss the origins and consequences of the reforms with respect to the freedom of choice of citizens. The main argument is that very limited attention has been paid in the national political discourse and reform design to the freedom of choice for citizens in welfare state policies, since other goals (such as cost containment) were much more crucial. The article will end with an overall assessment of the evolution of freedom of choice in the Italian welfare state setting.     

Formulating the Matthew Principle: on the role of the middle classes in the welfare state

The Matthew Principle, which formulates the role of the middle classes in the welfare state, is discussed in this article. The middle classes are described as primary beneficiaries of the welfare state. This status is achieved through the ability of this social group to influence the policy-formulating process by way of six different channels of influence. It is also facilitated due to the impact of middle-class clients upon the implementation stage of social policy. A case study of employment policy in Israel illustrates the workings of different aspects of the Matthew Principle.     

Traits of a representative welfare state: the Swedish example

Järkestig Berggren U, Blomberg S, Petersson J. Traits of a representative welfare state: the Swedish example Int J Soc Welfare 2010: 19: 402–411 © 2009 The Author(s), Journal compilation © 2009 Blackwell Publishing Ltd and the International Journal of Social Welfare. The care manager reform and the case manager reform are new reforms in the social care services in Sweden, which are evolving during the 2000s. Together they shape the social care services introducing a new way of decision‐making where representatives for the organisation (care manager) and the users (case manager) negotiate. The reforms have been analysed in two studies with results presented in this article. Using the concepts of role, orientation, function and assignments, it is argued that the managers come to the negotiations on rights from different positions that are both conflicting and complementary. They further mediate the development towards a welfare mix, where the market, social networks and users interact to obtain the public welfare provision. Through this negotiated rights model, it is argued that traits of a representative welfare state emerge, with the distinction of moving the focus to the administrative practices and their differences away from political ideologies.     

Radical alternative conceptualizations of the classical welfare state? Contrasting the United Kingdom and the Netherlands with Norway

In many countries, new, broad, and normative “conceptions of society” gained prominence that represent fundamentally different discursive alternatives to the classical welfare state. We present two political projects that contain radical alternative conceptualizations of the classical welfare state, the “Big Society” in Britain and the “Participation Society” in the Netherlands, and contrast these with Norwegian developments, where no such a radical alternative conceptualization of the welfare state can be found. We show that the British and Dutch political projects were attempts to replace the welfare state, whereas there is no comparable big idea about a radical overhaul of the welfare state in Norway. Our analysis contributes to a better understanding of a fundamental shift in welfare state reform, namely a radical reconsidering of the ideational and normative foundation that defines and underpins what the welfare state is or should be.     

The performance of the Australian welfare system in a time of neoliberal economic reform

“Neoliberalism”, both as a body of theory and as a set of policies and practices, is commonly seen as unsympathetic, even antagonistic, to the welfare state. In the period from the mid‐1980s to the global financial crisis of 2007–08, Australia underwent very considerable “neoliberal” economic policy reform. What happened to the Australian welfare system and to Australia's socioeconomic egalitarianism in this period? To shed light on that question three kinds of trend are tracked. The first is household taxes and social expenditure in both cash and kind, using fiscal incidence analysis where the main metric is “net benefits”. The second is economic inequality, as measured by the distribution of incomes and wealth. The third is the performance of the labor market, as measured by earned incomes and unemployment rates. The article concludes with an attempt to integrate the evidence collected from these three sources. The general conclusion is that the Australian welfare system did not follow the pessimists' predictions. The welfare system grew in size and redistributive quantum. Wage levels rose strongly, while unemployment rates fell. Overall, income inequality increased to a small extent, though mainly before the full economic reform process was in place, while wealth inequality changed little.     

