Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
HGU
Byungdeok Kang
Social Welfare Policy
The Welfare State
Welfare Sate?
A public response to a problems in a society
Need to Understand Wholeness of a Society
Definitions
Narrow and Broad Senses
Convergence and Typology
Orientation: Economy-based and Politics-based
Definitions of Social Welfare
Narrow Sense
Focused on poverty
Focused on a low class/social minority of a society
Broad Sense
Expanded to employment, wage, macro
economics, etc.
Expanded to a middle class of a society
Convergence
One path
Ex: Industrialization Theory,
Neo-Marxism (Monopolistic Capital)
Typology
Multiple paths
Ex: Esping-Andersen Regime Theory
(Three Worlds of Welfare Capitalism)
Economy-based
Social resources … economy
Politics-based
Social resources … political power
Structural-Functionalist Theory
Social/Political Institutions
Social institutions = collective responses in a
society
A society = social organism
An organism wants to keep homeostasis
A goal of a society = to keep homeostasis …
natural to have a social consensus
Changes a threat to an organism try to
adapt to the changes to keep homeostasis
Pluralist Theory
Not economy-based, but politics-oriented
Emphasized on conflicts between groups
How to solve/mediate the conflicts
Various Political Actors (having social powers)
Political Actions Development of Social
Welfare
Social Welfare Policies … so diverse and
complex
Neo-Marxism
Discussion and Consensus in a democratic society … illusion (sounds great, but not realistic)
Social Welfare = A planned activities of Socio-Economic Leaders
Social Welfare … Ideas from whom?
Labor Dispute/Riot vs. Social Welfare … which one is better?
Instrumentalist and Structuralist
Instrumentalists
Structuralists
Power Resources Theory
A continuum of Neo-Marxism
Instrumentalists and Structuralists … both of them depreciate/deevaluate roles of the laboring class
The laboring class has social/political power
Collective actions
The number of the laborers (capitalism goes with democracy)
Centralization of labor union
Left Parties in Power
Feminism
Criticize patriarchies
Equal society = just based on economics?
Focus on Tragic Realities of Women
Decommodification?
Just for men
Social Welfare
Due to roles of women (as a group)
A nation’s responses to the needs of women
Neo-Institutional Theory
Public Sectors’ Roles
Public officers do something for their own sake
Independent paly of a nation
Social welfare exists even before existence of the
laboring class
Globalization Theory
related to Economic Globalization
focus on Open Economy
Open economy … international export/trade
Importance of International Creditworthiness & Labor-Management Relations
Social security Welfare state UP
focus on Hegemony of Neo-Liberalism
Capital inflow UP
the power of the laboring class DOWN
Welfare sate DOWN
Contemporary Welfare State
“Government has a significant responsibilities
for social protection.”
“Every modern industrial state is a welfare state.”
A residual conception
An institutional conception
Social Protection … Social Rights?Civil Rights Political Rights Social Rights
Time Period 18 C. 19 C. 20 C.
Principle
(What)Individual
Freedom
Political
FreedomSocial Welfare
Method
(How)Freedom in
thought and belief
Freedom within
legal systems
Electoral democracy /
Congregational government
헌법총론
제 10조:모든국민은인간으로서존엄과가치를가지며, 행복을추구할권리를가진다. 국가는개인이가지는기본적인권을확인하고이를보장할의무를진다.
자유권
참정권
사회권
Why Social Rights in the Contemporary
Society?
Contemporary Society … social risks
Social Risks vs. Individual Risks
Who is responsible for?
Who can/will respond appropriately?
