The hybridisation of welfare regimes is a critical issue in social policy literature due to the lack of a uniform dependent variable and the comparative, international scope of social policy analysis, and data availability. We argue that what is presented in the global welfare regime literature as an analytical problem of classification or transitioning could also, in fact, be treated as a methodological issue. Based on this, we aim to establish a criterion for determining the membership of a welfare regime by capturing the presence of hybridisation of welfare regimes in a given country at a particular time. We present a novel methodological approach based on multistage sampling to capture the hybridisation of distinct welfare regimes and determine the most populous cluster in Pakistan. Establishing criteria for capturing and determining welfare regime membership can improve the understanding of welfare regime dynamics and factors that contribute to hybridisation. Ultimately, this knowledge can inform policy decisions and contribute to the development of more effective welfare systems for diverse populations.

The role of external actors has now been widely acknowledged in shaping social policy processes in sub-Saharan Africa. Yet, the social policy roles and influence of philanthropic donors have been less recognised and examined. As various countries in the region seek to expand social policy implementation and delivery and revitalise the development of national welfare systems, it is important to better understand the roles and functions of philanthropic donor agencies in the processes of agenda-setting, financing, and delivery of social policy. This article discusses the complex social policy functions held by philanthropic donor agencies in sub-Saharan Africa through the lens of the “welfare mix,” drawing attention to the divergencies and convergences between Western philanthropic donors and their African counterparts, while reflecting on the direction of future research agendas.

Developing an old-age service system that can meet the fast-growing needs of the aging population is challenging. It is increasingly recognised that community-level services should be pivotal in providing services to older people. In this article, the authors use the Chinese experience and argue that because the state is not clear how such a system should look like, all actors behave like entrepreneurs who strategise, take risks and search for a viable “business model”. The research draws upon in-depth interviews and focus groups in six cities in China collected in 2015-2016 and follow-up interviews in one community in three cities in 2021. The findings show that the service system has evolved into a dynamic entrepreneurial welfare mix that actively embraces the market. This research contributes to the theoretical development of the welfare mix. The authors also raised possible issues with such a direction of change in the conclusion.

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.

Equal access to childcare services is a key concern of childcare policy. This article analyses social inequalities in the availability of such services. We explore how observed disparities are related to the socio-economic status of neighbourhoods and investigate how different provider types contribute to such differences. To do so, we use data on all childcare centres in the city of Vienna, Austria, on the spatial distribution of children aged under six and on three measures of neighbourhood status, over a period of eight years. We find that spatial accessibility is highest in neighbourhoods with the highest socio-economic status, that such inequality has increased over time and that both effects can be attributed to the role of non-profits. The results indicate that the policy change undertaken in Vienna towards increased communitarisation – that is, a shift towards non-profit provision – has undermined the universal character of the city’s childcare system.

In his path-breaking account of ‘The Three Worlds of Welfare Capitalism’, Gøsta Esping-Andersen (1990) aimed to provide a ‘re-specification of the welfare state’. This article examines the claim of Esping-Andersen that his account draws on the theoretical work of Polanyi, Marshall and Titmuss. It then explores the conceptual critique of Esping-Andersen which led to his 1999 revision, with its rather different theoretical underpinnings. It concludes that some of the theoretical underpinning of this work is unclear both in the work of Esping-Andersen and in subsequent accounts, resulting in a largely atheoretical debate. Concepts such as de-commodification do not appear to be clearly drawn from their stated ‘parent’ authors, and may not sum up the content or essence of welfare states. The ‘re-specification of the welfare state’ must be a larger part of the strategy of the welfare modelling business in the future.

Despite their geographical proximity, and similarities in ethnic composition and political contexts, Hong Kong's and Macao's social policies have not been compared in the literature. This article aims to compare the welfare regimes between these two city-states. The comparison involves two dimensions: the pattern of welfare mix, and the modification impact of social policy on the capitalist social structure. It is found that the two states’ patterns of welfare mix have much in common, and their social policies are both marked by a relatively low level of modification impact. Therefore, the conclusion is drawn that Hong Kong and Macao can be grouped into a distinct welfare regime. The major contributions of this study are that it helps add to the understanding of East Asian social policy and suggests a useful framework for comparing welfare regimes.