Productivist Welfare Capitalism: Social Policy in East Asia

Abstract

The article engages with the literature on the ‘East Asian welfare model’ by using Esping‐Andersen's ‘worlds of welfare capitalism’ approach to analyze social policy in the region. It describes the main features of a productivist world of welfare capitalism that stands alongside Esping‐Andersen's conservative, liberal and social democratic worlds. It then shows that Japan, Hong Kong, Singapore, South Korea and Taiwan are all part of this world, though they divide into sub‐groups within it. To account for productivist welfare capitalism in East Asia, the article focuses particularly on bureaucratic politics at the unit level, and on a range of key shaping factors at the system level. It closes by considering the implications of East Asian experience for comparative social policy analysis.

Democratization, post-industrialization, and East Asian welfare capitalism: the politics of welfare state reform in Japan, South Korea, and Taiwan

“…Building on developmental state theory and its highlighting of the steering role of the state (C. A. Johnson, 1982;Wade, 1990), social policy analysis in the region has been dominated by the developmental welfare state perspective and the related productivist welfare regime approach (Holliday, 2000;Kwon, 1997;Deyo, 1992). According to this body of literature, social policy is subordinated to the key policy objectives of economic growth and industrialization; and policy-makers forcefully pursued the state-led "modernization" of their economies, which was essentially understood as catching up with advanced economies in the West.…”

Changing Korean Housing System and Its Structural Forces

“…The societal change was accompanied by a significant erosion in family-oriented values and traditional family types. 7 Although the government's budgetary balance in the face of elevating social spending and tackling the impacts of the Global Financial Crisis (GFC) had concerned the Lee Myung-bak administration (2008)(2009)(2010)(2011)(2012)(2013), the state undertook the most inclusive housing production plan called 'Bogeumjari (nest)', 8 addressed socio-demographic transformation into the housing policy, restored the pro-homeownership policy and embraced a wide array of public rental programs (e.g., long-term Chonsei housing, National Public Rental Housing, and Permanent Public Rental Housing). While the GFC in 2008 delayed the actual undertaking, the state actively encouraged the private sector to build multi-unit buildings with small self-contained units, so-called 'Dosihyung Saenghwal Housing (housing for urban living)', to resolve location mismatch between home and work and supply affordable housing for oneor two-person households (e.g., college students and young singles) in inner-city neighbourhoods.…”

“…The unique and distinctive features of the developmental state are grouped as the fourth category of Esping-Andersen (1990)'s welfare capitalism, later the separate type is defined with productivist welfare capitalism (Holliday, 2000) and subsequently the developmental states are called developmental welfare state (Kwon, 2005 The state plan lasted until 1995, and then renamed the New Economic Development Plan from 1993 to 1997. 4 Historically, the platform is partially associated with the land reform of 1949 which strengthened private ownership.…”

Social Policy Regimes in the Developing World

“…The welfare-enhancing impact of the state extends beyond traditional social policy -or at least our indicators of it. In a study of East Asian countries I followed Holliday (2000) in characterizing these as examples of a 'productivist social development regime' (Gough, 2004b).…”