POLI SCI 3290 Comparative Public Policy Midterm

Decommodification

The degree to which a person can maintain a livelihood without relying on the market (the extent to which distribution is detached from the market mechanism) Esping Andersen

Esping Andersen’s view of Decommodification

the minimum standard of decommodifcation is it being high enough so you can stop workign when enecessary while retaining economic security

Stratification

the demographic/class for which a program is created for

Why is total spending a poor measure of welfare state?

it does not take into account the means by which the money is beign spend (i.e. universal v means-tested)

spendign can’t measure tax subsidies or the fact that low spending could signal a stronger commitment to full employment

Three Welfare Regimes

Liberal, Corporativist, Social Democratic

Liberal Characteristics

the state upholds class; the market can undo it

• modest means-tested social insurance

• minimal decommodification

• market encouraged and subsidized

• stratification based on poor vs. market majority

• family not seen as important or a factor considered in welfare

• US, Canada, Australia

Conservative Characteristics

Discipline, not competition, guarantees efficiency; the state or church should help with harmonizing conflicting interests

• welfare segmented based on status

• decommodification seen as moderate and linked with the type of/amount of work someones does

• amplified the fact that workers are not just a commodity and that efficiency meant treating them as such

• elfare as an instrument of hierarchy, not equality

Social Democratic Characteristics

• universl and earnings tier welfare

• high levels of decommodification

• status equlity regardless of which class each person is in

• market crowded out by government

Mandatory Spending

fundign determined by underlying law, not annual appropriations

Entitlement

everyone who meets the eligibility rules has a legal claim to the benefit

Discretionary Spending

funded through annual appropriations

Means-Testing

welfare ased on meeting minimum eligibility standards

• difficult to implement since you msut find and maintain the list of those who fit within the peraeters of the program which is complicated by identifying households and family units

Universalism

Skocpol- universal programs shoudl favor lower-income beneficiaries from inside like Social Security does

• less privileged shoudlw ork together witht he middle class instead of being isolated from them

  • either through a targeted program spread upwards or a universal one tilted downwards to focus on helping less privileged

Requires the sustenance of high taxes (Esping Andersen)

Class Mobilization Thesis

the wlefare state is a power resource that depends on the balance of class power

(critiqued for lack of recognition of unity on each side NOT FINISHED)

Coalitions and the Middle Class

Esping Andersen’s Core Findings

1. Institutional Approach and Democracy - the economy must be embedded in social institutions to suvive and democracy can’t resist majoritarian demands for protection

   1. critiqued since welfare intitiatives started before democracy

2. Systematic/Structuralist Approach - industrialization makes social policy necessary and possible. modernization destroys former institutions (family, church, guild solidarity) and market only helps those who are part of it

   1. critiqued since policy came much much later then the destruction of traditional community standards

3. class mobilization thesis

4. coalitions

Esping Andersen’s 3 criteria for welfare regimes

1. decommodification

2. stratification

3. state, market, family

Explanations of Regime Formation

1. institutional approach and democracy

2. systemic/structuralist approach

3. class mobilization thesis

4. Coalitions

Partanen’s Nordic Model

Power Resources Approach

welfare state development shoudl reflect class-related distributice conflict and partisan poltiics because class is tied to the power resources citizens control and to the life-course risks they face

Two Power Resources

economic assets

human

Protagonists v Consenters v Antagonists

• protagonists - strive for and start with the introduction of new policy

• consenters - agree to/with new policies but did not start them

• antagonists - those who disagree and shut down policy

Korpi’s Critique of varieties of capitalism

employee centered approach

cross-class alliances

segmentalism

cartelism

asset specific skills

Korpi’s Claim

Swenson’s Claim

Differences between Korpi and Swenson

Politics of Resentment

Rural Consciousness

Identity as a Lens

Cramer’s Method of Research

Policy Paradigm

Social Learning

Settings of Public Policy

Instruments and Goals of Public Policy

First- Order Change

Second-Order Change

Third-Order Change

What causes paradigm shifts

How do anomalies affect policy paradigms

The Locus of Authoriy

Experts vs. Politicians

Britain Policy Paradigm Shift

Keynesianism-

Monetarism-

Social Democracy

Revisionism

Primacy of Politics

Postwar Settlement

The Move to the Center

Social Democratic decline and rise of populism explanation

Christian Democracy

Confessional Origins

Paradox of Confessional Origins

Cross-class coalitions

Subsidiarity

Christian Democratic Welfare State’s Power in different countries

Electoral Formulas

• plurality

• majority

• proportional representation

• semi-proportional representation

District Magnitude

Threshold

Disproportionality

Effective Number of Parties

Manufactured Majorities

How do electoral systems shape party systems

Increasing Returns

Positive Feedback

Path Dependence

Sources of Increasing Returns

Timing and Sequence

Critical Junctures

Lock-In

Path Dependency and Politics

Korpi v. Swenson

Esping Andersen vs. Korpi Class Mobilization

Liberal vs. Conservative Regimes

Nordic Model vs. US

Social Democracy vs. Christian Democracy

Plurality vs. PR

Hall vs. Pierson

Which authors address interests and how?

Which authors address ideas and identities and how?

Which authors address institutions and how?

• Esping- Andersen - Social welfare institutions measured by country/regime

• Greenstein - social welfare spendign by institutions determined by the specific program