A Report: The Welfare State in Cross-National Perspective

1987 ◽  
Vol 51 (3) ◽  
pp. 404 ◽  
Author(s):  
Tom W. Smith
Author(s):  
Marie Gottschalk

Some of the most promising work on mass incarceration, the retributive turn in penal policy, and growing inequalities in the United States employs a historical institutional lens. This work has illuminated the origins of the carceral state and the possibilities for dismantling it, the sources of interstate and cross-national variations in penal policy, and the role of race, gender, and the transformation of the welfare state in the construction of the carceral state. Going forward, illumination of pressing political problems like the carceral state will require that historical institutionalism retain or resurrect some of the qualities that originally made it so distinctive—even if that cuts against the grain of the wider discipline of political science.


1985 ◽  
Vol 26 (4) ◽  
pp. 276 ◽  
Author(s):  
Bernice A. Pescosolido ◽  
Carol A. Boyer ◽  
Wai Ying Tsui

2021 ◽  
pp. 452-472
Author(s):  
Herbert Obinger

This chapter focuses on both the expenditures and the revenues of the welfare state. Using the latest data available, it depicts and analyses major developments in social spending and public revenues in twenty-one advanced Western democracies since 1980. The entry discusses measurement issues, depicts the determinants of cross-national differences in spending and revenue levels identified in the literature, and sheds light on the impact of social spending and taxation on social outcomes, such as income inequality. It is argued that spending and revenue figures, irrespective of several shortcomings, provide important indicators of both the logic and pattern of welfare state development.


1985 ◽  
Vol 15 (4) ◽  
pp. 427-450 ◽  
Author(s):  
Gary M. Klass

Although research on the welfare state is fundamentally comparative and cross-national, empirical observation of the peculiarities of the American case has structured much of the thinking on the subject. Explaining variations in welfare state policy usually begins with the identification of cross-national variations in the initiation, scope or size of national social service programs such as social security, workman's compensation, unemployment insurance, national medical care and public housing. The coverage of the programs that have been established, the number of programs and the size of the benefits distributed are typically found to be smaller in the United States than in other industrialized democracies. The relative lateness of the United States' adoption of major social welfare programs, along with the low percentage of either Gross National Product or government revenue expended in social service programs, constitutes clear evidence that the welfare state is a function of more than the level of national economic development. To the extent that welfare state research devotes itself to explaining the extreme variations represented by American policy performance, its theory often derives from interpretations made of corresponding peculiarities of American popular ideology, social structure, political institutions and history. As a consequence, explaining the welfare state often depends on how one explains America.


10.5153/sro.9 ◽  
1996 ◽  
Vol 1 (1) ◽  
pp. 9-29 ◽  
Author(s):  
O'Reilly Jacqueline

This article critically reviews a range of theoretical approaches to cross-national employment research in terms of universal, culturalist and intermediary perspectives. These approaches have difficulty accounting for change and the co- existence of similarity and diversity, as well as being ‘gender blind’. Debates on the welfare state or women's employment have shown more interest in gender although this tends to become an optional variable in the cross-national comparison, or where there have been attempts to make it more central, the meaning of cross-national differences becomes blurred and confused. It is argued that an employment-systems approach, coupled with the gender order perspective, can provide a useful framework of analysis which enables us to identify how comparable pressures for change have generated specific interest coalitions; these coalitions resolve conflicts by agreeing on a particular gender compromise.


2005 ◽  
Vol 46 (1) ◽  
pp. 91-126 ◽  
Author(s):  
sigrun kahl

this paper shows that religion is a basic principle that underlies modern poverty policy. however, it has played out in very different ways in societies according to the relative predominance of catholic, lutheran, and calvinist heritages. though religion is but one explanation for why we deal with the poor as we do today, systematically accounting for denominational differences in poor relief traditions can help to answer a series of otherwise perplexing cross-national differences in poverty policy and enrich existing explanations of the welfare state.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document