2. Definition:
• Comparative social policy examines
how the welfare state or welfare
system is funded, organized and
delivered;
• And also what are the consequences,
of such policies for individuals and
communities.
3. Collecting comparable data
http://www.oecd.org/
Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development
Databases provide information for Member States on topics such as health care and
families.
The benefits of such data is the possibility of policy transfer; sharing best practice.
Alcock and Craig (2009) refer to this as policy translation. The ability of one
government to effectively translate and apply the policies of another country is
achieved with varying success.
4. What sorts of factors impact upon
‘policy translation’?
• Rushed (ie Sure Start)
• Historical
• Cultural
• Economic
• Political
• Social
5. • Not all countries have a clearly defined
welfare state such as in the UK and
Scandinavia.
• Making some comparisons
problematic
6. Welfare Regimes
• The word ‘regime’ implies some way of
organizing or running something.
• Esping-Anderson (1990; 1996) identified three
main welfare regimes:
7. Esping-Anderson focused on welfare
systems
• In the developed world.
• Using national data on public expenditure on
employment; sickness; pensions.
• He also examined the social and political
aspects of welfare development.
• Concentrated on paid work, ignoring unpaid
work – such as care work done by families.
8. In his analysis Esping-Anderson
focused on:
Stratification
Refers to the
structuring of access to
welfare by social class
Decommodification
Refers to the way that
welfare is provided,
regardless to fluctuations in
the economy.
9. Decommodification is
“The extent to which individuals
and families can maintain a
normal and socially acceptable
standard of living regardless of
their market performance”.
(Esping-Anderson, 1987, cited in Shaw, 2013:146)
10. • Financial Welfare relies on social insurance:
People have to put something in to get
something back.
• High employment levels are necessary to
subsidise benefits.
• Individuals and families should look after
themselves first, only turning to the state as a
last resort.
• Commitment to ‘traditional family forms’.
11. • Based on market-based social insurance:
relatively low state benefits for the residual
poor, which are means tested.
• There is a stigma associated with benefits.
• Universal benefits are not favoured; as they
disincentive work.
• Social inequality is not seen as problematic
12. • Based on core principle of universalism; social
solidarity; equality across classes.
• Highly developed welfare state.
• High levels of taxation
• Many responsibilities of ‘the traditional
family’ are fulfilled by the state, i.e. childcare.
• Greater levels of gender equality.
13. Critique
• Narrow range of data
• Some ‘welfare’ is not easily quantifiable:
public/private care?
• Some tax measures can have an impact on
welfare, these were not counted. (Titmus, 1974).
• What about devolution? (i.e. in the UK – creating
a ‘mixed regime’?)
• Esping-Anderson ignored Mediterranean
countries former soviet countries.
• And others!(see Shaw, 2013)
14. Gender and Welfare Regimes
• Esping-Anderson acknowledged that
comparative welfare analysis required analysis
of public/private realms including
interconnections between:
• However, ignores
‘domestic’, gendered,
‘private’, unpaid work…
15. Gender and Welfare Regimes
• Unpaid labour in the home also facilitates
men’s labour market participation.
• Hence, gender should be a critical element of
thinking about welfare systems and social
policies. (Shaw, 2013:152).
• In, ‘The incomplete revolution’, Esping-
Anderson (2009) focused upon gender
(in)equality.
16. Changing European Families
• Dramatic disconnection between marriage
and child bearing.
• Cohabitation has become a generally accepted
living arrangement across Europe.
• Links with female economic empowerment
and the contraceptive revolution (Kiernan,
2004 cited in Lappegard, 2014:57).
• Sobotka and Toulemon (2008) suggest three
main stages across countries:
17. Sobotka and Toulemon (2008)
1. Diffusion: Young adults enter into a
consensual union, which becomes a majority
practice.
2. Permanency: cohabitation lasts longer and is
less frequently converted into marriage.
3. Arrangement: pregnancy gradually ceases to
be a strong determinant.
19. • Across Europe, life has become more uncertain in
the labour and housing markets.
• Because of this, young people have responded by
postponing family-related events including child
rearing and leaving the family home.
• Level of education is inversely linked to childbirth
in cohabitation: Low levels of female education
increases ‘risk’ of childbirth in cohabitation.
• Marriage increases stability…
20. Holland 2013 proposes four categories
of marriage
• Family forming marriage: Marriage then
children
• Legitimizing marriage: ‘Shotgun marriage’
• Parenting is seen as most important; marriage
may follow some time afterwards as a
‘reinforcer’.
• Capstone: Marriage occurs when the couple
has achieved a desired family size.
22. The Gender Revolution: Most modern societies
are moving toward higher gender equality
Many describe this as a two-step process:
1. Developing gender equality in education and employment
and better integration of women in the political process.
2. This is followed by higher gender equality in the private
sphere of the family (Goldscheider, Olah, and Puur, 2010),
implying that men take a more active role in the family,
that is, participation in housework and childcare.
Where the process of gender equality within the family
sphere is not occurring at the same pace as gender equality at
the societal level, families are put under pressure, thereby
limiting fertility (Goldscheider, Olah, and Puur, 2010).
23. Conclusions
• Esping-Anderson’s regimes still offer a useful but limited method of
conceptualising and comparing different welfare states.
• There has been a contemporary focus of gender (in) equality. Part
of this analysis turns upon ‘public’/‘private’ paid/unpaid
conceptions of ‘welfare’.
• Cohabitation is on the increase across Europe.
• Although cohabitation is becoming more popular, and generally
‘accepted’ across European States it is associated with ‘uncertainty’,
other uncertainties include the labour market and housing markets.
• The Gender Revolution is taking place at differing pace across
Europe.
• A single unitary ‘children’s policy’ across the European Union may
or may not promote children’s welfare more effectively than
policies aimed at gender equality and workforce participation?
24. 1. Sandra Shaw, 2013, Comparative Welfare.
2. Trude Lappegard, 2014, Changing European
Families.
3. Robert Henry Cox, 2013, Welfare States in North
America.
4. Sandy Ruxton, 2001, Towards a ‘Children’s
Policy’ for the European Union?
5. Wil Arts & John Gelissen, 2002, Three worlds of
welfare capitalism or more? A state-of-the-art
report
