Documents Social Policy & Administration 12 results

"Social protection in Germany, Belgium and the Netherlands share Bismarckian roots. Over time, these welfare states were however in constant flux and incorporated to a greater or lesser extend elements of both the Anglo‐Saxon and Nordic models. While the Netherlands has from the beginning deviated from the Bismarckian model, in recent years this welfare state has undergone important reforms that have made it increasingly evolve into a “Bismarck cum Beveridge” model. Germany and Belgium also witnessed a dual transformation, with retrenched earnings‐related benefits for long‐term unemployed and an increasing number of atypically employed people on the one hand and expanded social security to the so‐called “new social risks” on the other. It is against this changing institutional background that we can understand the similarities and differences in the extent to which these three continental welfare states used traditional social insurance systems to buffer the social and economic consequences of confinement. First, all three countries strengthened to varying degrees social protection systems for the active age population. So conceived, the policy responses were a response to the dual transformation of social protection that took place in recent decades without, however, changing its course. Second, the extent to which continental welfare states made use of existing social insurance schemes seems to be related to the extent to which these welfare states have moved in the Anglo‐Saxon direction."

"While prior research has demonstrated the poor and unpredictable working conditions and ambiguous working arrangements characteristic of platform-based food delivery, we lack research on the question of how well these workers are informed about essential aspects of their work, including protection of their rights, working time and schedules, and earnings. Comprehensive and transparent information on working conditions at an early stage is indispensable if workers are to be able to make informed decisions on taking up work and, where relevant, investing in equipment and exercising rights linked to a specific job. Drawing on the multi-dimensional job quality literature, this article focuses on digital labour platforms in the food delivery sector across four countries: Denmark, Germany, the Netherlands and Spain. We exploit firm-level variations, including with regard to the types of work arrangements used and the application—or not—of collective agreements. We draw on information provided to riders during the application process prior to the start of employment, including via websites and FAQs, as well as scrutiny of contracts, service agreements and collective bargaining agreements, where relevant. This information is complemented with interviews with trade union representatives. Our findings point to the relationship between a firm's choice of employment status and form of contract, on one hand, and the predictability and transparency of information provided to workers, on the other. Differences and similarities in such information seem to be more strongly bound to firm-level decisions than to the welfare and industrial relations regimes in which the platform companies operate."

"Social Europe, or the social dimension of the European Union (EU), has been receiving increasing attention in academic debates. This special issue introduction discusses Social Europe through the analytical framework of multi-level governance while asking, perhaps controversially, whether Social Europe has the potential to become a fully-fledged welfare state. This introduction also summarises the articles included in this special issue which focus on different governance levels, including EU institutions, member states, national parties, economic sectors, workers and the general public. On this basis, the introduction identifies sources of challenges and opportunities for Social Europe from various levels of governance. We conclude that the needs and demands become more diverse when we move from European institutions to the citizens. Notably, obstacles from one governance level often carry over to another governance level. Consequently, it becomes much more difficult to design welfare policies on the EU level that work for everyone. While a more evolved EU-level welfare state may be possible in the future, substantial obstacles make it difficult to achieve in the short run. Hence, future research should examine the multi-level structure of Social Europe in more detail to better grasp what Social Europe can and cannot deliver and why. Such research is not only relevant in the European Union but also in other multi-level governance systems across the world."

"Welfare state retrenchment is widely seen as a highly unpopular endeavour and, therefore, as politically difficult to pursue. This assumption has underpinned most of the political science research on this issue, notably Paul Pierson's seminal contributions about the ‘new politics of the welfare state'. Yet, the question remains why and under what circumstances cutbacks take place in highly developed welfare states despite these formidable political obstacles. This article reviews the literature on the politics of retrenchment, namely on the impact of socio-economic problem pressure, political parties, political institutions, welfare state structures and ideas. Most authors agree that socio-economic problems – particularly domestic problems – contribute to an atmosphere of ‘permanent austerity' which inspires cutbacks. Moreover, according to most scholars, the extent of retrenchment possible depends on the specific institutional configuration of a political system and the path dependence of existing welfare state structures. The debate on the relevance of political parties and ideas, by contrast, is still far from settled. Further unresolved issues include the nature of the dependent variable in retrenchment studies. Also, the exact motives for cutbacks are theoretically still little understood, as are the political mechanisms through which they are realized. I argue that, because of the nature of these persisting issues, the pluralistic dialogue between different methods and approaches – as well as their combination – remains the most promising way forward in the study of welfare state politics."

