Abstract
This book analyses the causes of change in social policy in six Western European countries since the early 20th century. What has been the impact of structural factors, economic globalisation and welfare regimes, and why? In terms of theory, the book nicely connects theories that suggest a divergence of welfare state models (Esping-Andersen’s welfare regime theory) and theories that suggest convergence (theories of the economics of globalisation). The book’s main argument is that both of these would overly stress the impact that structural factors have on national social policy.
The theoretical background is crucial in this study. Esping-Andersen’s regime theory, and theories based on it, argues that continuity and change in welfare states would be dictated by domestic welfare structures: once established, they constrain policy-makers’ choices. Countries could be clustered in representative welfare state regimes on these changes, each of which would feature different kinds of economic and social political systems. Esping-Andersen classified countries into three groups on the basis of how extensively the state intervened in market transactions. Ideal types were the Swedish (universal), the German (corporatist) and the British (liberal) models. This difference between the models would be rather permanent as stakeholders would use national history as their primary point of reference.
The globalisation theory, again, argues that economic globalisation would lead to a convergence of welfare regimes. There would be a push towards liberalism because states would give private companies more freedom to act, in order to prevent jobs from moving off-shore. This ‘race to the bottom’ would minimise the impact of national policies and create a universal, global market.
The theoretical strengths of the book are in showing that these two approaches – often thought to be opposed – are alike in that both theories suggest that structural factors dictate the development of national social policies. Weishaupt does not take this approach for granted but, instead, studies which independent variables affect welfare state continuity and change. The hypothesis is that structural factors – either domestic (welfare regimes) or global (economic pressure) – would not be the most important factors that affect continuity and change in European welfare states. The influence of structural factors would diffuse to actual policies through innovative stakeholders on the national level. This reflexive action, or, more precisely, these stakeholders’ beliefs and attitudes, would be the independent variable that explains the stability or convergence of welfare states. These actors would take elements from both of these main explanations and constantly reassess the context in which they act.
The hypothesis is tested with a research design that operationalises the research question into three sub-questions. They consist of specific empirical variables that can be measured. The first sub-question is, do national labour-market policy-reform efforts exhibit cross-national co-variation in Europe, and if so, why? Secondly, what impact have the recommendations of international organisations had on national policy agendas? Thirdly, have recent reform activities transformed the historical composition of national labour-market policy agendas?
Both qualitative and quantitative data are used. The dependent variables are measured by analysing secondary sources. The independent variables are measured by analysing primary sources: firstly, different kinds of documents such as policy papers and legislative documents, and secondly, interviews conducted with policy-makers. The strength of the research design is that it enables Weishaupt to provide an insightful answer to the research question. One possible weakness might be caused by the macro level of analysis followed by generalising on the basis of the results; even if the sample was representative, generalising results from one social context to another may be considered risky. Weishaupt classifies the countries he studies into three pairs, each of which represents one regime. The countries are then compared with one another in order to show how the regime affects the policies.
Finally, the results of the study are three-fold. Firstly, national labour-market policy-reform efforts started from convergence towards universalism in the 1960s, then after a state of confusion and divergence in the 1970s – and a ‘crisis’ of the welfare state in the 1980s – ultimately ended in convergence towards a corporatist-liberal model in the 1990s. Secondly, recommendations of international organisations have helped policy-makers make decisions in puzzling situations. Thirdly, the 1990s convergence and the emergence of the corporatist-liberal activation paradigm challenged the existence of separate regimes. In the countries under study here, elements from three regimes are combined differently.
Weishaupt’s analysis does not necessarily deliver enough solid, empirical proof to actually displace Esping-Andersen’s established theory. However, it is worth reading as it provides crucial information and fresh insights into the topic. One final observation is that more empirical research from different countries would be needed to give more substance to the results.