Week 6 HT08

1
Sociology of Industrial Societies
The development of welfare capitalism(s)
Week 6 HT08
2
The development of welfare capitalism(s)

• Lecture plan
• Traditional theories of welfare state development
• Contemporary theory three worlds of welfare
  capitalism
• Empirical patterns of state welfare
  cross-nationally
• Different welfare regimes?
• Differences in level of support for social
  redistribution
• How many worlds of welfare?

The development of welfare capitalism(s)
Week 6 HT08
3
Traditional theories of welfare state development

• Structuralist / systems theory (e.g. Kerr et al
  1960)
• Logic of industrialism makes social policy both
  necessary and possible
• Necessary b/c modernization destroys/transforms
• many pre-industrial modes of social reproduction
• (e.g. the family, the church, noblesse oblige)
• Possible because rise of bureaucracy as rational,
• efficient, universalist system of organization
• (plus economic development provides the funds)
• Institutional approaches (e.g. Polanyi 1944)
• Economy must be embedded in social/democratic
  institutions in order to survive
  social/democratic institutions promote welfare
  state development
• Nation-building involves extension of citizenship
  which must include social rights
• Social redistribution favoured by majorities as
  compensation for market risks

The development of welfare capitalism(s)
Week 6 HT08
4
Traditional theories of welfare state development

• Some problems with traditional theories
• Problems of timing misspecification of causes?
• Welfare states typically developed long after
  they became necessary
• and some time after they became possible
• Many welfare states pre-date democratization
• and are least developed in early-democratic
  countries
• Problems of purpose what are welfare states for?
• Emancipation from market dependence?
• Legimization of the capitalist system?
• Market complement / contradiction?
• Problems of degree how far do/should
• states meet welfare needs?
• Minimum subsistence needs?

The development of welfare capitalism(s)
Week 6 HT08
5
Contemporary theory three worlds of welfare
capitalism

• An alternative approach
• Movement away from universal, linear models
  towards those that incorporate welfare state
  differences cross-nationally
• Conception of the historical development of
  different welfare regimes as a product of
  interactions between
• Extent and nature of (working) class mobilization
• Class-political coalition structures
• Historical legacy of regime institutionalization
• Need to think about contemporary welfare regimes
  differences in terms of interaction between
  family, market and state
• Focus on state welfare differences in degree of
• Decommodification the extent of emancipation
  from market dependence
• Destratification the extent of inequality
  reduction (or increase)

The development of welfare capitalism(s)
Week 6 HT08
6
Contemporary theory three worlds of welfare
capitalism

• Three ideal-type welfare regimes (Esping-Andersen
  1990, 1999)
• Liberal Conservative Social Democratic
• Welfare state provides
• Decommodification No No Yes
• Destratification No Yes Yes
• Welfare role of
• Family Marginal Central Marginal
• Market Central Marginal Marginal
• State Marginal Subsidiary Central
• State intervention in
• LM regulation Low Medium High
• Welfare provision Residual Social
  insurance Universalist
• Examples USA Germany Sweden
• Canada France Norway

The development of welfare capitalism(s)
Week 6 HT08
7
Empirical patterns different welfare regimes?

• Decommodification and type of welfare regime
• Degree of decommodification
• indicated by minimum and typical
• extent to which benefits match up
• to normal worker earnings
• Indicated further by extent of
• qualifying period (minimum
• required contribution, waiting
• period, etc.)
• Liberal welfare regimes least and
• social democratic welfare most
• decommodifying
• Conservative welfare regimes
• somewhere in between

Source Esping-Andersen (1990, p.70)
The development of welfare capitalism(s)
Week 6 HT08
8
Empirical patterns different welfare regimes?

• Destratification in liberal welfare regimes
• Liberal welfare regimes especially
• notable for high degree of
• residualism
• Substantial reliance on individual
• private provision of welfare
• State provision of welfare a last
• resort, largely restricted to the
• poorest of the poor
• Unclear whether residualism
• lowest in social democratic or
• in conservative regimes

Source Esping-Andersen (1990, p.70)
The development of welfare capitalism(s)
Week 6 HT08
9
Empirical patterns different welfare regimes?

• Destratification in conservative welfare regimes
• Conservative welfare regimes
• principally characterised by
• social insurance model
• Greater degree of corporatism
• welfare benefits segmented and
• differentiated according to
• occupational group
• Greater degree of etatism
• concentration of economic
• planning and control into govt
• hands (measured here by GDP
• spent on civil service pensions)
• Corporatism/etatism generally

Source Esping-Andersen (1990, p.70)
The development of welfare capitalism(s)
Week 6 HT08
10
Empirical patterns different welfare regimes?

• Destratification in social democratic welfare
  regimes
• Social democratic welfare
• regimes characterised primarily
• by universalism
• Welfare benefits most likely to
• be made available to all,
• irrespective of individual need
• Level of benefits more likely to
• be equal irrespective of
• individual inputs
• Conservative regimes and esp.
• liberal regimes tend to have lower
• levels of universalism or equality
• or both

Source Esping-Andersen (1990, p.70)
The development of welfare capitalism(s)
Week 6 HT08
11
Empirical patterns levels of support for social
redistribution

• Support for redistribution generally lowest in
  liberal regimes
• and biggest disjuncture between support for
  redistribution and perceived inequality

Source Evans 1998
The development of welfare capitalism(s)
Week 6 HT08
12
Empirical patterns levels of support for social
redistribution

• Attitudes to income inequality
• Larger income inequalities accepted in liberal
  regimes legitimate income gap smallest in social
  democratic regimes

Source Svallfors 1997
The development of welfare capitalism(s)
Week 6 HT08
13
Empirical patterns levels of support for social
redistribution

• Attitudes to income inequality
• Larger income inequalities accepted in liberal
  regimes legitimate income gap smallest in social
  democratic regimes
• Attitudes to govt responsibility
• Perceived least by those in liberal regimes, most
  by those in social democratic regimes
• but note similarity of social democratic and
  conservative regimes in relation to full
  employment and basic wage

Source Svallfors 1997
The development of welfare capitalism(s)
Week 6 HT08
14
Empirical patterns how many worlds of welfare?

• Some industrial societies sit between worlds
  (e.g. UK, IRE, AUS, NZ)
• Several contenders for fourth world?
• Antipodean social democratic/
• liberal crossover (Castles 1996 ch4.)
• Mediterranean no articulated
• social minimum (Leibfried 1992)
• East Asian particularistic social
• insurance coupled with strong
• reliance on family
• (Goodman and Peng 1996 ch7.)
• Convergenceone world?
• Particular cases, yes

Source Brady et al 2005
The development of welfare capitalism(s)
Week 6 HT08