This paper examines unemployment benefit reforms in twenty-five advanced democracies between the middle of the 1980s and the onset of the Great Recession in 2008. The paper’s main argument is that the type of government – coalition or single-party – has an effect on whether cutbacks in social benefits are combined with compensating measures that mitigate the negative effects of the cuts. We show empirically that when cuts in unemployment benefit duration were made by coalition governments, spending on training programs tended to increase, but when cuts in duration were made by single-party governments, training spending tended to decrease. This pattern suggests that coalition governments, but not single-party governments, use compensation mechanisms to build political support for labor market reforms.
AndewegR. B.IrwinG. A. (2009). Governance and politics of the Netherlands (3rd ed.). Basingstoke, UK: Palgrave.
2.
AnthonsenM.LindvallJ. (2009). Party competition and the resilience of corporatism. Government and Opposition, 44, 167-187.
3.
ArmingeonK.WeisstannerD.EnglerS.PotolidisP.GerberM. (2012). Comparative Political Data Set I 1960-2010. Bern, Switzerland: Institute of Political Science, University of Bern.
4.
Assemblée Nationale. (1992). “Loi de finances pour 1993.” 2e sance du vendred 6 novembre 1992 [“1993 Budget Act.” 2nd session of Wednesday, November 6, 1992]. Paris, France: Journal Officiel de la République Française.
5.
BaccaroL.SimoniM. (2008). Policy concertation in Europe. Understanding government choice. Comparative Political Studies, 41, 1323-1348.
6.
BassaniniA.DuvalR. (2006). The determinants of unemployment across OECD countries (OECD Economic Studies, No. 42). Paris, France: OECD.
7.
BecherM. (2009). Constraining ministerial power: The impact of veto players on labor market reforms in industrial democracies, 1973-2000. Comparative Political Studies, 43, 33-60.
8.
BeckN.KatzJ. N. (1995). What to do (and not to do) with time-series cross section data. American Political Science Review, 89, 634-648.
9.
BeckN.KatzJ. N. (2011). Modeling dynamics in time-series-cross-section political economy data. Annual Review of Political Science, 14, 331-352.
10.
BirchfieldV.CrepazM. M. L. (1998). The impact of constitutional structures and collective and competitive veto points on income inequality in industrialized democracies. European Journal of Political Research, 34, 175-200.
11.
BlanchardO. (2006). European unemployment: The evolution of facts and ideas. Economic Policy, 21, 7-59.
12.
BonoliG. (2010). The political economy of active labor-market policy. Politics & Society, 38, 435-457.
13.
ClasenJ. (2005). Reforming European welfare states. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
14.
ClasenJ. (2011). The United Kingdom: Towards a single working-age benefit. In ClasenJ.CleggD. (Eds.), Regulating the risk of unemployment (pp. 15-34). Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
15.
CleggD. (2011). France: Integration versus dualization. In ClasenJ.CleggD. (Eds.), Regulating the risk of unemployment in Europe (pp. 35-53). Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
16.
Cortes Generales. (1992). Sesión Plenaria núm 179 [Plenary Session Num. 179]. Diaro de Sesiones del Congreso De Los Diputados, 185, 9072-9076.
17.
CoxR. H. (2001). The social construction of an imperative. World Politics, 53, 463-498.
18.
CrepazM. M. L. (1998). Inclusion versus exclusion: Political institutions and welfare expenditures. Comparative Politics, 31, 61-80.
19.
CrombezC. (1996). Minority governments, minimal winning coalitions and surplus majorities in parliamentary systems. European Journal of Political Research, 29, 1-29.
20.
De BoefS.KeeleL. (2008). Taking time seriously. American Journal of Political Science, 52, 184-200.
21.
DingeldeyI. (2007). Between workfare and enablement—The different paths to transformation of the welfare state. European Journal of Political Research, 46, 823-851.
22.
EichhorstW.KaufmannO.Konle-SeidlR.ReinhardH.-J. (2008). Bringing the jobless into work? In EichhorstW.KaufmannO.Konle-SeidlR. (Eds.), Bringing the jobless into work? (pp. 1-6). Berlin, Germany: Springer.
23.
EmmeneggerP.HäusermannS.PalierB.Seeleib-KaiserM. (2012). The age of dualization: The Changing face of inequality in deindustrializing societies. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
24.
Esping-AndersenG. (1999). Social foundations of postindustrial economies. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
25.
FinnD.SchulteB. (2008). “Employment first”: Activating the British welfare state. In EichhorstW.KaufmannO.Konle-SeidlR. (Eds.), Bringing the jobless into work? Experiences with activation schemes in Europe and the US (pp. 297-343). Heidelberg, Germany: Springer.
26.
FredrikssonP.HolmlundB. (2006). Improving incentives in unemployment insurance. Journal of Economic Surveys, 20, 357-386.