Work,welfare, and wellbeing: The impacts of welfare conditionality on people with mental health impairments in the UK

The personal, economic, and social costs of mental ill health are increasingly acknowledged by many governments and international organisations. Simultaneously, in high-income nations, the reach of welfare conditionality has extended to encompass many people with mental health impairments as part of on-going welfare reforms. This is particularly the case in the UK where, especially since the introduction of Employment and Support Allowance in 2008, the rights and responsibilities of disabled people have been subject to contestation and redefinition. Following a review of the emergent international evidence on mental health and welfare conditionality, this paper explores two specific issues. First, the impacts of the application of welfare conditionality on benefit claimants with mental health impairments. Second, the effectiveness of welfare conditionality in supporting people with experience of mental ill health into paid work. In considering these questions, this paper presents original analysis of data generated in qualitative longitudinal interviews with 207 UK social security benefit recipients with experience of a range of mental health issues. The evidence suggests that welfare conditionality is largely ineffective in moving people with mental health impairments into, or closer to, paid work. Indeed, in many cases, it triggers negative health outcomes that make future employment less likely. It is concluded that the application of conditionality for people with mental health issues is inappropriate and should cease.     

Children against parents? The politics of intergenerational recalibration in Southern Europe

Traditionally, Southern European countries displayed remarkably elderly biased social policy arrangements. This article introduces the notion of intergenerational recalibration to capture reforms aimed at rebalancing the generational profile of Southern European welfare states via the expansion of family policy and social assistance schemes—both monetary benefits and care services—and retrenchment in the field of pensions. Then, it elaborates theoretically on the political dimension of this policy strategy, focusing on the implications of the peculiar combination of expansionary and retrenchment reforms, to advance the hypotheses that domestic politics would prevent the realization of such an agenda, whereas the latter would be favored by a major role of supranational actors, especially the European Union. To test these hypotheses, we systematically analyze policy trajectories in the field of pensions and social assistance in Italy and Spain between the mid‐1990s and 2016. This allows, first, to argue that investment in “pro‐children” measures has not adequately balanced the reduction of pro‐parents expenditure and, second, to question the idea that domestic political incentives to expand “pro‐children” policies are necessarily too weak as well as the “enabling” role of external pressures in pursuing intergenerational recalibration.     

Civil criticism and the welfare state

This article is a report on a Finnish survey on criticism of the welfare state. The research questions are: 1) How commonly do people see the negative sides of the welfare state? 2) What background variables correlate with critical attitudes? Data for the study were gathered in a representative Finnish mail survey (N=2, 949). The main results show that criticism against the welfare state is rather widespread in Finland. The most critical people are those who support the Rightist parties. However, different socio-economic groups express diverging forms of criticism. People with a lower position in stratification hierarchies are critical of the alleged bureaucracy of the welfare state. The middle classes are more critical about the redistributive effects of the welfare state. However, the widespread criticism cannot be interpreted as a sign of a legitimation crisis. People both support and criticize the welfare state at the same time.     

Retrenching or renovating the Australian welfare state: the paradox of the Howard government's neo-liberalism

Most conventional studies of the former Australian Liberal–National Coalition government refer to its neo-liberal ideological agenda: its concern to reduce government interference with free market outcomes by restricting access to social security payments. That analysis suggests a substantial retrenchment of the Australian welfare state based on redirecting responsibility for the disadvantaged from government to corporations, private individuals and families. Yet there is increasing evidence from reliable sources that the government has not reduced social expenditure, and that increasing resources have been directed, particularly via the family payments system, towards some disadvantaged groups such as low-income families and the aged. Utilising the theory of the US political scientist Paul Pierson, this article explores the joint paradox of Australian neo-liberalism: the punitive treatment of some disadvantaged groups such as the disabled and lone parents versus the generosity towards other groups and, more generally, the growth rather than decline in social expenditure. The author asks what this paradox tells us about the likely future of the welfare state in Australia and elsewhere.     

Migration and welfare

Migrants accout for an increasing proportion of unemployed people in Europe, and their economic position is deteriorating in many countries. Non-European refugees face the biggest risk of unemployment and welfare dependence. This, in turn, affects their health and wellbeing. Assessing and meeting the need for health care and social welfare for these vulnerable individuals is a challenge to health care, social services and to the public in host countries. Mainstream facilities should be the base, but transitional culturally sensitive programs may have many advantages as complements. Ethnically specific public services should not be regarded as a privilege for certain groups but as a measure to protect minorities from hidden discrimination. There is great complexity in migratory flows as well as in the responses of recipient countries. This generates opportunities for comparative research programs focusing on intercultural encounters and adaptation processes. Joint effort are essential to initiate collaborative research.