Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-7cvxr Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-27T09:22:42.242Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Welfare Over Time: Three Worlds of Welfare Capitalism in Panel Perspective*

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  28 November 2008

Bruce Headey ,
Robert E. Goodin ,
Ruud Muffels  and
Henk-Jan Dirven
Bruce Headey*
Affiliation:
Public Policy, University of Melbourne
Robert E. Goodin*
Affiliation:
Philosophy, Australian National University
Ruud Muffels*
Affiliation:
Economics, Tilburg University
Henk-Jan Dirven*
Affiliation:
Sociology, Central Bureau of Statistics Netherlands
*
Public Policy Program, 234 Queensbury St., University of Melbourne, Parkville VIC 3052, Australia; Fax: (61)(3) 9349 4442; email: B.W._Headey. [email protected].
Philosophy, Research School of Social Sciences, Australian National University, Canberra ACT 0200, Australia; Fax: (61)(2)62493294; email: goodinb@coombs,anu.edu.au.
Research Unit on Work & Social Security, Tilburg University, PO Box 90153, Tilburg, The Netherlands; Fax: 31 13 4 66 2053; email: [email protected].
Department of Socio-Economic Household Surveys, Central Bureau of Statistics, P.O. Box 4481, NL-6401 CZ Heerlen, The Netherlands; Fax: +31 45 5706272; email: [email protected].
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

In this paper we analyse the effects, over time, of the liberal (US), corporatist (German) and social democratic (Dutch) welfare states on poverty, inequality and income redistribution 1985–89. Unlike previous international comparisons relying on static frameworks and cross-sectional data, we use panel data from the Dutch Socio-Economic Panel (SEP), the German Socio-Economic Panel (SOEP), and the American Panel Study of Income Dynamics (PSID) — all of which have large samples (15,000+ respondents) and all of which have been running for fully a decade — to compare welfare state performance over one and five years. We find that both the corporatist (German) and especially the social democratic (Dutch) welfare states redistribute income substantially to reduce poverty and inequality, and that in both cases these effects are substantially greater over five years than one. In the social democratic (Dutch) regime very few people have incomes which, taking a five year average, put them below the poverty line. The corporatist (German) regime also turns out to be much more redistributive over five years than would ordinarily be expected. The liberal (US) welfare state, in contrast, is not only much less redistributive on a one-year basis but also no more so over five years than one. There is, however, evidence of efficiency losses in the more ‘generous’ social democratic welfare state, in that fewer people appear to escape poverty through labour markets than in the liberal welfare regime.

Type
Articles
Information
Journal of Public Policy , Volume 17 , Issue 3 , September 1997 , pp. 329 - 359
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1997

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Footnotes

*

An earlier version was presented to the Second German Socio-Economic Panel Conference, Potsdam, July 1996. We gratefully acknowledge the helpful comments of that audience, of Richard V. Burkhauser, Peter Krause, Julian Le Grand, Deborah Mitchell, Stein Ringen, Gert G. Wagner and of the JPP's anonymous referees. Thanks also to Ewa Karafilowska for superb statistical and computing advice. This paper is based on research carried out in the context of the comparative research project entitled ‘The Real Worlds of Welfare Capitalism’. Master sets of the American and German panel data are held at the Center for Demography and Economics of Aging at Syracuse University and the German Institute for Economic Research, Berlin. We are grateful to these institutions for preparing matched data sets. The Dutch data are collected and held by the Central Bureau of Statistics to which we express our gratitude. Views in the paper are those of the authors and not of our employers.

