The Three Worlds of Welfare Capitalism

The Three Worlds of Welfare Capitalism is a book on political theory written by Danish sociologist Gøsta Esping-Andersen, published in 1990. The work is Esping-Andersen's most influential and highly cited work, outlining three main types of welfare states, in which modern developed capitalist nations cluster.[1][2][3] The work occupies seminal status in the comparative analysis of the welfare states of Western Europe and other advanced capitalist economies.[4] It has been described as "the single most influential piece of comparative welfare state research of the contemporary period."[5] The work called into question well-established ways of thinking about differences among welfare states in advanced capitalist democracies.[6] At the time of writing this book, Gøsta Esping-Andersen was Professor at the European University Institute, Florence.

The Three Worlds of Welfare Capitalism
AuthorGøsta Esping-Andersen
CountryUSA
LanguageEnglish
PublisherPrinceton University Press
Publication date
1990
Pages248
ISBN9780069028573

Typology of welfare capitalism

In The Three Worlds of Welfare Capitalism, Esping-Andersen outlines a typology of welfare capitalism in an attempt to classify contemporary Western welfare states as belonging to one of three "worlds of welfare capitalism."[7] The three types are characterised by a specific labour market regime and also by a specific post‐industrial employment trajectory.[8]

The three types are:

  • Liberal regimes, characterized by modest, means-tested assistance, and targeted at low-income, usually working-class recipients. Their strict entitlement rules are often associated with stigma. This type of welfare state encourages market solutions to social problems — either passively, by guaranteeing only a minimum, or actively, by directly subsidizing private welfare schemes.
  • Conservative regimes, which are typically shaped by traditional family values, and tend to encourage family-based assistance dynamics. Social insurance in this model typically excludes non-working wives, and family benefits encourage motherhood. State assistance will typically only step in when the family's capacity to aid its members is exhausted.
  • Social democratic regimes, universalistic systems that promote an equality of high standards, rather than an equality of minimal needs. This implies decommodifying welfare services, to reduce the division introduced by market-based access to welfare services, as well as preemptively socializing the costs of caring for children, the aged, and the helpless, instead of then waiting until the family's capacity to support them is depleted. This results in a commitment to a heavy social service burden, which introduces an imperative to minimize social problems, thereby aligning the system's goals with the welfare and emancipation (typically via full employment policies) of those it supports.

Since its publication the typology has been widely used in academic research and theory,[9] and has generated much debate on the subject of the nature of the welfare state.[10] The desirability of the work's approach has been stated by various comparative welfare state scholars.[11]

In the book Esping-Andersen criticized earlier theoretical models of the welfare state as "inadequate", arguing that their analysis relied too heavily upon the misleading comparison of aggregate welfare state expenditure,[12] and also argued that public expenditure should no longer be a measure of comparison and that we should seek to replace it with other measures.[13] In the place of expenditure, Esping-Andersen built his typology on a rich database of detailed programme characteristics.[14]

East Asia

While using three categories in his typology, the author notes that East Asia may not strictly fit in a single category but may be seen as a hybrid of liberal and conservative models.[15]

See also

References
  1. Esping-Andersen, Gøsta (1990). The three worlds of welfare capitalism. Princeton, New Jersey: Princeton University Press. ISBN 9780069028573.
  2. Esping-Andersen, Gøsta (Fall 1990). "The three political economies of the welfare state". International Journal of Sociology. M.E. Sharpe, Inc. via JSTOR. 20 (3): 92–123. JSTOR 20630041.
  3. Deeming, Christopher (2017). "The Lost and the New 'Liberal World' of Welfare Capitalism: A Critical Assessment of Gøsta Esping-Andersen's The Three Worlds of Welfare Capitalism a Quarter Century Later". Social Policy and Society. 16 (3): 405–422. doi:10.1017/S1474746415000676. ISSN 1474-7464.
  4. Scruggs, Lyle A., and James P. Allan. "Social stratification and welfare regimes for the twenty-first Century: Revisiting the three worlds of welfare capitalism." World Politics 60, no. 04 (2008): 642-664.
  5. Lynch, Julia (2014-01-13). Béland, Daniel; Morgan, Kimberly J.; Howard, Christopher (eds.). A Cross-National Perspective on the American Welfare State. 1. Oxford University Press. doi:10.1093/oxfordhb/9780199838509.013.023.
  6. Ragin, Charles. "A qualitative comparative analysis of pension systems." The comparative political economy of the welfare state (1994): 320-45.
  7. Svallfors, Stefan. "Worlds of welfare and attitudes to redistribution: A comparison of eight western nations." European Sociological Review 13, no. 3 (1997): 283-304.
  8. Kloosterman, Robert C. "Three Worlds of Welfare Capitalism? The welfare state and the post‐industrial trajectory in the Netherlands after 1980." West European Politics 17, no. 4 (1994): 166-189.
  9. Bambra, Clare. "Going beyond The three worlds of welfare capitalism: regime theory and public health research." Journal of Epidemiology and Community Health 61, no. 12 (2007): 1098-1102.
  10. Bambra, Clare. "The worlds of welfare: illusory and gender blind?." Social Policy and Society 3, no. 03 (2004): 201-211.
  11. Allan, James P., and Lyle Scruggs. "Political partisanship and welfare state reform in advanced industrial societies." American Journal of Political Science 48, no. 3 (2004): 496-512.
  12. Bambra, Clare. "Worlds of welfare and the health care discrepancy." Social Policy and Society 4, no. 01 (2005): 31-41.
  13. Castles, Francis G. "Is expenditure enough? On the nature of the dependent variable in comparative public policy analysis." Journal of Commonwealth & Comparative Politics 32, no. 3 (1994): 349-363.
  14. Castles, Francis G. "Developing new measures of welfare state change and reform." European Journal of Political Research 41, no. 5 (2002): 613-641.
  15. Lee, Yih‐Jiunn, and Yeun‐wen Ku. "East Asian welfare regimes: testing the hypothesis of the developmental welfare state." Social Policy & Administration 41, no. 2 (2007): 197-212.
This article is issued from Wikipedia. The text is licensed under Creative Commons - Attribution - Sharealike. Additional terms may apply for the media files.