Welfare Regimes (welfare + regime)

Distribution by Scientific Domains

Terms modified by Welfare Regimes

  • welfare regime type

  • Selected Abstracts


    Neither Hybrid nor Unique: A Reinterpretation of the East Asian Welfare Regime

    ASIAN SOCIAL WORK AND POLICY REVIEW, Issue 3 2008
    Kyung-Zoon Hong
    Some researchers have been convinced that welfare developments in East Asia, especially Japan and Korea, can be fitted into the existing three worlds of welfare model, while others have insisted that existing welfare regime theories are not able to explain East Asian welfare regimes. This article assumes that we need to go beyond both of these traditional explanations. In the welfare state research fields, welfare regime approaches tend to focus on specific contextual conditions and cross-national differences. As a result, they tend to overemphasize history at the expense of theory. This article tries to combine deductive causal modeling with an institutional,historical context by identifying the contingent rent political game model and deducing important characteristics of East Asian welfare regime from this model. This model opens out the possibility of change in East Asian welfare regimes following the processes of democratization and globalization. Details of this are given in the conclusion. [source]


    Welfare Regimes for Aging Populations: No Single Path for Reform

    POPULATION AND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW, Issue 4 2009
    Mehmet F. Aysan
    We consider recent trends in pension policies in OECD countries in light of demographic aging associated with welfare regime type (Liberal, Social Democratic, Continental, and Southern European). These regime types represent different responsibilities assumed for social security on the part of the market, the state, and the family. While there are significant differences in labor market characteristics, the demographic similarities in aging bring similar pressures for pension reforms across OECD countries. These reforms address fiscal issues in state pensions, typically by increasing the length of the working life, placing more of the pension responsibility on individuals, or converting to defined-contribution approaches. Our study shows that there is no single path for pension reform. While there are some variations, welfare states tend to follow their traditional paths, which differ across welfare regime types. [source]


    How does economic globalisation affect the welfare state?

    INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF SOCIAL WELFARE, Issue 2 2009
    Focusing on the mediating effect of welfare regimes
    In recent years the impact of globalisation on the welfare state has become a major issue in comparative policy studies. Some empirical studies demonstrate a negative relationship between globalisation and the welfare state, while others show adverse findings or a non-significant relationship. The impact of globalisation, however, can be neither uniform nor unidirectional because of the differences in the political economies of individual welfare states. Welfare regimes reflect qualitative differences in arrangements of welfare institutions and the associated enduring configuration of the welfare nexus, suggesting that welfare regimes may influence the impact of globalisation on the welfare state. We scrutinise the relationship between globalisation and the welfare state by sampling 18 affluent countries from 1980 to 2001 and concentrating on the mediating effect of three welfare regime types. Our study provides a comprehensive examination of the relationship between globalisation and the welfare state using a state-of-the-art analytical technique , the mixed-effect model. Findings suggest that welfare regimes respond differently to the impact of globalisation and therefore mediate the relationship between globalisation and the welfare state. Globalisation negatively affects the welfare state in a social democratic regime, while it marginally affects the welfare state in liberal and conservative regimes. [source]


    A great leap towards liberalism?

    INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF SOCIAL WELFARE, Issue 2 2000
    The Hungarian welfare state
    The article analyses the changing role of the Hungarian state by examining the principles and boundaries of government commitment in income maintenance. I test the hypothesis that the welfare regime is liberal and is becoming increasingly more so. The empirical analysis addresses three major issues: the reliance on universal schemes in family support, the nature of poor relief assistance, and the institutional structure of the pension system. I find that these different programs do not add up to constitute any specific type of welfare regime. Rather, the emerging, and still transitory welfare system appears ,,faceless''. I claim that a static welfare typology cannot be applied to the Hungarian welfare system and therefore reject the liberal hypothesis. [source]


    Assessing gender inequality in the Turkish pension system

    INTERNATIONAL SOCIAL SECURITY REVIEW, Issue 2 2008
    Adem Y. Elveren
    Abstract Since the 1990s, the welfare regime in Turkey has become more market-oriented. The introduction of the Individual Pension System (IPS), a privately managed defined contribution scheme, is part of this process. This paper uses an autoregressive stochastic model in order to show the total effect of specific disadvantages, such as a shorter working life, less earnings, longer life expectancy, real wage growth, administrative cost and risk aversion, on the retirement benefits of women in Turkey. Using an actuarial model, the article aims to contribute to the literature by investigating the gender gap in the Turkish defined contribution scheme. [source]


    Neither Hybrid nor Unique: A Reinterpretation of the East Asian Welfare Regime

    ASIAN SOCIAL WORK AND POLICY REVIEW, Issue 3 2008
    Kyung-Zoon Hong
    Some researchers have been convinced that welfare developments in East Asia, especially Japan and Korea, can be fitted into the existing three worlds of welfare model, while others have insisted that existing welfare regime theories are not able to explain East Asian welfare regimes. This article assumes that we need to go beyond both of these traditional explanations. In the welfare state research fields, welfare regime approaches tend to focus on specific contextual conditions and cross-national differences. As a result, they tend to overemphasize history at the expense of theory. This article tries to combine deductive causal modeling with an institutional,historical context by identifying the contingent rent political game model and deducing important characteristics of East Asian welfare regime from this model. This model opens out the possibility of change in East Asian welfare regimes following the processes of democratization and globalization. Details of this are given in the conclusion. [source]


    How does economic globalisation affect the welfare state?

    INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF SOCIAL WELFARE, Issue 2 2009
    Focusing on the mediating effect of welfare regimes
    In recent years the impact of globalisation on the welfare state has become a major issue in comparative policy studies. Some empirical studies demonstrate a negative relationship between globalisation and the welfare state, while others show adverse findings or a non-significant relationship. The impact of globalisation, however, can be neither uniform nor unidirectional because of the differences in the political economies of individual welfare states. Welfare regimes reflect qualitative differences in arrangements of welfare institutions and the associated enduring configuration of the welfare nexus, suggesting that welfare regimes may influence the impact of globalisation on the welfare state. We scrutinise the relationship between globalisation and the welfare state by sampling 18 affluent countries from 1980 to 2001 and concentrating on the mediating effect of three welfare regime types. Our study provides a comprehensive examination of the relationship between globalisation and the welfare state using a state-of-the-art analytical technique , the mixed-effect model. Findings suggest that welfare regimes respond differently to the impact of globalisation and therefore mediate the relationship between globalisation and the welfare state. Globalisation negatively affects the welfare state in a social democratic regime, while it marginally affects the welfare state in liberal and conservative regimes. [source]


    Variations in Kinship Networks Across Geographic and Social Space

    POPULATION AND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW, Issue 1 2008
    Michael Murphy
    This article analyzes variations in interaction with non-coresident adult kin based on comparable cross-national surveys conducted in 2001 in 27 countries. The two main dimensions of kin contact are considered: (1) overall levels and (2) the relative emphasis given to contacts with primary kin (parents, adult children, siblings) and secondary kin (aunts, cousins, in-laws). Age-adjusted variations in kin contact between countries are much greater than those within countries. These results do not confirm the commonly hypothesized existence of well-defined family system boundaries in Europe arising from historical factors. The similarity of patterns of countries outside Europe with European countries with which they have historical ties suggests cultural factors are important in explaining interaction with kin, whereas welfare regimes appear to have little explanatory value. Within Europe, kin contact levels are more strongly related to a north/south divide than to indicators of economic development or religiosity. The findings suggest that neither of the extreme assumptions,homogenizing pressures toward a nuclear family model or persistent well-defined groupings arising from historical contexts,can be substantiated. Rather, there is a continuum in family behaviors over a substantial range, related to a number of explanatory factors. [source]


    Institutional competitiveness, social investment, and welfare regimes

    REGULATION & GOVERNANCE, Issue 3 2007
    Paul Bernard
    Abstract Are the rather generous welfare regimes found in most European countries sustainable; that is, are they competitive in a globalizing economy? Or will they, on the contrary, be crowded out by the more austere and less expensive regimes generally found in liberal Anglo-Saxon countries? We first discuss this issue conceptually, focusing on the notions of institutional competitiveness, social investment, and short-term and long-term productivity. We then briefly present the results of an empirical study of 50 social indicators of policies and outcomes in 20 Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) countries during the early 2000s. We conclude that welfare regimes have not been forced to converge through a "race to the bottom." There remain three distinct ways to face the "trilemma" of job growth, income inequality, and fiscal restraint: Nordic countries achieve high labor market participation through high social investment; Anglo-Saxon countries attain the same objective through minimal public intervention; while Continental European countries experience fiscal pressures because their social protection schemes are not promoting participation to the same extent. [source]


    Neither Hybrid nor Unique: A Reinterpretation of the East Asian Welfare Regime

    ASIAN SOCIAL WORK AND POLICY REVIEW, Issue 3 2008
    Kyung-Zoon Hong
    Some researchers have been convinced that welfare developments in East Asia, especially Japan and Korea, can be fitted into the existing three worlds of welfare model, while others have insisted that existing welfare regime theories are not able to explain East Asian welfare regimes. This article assumes that we need to go beyond both of these traditional explanations. In the welfare state research fields, welfare regime approaches tend to focus on specific contextual conditions and cross-national differences. As a result, they tend to overemphasize history at the expense of theory. This article tries to combine deductive causal modeling with an institutional,historical context by identifying the contingent rent political game model and deducing important characteristics of East Asian welfare regime from this model. This model opens out the possibility of change in East Asian welfare regimes following the processes of democratization and globalization. Details of this are given in the conclusion. [source]