Nigeria is home to a significant and growing “youth” population, over a third of it below 24 years of age. The demographic potential for productivity and growth this group represents occurs alongside large-scale unemployment among young people of working age. The “unemployment crisis” has deep historical roots and exists within a wider context of poor governance, insecurity, conflict, and poverty. Policy norms and practices to address youth unemployment in Nigeria largely centre on skill development and job creation, with complementary schemes selectively targeted to specific groups of vulnerable and poor individuals. Measures are typically ad hoc, detached from a coherent programme of sustainable reform. Pre-existing structural factors and capacity constraints also shape the effectiveness of these programmes. While a productivist focus within current policy is potentially empowering in giving young Nigerians “worker” status, it also detracts from attending to deep-rooted structural problems seen to affect young people in disproportionate ways. Securing meaningful choices and lives for Nigerian youth requires reframing youth unemployment beyond labour markets alone, and embedded in ideas of equality and collective action.

This study provides a comparative analysis of the evolution of skill formation systems in Japan and South Korea, considering the nuances in active labour market policies (ALMPs) and institutional transformations in the post-industrial landscape. Both nations initially adopted segmentalist skill formation systems; however, they now exhibit divergent paths. Korea, in particular, has undergone institutional changes from segmentalist to a liberal skill formation system, with firms reducing their involvement in skill formation, resulting in a pronounced skill formation gap. Firms have curtailed their role in skill formation in alignment with environmental changes, and ALMPs have primarily centred on job creation for the elderly and small- and medium-sized enterprise employment subsidies. Conversely, Japan has maintained consistent policy approaches despite similar environmental changes. This study highlights that these divergent trajectories are rooted in the different stages of institutional maturity established during industrialization.

Social protection has expanded unevenly across Africa because of variations in both the initial adoption of programmes and their subsequent ‘institutionalisation’ through government-funded expansions in coverage. The case of Zambia illustrates how policy coalitions promoting the institutionalisation of social protection compete with other claimants over prioritisation in public spending. Even when faced with competitive elections, incumbent governments may prioritise other programmes over social protection. In Zambia, the incumbent government announced and budgeted for a massive government-funded expansion of social protection but failed to allocate the necessary funding – with the result that benefits were not paid to registered beneficiaries. If ‘institutionalisation’ is understood as entailing the political irreversibility of expansion, then the rhetoric of institutionalisation belied the reality (for several years) of retrenchment. The weakened policy coalition supporting social protection was unable to prevent government defunding as scarce government resources were allocated to competing programmes.

A growing scholarship has documented changes in welfare policy in twenty-first-century Latin America, but no study yet has offered a systematic assessment, using a welfare regime approach, that captures the main trends across countries and over time. For a sample of 17 countries, this study offers a comprehensive tool to measure shifts in social policy regimes, highlighting three dimensions of welfare – inclusion, generosity, and equity – across four policy areas: transfers, health care, education, and family policies. Countries made significant progress in generosity and inclusion, but none improved equity. A cluster analysis based on the three dimensions of welfare offers a new, more precise classification of Latin American countries in welfare regimes in 2002 and 2017. Although the analysis shows minor shifts in country groupings, an increasing reliance on social assistance policies, particularly among the most advanced countries, marks a shift towards what I call compensatory regimes.

Facing ageing challenges, long-term care (LTC) has become a focus of policymaking and policy analysis in China. However, the burgeoning literature obscures a lack of understanding of LTC policymaking, implying a linear and neutral process. This depoliticisation is unrealistic and contributes little to understanding the diversity of LTC policies and improving inclusive LTC provision. Focusing on the core institutional arrangement, LTC insurance (LTCI), this article explores a highly politicised policymaking process and reveals complex political deliberations behind different LTCI choices across regions. Underpinned by the multiple streams approach, which supports a systematic comparison of the policy process, this article identifies four key factors from a relational perspective that influence LTCI policymaking, including the tension between evidence and politics in the construction of LTC issues, the tension between policy effectiveness and stability in the assessment of policy options, strong or weak political will, and the presence or absence of municipal government.