27.
GigerN.NelsonM. (2011). The electoral consequences of welfare state retrenchment: Blame avoidance or credit claiming in the era of permanent austerity?European Journal of Political Research, 50, 1-23.
28.
GigerN.NelsonM. (2013). The welfare state or the economy? Preferences, constituencies, and strategies for retrenchment. European Sociological Review, 29, 1083-1094.
29.
Green-PedersenC. (2002). The politics of justification. Amsterdam, The Netherlands: Amsterdam University Press.
30.
HamannK.KellyJ. (2007). Party politics and the reemergence of social pacts in Western Europe. Comparative Political Studies, 40, 971-994.
31.
HarrisN. (2008). From unemployment to active jobseeking: Changes and continuities in social security law in the United Kingdom. In StendahlS.ErhagT.DevetziS. (Eds.), A European work-first welfare state (pp. 49-77). Gothenburg, Sweden: Centre for European Research.
32.
HäusermannS. (2010). The politics of welfare state reform in continental Europe. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
33.
HäusermannS.PicotG.GeeringD. (2013). Rethinking party politics and the welfare state. British Journal of Political Science, 43, 221-240.
34.
HemerijckA. (2012). Two or three waves or welfare state transformation? In MorelN.PalierB.PalmeJ. (Eds.), Towards a social investment welfare state? (pp. 33-60). Bristol, UK: The Policy Press.
35.
HermanV.PopeJ. (1973). Minority governments in Western democracies. British Journal of Political Science, 3, 191-212.
36.
HestonA.SummersR.AtenB. (2013). Penn World Table, Version 7.1. Philadelphia: Center for International Comparisons of Production, Income and Prices at the University of Pennsylvania.
37.
HicksJ. (1939). The foundations of welfare economics. Economic Journal, 49, 696-712.
38.
HuoJ.NelsonM.StephensJ. D. (2008). Decommodification and activation in social democratic policy: Resolving the paradox. Journal of European Social Policy, 18, 5-20.
39.
IversenT. (2005). Capitalism, democracy, and welfare. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
40.
IversenT.CusackT. R. (2000). The causes of welfare state expansion. World Politics, 52, 313-349.
41.
IversenT.SoskiceD. (2011). Dualism and political coalitions: Inclusionary versus exclusionary reforms in an age of rising inequality. Harvard University and LSE. Presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Political Science Association, Toronto, Canada, September 3-6.
42.
IversenT.WrenA. (1998). Equality, employment, and budgetary restraint: The trilemma of the service economy. World Politics, 50, 507-546.
43.
Jefatura del Estado. (1992a). Ley 22/1992, de 30 de julio, de medidas urgentes sobre fomento del empleo y protección por desempleo [Law 22/1992 of July 30 on urgent measures to promote employment and protection from unemployment]. Boletín Oficial Del Estado, 186, 27112-27116.
44.
Jefatura del Estado. (1992b). Real Decreto-Ley 1/1992, de 3 de abril, de Medidas Urgentes sobre Fomento del Empleo y Protección por Desempleo [Royal Decree-Law 1/1992 of April 3 on urgent measures to promote employment and protection from unemployment]. Boletín Oficial Del Estado, 84, 11644-11647.
45.
KvistJ. (1998). “Complexities in assessing unemployment benefits and policies. International Social Security Review, 51(4), 33-55.
46.
LaverM.ShepsleK. A. (1996). Making and breaking governments: Cabinets and legislatures in parliamentary democracies. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
47.
LaverM.ShepsleK. A. (2000). Ministrables and government formation: Munchkins, players and big beasts of the jungle. Journal of Theoretical Politics, 12, 113-124.
48.
LayardR.NickellS.JackmanR. (1991). Unemployment. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
49.
LijphartA. (1999). Patterns of democracy. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
50.
LindvallJ. (2010a). Mass unemployment and the state. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
51.
LindvallJ. (2010b). Power sharing and reform capacity. Journal of Theoretical Politics, 22, 359-376.
52.
LindvallJ.RuedaD. (2014). The insider-outsider dilemma. British Journal of Political Science, 44, 460-475.
53.
MartinC. J. (2004). Reinventing welfare regimes. World Politics, 57, 39-69.
54.
MitchellP.NybladeB. (2008). Government formation and cabinet type. In StrømK.MüllerW. C.BergmanT. (Eds.), Cabinets and coalition bargaining (pp. 201-235). Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
55.
MolinaO. (2011). Policy concertation, trade unions and the transformation of the Spanish welfare state. In GuillénA. M.LeónM. (Eds.), The Spanish welfare state in European context (pp. 77-95). Aldershot, UK: Ashgate.
56.
MorelN.PalierB.PalmeJ. (Eds.). (2012). Towards a social investment welfare state?Bristol, UK: Policy Press.
