Documents Abrahamson, Peter 3 results

"In Danish family policy, changes initiated by the present conservative-liberal government differ little from those proposed by the opposition. Recent changes are minor, but significant ones occurred in the 1960s, when childcare was universalized, and in the 1980s, when parental leave substituted maternal leave. These changes can be explained as adjustments to post-industrial conditions within a political culture relying on class compromises and a broad consensus informed by expert advice coming from civil servants and ad hoc policy commissions. The paper concludes that changes in Danish family policy reflect changing conditions for employment and the minding of children and that there has been a high degree of continuity and consensus about the change, as indicated by the strong increase in female labour market involvement. "

"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."