Social Protection
Social Rights
Welfare State
Welfare State
A country which provides a minimum safety net in income, health, nutrition, housing and education (Willensky, 1975)
A country which takes collective responsibility for people in the country (Heckscher, 1984)
A country which guarantees social rights (Wincott, 2011)
“국가가모든국민에게최소한의수입, 건강, 영양, 건강, 주택, 그리고교육을보장하는것”
“자국내에거주하는국민들의삶에대해집합적으로책임을지는국가”
“사회적시민권을보장해주는국가”
Welfare States
A country which
modifies the play of
market forces (Briggs,
1961)
Right Wing 보수주의(우파)
전통적인가족질서와지역질서를문란케하는것
시장체제에대한적절한조정양식
Left Wing 자유주의(좌파)
생활세계의식민지화메커니즘
노동운동의회유책
Welfare State
Beverage Report in England: “From the Cradle to the Grave” in 1948 (which was the first year of the welfare state)
Five Giants against the Welfare of England
Want – Low income
Idleness – Unemployment due to the lack of work opportunities
Squalor – Poor housing
Ignorance – Inadequate quantity and/or quality of education
Disease – Limited access to health care
Giants against Welfare Areas of Welfare
Want
Idleness
Squalor
Ignorance
Disease
Three Pillars of the Welfare State
Goals Policies Beneficiaries
Economic
Security
Social Security The working populations,
retirees, & their families
and dependents
Material
Sufficiency
Public Assistance The poor & disadvantaged
Basic Services Education
Health care
Housing
Nutrition
All citizens
Welfare Goals
Goals Policies Beneficiaries
Economic security:
Protect citizens from
common life risks by
replacing lost income
Material sufficiency:
Provide a basic floor of
social protection
Basic services: ensure
access to critical goods
and services
Redistribution: reduce
socioeconomic
inequality
Esping-Anderson ‘s Three Worlds of
Welfare Capitalism
Diversity of Welfare Capitalism Hegemony of New-Liberalism
Convergence of welfare state development
Collapse of welfare states
Against the perspective of Hegemony of New-Liberalism Deconvergence of welfare state development
Key Issues Decommodification
Unemployment
Equality
Social Policy & Welfare
The Liberal Approach
The Social Democratic Approach
The Conservative
Approach
Esping-Anderson ‘s Three Worlds of
Welfare Capitalism
Germany
France
Austria
Italy
Sweden
Denmark
Finland
Norway
U. S. A.
Canada
U. K.
Australia
The Liberal Approach
The maximization of the free market with
little to no state (government) intervention.
All individuals are capable of market
participation.
The freedom to compete in the market will
contain elements of insecurity that may result
in poverty - not the fault of the system, but
solely a consequence of an individual's lack of
foresight and thrift.
Liberal states such as the United States, Canada and Australia view welfare in terms of minimal assistance to allow the worker the opportunity to gain entry back into the market.
In general, liberal welfare policies have not facilitated equal entrance to compete in the market.
The stigma of means testing demonstrates the perverse nature of the free market and workers in liberal societies remain heavily commodifiedand reliant upon the market.
Key = Public Assistance
Residual
Divide … Deserving poor and Undeserving poor
Deserving poor … stay in the public assistance
Undeserving poor … should go to the market
The Conservative Approach
Indicative of its historical beginnings the conservative approach to social policy, welfare, and the decommodification of labor is based upon stratification along class lines and the maintenance of a hierarchical society.
The state is viewed largely as a minimal interventionist with any welfare allocated firmly upholding the stratification of society or maintaining the hierarchical / patriarchal structure.
Social Security Systems …
fragmented by industries
Employment-based
Key = Social Insurances
Not force to work, but encourage to work
Key = Education
Opportunities to develop human capitals
Public assistance
Social integration for the people not having labor capacity
The Social Democratic Approach
Welfare diminishes social divisions.
Social democratic theory advocates full employment and promotes equality emphasis on working.
The primary concern is not to wait until the family is unable to provide further, but "to preemptively socialize the costs of familyhood."
The reality of fully socialized welfare programs is minimal due to the overwhelming maintenance costs and the problems experienced by governments that try to convince the population to pay higher taxes in order to provide for those who do not compete in the market place, unwillingly or not.
Social Welfare Programs
include the Middle Class
Diverse social welfare programs
Welfare State
Is a welfare state a better society?
Is Korea a welfare state?
Welfare Scope in the US
1990 2010 1990 2010
Total Public
Spending
$528.2 B
(100%)
$2,102.9 B
(100%) AFDC / TANF19.0
(3.6)
30.6
(1.5)
Social Security
(OASDI)
248.6
(47.1)
695.0
(33.0) Food Stamps15.9
(3.0)
73.0
(3.5)
Medicare98.1
(18.6)
525.0
(25.0)SSI: Supplemental
Security Income
16.1
(3.0)
47.2
(2.2)
Medicaid78.1
(14.8)
400.7
(19.1) EITC4.4
(0.8)
49.5
(2.4)
Veterans’
Benefits
29.1
(5.5)
124.7
(5.9)Unemployment
Compensation
18.9
(3.6)
157.2
(7.5)
Welfare Scope in Korea
Won:십억원
(%) (%)
Total 78,696 53,298 (100)
Public Assistance (공공부조) 11,805 (15.0) (22.1)
Public Social Services
(공공복지서비스)
13,776 (17.5) (25.8)
Social Insurance (사회보험) 47,383 (60.2)
- Health Insurance (건강보험) 25,398 (32.3)
- Other Social Insurance 21,985 (27.9) (41.2)
Private Social Services 915 (1.2) (1.7)
Workplace Benefits 4,817 (6.1) (9.0)
Source: OECD Social Expenditure database (SOCX, www.oecd.org/els/social/expenditure)
2007 2012% GDP Pension I. S. Health O. S. % GDP Pension I. S. Health O. S.
