Many studies have found that countries with union-administered unemployment insurance have higher rates of unionization than countries with state-administered unemployment insurance. With data going further back in history, this article demonstrates that the introduction of so-called “Ghent systems” had no effect on unionization rates. We argue that the Ghent effect identified by the existing literature came about as a result of increasing state subsidization and benefit generosity in the 1950s and 1960s. Exploring the partisan politics of unemployment insurance, we show that progressive Liberals (“Social Liberals”) favored Ghent designs while Social Democrats favored state-administered unemployment insurance before the Second World War. We also present some evidence suggesting that Left governments, inheriting Ghent systems that were not of their choosing, promoted state subsidization in the postwar era and thus helped generate the Ghent effect identified by the existing literature.
AlberJ. (1981). Government responses to the challenge of unemployment: The development of unemployment insurance in Western Europe. In FloraP.HeidenheimerA. J. (Eds.), The development of welfare states in Europe and America (pp. 151-183). New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction Books.
ArndtC.RennwaldL. (2016). Union members at the polls in diverse trade union landscapes. European Journal of Political Research, 55, 702-722.
4.
BanksA. S. (2013). Cross-national time-series data archive. Jerusalem, Israel: Databanks International.
5.
BarbieriK.KeshkO.PollinsB. (2008). Correlates of war project trade data set codebook, version 2.0. Available from http://correlatesofwar.org
6.
BjørnsonØ.HaavetI. E. (1994). Langsomt ble landet et velferdssamfunn: Trygdens historie, 1894-1994 [Slowly the country became a welfare society: The history of social security 1894-1994]. Oslo, Norway: Ad Notam Gyldendal.
BoltJ.van ZandenJ. L. (2014). The first update of the Maddison project; Re-estimating growth before 1820 (Maddison Project Working Paper 4). University of Groningen. Retrieved from http://www.ggdc.net/maddison/maddison-project/data.htm
9.
BramborT.LindvallJ.StjernquistA. (2014). The ideology of Heads of Government (HOG), 1870–2012. Lund, Sweden: Lund University.
10.
CameronD. R. (1978). The expansion of the public economy: A comparative analysis. American Political Science Review, 72, 1243-1261.
11.
ClasenJ.ViebrockE. (2008). Voluntary unemployment insurance and trade union membership: Investigating the connections in Denmark and Sweden. Journal of Social Policy, 37, 433-451.
12.
CrouchC. (1999). Employment, industrial relations and social policy: New life in an old connection. Social Policy & Administration, 33, 437-457.
13.
Det Norske Arbeiderparti. (1932). Det arbeidende folks krisekrav [The working peoples crisis demand]. Oslo, Norway: Party Press.
14.
EbbinghausB.VisserJ. (1999). When institutions matter: Union growth and decline in Western Europe, 1950–1995. European Sociological Review, 15, 135-158.
15.
EbbinghausB.VisserJ. (2000). Trade unions in Western Europe since 1945. London, England: Palgrave Macmillan.
16.
EdebalkP. E. (1975). Arbetslöshetsförsäkringsdebatten: En studie i svensk socialpolitik 1892-1934 [The Unemployment insurance debate: A study in swedish social policy-making 1894-1934]. Lund, Sweden: Ekonomisk-historiska föreningen.
17.
FlavinP.RadcliffB. (2011). Labor union membership and voting across nations. Electoral Studies, 30, 633-641.
18.
FloraP.KlausF.PfenningW.AlberJ. (1983). State, economy, and society in Western Europe 1815-1975: A data handbook in two volumes (Vol. 1). Frankfurt am Main, Germany: Campus Verlag.
19.
HecloH. (1974). Modern social policies in Britain and Sweden. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
20.
HicksA.MisraJ.NgT. N. (1995). The programmatic emergence of the social security state. American Sociological Review, 60, 329-349.
21.
HøgedahlL. (2014). The Ghent effect for whom? Mapping the variations of the Ghent effect across different trade unions in Denmark. Industrial Relations Journal, 45, 469-485.
22.
HøgedahlL.KongshøjK. (2017). New trajectories of unionization in the Nordic Ghent countries: Changing labour market and welfare institutions. European Journal of Industrial Relations. Advance online publication. doi:10.1177/0959680116687666
23.
HuberE.StephensJ. D. (2001). Development and crisis of the welfare state: Parties and policies in global markets. Chicago, IL: The University of Chicago Press.
24.
HubermanM. (2012). Odd couple: International trade and labor standards in history. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
25.