References

REFERENCES

Atkinson, A. B. (1995) Incomes and the Welfare State. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Atkinson, A. B. (1997) The Economic Consequences of Rolling Back the Welfare Slate. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Atkinson, A. B. and Micklewright, J. (1992) Economic Transformation in Eastern Europe. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Atkinson, A. B.; Rainwater, L.; and Smeeding, T. M., T. M., (1995). Income Distribution in OECD Countries: The Evidence from the Luxembourg Income Study. Paris: OECD. Reprinted Atkinson 1995, ch. 2.Google Scholar
Bane, M. J. and Ellwood, D. (1986) Slipping into and out of poverty: the dynamics of spells, fournal of Human Resources, 21, 1–23.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bane, M. J. and Ellwood, D. (1994) Welfare Realities: From Rhetoric to Reform. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Barr, N. (1992) Economic theory and the welfare state: a survey and an interpretation, fournal of Economic Literature, 30, 741–803.Google Scholar
Beckerman, W. (1979) Poverty and the Impact of Income Maintenance Porgrammes in Four Developed Countries. Geneva: International Labour Organisation.Google Scholar
Buhmann, B.; Rainwater, L.; Schmaus, G. and Smeeding, T. M. (1988) Equivalence scales, well-being, inequality and poverty: sensitivity estimates across ten countries using the Luxembourg Income Study (LIS) database. Review of Income and Wealth, 34, 115–42.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Burkhauser, R. V. and Poupore, J. G. (1993) A cross-national comparison of permanent inequality in the US and Germany. Cross-National Studies in Aging Program, Project Paper No. 10. Syracuse, N.Y.: Syracuse University.Google Scholar
Castles, F. G. (ed.) (1993) Families of Nations: Patterns of Public Policy in Western Democracies. Aldershot: Dartmouth.Google Scholar
Castles, F. G. (1996) Needs-based strategies of social protection in Australia and New Zealand. Ch. 4 in Esping-Andersen 1996a.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Castles, F. G. and Mitchell, D. (1992) Identifying welfare state regimes: the links between politics, instruments and outcomes. Governance, 5, 1, 1–26. Reprinted in Castles 1993, ch. 3.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Citro, C. F. and Michael, R. T. (1995) Measuring Poverty: A New Approach. Washington D.C.: National Academic PressGoogle Scholar
Coulter, F. A. E.; Cowell, F. A.; and Jenkins, S. P. (1992) Equivalence scale relativities and the extent of the inequality and poverty. Economic fournal, 102, 1067–82.Google Scholar
Duncan, G.J. et al. (1984) Years of Poverty, Years of Plenty. Ann Arbor: Institute for Social Research, University of Michigan.Google Scholar
Duncan, G.J. (1994) Using panel studies to understand household behaviour and well-being. Paper presented to Aldi Hagenaars Memorial Conference, 28–29 08.Google Scholar
Duncan, G. J.; Gustafsson, B.; Hauser, R.; Schmauss, G.; Laren, D.; Messinger, H.; Muffels, R.; Nolan, B.; and Ray, J.-C. (1993) Poverty dynamics in eight countries, fournal of Population Economics, 6, 215–34.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Duncan, G. J.; Hill, M. S.; and Hoffman, S. D. (1988). Welfare dependence within and across generations. Science, 239, 467–71.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Esping-Andersen, G. (1990) The Three Worlds of Welfare Capitalism. Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Esping-Andersen, G. (ed.) (1996a) Welfare States in Transition. London: SAGE for United Nations Research Institute for Social Development.Google Scholar
Esping-Andersen, G. (1996b) Welfare states without work: the impasse of labour shedding and familialism in Continental European social policy. Ch. 3 in Esping-Andersen 1996a.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Falkingham, S. and Hills, J. (eds) (1995) The Dynamic of Welfare: The Welfare State and the Life Cycle. Hemel Hempstead: Harvester-Wheatsheaf.Google Scholar
Falkingham, S.; Hills, J.; and Lessof, C. (1993) William Beveridge versus Robin Hood: social security and redistribution over the life cycle. Discussion Paper WSP/88. London: Suntory-Toyota International Centre for Economics and Related Disciplines, London School of Economics.Google Scholar
Flora, P. (ed.) (1986) Growth to Limits: The Western European Welfare States since World War II. Berlin: de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Foster, J.; Greer, J.; and Thorbecke, E. (1984) A class of decomoposable poverty measures. Econometrica, 52, 761–6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Friedman, M. and Friedman, R. (1979) Free to Choose. New York: Harcourt, Brace, Jovanovich.Google Scholar
Galler, H.-P. and Wagner, G. (1986) The microsimulation model of the Sfb3 for the analysis of economic and social policies. In Orcutt, G. (ed.), Microanalytic Simulation Models to Support Social and Financial Policy. New York: North-Holland.Google Scholar
Glennerster, H. (1995) British Social Policy Since 1945. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Goodin, R. E. (1988) Reasons for Welfare. Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Goodin, R. E. (1985) Erring on the side of kindness in social welfare policy. Policy Sciences, 18, 141–56.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Goodin, R. E.; Headey, B.; Muffels, R.; and Dirven, H.-J. (forthcoming) Real Worlds of Welfare Capitalism. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Habermas, J. (1975) Legitimation Crisis. Boston: Beacon Press.Google Scholar
Hagenaars, A. J. M. (1986) The Perception of Poverty. Amsterdam: North-Holland.Google Scholar
Hagenaars, A.J. M. (1991) The definition and measuement of poverty. Pp.134–56 in Osberg, L. (ed.), Economic Inequality and Poverty: International Perspectives. New York: M. E. Sharpe.Google Scholar