Italy 24.9 14.1 2.8 6.6 1.4 26.4 14.1 3 6.7 2.6Korea 7.6 1.7 0.8 3.5 1.5 9.7 2.6 1.4 4.3 1.4Mexico 7.2 1.4 0.9 2.6 2.3Sweden 27.3 7.2 5.6 6.6 8 26.5 7.2 5.3 6.7 7.3UK 20.5 5.4 4.5 6.8 3.8 22.9 5.5 5.3 7 5.1US 16.2 6 2 7.2 1 19.5 6.7 2.6 8.7 1.5
OECD 19.3 6.9 4 5.8 2.5 22.1 7.4 4.9 6.3 3.5
% GDP = Public Social Exp % GDP
I.S. = Income Support to the Working Age O.S. = Other services
Composition of Public Social Expenditurein % of GDP, by broad category, 2007 & 2012 (Estimates)
Three Systems in Welfare
Social Component Public contributions (direct expenditure of government):
income support, health, social services, etc.
Occupational Component Nongovernmental welfare
Workplace(Employment-related) benefits
Job benefits are influenced by government
Fiscal Component Tax systems: deductions, exemptions, and credits
Tax … beyond its role as a source of revenue of government
Regulatory Welfare
Regulatory Power of Government
Social Welfare Objectives
RegulationsObligations
on the Private Sector
New Social Accounting
Let’s see our textbook p. 54
The Cases of Edith (Americana) and Alva (Nordica)
Edith Alva
- $9,000 Income Tax
(at the end of year)
- $9,000
A child care grant + $1,000
+ $1,000 A childcare tax credit
- $8,000 - $8,000SAME?
New Social Accounting: Net Total Social Expenditure
Direct Public Expenditures
Tax Expenditures
Publicly Mandated Private
Expenditures
Voluntary Private Expenditure
NTSE
Among OECD Countries, 2001
Country
Public Social
Spending as
Percentage of
GDP
Rank
Order
Net Social
Spending as
Percentage of
GDP
Rank
Order
Rank Order:
Net Social
Spending
per Capita
Sweden 29.8 1 26.0 3 3
Denmark 29.2 2 22.5 7 8
France 28.5 3 27.0 2 4
Germany 27.4 4 27.6 1 5
Austria 26.0 5 21.8 10 10
U. K. 21.8 10 23.3 4 6
Canada 17.8 18 20.3 13 11
Japan 16.9 19 20.2 14 14
U. S. 14.7 20 23.1 6 1
Korea 6.1 22 10.0 22 21
Comparison of Poverty Rates
Difference of Poverty Rates based on Market
Income and Disposable Income (%)
CountrySweden
(2005)
Finland
(2004)
England
(2004)
USA
(2004)
Mexico
(2004)
Korea
(2005)
Diff % 22.1 20.8 15.3 7.2 -6.2 1.7
Policy Debate about Korean Situation
“국가비전: 선진화인가, 복지국가인가”
http://www.hani.co.kr/arti/SERIES/249/420761.ht
ml
“일자리가복지” vs “보편적복지확대필요”
http://www.hani.co.kr/arti/SERIES/249/423290.ht
ml
Crisis of the Welfare State
and Restructuring
Five Symptoms of Welfare State in Crisis
(Mishra, 1984)1. Stagflation (the inflation rate is high + economic
growth rate slows down + unemployment rate is high) and Low Economic Growth
2. Collapse of Full Employment Systems and Mass Unemployment
3. Increase of (Government) Fiscal Deficit
4. Intentional Cuts in Social Service Spending
5. Loss of Trust in the Welfare State Systems
Crisis = Danger + Opportunity
Welfare State?