Charities are long-established and increasingly prominent non-state actors in social policy. However, these organisations remain understudied within social policy research, particularly their presence in the delivery of global social policy. This paper provides new cross-national evidence about charities operating internationally. It makes use of a comprehensive administrative dataset covering the country of operation of every overseas charity registered in England and Wales, Australia, and Canada. The international connections of charities are extensive, and these organisations are much more likely to work in countries with shared colonial and linguistic ties, and less likely to work in those with poor governance or high levels of corruption. This paper goes beyond a binary focus on either “developing” or “developed” country contexts, and provides insight into the international connections of “non-elite” as well as “elite” social policy actors.

Although there is a growing literature on transnational ideational processes in sub-Saharan Africa, the linkages between local, national, and transnational actors and ideas in African social policy would gain from more systematic mapping. In this paper, we explore what we call the “scales of ideational policy influence” by sketching a multi-level, actor-centric, and institutionalist perspective on ideational policy influence at the local, national, and transnational scales. This discussion leads to analysis of how these scales interact in terms of specific ideas and how both governmental and non-governmental actors seek to impact social policy decisions in sub-Saharan Africa. To illustrate the three scales of ideational influence and their interaction, the paper turns to the making of poverty reduction policies in Ghana. We show how policy ideas move from the global level to a national and subnational level using ideational mechanisms aided by the institutional position of actors and material factors.

It has become universal to claim a relationship between social cohesion and quality public childcare. The more we invest in our children, the better the return later in life. We explore how childcare is used to strengthen social life by comparing the state role in civilising childcare as described in policy and educational guidelines. At one level, we find that policy intentions are framed by the idea of using childcare to reduce inequalities between people and social groups, and at another by the idea of civilising children to adapt to existing social structures. The analysis unfolds these two sets of intentions by showing how pedagogical ideas of child development become linked to the ways two very different states – Brazil and Denmark – formulate and organise ECEC policies as well as using childcare to bridge between people and social groups, and to civilising children to adapt to existing social structures.

There has been an increasing interest in exploring the different types of welfare regimes in middle- and low-income countries. However, most of the studies so far seem to neglect the importance of illicit groups as welfare providers. Illicit groups can be so powerful in many of these societies, that they can create extensive social safety nets embedded in parallel governance orders. Considering their importance as fundamental actors in the Global South, it is required to acknowledge their role as welfare deliverers as a missing piece in the literature. Hence I discuss the nature of what I call “clandestine welfare” and three specific forms of social protection provided by illicit groups: direct, involuntary, and forced. In the first form, the illicit groups provide directly to society by delivering goods or services that the formal state fails to provide. In the second, the illicit group’s activities have involuntary but positive spill-overs over society in terms of welfare. In the last one, the illicit groups use violence to force other social actors to provide social protection. By bringing illustrative examples from Latin America, I aim to show that the action of illicit groups represents a tangible source of welfare for a large segment of the population that goes beyond charity.

Over the last 10 years, to no small degree, thanks to the work of the outgoing editors Zoë Irving and Kevin Farnsworth, the Journal of International and Comparative Social Policy (hereafter: the Journal) has positioned itself among the leading outlets for international and comparative social policy research.

The aim of this article was to use an interpretivist approach to analyse the state–citizen nexus in general and the conflict between civil and social rights imposing restrictions on people’s freedom of movement during the COVID-19 pandemic in the Nordic countries: Sweden (restrictions were voluntary and relied on nudging and individual implementation), Norway (restrictions of movement were for everyone and was enforced by authorities), and Finland (restrictions of movement were for the capital region and was enforced by authorities). Sweden focused more on upholding the civil rights vis-à-vis social rights whereas in Norway and Finland social rights have trumped civil rights in the face of the pandemic. Thus, the analysis suggests that the Nordic countries cannot be understood as monoliths in all respects. The article thereby contributes to a greater understanding of how the Nordic governments prioritise civil and social rights differently when they are forced to choose.