"The marginal role of social assistance and the absence of minimum income programmes have long been thought to constitute defining characteristics of the southern European model of welfare. Nevertheless, over the 1990s significant innovations in this field have taken place. The paper aims to contribute to the analysis of recent developments by critically examining the experience of anti-poverty policies in Greece, Italy, Portugal and Spain. It is argued that the “patchiness” of safety nets in southern Europe is due to a unique set of constraints, the most relevant of which are the role of families and the “softness” of state institutions. A review of national profiles reveals that new policies introduced in all four countries mark progress towards redressing some of the historical imbalances of that welfare model. In particular, fully fledged minimum income schemes now operate in Portugal and in certain Spanish regions, while an experiment involving a number of Italian municipalities is still in progress. In spite of this, the paper concludes that social safety nets in southern Europe remain frail in terms of institutional design as well as political support and legitimacy."

"The literature on the Ghent system has focused on the link between voluntary unemployment insurance and union membership in terms of industrial relations. Less attention has been paid to unemployment benefits and employees' decision ‐ making concerning unemployment insurance, even though the core function of the Ghent system is to provide unemployment insurance. This paper examines both of the options that precarious workers (i.e., part ‐ timers, temporary employees, and low ‐ skilled service employees) choose regarding unemployment insurance membership and the change in union density after the Ghent system reform in Finland. First, the results show that the growth of the inde- pendent unemployment insurance fund was the main rea- son for declining union density in the 2000s and early 2010s. Second, in terms of precarious workers, we find that the emergence of the independent fund has affected their choices about unemployment insurance membership and that their choices depend on the type of precarious employ- ment they have. Moreover, part ‐ timers and temporary employees younger than 35 years of age are much less likely to enroll in unemployment insurance than older employees who have the same types of employment contracts. "

"The paper starts out by identifying a substantial increase in the use of welfare state typologies within comparative studies. This has developed to a degree where many authors take it for granted that the world consists of a limited number of well-defined welfare regimes. This discussion took off in 1990 and it is expected to continue as an important dimension of welfare and social policy research long into the next millennium. It is shown that the idea of ordering welfare states according to ideal-typical models dates back to the late 1950s and was elaborated substantially during the early 1970s, though rather unnoticed. The publication of Esping-Andersen's The Three Worlds of Welfare Capitalism in 1990 is identified as the starting point for what has now become a whole academic industry, here entitled the Welfare Modelling Business. Different typologies with different degrees of differentiation are discussed: should we consider welfare capitalism to come in two, three, four or more models? Though the differentiation into regimes is widely recognized, there have, of course, been many discussions about problems and shortcomings. Two major issues are elaborated: the one-sided focus on social insurance provisions and the simultaneous neglect of personal social services; and the parallel one-sided focus on state and market and the neglect of civil societal institutions such as family and networks. The paper concludes that welfare typologizing must take into account the kinds of programmes analysed: context matters."

"This paper provides an overview of the initial crisis responses to the coronavirus pandemic and asks whether and how both the nature of the COVID‐19 crisis and the national responses to this differ from those witnessed during the Great Recession. We argue that the speed and scale of the crisis are indeed distinctive, but that claims of symmetry—a crisis affecting all equally—are misplaced. We suggest that stimulus packages have, in broad terms, reflected the scale of the threat and that the wage subsidies and employment supports that were introduced or adjusted are novel in scope and scale, with innovative developments. There has been a greater emphasis on housing than was apparent in responses to the Great Recession and, while a focus on taxation in response packages has been a focus in both crises, its form differs, with a greater reliance on deferrals rather than tax reductions in the stimulus plans announced to date. Our account stresses the agility of crisis responses and this agility must be regarded as welcome, mitigating a great deal of social harm during the initial phase of the pandemic. Whether these short‐run responses create pressures for wider‐ranging change is much debated, but highly uncertain."

"In this paper, we examine the mental health effects of lowering the UK's benefit cap in 2016. This policy limits the total amount a household with no-one in full-time employment can receive in social security. We treat the reduction in the cap as a natural policy experiment, comparing those at risk of being capped and those who were not, and examining the risk of experiencing poor mental health both before and after the cap was lowered. Drawing on data from ~900,000 individuals, we find that the prevalence of depression or anxiety among those at risk of being capped increased by 2.6 percentage points (95% confidence interval: 1.33–3.88) compared with those at a low risk of being capped. Capping social security may increase the risk of mental ill health and could have the unintended consequence of pushing out-of-work people even further away from the labour market."