The Direction and Scope of Social Policy Change: Regime-specific or Radical Shift towards Workfare?

Vis, Barbara

doi:10.1080/13876980802028065

Cited by 7 publications

(6 citation statements)

References 43 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…For the truth table, we selected a consistency threshold of 0.8. This is well above the required level of 0.75 (Schneider and Wagemann 2012) and coincides with a gap in consistency scores visible in the data (see Vis 2009). Given the limited number of cases, we use a frequency threshold of 1 (based on Ragin 2008).…”

Section: The Truth Table Is Then Constructed (See Table 5)mentioning

confidence: 62%

Mix and Match: How Contractual and Relational Conditions Are Combined in Successful Public–Private Partnerships

Warsen

Klijn

Koppenjan

2019

Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In explaining public-private partnership (PPP) performance, both contractual and relational conditions play a role. Research has shown that these conditions may complement each other in successful PPPs. However, which specific combinations of conditions and how these combinations may influence PPP performance remains unclear. Building on the ideas of neo-institutional economics, principal-agent theory, relational contracting, and governance theories, this article explores the mix and match of contractual aspects and relational characteristics in successful PPP projects. A fuzzy set qualitative comparative analysis (QCA) of 25 PPP projects in the Netherlands and Flanders (Belgium) was used to test how contractual factors, such as the use of sanctions and risk allocation, and relational conditions, such as trust and conflict management, jointly shape the performance of PPPs. The results show three different combinations of conditions that match with high performing PPPs. These configurations often consist of a mix of contractual and relational conditions, which confirms our initial expectation that these factors complement each other, but a combination of only relational conditions is also present.

show abstract

Section: The Truth Table Is Then Constructed (See Table 5)mentioning

confidence: 62%

Mix and Match: How Contractual and Relational Conditions Are Combined in Successful Public–Private Partnerships

Warsen

Klijn

Koppenjan

2019

Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Comparative welfare research has been preoccupied with devising ways to distinguish quantitative, incremental welfare state changes from more qualitative, structural ones (see, e.g. Vis, 2008). In this article, we identify three distinct types of welfare state development, which are determined via changing membership to the welfare models or sub-models within the conceptual East Asian welfare regime outlined above.…”

Section: Examining East Asian Welfare Development With F Uzzy Setsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Beyond the Limits of the Productivist Regime: Capturing Three Decades of East Asian Welfare Development with Fuzzy Sets

Yang

Kühner

2020

Social Policy and Society

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Systematic accounts of East Asian government responses to the ‘limits of productivist regimes’ (Gough, 2004) remain surprisingly rare. This article develops three distinct types of East Asian welfare development, i.e. quantitative, type-specific, and radical, employing set-theoretic methods. It then uses these types to analyse six policy fields, including education, health care, family policy, old-age pensions, public housing, and passive labour market policy, in six East Asian societies: China, Hong Kong, Japan, Korea, Singapore and Taiwan. We find that all cases except Hong Kong and Singapore have experienced at least one radical shift in their welfare models over the past three decades (1990–2016). East Asian governments have increasingly combined quantitative expansion or retrenchment of ‘productive’ and ‘protective’ policy structures but have done so in unique ways. South Korea has followed the most ‘balanced’ approach to welfare development and stands out as the best candidate for further type-specific expansions moving forward.

show abstract

“…The first two dimensions, welfare culture and welfare institutions, can be subdivided into a liberalism vs. conservatism‐spectrum and a solidarism vs. residualism‐spectrum that together generate a 2x2 matrix of a conservative and a liberal ‘pure’ regime type alongside a socio‐conservative and a socio‐liberal variant. Together with the related third dimension of economically and socially conservative or transformative societal effects, such an ideal‐typical welfare regime framework may prove a useful tool in researching not only the de facto variation of social policies and their outcomes across welfare states, welfare regions/localities and welfare programmes, but also the path‐dependent versus path‐breaking effects of new policy trajectories (Clasen and Van Oorschot ; Cox ; Pierson ; Vis ) or the societal effects of welfare reforms (cf. Machado and Vilrokx ).…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Beyond Welfare Regimes: From Empirical Typology to Conceptual Ideal types

Rice¹

2012

Soc Policy Adm

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The welfare regime concept introduced by Gøsta Esping-Andersen in 1990 is still widely used in comparative political research, although it has been challenged extensively both on empirical and analytical grounds. Besides the fact that many empirical welfare states seem to be hybrid cases of the established welfare regime categories, the argument that welfare regimes exist not only at the country level but also at the local level and at the level of particular welfare programmes has recently gained momentum in the academic literature. In this article, it is argued that the welfare regime concept should be stripped of its historical-geographical connotations and turned into an idealtypical approach. To this end, a three-dimensional model is proposed here that allows for analyzing the attributes of welfare states, welfare regions and welfare programmes on three analytical dimensions: welfare culture, welfare institutions and socio-structural effects.

show abstract

The Direction and Scope of Social Policy Change: Regime-specific or Radical Shift towards Workfare?

Cited by 7 publications

References 43 publications

Mix and Match: How Contractual and Relational Conditions Are Combined in Successful Public–Private Partnerships

Mix and Match: How Contractual and Relational Conditions Are Combined in Successful Public–Private Partnerships

Beyond the Limits of the Productivist Regime: Capturing Three Decades of East Asian Welfare Development with Fuzzy Sets

Beyond Welfare Regimes: From Empirical Typology to Conceptual Ideal types

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About