To date, social long-term care insurance (SLTCI) systems have been introduced in six countries globally: the Netherlands, Israel, Germany, Japan, Luxembourg and South Korea. Applying an actor-centred, multi-dimensional framework and fuzzy-set analysis, the present article investigates the typical characteristics and variations of these SLTCI schemes at introduction and today. In short, we find that the SLTCI model features dominant social contribution financing, a mix of for- and non-profit providers, and state regulation. In light of the relevance of corporate self-regulation often associated with social insurance systems, the dominance of state regulation is unexpected. The analysis also reveals considerable variance between cases, most notably concerning the extent of private individual actors’ involvement. While geographical proximity of countries does not explain differences between SLTCI systems, “temporal clusters” seem to partly drive the variation of SLTCI actor configurations.

This review paper critically examines a range of analytical frameworks used to analyse the German mini-job scheme in comparative research on work and welfare. The approaches examined include labour market dualisation in comparative political economy research and welfare-to-work policies in comparative social policy research. The paper claims that using stylized facts instead of a thorough understanding of the broader context of national employment and social systems leads to misinterpretations in terms of policy learning. By describing the institutional context and main drivers of the evolution of mini-jobs over time, based on variety of data sources, statistics and empirical studies, the paper addresses the critical role of this specific employment scheme for gender equality, largely ignored in the comparative literature.

This exploratory paper utilises a comparative research approach to shed light upon the developmental trajectories of the Greek and Cypriot guaranteed minimum income (GMI) schemes. Our analysis indicates that, despite similarities (e.g. in the emergence of the two schemes, as part of the extensive reforms imposed during the financial crisis on the Greek and Cypriot welfare systems), there are also significant differences. These mainly relate to implementation and, ultimately, the “success” of the two schemes in attaining their declared goals. Moreover, we argue that the developmental paths followed by the Greek and Cypriot GMI schemes should be interpreted in the light of key variables (“functionalist,” “political” and “institutional”), often used to explain the establishment and further evolution of such schemes. Within this context, the relatively “superior” performance of the Cypriot GMI, compared with the Greek scheme, is largely attributed to factors such as government effectiveness and political stability.

This paper explores the contextual and government response factors to the first-wave of the COVID-19 pandemic for 25 the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development nations using fuzzy-set qualitative comparative analysis. It considers configurations of: obesity rates; proportions of elderly people; inequality rates; country travel openness and COVID-19 testing regimes, against outcomes of COVID-19 mortality and case rates. It finds COVID-19 testing per case to be at the root of sufficient solutions for successful country responses, combined, in the most robust solutions, with either high proportions of elderly people or low international travel levels at the start of pandemic. The paper then locates its sample countries in relation to existing welfare typologies across two dimensions based on total social expenditure and proportional differences between the GINI coefficient before and after taxes and transfers. It finds that countries generally categorised as “liberal” in most existing typologies did the most poorly in their first-wave COVID-19 response.

In 2008, the world underwent one of its worst economic and financial crises, whose consequences are still visible in some countries. This paper aims to analyse the impact of the crisis within the long-term care systems of Germany, England, Sweden and Spain from a comparative perspective. The time period analysed spans from the outset of the crisis in 2008, up to 2017. This article starts off from the thesis of the divergent impact of the economic crisis in these countries and the convergence between the impact of the crisis and long-term care contractions in the most afflicted countries. The outcome highlights the power of economic and financial pressures in order to explain the contractions within the care policies. Equally, it emphasizes the contradictions between the formal development level of the care systems and their practical institutional implementation in the field.

Over two decades ago, Korpi and Palme (1998) published one of the most influential papers in the history of social policy discipline, in which they put forward a “paradox of redistribution”: the more countries target welfare resources exclusively at the poor, the less redistribution is actually achieved and the less income inequality and poverty are reduced. The current paper provides a state-of-the-art review of empirical research into that paradox. More specifically, we break down the paradox into seven core assumptions, which together form a causal chain running from institutional design to redistributive outcomes. For each causal assumption, we offer a comprehensive and critical review of the relevant empirical literature, also including a broader range of studies that do not aim to address Korpi and Palme’s paradox per se, but are nevertheless informative about it.

The purpose of this study is to analyse determinants of resources devoted to public employment services (PES). It has proven difficult to disentangle ‘carrots’ (placement and services) from ‘sticks’ (sanctions and monitoring) when tracking the development of PES spending. This has contributed to ambivalence concerning the role of partisan politics, especially since welfare states have been argued to increasingly emphasize the ‘sticks’ aspect of the PES, irrespective of ideological orientation. This suggests that the role of partisan politics should be analysed together with ‘demanding’ activation, which is made possible with novel data on unemployment benefit conditionality. The analysis includes 16 welfare states and results indicate that left and secular centre-right parties are associated with increased resources devoted to PES, but that effects of partisan politics are contingent on the form and extent of benefit conditionality. Increased conditionality is associated with higher PES spending, thus nuancing the cost-containment argument for activation.