Harding, A. (1993) Lifetime vs annual tax-transfer incidence: how much less progressive? Economic Record, 69, 179–91.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Harding, A. (1995) The impact of health, education and housing outlays on income distribution in Australia in the 1990s. Discussion Paper, No.7. Canberra: NATSEM.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Headey, B. W.; Krause, P.; and Habich, R. (1994) Long and short term poverty: is Germany a two-thirds society? Social Indicators Research, 31, 1–25.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jordan, B. (1996) A Theory of Poverty and Social Exclusion. Oxford: Polity.Google Scholar
Kakwani, N. (1986) Analysing Redistribution Policies. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Korpi, W. (1983) The Democratic Class Struggle. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul.Google Scholar
Korpi, W. (1985) Economic growth and the welfare state: leaky bucket or irrigation system? European Sociological Review, 1, 97–118.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lewis, J. (1992) Gender and the development of welfare regimes, Journal of European Social Policy, 2, 159–73.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Liebenstein, H. (1966) Allocative efficiency vs. x-efficiency. American Economic Review, 56, 392–415.Google Scholar
Lindbeck, A. (1981) Disincentive Problems in Developed Countries. International Chamber of Commerce.Google Scholar
Lindbeck, A.; Molander, P.; Persson, T.; Petersson, O.; Sandmo, A.; Swedenborg, B.; and Thygesen, N. (1994) Turning Sweden Around. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Marshall, T. H. (1977) Social Policy in the Twentieth Century. London: Hutchinson.Google Scholar
Mishra, R. (1984) The Welfare State in Crisis. Hemel Hempstead: Wheatsheaf.Google Scholar
Mitchell, D. (1991) Income Transfers in Ten Welfare States. Aldershot: Avebury.Google Scholar
Muffels, R.J.A. (1993) Welfare Economic Effects of Social Security. Essays on Poverty, Social Security and Labour Markets: Evidence from Panel Data. Series on Social Security Studies, Report No. 21. Tilburg, Netherlands: Tilburg University.Google Scholar
O'Connor, J. (1973) The Fiscal Crisis of the State. New York: St Martin's.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) (1981) The Welfare State in Crisis. Paris: OECD.Google Scholar
OECD (1990) Main Economic Indicators. Paris: OECD.Google Scholar
OECD (1991) Revenue Statistics of OECD Member Countries 1965–90. Paris: OECD.Google Scholar
OECD (1994) New Orientations for Social Policy. Paris: OECD.Google Scholar
Offe, C. (1984) Contradictions of the Welfare State. Cambridge, Mass: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Okun, A. M. (1975) Equality and Efficiency: The Big Trade-Off. Washington, D.C.: Brookings Institution.Google Scholar
Pechman, J. A. and Mazur, M. S. (1984) The rich, the poor and the taxes they pay: an update. Public Interest, 77, 28–36.Google Scholar
Pierson, P. (1994) Dismantling the Welfare State? Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rainwater, L. (1974) What Money Buys: Inequality and the Social Meanings of Income. New York: Basic.Google Scholar
Ringen, S. (1987) The Possibility of Politics: A Study in the Political Economy of the Welfare State. Oxford: Clarendon Press.Google Scholar
Ringen, S. (1991) Households, standard of living and inequality. Review of Income and Wealth, 37, 1–13.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Runciman, W.G. (1966) Relative Deprivation and Social Justice. Harmondsworth, Mddx.: Penguin.Google Scholar
Sainsbury, D. (1996) Gender, Equality and Welfare States. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Saunders, P. (1994) Welfare and Inequality: National and International Perspectives in the Australian Welfare State. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Sawyer, M. (1976) Income distribution in OECD countries. OECD Economic Outlook — Occasional Studies. Paris: OECD.Google Scholar
Sen, A. (1973) On Economic Inequality. Oxford: Clarendon Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sen, A. (1976) Poverty: an ordinal approach to measurement. Econometrica, 44, 219–31.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sen, A. (1979) Issues in the measurement of poverty. Scandanavian Journal of Economics, 81, 285–307.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Shorrocks, A.F. (1980) The class of additively decomposable inequality measures. Econometrica, 48, 613–25.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Smeeding, T.M. et al. (1985) Poverty in major industrialised countries. Luxembourg Income Study Working Paper No. 2. Luxembourg: LIS-CEPS Institute.Google Scholar
Smeeding, T. M.: Saunders, P.; Coder, J.; Jenkins, S.; Fritzell, J.; Hagenaars, A. J. M.; and Wolfson, M. (1993) Poverty, inequality and family living standards across seven nations: the effect of non-cash subsidies for health, education and housing. Review of Income and Wealth, 39, 229–56.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stevens, A. H. (1994) The dynamics of poverty spells: updating Bane and Ellwood. American Economic Review (Papers and Proceedings), 84, 5, 34–7.Google Scholar
Therborn, G. (1986) Why Some People Are More Unemployed Than Others — The Strange Paradox of Growth and Unemployment. London: Verso.Google Scholar
Theil, H. (1967) Economics and Information Theory. Amsterdam: North-Holland.Google Scholar
Thurow, L. C. (1996) The Future of Capitalism. Sydney: Allen & Unwin.Google Scholar
Titmuss, R. M. (1974) Social Policy. London: Allen & Unwin.Google Scholar
Townsend, P. (1979) Poverty in the United Kingdom. Harmondsworth, Mddx.: Penguin.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Van Praag, B. M. S.; Hagenaars, A. J. M. and Weeren, J. van (1982) Poverty in Europe. Review of Income and Wealth, 28, 345–59.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
World Bank (1996) Averting the Old Age Crisis. Oxford: Oxford University Press for the World Bank.Google Scholar