The Welfare State as Crisis Manager

Starke, Peter; Kaasch, Alexandra; Hooren, Franca van

doi:10.1057/9781137314840

Cited by 82 publications

(44 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In an important new book, Starke et al. () argue that generous social welfare provisions not only reduce the need for fiscal policy activism during recessions, but also reduce partisan conflict over fiscal policy responses to recessions. Based on case studies of policy change in Australia, Belgium, the Netherlands and Sweden during the recessions of the 1970s, the early 1990s and 2008–2009, Starke et al.…”

Section: Existing Literature and Working Hypothesesmentioning

confidence: 99%

The politics of fiscal policy during economic downturns, 1981–2010

Raess

Pontusson

2014

European J Political Res

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract. This article investigates fiscal policy responses to the Great Recession in historical perspective. It explores general trends in the frequency, size and composition of fiscal stimulus as well as the impact of government partisanship on fiscal policy outputs during the four international recessions of 1980-1981, 1990-1991, 2001-2002 and 2008-2009. Encompassing 17-23 Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) countries, the analysis calls into question the idea of a general retreat from fiscal policy activism since the early 1980s. The propensity of governments to respond to economic downturns by engaging in fiscal stimulus has increased over time and no secular trend in the size of stimulus measures is observed. At the same time, OECD governments have relied more on tax cuts to stimulate demand in the two recessions of the 2000s than they did in the early 1980s or early 1990s. Regarding government partisanship, no significant direct partisan effects on either the size or the composition of fiscal stimulus is found for any of the four recession episodes. However, the size of the welfare state conditioned the impact of government partisanship in the two recessions of the 2000s, with left-leaning governments distinctly more prone to engaging in discretionary fiscal stimulus and/or spending increases in large welfare states, but not in small welfare states.

show abstract

Section: Existing Literature and Working Hypothesesmentioning

confidence: 99%

The politics of fiscal policy during economic downturns, 1981–2010

Raess

Pontusson

2014

European J Political Res

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…There are a number of papers that discuss the influence of the previous crises, and project the effects of the current crisis on the European welfare states in the institutional context. The findings contained in several papers were particularly influential for our research (Hemerijck et al 2009;Castles 2010;Ferreiro, Gómez 2014;Hartmann-Hirsch 2010;Josifidis et al 2010Josifidis et al , 2014Palier 2010;Stiller 2010;Adema et al 2011;Chung, Thewissen 2011;Chung, Van Oorschot 2011;Sacchi et al 2011;Starke et al 2011Starke et al , 2013Theodoropoulou, Watt 2011;Vis et al 2011;Yerkes, van der Veen 2011;Clasen et al 2012;De Beer 2012;Blot et al 2014;Hermann 2014;Peinado, Serrano 2014;Verbič, Spruk 2014). The authors listed above do not share unique opinion about the need, and type, of responses of the welfare state to the crisis in the context of long versus short term reforms, or convergent versus divergent reactions.…”

Section: Literature Surveymentioning

confidence: 98%

The European Welfare State Regimes: Questioning the Typology During the Crisis

Josifidis

Hall

Supic

et al. 2015

Technological and Economic Development of Economy

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper examines the nature of changes within the EU–15 welfare states affected by the 2008 crisis. We try to answer the question of whether the differences that exist among different welfare state regimes, according to prevailing welfare state typologies, lead to different responses to the consequences of the crisis. Welfare state regimes are the result of different institutional perceptions of social risks hence it is realistic to expect specific responses to the effects of crisis among different welfare state regimes, and similar responses among the countries that belong to the same welfare state regimes. In order to recognize convergent vs. divergent processes, we perform a comparative analysis of the dynamics of the key welfare state determinants of the EU–15 countries, grouping according to welfare state regimes, in the pre-crisis and crisis periods. The results indicate that institutional rigidity and inherent inertia has remained a key factor of convergent welfare state processes in countries that belong to the Social Democratic and Corporatist welfare state regimes. Deviations from such a course are the most evident in the Mediterranean welfare state regimes, especially in Greece and Portugal where austerity measures have been formulated under the strong influence of the Troika.

show abstract

“…Second, as Pierson (), Van Kersbergen and Vis (), Starke et al () and others have pointed out, politicians typically avoid high profile welfare state cuts. In general, the benefits (lower taxes) are diffused through the electorate or focused on small minorities (as in the case with tax cuts for the wealthy) while the pain is concentrated and felt more intensely.…”

Section: Challenges To the Social Division Project In The Ukmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…This perception is reinforced by two factors: first the stringent conditions attached to joint European Central Bank (ECB)/IMF/EU loan packages, including profound cuts in public spending and restructuring of the public sector, privatization and tax reforms, most evident in Greece, and affecting Ireland, Italy, Spain and Portugal (Hay and Wincott ; Armingeon ; Van Kersbergen and Vis ; Starke et al . ); and, second, the more recent EU instruments that require Eurozone governments to submit budgets for ECB comment and set up a mechanism for surveillance and enforcement of the Treaty (the Six‐Pack and Two‐Pack: EC ; De la Porte and Heins ).…”

Section: Challenges To Social Cohesionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

The Divisive Welfare State

Taylor‐Gooby

2016

Soc Policy Adm

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

An important tradition in social policy writing sees the welfare state as an agent of social cohesion against the conflicts of market capitalism. Social policy in the UK is now developing in a way that directly conflicts with this approach. This may signal the future direction of change in other countries, as crisis and slow growth limit available resources and governments become increasingly committed to neo-liberal and consolidation agenda. The 2010 Conservative-led Coalition and 2015 Conservative governments in the UK use social policy to exacerbate and embed social divisions as part of a project to achieve permanent cuts in welfare state spending without damaging their own electoral chances. This paper reviews the divisive welfare state policies in relation to taxation, benefits for working age people and for immigrants and between pensioners and non-pensioners because these groups cover much of welfare state activity and are currently salient in a way that gives the project political purchase. It goes on to argue that the divisions mask a further neo-liberal long-term project of reducing the proportion of national resources going to all recipients of social spending. In this sense we are all in it together.

show abstract

The Welfare State as Crisis Manager

Cited by 82 publications

References 0 publications

The politics of fiscal policy during economic downturns, 1981–2010

The politics of fiscal policy during economic downturns, 1981–2010

The European Welfare State Regimes: Questioning the Typology During the Crisis

The Divisive Welfare State

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About