Collapse
State’s Failure
Contradictions of the Welfare State
Degenerating Fundamental
Sustenance
The irreversibility Thesis
The Maturity Thesis
Restructuring
Welfare Pluralism and Mixed Economy
Esping-Andersen
Collapse of Welfare State
State’s Failure
New Right
Causes of State’s Failure: Government overload Weakening private economy
Causes of Govt. Overload: Political market (no competition, no cost-effectiveness)
Others – Causes of Govt. Overload
Bureaucratic systems (expansions of governmental officers to enlarge their powers)
Revolution of the rising expectation (individual or familial responsibilities national responsibilities)
Contradictions of the Welfare State
Neomarxism – Fiscal Crisis
Welfare and Capitalism are incompatible …
welfare state is not sustainable.
Revenue < Expenditure
Big government (bureaucracy) for welfare state
Degenerating Fundamental 1950s & 1960s
Virtuous circle between mass production and mass consumption Social wage
The late of 1960s Inefficiency of the Fordism (labor-saving production systems)
Saturation of domestic market
To Escape the Crisis of Welfare Capitalism Globalization of financial capital
Flexible production systems
Eating into the Base of Keynesian Welfare State State-driven Demand-side management … not working
Simultaneous achievement of growth and distribution … not possible
Sustenance of Welfare State
The Irreversibility Thesis Yes, budget cut of social welfare spending, BUT
marginal/little cut
the decrease of social welfare spending
< the decrease of overall economic growth
Exaggeration of collapse of legitimacy of welfare state systems
Decrease of the approval rating for the Left parties vs. Increase of overall political apathy/indifference
Many and various interest groups … not east to turn over the welfare state frameworks in a basis of democracy
The Maturity Thesis
Welfare State in 1980s …
Not a reduction, BUT a period of stabilization
No expansion of welfare state due to an end to
growth
An end to growth … not a crisis, BUT it is a
natural phenomenon
Height of a person … can grow continuously?
Restructuring Welfare State
Welfare Pluralism and Mixed Economy
Esping-Andersen’s Types of Restructuring
Welfare Status Theory
Welfare Pluralism and Mixed
Economy
Crisis of Welfare State in the 1980s
≠ Crisis of Overall Welfare in a Society
Welfare Actors are Various
The Grand Volume of Social Welfare
= govt. + market + family/kinship + nonprofit orgs.
Crisis of Welfare State in the 1980s
= Readjustment of the Ratios of Mixing
Esping-Andersen’s Types of Restructuring
Crisis of welfare state …
not a universal phenomenon
different restructuring processes
Agreement
No more Keynesian approach
Weakening a tradition of a male breadwinner
Low birthrates
Non-standardization of life courses
Three Trade-Offs
Equality and Employment
Social Security and Economic Growth
Equality and Efficiency
Positive-Sums Zero-Sums or Negative-Sums
Three Different Restructurings
The Liberal
Interpret “social” as narrow as possible
Maximize the roles of market Residual social welfare
Social Democracy
Lower social benefits due to budget deficits
Adopt “means test” for a basic pension
The Conservative
Corporism
Monarchical Etatism … special benefits to public officers
Welfare
State
Theory A
Theory B Theory C
Power Resources
Theory
Key of Power Resources Theory
… the class issue + politics-oriented
Observed Phenomenon:
- Decline of the politics of class
- Crisis of welfare state … Not Universal
Welfare Status Theory
Non-class political view of welfare state
Not only rights, but also duties
Criticisms against the class-orientation
(1) No optimistic view of the theory of class
Theory of civil rights … not working
(2) Decline of politics of class
Post-industrial affluence decrease the size of the
laboring class; creation of a middle class
(3) Economic globalization (Newliberalism)
A one-sided favorable environment for the
capitalists
Market selection of the capitalists
Three dimensions of welfare-related interests
Status as welfare beneficiary
Status as welfare taxpayer
Status as welfare service provider
Status as welfare beneficiary
Different levels of interest on social welfare
Group of people who can meet their needs with
their money vs. Group of people who cannot
Generational Conflict
Status as welfare taxpayer
Financial burden … Financial contributions by
whom?
The higher financial burden, the lower support for
welfare state
Hiding effect (of tax resistance):
Direct tax vs. Indirect tax
Contribution of social security recipients (equality)
Status as welfare service provider
The middle class … a diverse and complex group
Service providers … managers, public officers, and
sociocultural experts
Managers and public officers ... Conservative
Sociocultural experts … Liberal / Radical
Direct and/or indirect relations among the
providers
Public vs. Private
Gender