KiehelC. (1932). Unemployment insurance in Belgium: A national development of the Ghent and Liége systems. New York, NY: Industrial Relations Counselors.
26.
KjellbergA. (2011). The decline in Swedish union density since 2007. Nordic Journal of Working Life Studies, 1, 67-93.
27.
KorpiW. (2006). Power resources and employer-centered approaches in explanations of welfare states and varieties of capitalism: Protagonists, consenters, and antagonists. World Politics, 58, 167-206.
28.
KorpiW.PalmeJ. (2003). New politics and class politics in the context of austerity and globalization: Welfare state regress in 18 countries, 1975–95. American Political Science Review, 97, 425-446.
29.
KorpiW.PalmeJ. (2007). The Social Citizenship Indicator Program (SCIP). Swedish Institute for Social Research, Stockholm University. Retrieved from http://www.sofi.su.se/spin/
30.
LuebbertG. M. (1991). Liberalism, fascism, or social democracy: Social classes and the political origins of regimes in interwar Europe: Social classes and the political origins of regimes in interwar Europe. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
31.
MahoneyJ.ThelenK. (2010). A theory of gradual institutional change. In MahoneyJ.ThelenK. (Eds.), Explaining institutional change: Ambiguity, agency and power (pp. 1-37). New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
32.
MaresI. (2003). The politics of social risk: Business and welfare state development. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
33.
MartinC. J.SwankD. (2008). The political origins of coordinated capitalism: Business organizations, party systems, and state structure in the age of innocence. American Political Science Review, 102, 181-198.
34.
RasmussenM. (2016). How organized labor shaped the origin and structure of the regulatory revolution 1870-2000 (Doctoral thesis). Aarhus University, Aarhus, Denmark.
RothsteinB. (1992). Labor-market institutions and working-class strength. In SteinmoS.ThelenK.LongstrethF. (Eds.), Structuring politics: Historical institutionalism in comparative analysis (pp. 33-56). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
37.
ScheveK.StasavageD. (2009). Institutions, partisanship, and inequality in the long run. World Politics, 61, 215-253.
38.
SchjolsetA. (2008). Institutional variance of the democratic peace, 1816-2002 (Doctoral thesis). University of Southern California, Los Angeles.
39.
SchnabelC. (2013). Union membership and density: Some (not so) stylized facts and challenges. European Journal of Industrial Relations, 19, 255-272.
40.
ScruggsL. (2002). The Ghent system and union membership in Europe, 1970-1996. Political Research Quarterly, 55, 275-297.
41.
ScruggsL.LangeP. (2002). Where have all the members gone? Globalization, institutions, and union density. Journal of Politics, 64, 126-153.
42.
Statistics Norway. (1915). Arbeidsledighet og Arbeidsledighetskasser [Unemployment and Unemployment funds]. Oslo, Norway: Author.
43.
StreeckW.ThelenK. (2005). Introduction. In StreeckW.ThelenK. (Eds.), Beyond continuity: Institutional change in advanced political economies (pp. 1-39). Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
44.
TabinJ.-P.TogniC. (2013). L’assurance chômage en Suisse: Une socio-histoire (1924-1982) [Unemployment Insurance in Switzerland: A Social History (1924-1982)]. Lausanne: Antipodes.
45.
ThelenK. (2004). How institutions evolve: The political economy of skill formation in Germany, Britain, the United States and Japan. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
46.
ThelenK. (2009). Institutional change in advanced political economies. British Journal of Industrial Relations, 47, 471-498.
47.
Van RieT.MarxI.HoremansJ. (2011). Ghent revisited: Unemployment insurance and union membership in Belgium and the Nordic countries. European Journal of Industrial Relations, 17, 125-139.
48.
ViebrockE. (2004). The role of trade unions as intermediary institutions in unemployment insurance: A European comparison (Doctoral thesis). European University Institute, Florence, Italy.
49.
VisserJ. (2011). ICTWSS: Database on institutional characteristics of trade unions, wage setting, state intervention and social pacts in 34 countries between 1960 and 2007. Amsterdam, The Netherlands: Amsterdam Institute for Advanced Labour Studies, University of Amsterdam. Retrieved from https://aias.s3-eu-central-1.amazonaws.com/website/uploads/1475058545241ictwss_v5.1.dta
50.
WallersteinM. (1989). Union organization in advanced industrial democracies. The American Political Science Review, 83, 481-501.
51.
WesternB. (1997). Between class and market: Postwar unionization in the capitalist democracies. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
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.
