Attitudes towards the welfare state in the Scandinavian countries

The current trajectory of the Scandinavian welfare states is unclear. However, social policy in the Scandinavian countries is, undoubtedly, in a period of transition. This article's main purpose is to analyze whether Scandinavians' support for the welfare state has played a critical role in this transition. Based on surveys from Sweden. Norway and Denmark, two conclusions are reached. Firstly, at the highest aggregated level, the Scandinavian welfare states had solid support in the beginning of the 1990s. Secondly, this support was characterized by significant cleavages between social groups. This article also attempts to further the research on the relationship between institutional characteristics and attitudes. The conclusion is that institutional characteristics provide a reliable guidance for an understanding of attitudes toward social policy in the Scandinavian countries.     

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.     

Solidarity towards immigrants in European welfare states

The concern that immigration could threaten the sustainability of the European Social Model is a reason to have a closer look at popular images of immigrants in the context of European welfare states. The focus is on Europeans' informal solidarity towards immigrants relative to other vulnerable groups in society. Using data from the European Values Survey 1999/2000 we find that in all European countries the public is least solidaristic towards migrants, in comparison with elderly people, sick and disabled people and unemployed people. Contrary to expectation, there is little relation between welfare state characteristics and people's solidarity, while the relative solidarity towards immigrants is higher in culturally more diverse countries. As expected, the relative solidarity towards immigrants is lower in countries with a more negative opinion climate towards immigrants and in poorer countries of Europe.     

Perceptions of inequality and attitudes towards redistribution in four East Asian welfare states

This study examined the effects of perceived economic inequality and inequality of opportunity on individual preferences for redistributive policies among people in mainland China, Japan, South Korea and Taiwan. Using data from the 2009 International Social Survey Program, a series of regression analyses were performed. Results of the analyses indicate that perceived economic inequality is the most significant predictive factor of attitudes towards redistribution in all four states. Perceived inequality of opportunity was positively associated with favourable attitudes towards redistribution in mainland China and South Korea. Perceived socioeconomic status was not found to have a significant effect on attitudes towards redistribution in South Korea.     

From the hidden welfare state to the hidden part of welfare state reform: Analyzing the uses and effects of fiscal welfare in France

This article argues that fiscal welfare in Europe not only forms part of the “hidden welfare state” (Howard, 1997 ), but also constitutes an important yet understudied—and therefore hidden—element of welfare state reform. Using the example of France, and relying both on available data and on an exhaustive database of social tax expenditures (STEs) compiled for 2014, the article begins by providing an overview of the structure of STEs in France (section 2 ). It then analyzes the specific uses and effects of STEs in the fields of employment, health care, and pensions. In particular, it shows, first of all, how STEs have constituted a privileged instrument for circumventing certain institutional features such as high levels of minimum wage and of social security contributions in the field of employment (section 3 ). Second, it also shows that STEs have been used to quietly divert resources away from the earmarked social security funds and into collective private insurance funds, thus fueling their development, in the case of health care and pensions (section 4 ). Lastly, the article engages with the notion of the “social division of welfare” (Titmuss, 1958 ) by considering some of the distributional effects of fiscal welfare in France (section 5 ), before concluding (section 6 ).     

Welfarism and the multidimensionality of welfare state legitimacy: Evidence from The Netherlands, 2006

Oorschot W van, Meuleman B. Welfarism and the multidimensionality of welfare state legitimacy: evidence from The Netherlands, 2006 Is it possible that citizens who support a substantial role for government in the provision of welfare are, at the same time, critical about specific aspects of such provision? Based on confirmatory factor analyses, and using a 2006 Dutch survey, this study shows that welfare state legitimacy is indeed multidimensional, i.e. that opinions tend to cluster together in several dimensions referring to various aspects of the welfare state. There is partial evidence for the existence of a single, underlying welfarism dimension which consists basically of views regarding the range of governmental responsibility, as well as of the idea that these governmental provisions do not have unfavourable repercussions in economic or moral spheres. However, the separate dimensions cannot be reduced entirely to this overall welfarism dimension. This is illustrated by the finding that the various attitude dimensions are affected differently by socio‐structural position and ideological dispositions.     

