"The idea of targeting within universalism has been evoked frequently, usually as a best of both worlds' strategy. The approach remains difficult to identify, however, because targeting is usually measured as the opposite of universalism. This article proposes to consider targeting and universalism as two distinct dimensions of the welfare state, the opposite of universalism being more usefully understood as residualism, and not as pro-poor targeting. Four welfare state possibilities then emerge, combining a position on the universalism/residualism axis and one on the pro-poor/pro-rich axis: universalism (France, for instance), targeting within universalism (Denmark), targeting within residualism (the United States) and pro-rich residualism (Japan). We show that targeting within universalism entails pro-poor targeting without means testing, a combination that can be achieved with limits on the earnings-relatedness of the pension system and generous transfers to the working age population. Thus understood, targeting within universalism proves to be an effective redistributive strategy, better to redistribute than mere targeting, and less costly than universalism pure and simple."

Support: Digital