Public opinion towards workfare policies in Europe: Polarisation of attitudes in times of austerity?

Abstract

Increasing wage inequality, strong labour market divides and welfare retrenchment are widely believed to result in more polarised public opinion towards the welfare state. The present study examined if attitudes towards workfare policies have become more polarised in Europe over recent decades. To achieve this aim, the study analysed public opinion data from the European Value Study (EVS) from 23 European countries in the years 1990–2008, using multi‐level regression analysis. It is found that individuals who are most affected by workfare – the unemployed, the poor and the young – most strongly oppose workfare concepts. Against expectations, there was no evidence of an increasing polarisation of attitudes in Europe. Attitudinal cleavages based on employment status, income and education have remained stable. Differences between age groups have even dissolved because younger cohorts increasingly favour strict workfare policies. The results suggest that warnings of increasing social conflicts and an erosion of solidarity in European societies are exaggerated.

Examining Attitudes towards Welfare in an In/Security Regime: Evidence from Ghana

“…Thus, people who perceive themselves as vulnerable (e.g. old persons, females, unemployed, rural residents and the less educated) tend to favour pro-welfare state ideologies compared to those in advantaged positions (Wilson et al, 2009;Blekesaune and Quadagno, 2003;Bailey et al, 2013;Wu and Chou, 2017;Buss, 2018). On the other hand, the social value hypothesis posits that ideological positions, belief systems, moral consciousness, knowledge about inequality, and norms of reciprocity shape welfare attitudes.…”

“…According to the results, there was a resounding preference for more welfare spending in general and also the specific case on healthcare. Studies across various regimes have demonstrated consistent public support for more welfare, and this may not be new in an 'insecure' context (Svallfors, 2010;Buss, 2018). A few explanations may apply.…”

“…The self-interest hypothesis also helps to explain the position of rural residents, the divorced, welfare beneficiaries and the poor. These groups are known to hold similar positions as well, especially in insecurity regimes and in welfare state regimes in times of austerity (Wood and Gough, 2006;Buss, 2018). However, participants with higher incomes did not support more welfare spending, and those with high perceived SES were less likely to support the government's role in the provision of healthcare for the sick.…”

“…Studies on public attitudes in different welfare regimes depict two major theoretical perspectives, namely self-interest and social values hypotheses (Wu and Chou, 2017;Buss, 2018). On the one hand, the self-interest thesis holds that actual and perceived socio-economic conditions of individuals shape their attitudes towards welfare.…”

“…A clear understanding of this relationship helps to conceptualise existing welfare structures and chart future changes accurately. However, the majority of studies embarking on this trajectory have been in Western and highincome states and often relied on Esping-Andersen's (1990) welfare regime framework which outlines three systems; namely social democratic, liberal and conservative regimes (Svallfors, 1999;Buss, 2018). Thus, there has been a minimal research emphasis on welfare conditions in low-and middle-income countries (LMICs) and their relations with public attitudes.…”