“…In the wake of Esping‐Andersen's (1990) work, the regime approach has been dominant, although scholars have pointed to the lack of gender awareness of his original classification (e.g., Lewis, 1992). More recently, scholars have also used an approach based on family policy typologies (rather than broad welfare regimes) and have extended the analysis beyond the traditional “three worlds” (e.g., Chung et al, 2018; Ciccia & Verloo, 2012; Thévenon, 2011; Yerkes & Javornik, 2019).…”
The article reviews the available quantitative evidence on the relationship between explicit family policy and women's employment outcomes in 45 high-income countries between 1980 and 2016. At the methodological level, we gathered 238 papers through a four-stage systematic qualitative review. We included articles published in English in international journals or by leading research institutes.
“…In the wake of Esping‐Andersen's (1990) work, the regime approach has been dominant, although scholars have pointed to the lack of gender awareness of his original classification (e.g., Lewis, 1992). More recently, scholars have also used an approach based on family policy typologies (rather than broad welfare regimes) and have extended the analysis beyond the traditional “three worlds” (e.g., Chung et al, 2018; Ciccia & Verloo, 2012; Thévenon, 2011; Yerkes & Javornik, 2019).…”
The article reviews the available quantitative evidence on the relationship between explicit family policy and women's employment outcomes in 45 high-income countries between 1980 and 2016. At the methodological level, we gathered 238 papers through a four-stage systematic qualitative review. We included articles published in English in international journals or by leading research institutes.
“…At the same time, these changes, alongside the changes in the nature of the labor market, increase demand for education and life‐long learning (Zimmerman, Chung, & Heuer, ). At the social level, demographic shifts exacerbate spending demands from traditional health and social care services and pensions, and the increasing number of women in the labor market expands the demand for care (Chung, Filipovič Hrast, & Rakar, ). At the political level, it seems that the electoral decline of mainstream political parties and the emergence of a new wave of populism are reshaping welfare state politics.…”
Section: Background: the Value Of Attitude Surveys In Studying Welfarementioning
Welfare attitudes are pivotal in understanding the preferences and demands of citizens to help shape future policy reforms in welfare states. Accordingly, and due to the availability of large scale comparative survey data on attitudes, large numbers of studies of welfare attitudes have emerged during the past few decades. However, some limitations still exist in the field, such as the background assumptions informing the questionnaire design and top-down framing of issues, the population represented, and, lastly, limitations in teasing out the causal mechanisms of relationships, especially pertaining to that of policy reform. This regional issue brings together articles that address some of these issues and others in welfare attitude research to provide some guidance for future studies. This article first summarizes the existing studies on welfare attitudes to identify some of the key limitations, and introduces the five articles in this issue. It concludes with some suggestions for future studies in welfare attitudes.
“…However, there was considerable support for affordable and accessible childcare (see also Chung, Filipovič Hrast, & Rakar, ). It was clear that many were aware of the limited availability of places and very high costs: “It's very expensive, very expensive.…”
This article introduces democratic forums as a method of studying attitudes towards the welfare state, and sets out briefly its strengths and weaknesses in comparison with existing methods. This is done by reporting the findings of a 2015 two-day forum based in the United Kingdom, in which the future of the welfare state was discussed by a largely representative sample of participants. The results show that participants linked both moral and economic arguments to come to two major framings that could encompass the debates surrounding the future of welfare states. One focuses on the inefficiencies of the welfare state, which found that welfare resources were largely misdirected and unsustainable. The other focuses on the possibilities for improving it via social investment, for example providing individuals with better training and education opportunities. The democratic forum method is helpful in allowing researchers to investigate the conceptual framings people use when thinking about the welfare state, and to see how people link different concepts and justifications together to argue their position. We argue that such framing can be distinct from that used and understood by policymakers and academics, and those applied in the more commonly used large scale surveys.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