In academia and beyond, it has become commonplace to regard populist parties – in particular, those on the radical right – as the archetypical embodiment of politics of nostalgia. Demand-side studies suggest that nostalgic sentiments motivate populist radical-right (PRR) voting and welfare chauvinist attitudes, yet systematic analyses of the nostalgic discourse that these parties promote have not been forthcoming. This paper seeks to fill that lacuna by analysing how the Freedom Party of Austria, the Dutch Party for Freedom and the Sweden Democrats framed the historical fate of the welfare state in their electoral discourse between 2008 and 2018. It demonstrates that their commitment to welfare chauvinism finds expression in a common repertoire of “welfare nostalgia,” manifested in the different modes of “reaction,” “conservation” and “modernisation.” Giving substance to a widespread intuition about PRR nostalgia, the paper breaks ground for further research into nostalgic ideas about social policy.

The universal basic income (UBI) has found its way into public debates and has prominent advocates across almost all political camps. In many debates, it is presented as a solution for the consequences of a large variety of current societal challenges, such as unemployment, over-education, ecological crises, gender inequality and issues related to digitalization and automatization. While UBI has been discussed broadly from an expert position, we know very little about the population’s perceptions of UBI. Thus, to shed light on the public legitimacy of UBI as a radically different concept of social justice and citizenship, our contribution uses data from large group discussions where participants explicitly refer to the UBI as an option for a future welfare state. By comparing debates in Slovenia and Germany, we unearth that the perspective adopted by the participants towards a UBI is strongly shaped by the welfare institutions of the countries in which they live and the social justice principles embodied in those institutions.

Care-leavers – those transitioning from alternative care towards young adulthood – are widely recognized as a vulnerable population, yet child protection legislation seldom applies to them because they have reached adulthood. Despite this, little internationally comparative research on care-leaving policy and legislation has been conducted. This paper maps multinational policy and legislation and its impact on the services to care-leavers and the challenges they experience. An online survey was conducted with key informants in 36 countries and analysed by a multinational team of care-leaving scholars. Findings reveal that few countries have well-developed care-leaving legislation. Most countries provide little aftercare beyond the age of 18, even when legislation provides for it. Within the context of suboptimal social policy and limited aftercare services, findings also reveal high vulnerability among care-leavers. Recommendations for policy development, global dialogue, further research and advocacy are proposed.

There is a long-established link between care policies and gender equality outcomes, and much modelling of welfare state typologies look at care provision as a distinguishing feature. However, to date, little research has been done which has systematically and critically examined those links by examining the policies and the way they operate, how and why they affect gender equality, and the governance of care policies in a comparative way. This paper draws on evidence from a recently completed comparative study looking at long-term care and gender equality. A CQA (Comparative Qualitative Analysis) approach was used to identify case studies, and further analysis carried out which focussed on: overall, how the policies and the way they operated to achieve gender equality; the governance and design of policies that led to good gender equality outcomes; the level of policy making; the role of the state, the family, the community and the nonstatutory civic sector in designing and delivering effective policies; and how context specific the ideas, actors and institutions supporting the policies were. Instead of using existing welfare typologies that were not driven by gender equality as the defining outcome variable, the author takes an inductive approach to policy analysis to compare policy outcomes according to gender equity outcomes. She devises two new models of long-term care policy: the Universal Model and the Partnership Model, both of which lead to improved gender equality in different ways. This paper concludes by noting the need to move beyond existing welfare state typologies in examining gender equality outcomes, which will result in new models as depicted here.

Disability assessments play a key role in welfare states but are increasingly contested, not least for their compatibility with the United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (CRPD). This paper draws on evidence of global governance and assessment practices in 34 European countries, the largest international study to date. The paper reflects on the model of disability in the CRPD and its implications for disability assessment, drawing on the work of the CRPD Committee. The paper also examines examples of promising practice in assessment in European countries and concludes by identifying elements of a CRPD-compatible approach. Disability assessments must be underpinned by both a social-contextual concept of disability and a human rights approach. Administrative attribution of disability status based on categorical diagnosis or individual functioning alone is incompatible with this approach. This approach challenges the historic individualization of disability assessments and the knowledge relationships underpinning them.

In this article, I present an analysis of the conditions that led to the success of an NGO coalition to challenge and bring about the suspension of a workfare program in Israel. I compare the Israeli contention against workfare with similar mobilizations that took place in France and Germany, in order to identify conditions that may enhance challenges to the politics of conditionality. I argue that the success of collective action against a workfare programme in Israel was precipitated by the formation of a loose coalition of civil society organizations which succeeded in seizing opportunities, gaining access to institutionalized political systems, and mobilizing allies from the ranks of political elites. Moreover, I demonstrate these opportunities’ fluidity, such that the loss of certain allies engendered the workfare programme’s rebirth. The article concludes by outlining lessons that can be learned from this case.

The main purpose of this article is twofold: (1) an examination of welfare regimes using a bottom-up approach, which enables a comprehensive analysis of welfare production based on recipients perceptions; and (2) an examination of more than one type of welfare-mix coexisting inside the national level across policy sectors. A classification of welfare regimes is carried out following a bottom-up approach and relying on the basis of the importance of welfare providers to satisfy social risks and promote well-being. Three traditional (e.g. state, market, family) and one alternative welfare providers (e.g. community) are considered. Data is collected through twenty semi-structured interviews in seven marginalised communities of Puerto Rico. The results show five configurations of intra-national welfare-mixes across the following welfare areas: housing, nourishment, health, education, maternity/paternity, disability, work-unemployment and older-age. This paper contributes to the theoretical proposals of intra-national welfare regimes, and alternatives providers in the welfare-mix.