The case for the privatization of social welfare: three decades of public opinion evidence from Great Britain and the United States

In the last two decades, the conservative critique of the welfare state has been very strong. This study examines the claim of neoconservatives that there is a mass repudiation of the welfare state in the advanced industrial countries. Empirical opinion survey findings from Great Britain and the United States between 1960 and 1990 are examined. Contrary to the radical right rhetoric, there is popular support for social programs in both countries. Evidence also points to sizeable support for a mixed economy of welfare. Three explanations are put forward to account for enduring public support for social programs: the prevalence of social rights, support from the poor and middle class and the limitations of markets.     

Work or welfare – a dilemma in the declining Swedish welfare state

The number of welfare recipients among people of working age increased from 1985 to 1992 in Sweden. Unexpectedly, this increase also took place under the economic boom during the late 1980s, characterized by very low unemployment. This is shown in a study of a 10% representative sample of the Swedish population. Not only has the number of welfare recipients increased, there has been a parallel increase in the relative number of people who are gainfully employed. This trend prevails until 1991, when the employment rates start going down. Until then, the development is characterized by growing polarization (bifurcation) into those who depend on work for their subsistence and those who depend on transfer payments from the welfare system. The development of welfare dependence has been different for men and women. The reasons for this development are discussed. Data about the increasing cost of social security are also presented, showing that the welfare system has not been in any immediate economic crisis from 1985 to 1993.     

Work, welfare and the attack on the welfare state: the mixing of politics and policy

This article considers the current ideological and political attack against the floor of benefits for poor families in the United States. It examines a number of punitive approaches to the treatment of families on welfare that were developed in the United States in the late 1980s and the 1990s and contends that such policies will not effectively deter the dysfunctional behavior of some of the poor. Rather these policy developments reflect an attack on current national policies of developing an income maintenance floor that seeks to economically sustain poor families, albeit often inadequately. The article contends that current welfare proposals by conservatives and social liberals are not satisfactory for dealing with the problems of the welfare poor and offers suggestions for dealing with these deficits. It also notes that criticisms of welfare state protection for the poor raised in the United States are much more categorical than those raised in Sweden.     

The ideological roots of the support for welfare state reform: Support for distributive and commodifying reform in The Netherlands

This article examines the extent to which four major trends in welfare state reform – privatisation, increasing selectivity, increasing activation and increasing discipline – are supported and how this support can be explained. Using recent public opinion data of the Dutch population, it is found that there are two ideological dimensions underlying welfare reform support, the first tapping distributive reform, the latter tapping commodifying reform. While support for distributive reform in the direction of decreasing redistribution can solely be explained by economic interests and economic values, support for commodifying reform can also be explained culturally. It appears that one's cultural position and cultural ideological values are important for support for commodifying reform.     

Discerning self‐interested behaviour in attitudes towards welfare state responsibilities across Europe

Baslevent C, Kirmanoglu H. Discerning self‐interested behaviour in attitudes towards welfare state responsibilities across Europe Int J Soc Welfare 2011: 20: 344–352 © 2010 The Author(s), International Journal of Social Welfare © 2010 Blackwell Publishing Ltd and the International Journal of Social Welfare. This article reports on an investigation into the influence of individual characteristics on attitudes to government responsibility for welfare‐related tasks using data from the European Social Survey. The main finding of this investigation was that socio‐demographic characteristics, basic personal values, a left–right ideological position and religious affiliation were all associated with attitudes towards welfare policies. An item‐by‐item examination of the six issues enquired about in the survey revealed that people tended to hold the government responsible for tasks that would benefit them more directly. Taken as a whole, the empirical findings were interpreted to mean that individuals' tastes for welfare state policies were driven, at least partially, by self‐interest, but it was also noted that further work was needed to disentangle the potential role of group loyalty effects.     

Social workers' attitudes towards social welfare policy

As social workers are widely called upon to take an active role in influencing social welfare policy, a better understanding of their views on the welfare state is crucial. This study examines the attitudes of 422 Israeli social workers from diverse social welfare agencies regarding social welfare policy. The framework for understanding these attitudes includes the notions of professionalisation processes, social work values, and the class position of social workers. The study's findings indicate that support for the welfare state is quite moderate and these reflect more the class affiliation of social workers than their professional values and the professionalisation process.     