57.
NelsonK. (2010). Social assistance and minimum income benefits in old and new EU democracies. International Journal of Social Welfare, 19, 367-378.
58.
NickellS. J. (1981). Biases in dynamic models with fixed effects. Econometrica, 49, 1417-1426.
59.
NickellS. J.LayardR. (1999). Labor market institutions and economic performance. In AshenfelterO. C.CardD. (Eds.), Handbook of labor economics (pp. 3030-3084). New York, NY: Elsevier.
60.
O’ConnorJ. (1998). US social welfare policy: The Reagan record and legacy. Journal of Social Policy, 27, 37-61.
61.
OeschD. (2006). Redrawing the class map: Stratification and institutions in Britain, Germany, Sweden and Switzerland. Basingstoke, UK: Palgrave Macmillan.
62.
OeschD.MenésJ. R. (2011). Upgrading or polarization? Occupational change in Britain, Germany, Spain, and Switzerland, 1990-2008. Socio-Economic Review, 9(3), 1-29.
63.
Organization for Economic Co-Operation and Development. (2009a). Addressing the labour market challenges of the economic downturn: A summary of country responses to the OECD-EC Questionnaire. Paris, France: OECD.
64.
Organization for Economic Co-Operation and Development. (2009b). Employment outlook: Tackling the jobs crisis. Paris, France: OECD.
65.
Organization for Economic Co-Operation and Development. (2012). OECD.Stat. Various statistics. Paris, France: OECD.
66.
PfeiferM. (2012). Comparing unemployment protection and social assistance in 14 European countries. Four worlds of protection for people of working age. International Journal of Social Welfare, 21, 13-25.
67.
PicotG. (2009). Party competition and reforms of unemployment benefits in Germany. German Politics, 18, 155-179.
68.
PiersonP. (2001). Coping with permanent austerity. In PiersonP. (Ed.), The new politics of the welfare state (pp. 410-456). Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
69.
RaeD. W. (1967). The political consequences of electoral laws. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
70.
RuedaD. (2006). Social democracy and active labour-market policies. British Journal of Political Science, 36, 385-406.
71.
RuedaD. (2007). Social democracy inside out. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
72.
SchofieldN. (1993). Political competition and multiparty coalition governments. European Journal of Political Research, 23, 1-33.
73.
ScruggsL.JahnD.KuittoK. (2014). Comparative Welfare Entitlements Dataset 2 (Version 2014-03). Storrs: University of Connecticut.
74.
SolE.SichertM.van LieshoutH.KoningT. (2008). Activation as a socio-economic and legal concept: Laboratorium the Netherlands. In EichhorstW.KaufmannO.Konle-SeidlR. (Eds.), Bringing the jobless into work? (pp. 161-220). Berlin: Springer.
75.
StrømK. (1984). Minority governments in parliamentary democracies. Comparative Political Studies, 17, 199-227.
76.
StrømK. (1990). Minority government and majority rule. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
77.
SvallforsS. (2011). A bedrock of support? Trends in welfare state attitudes in Sweden, 1981-2010. Social Policy & Administration, 45, 806-825.
78.
TeorellJ.SamanniM.HolmbergS.RothsteinB. (2012). The Quality of Government Dataset (Version 6April2011). Gothenburg: The Quality of Government Institute, University of Gothenburg.
79.
TorfingJ. (1999). Workfare with welfare. Journal of European Social Policy, 9, 5-28.
80.
TsebelisG. (2002). Veto players. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
81.
Tweede Kamer. (2006). Behandeling van: - het wetsvoorstel Wijziging van de Werkloosheidswet en enige andere wetten in verband met aanscherping van de wekeneis (29738); - het wetsvoorstel Wijziging van de Werkloosheidswet en enige andere wetten in verband met de wijziging van het WW-stelsel en wijziging van het ontslagrecht (Wet wijziging WW-stelsel en ontslagrecht) [Deliberation on: - the Bill to amend the Unemployment Insurance Act and other laws related to the reduction of the duration of benefit payments (29738); - the Bill to amend the Unemployment Insurance Act and other laws related to the reform of the unemployment benefit system and dismissal protection rules (Unemployment Insurance and Dismissal Protection Rules Amendment Act)]Handelingen, 43, 2848-2878.
82.
VlandasT. (2013). Mixing apples with oranges? Partisanship and active labour market policies in Europe. Journal of European Social Policy, 23, 3-20.
83.
WeishauptT. (2011). From the manpower revolution to the activation paradigm. Amsterdam, The Netherlands: Amsterdam University Press.
84.
WrenA. (Ed.). (2013). The political economy of the service transition. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
85.
YsmalC. (1993). Political data yearbook—France 1992. European Journal of Political Research, 24, 425-434.
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