The growing literature on individual determinants of subjective well-being has given little attention to political factors. This paper considers the welfare state, and how social expenditure affects individuals’ self-reported life satisfaction. The statistical analysis uses indicators of subjective well-being, reflecting individuals from OECD-countries between 1980 and 2012, with data gathered from the Eurobarometer and the World Values Survey - which are analysed in comparison. The results suggest that social spending should be studied in terms of underlying branches when addressing its implications. The results find social spending to be uncorrelated with levels of subjective well-being when considered in terms of total levels. When considered as types of spending however, a majority of the elements are found to have significant impacts. The findings show mixed results among the two data sets; however, important similarities are found in the way social spending related to health care and poverty are having positive impacts, and spending associated with unemployment and labour market programmes have negative impacts. As the correlations of the underlying elements affect life satisfaction in different directions, total social spending appears to be uncorrelated with subjective well-being, although the true impact depends on which socialpolicies are being promoted through such spending.

This paper investigates elite-level partisan differences along the socioeconomic dimension in three developed East Asian democracies – Japan, South Korea and Taiwan. On the one hand, the mainstream literature in welfare studies and party politics expects left- and right-leaning parties should vary significantly in utilizing social policy promises. On the other hand, the path dependency logic tells us that left–right difference should be found over particularistic benefits, such as agricultural subsidies or construction projects, considering that these were central means for right-leaning parties to maintain their power during the developmental state period in the three countries. Using an original bill-sponsorship data set between 1987 and 2012, we find that there has not been any substantial difference in the agenda setting of conventional social welfare bills between left- and right-wing government periods. However, a clear elective affinity can be observed between established right-wing parties and particularistic benefits. The paper shows that contextualizing key political actors' preferences can lead to a more systematic understanding of political dynamics behind the socioeconomic dimension in non-Anglo-European countries.

This article analyses whether the extent of public welfare provision influences the speed at which (quasi-)jobless households get (back) into employment. (Quasi-)joblessness is one of the key criteria defining the risk of poverty and social exclusion in the EU. Moreover, the perceived tension between the main functions of social benefits (protecting households from poverty and incentivising job search) is most acute among these households. Based on EU-SILC data, we examine changes of household work intensity during one year after benefit receipt. We observe that “more-generous” social benefits have a slightly negative impact. This can potentially be due to a disincentive effect of social benefits, but it can also mean that the additional financial leeway is used by job seekers to wait for more adequate job offers or engage in further training. Even though statistically significant, the estimated negative effects are very small.

Income security when health impairment or other social risks occur is a major objective of welfare states. This comparative study uses register data from four Nordic welfare states for examining equivalized disposable income during the last 12 years alive among men and women who died when aged 55–69 years old. The analysed outcome indicates the aggregate result of a varied set of income maintenance mechanisms. Median income increased in the Finnish, Norwegian and Swedish samples, but decreased somewhat in Denmark, probably due to relatively frequent transitions to retirement and larger income drops after retirement than in the other Nordic countries. Analyses of comparison samples weighted by propensity scores indicated a better income development among those who lived beyond the observation period than among those who died. The higher educated had a more favourable income development during the years prior to death than those with low education.

This paper analyses the politicisation of the Eurozone crisis in Finnish public debate, in May-November 2010. We emphasise how the mainstream parties responded to the radical right Finns Party's framing, in addition to two context factors: first, the constraints posed on domestic policymakers by EU and EMU-level decisions, and secondly, the sharp, economic downturn, encouraging a zero-sum interpretation of distributive claims. To trace actor positions, we analyse 1183 actor-issue statements coded from Finland's main newspaper, Helsingin Sanomat. Our findings suggest that radical right-wing parties can benefit from the high salience of socio-economic issues, if distributive conflict can plausibly be portrayed as a in- and out-group conflict, and that the mainstream parties did not only adopt nationalistic rhetoric as a response to the radical right-wing Finns Party's framing, but were responding to a constraints such as the diminished room for maneuver in the EMU, moving them towards the Finns Party's position.

In many European countries and in the US, populist right-wing parties are gaining ground. The political agenda of these parties is dominated by their reluctant or even out-right hostile position against migration and foreigners and a strong emphasis on nationalist values in combination with an anti-globalisation economic agenda. In most cases, the social agenda of the radical right parties and politicians are more ambiguous and less clearly explicated. These parties rely on working class ‘insiders’ and therefore may be expected to oppose austerity measures, but at that same time have firm opinions about deservingness and conditionality that may sometimes harm the interests of their voters. This article sets out to explore the social policy agenda of radical right parties in six different countries: the US, Sweden, the Netherlands, Belgium, Germany and France. The article uses content analysis of speeches and party manifestos as its main method of data analysis.