The reform of the developmental welfare state in East Asia

This article examines social policy reforms in East Asia and whether the welfare states in the region became more inclusive in terms of social protection while maintaining their developmental credentials. It draws on findings from the United Nations Research Institute for Social Development (UNRISD) project on social policy in East Asia, covering China, Hong Kong Special Administrative Region of China, Japan, Malaysia, the Republic of Korea, Singapore, Taiwan Province of China, and Thailand. It shows that East Asian economies responded differently to the crisis in terms of welfare reform. While Singapore and Hong Kong maintained the basic structure of the selective developmental welfare state, Korea, Taiwan, and, to a lesser extent, Thailand implemented social policy reforms toward a more inclusive one. Despite such different responses, policy changes are explained by the proposition of the developmental welfare state: the instrumentality of social policy for economic development and realization of policy changes through democratization (or the lack of it).     

Changing preferences towards redistribution: How deliberation shapes welfare attitudes

The article departs from the argument that research on welfare attitudes is, so far, dominated by large‐scale survey‐studies, which allow for generalizable insights into citizens' preferences and evaluations, but are necessarily limited in their ability to capture the dynamic and contextual aspects of attitude formation. In order to broaden the horizon of welfare attitudes' research, this article introduces a new qualitative method, namely deliberative forums. In these large group discussions—originally developed for participatory decision‐making—attitudes, opinions, and preferences are core aspects of the deliberation process, and the article argues that by observing deliberation, we can observe attitude construction “in vivo ”. The evidence from a two‐day German deliberation event illustrates in an exploratory manner how information, reasoning, and group processes can influence people's evaluations and expressed policy preferences with regard to redistribution. By linking participants' answers from a survey before and after the event to their statements during the discussions, the article not only shows that the preferences for redistribution people expressed in the survey answers are often higher after the deliberative event, but also seeks to make sense of attitudinal dynamics on the basis of the qualitative material by pointing towards the role of information, reasoning, and group processes.     

Beyond benevolence – solidarity and welfare state transition in Sweden

For many decades the Swedish welfare system has served as an archetype of the modern comprehensive welfare state. When economic recession hit Sweden in the beginning of the 1990s, a period of half a century of continuous expansion and reforms in the welfare sector came to an end. The economic downturn enforced rationing measures in most welfare programs and was accompanied by a move towards privatisation of local welfare services and an endeavour to initiate market incentives in the care-giving systems. The focus was increasingly directed on welfare as a financial burden, and the issue of how diminishing resources should be allocated ranked high on the political agenda. In this article we depart from the concept of solidarity and discuss the development of Swedish welfare and welfare opinion. First, we articulate various representations of the concept of solidarity – societal cohesion, individual support for comprehensive welfare and the amount of universality in the provision of care. Second, we describe some fundamental traits in the route taken by Swedish welfare during the 1990s, focusing especially on care of elderly and the demographic challenge of an ageing population. Third, we summarise the evolution of public opinion regarding welfare provision and discuss the determinants of its variations. The article concludes with a discussion of how the (once salient) features of universalism have been affected by the development during the past decade, and the role of popular support in the route ahead for Swedish welfare.     

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.     

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.     

Debate Privatization in the social welfare state: the case of Norway

The method of deviant case analysis is used to study privatization under the least hospitable circumstances. Norway, a country steeped in principles of egalitarianism, is moving in new directions, mostly due to forces from the global economy. This article puts contemporary trends in sociocultural context. The implications for the health and mental health fields are discussed.     

From welfare state to welfare society: toward a viable system of welfare in Japan and England

Laratta R. From welfare state to welfare society: toward a viable system of welfare in Japan and England
Int J Soc Welfare 2010: 19: 131–141 © 2009 The Author(s), Journal compilation © 2009 Blackwell Publishing Ltd and the International Journal of Social Welfare. This article compares the impact that public welfare reforms during the 1980s and 1990s had, and are still having, on the relationship between statutory organisations and the non‐profit sector in two developed countries, England and Japan. The author argues that the failure of these reforms clearly shows that, although non‐profit organisations may not be able to effectively replace the state in the provision of welfare services, they can contribute, working closely with the statutory organisations, to the shaping, financing and delivery of public services in a variety of ways. It is also interesting to note that, while the public welfare reforms of the late 1990s in England produced a shift away from a culture based on privatisation and contracting‐out toward a partnership culture of collaboration between state and non‐profit entities, similar reforms in Japan have resulted instead in an uncertain area of deregulation and privatisation.