Little is known about government policies that regulate economic transfers between separated parents (child support) outside of high-income countries. This paper provides the first broad overview of child support policy and its outcomes in 37 middle- and low-income countries. Using a systematic literature review, we provide information on child support policies in these countries, considering institutional arrangements, procedures for determining how much child support is due and how obligations are enforced. Using descriptive statistics on individual-level data from the Luxembourg Income Study Database, we show that poverty rates are high among lone-mother families and that fewer than one-third of lone mothers receive child support. Among those who receive, however, amounts average over $3,600 US$/year, making child support an important income source for some. We discuss how current policies and their estimated outcomes are similar to (or differ from) the previous work that focused on high-income countries.

This article examines with empirical evidence the social protection measures implemented in response to the COVID-19 pandemic in ten welfare states in the Global North. We analysed the potential similarities and differences in responses by welfare regimes. The comparative study was conducted with data from 169 measures, collected from domestic sources as well as from COVID-19 response databases and reports. In qualitative terms, we redeveloped Hall’s theory on the distinction between first-, second- and third-order changes. In accordance with the path-dependence thesis, we show systematically that the majority of the studied changes (91%) relied on a pre-pandemic tool demonstrating flexibility within social security systems. The relative share of completely new instruments was notable but modest (9%). Thematically, the social protection measures converged beyond traditional welfare regimes, particularly among the European welfare states. Somewhat surprisingly, the changes to social security systems related not just to emergency aid to mitigate traditional risks but, to a greater extent, also to prevent new risks from being actualised.

This article analyses how life course events including education, citizenship, marriage status and having children would affect female migrant labour market integration. This is put in terms of employment status and job quality under the perspective of welfare and production regimes. To investigate different institutional effects, countries representative of these regimes’ typologies, such as the UK and Ireland for liberal market economies/liberal welfare states, Denmark, Finland, Norway and Sweden for coordinated market economies (CME)/social democratic welfare states, alongside Germany and France for CME/conservative welfare states, were employed. European Social Survey data are adopted within a linear probability model, alongside a nested model aggregating life course events. Through these, migrant penalty is analysed regarding labour market outcomes with respect to natives. Among the life course events, education and citizenship acquisition showed a particularly strong impact on migrant penalty, while marriage and having a child did not significantly affect migrant penalty.

Research on the welfare state often examines social policies in democratic regimes separately from social policies in authoritarian regimes. Two bodies of research have emerged, as the extant literature views these political systems as sufficiently distinct to merit the division of analysis. In this article, we challenge the existing approach by showing that differing regime types can indeed be analysed together. By looking for patterns of similarities, rather than differences, we bring the two literatures into conversation and show how a common factor can trigger social policy expansion in both regime types. Using case studies of India and China, the two most populous democratic and authoritarian regimes, this article illustrates how the expansion of policies that serve low-income groups – India’s Mahatma Gandhi National Rural Employment Guarantee (NREGA) and China’s Minimum Livelihood Guarantee Scheme (dibao) – were both prompted by social mobilisation.

This paper is a first attempt to analyse the relationship between social protection systems and countries’ responses towards the regulation of platform work. It is argued that the degree of accessibility to social protection for self-employed workers is a predictor for how countries will deal with platform work. Countries that provide wide access to social protection for the self-employed tend to develop a more integrative response towards these work arrangements from a social protection perspective because the social protection of platform workers is a smaller policy challenge. On the other hand, in countries with a low degree of accessibility to social protection schemes, the response towards platform work is more confrontational. These responses are characterised by a larger number of court cases and legislative proposals because social protection for platform workers is a more pressing policy challenge and platform work arrangements are understood to be more antagonistic towards the respective social protection systems.

The COVID-19 pandemic has sparked a debate around the world on whether pension systems should be used to support individuals in economic distress. In Latin America, Chile, Bolivia and Peru have passed legislation allowing withdrawals from pension pots, yet with some significant variation. We argue that these measures cannot be simply understood because of the COVID-19 emergency alone but should also take into consideration the combination of legacies from previous pension re-reforms and the political institutional setting. We find that where previous re-reforms have been difficult to implement or have not been implemented at all and the institutional setting makes change difficult, measures that lead to a significant amount of savings being withdrawn may be favoured by political actors as a way to break the stalemate. By contrast, where re-reforms have been largely implemented and the political institutional setting poses few barriers to change, withdrawals may be more limited.

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.