Mainstream European left-wing parties have seen their traditional class base evolve in postindustrial economies. In response, these parties have adjusted their platforms to adopt policies that aim to secure positions for workers in a more volatile labor market through education and training. But how does the electoral appeal of this “social investment” paradigm compare to that of the older welfare paradigm that passively distributes benefits to the poor and inactive? Using cross-country data from two surveys, I find that industrial workers respond differently to labor market precarity than service sector workers, particularly sociocultural professionals. Further, industrial workers who prefer traditional welfare policies are less likely to vote for the center-left than professionals, even if those professionals hold similar policy priorities. These results help explain the center-left’s recent electoral trends while also highlighting current limitations on building cross-class political coalitions in postindustrial economies.
Abou-ChadiTWagnerM (2019) The electoral appeal of party strategies in postindustrial societies: when can the mainstream left succeed?The Journal of Politics81(4): 1405–1419.
2.
ArndtC (2013) The Electoral Consequences of Third Way Welfare State Reforms: Social Democracy's Transformation and its Political Costs. Amsterdam: Amsterdam University Press.
3.
BaccaroLLockeRM (1998) The end of solidarity? The decline of egalitarian wage policies in Italy and Sweden. European Journal of Industrial Relations4(3): 283–308.
4.
BenedettoGHixSMastroroccoN (2020) The rise and fall of social democracy, 1918–2017. American Political Science Review114(3): 928–939.
5.
BonoliG (2007) New social risks and the politics of post-industrial social policies. In: ArmingeonKBonoliG (eds) The Politics of Post-Industrial Welfare States. London: Routledge, 21–44.
6.
BonoliG (2013) The Origins of Active Social Policy: Labour Market and Childcare Policies in Comparative Perspective. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
7.
BonoliGLiechtiF (2018) Good intentions and Matthew effects: access biases in participation in active labour market policies. Journal of European Public Policy25(6): 894–911.
8.
BornschierSKriesiH (2012) The populist right, the working class, and the changing face of class politics. In: RydrenJ (ed) Class Politics and the Radical Right. London: Routledge, 28–48.
9.
BremerB (2018) The missing left? Economic crisis and the programmatic response of social democratic parties in Europe. Party Politics24(1): 23–38.
10.
BremerBRennwaldL (2022) Who still likes social democracy? The support base of social democratic parties reconsidered. Party Politics29(4): 741–754.
11.
BusemeyerMR (2008) Education and the “new” social democracy: an analysis from the view of comparative state expenditure research. Politische Vierteljahresschrift49(2): 283–308.
12.
BusemeyerMRGarritzmannJNeimannsE, et al. (2018) Investing in Education in Europe: Attitudes, Politics and Policies (INVEDUC). Cologne: GESIS Data Archive. ZA6961. Data file Version 1.0.0 DOI: 10.4232/1.13140.
13.
CrouchCKeuneM (2012) The governance of economic uncertainty: beyond ‘new social risks’ analysis. In: BonoliGNataliD (eds) The Politics of the New Welfare State. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 45–67.
14.
De DekenJ (2014) Identifying the skeleton of the social investment state: defining and measuring patterns of social policy change on the basis of expenditure data. In: CantillonBVandenbrouckeF (eds) Reconciling Work and Poverty Reduction: How Successful Are European Welfare States?Oxford: Oxford University Press, 260–285.
15.
DöringHHuberCManowP, et al. (2023) Parliaments and governments database (ParlGov): information on parties, elections and cabinets in established democracies. Development version: https://parlgov.org
16.
EdlundJLindhA (2019) The ISSP 2016 role of government module: content, coverage, and history. International Journal of Sociology49: 99–109.
17.
EmmeneggerPMarxPSchraffD (2015) Labour market disadvantage, political orientations and voting: how adverse labour market experiences translate into electoral behaviour. Socio-Economic Review13(2): 189–213.
18.
Esping-AndersenG (1990) The Three Worlds of Welfare Capitalism. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
19.
FossatiF (2018) Who wants demanding active labour market policies? Public attitudes towards policies that put pressure on the unemployed. Journal of Social Policy47(1): 77–97.
20.
GarritzmannJLBusemeyerMRNeimannsE (2018) Public demand for social investment: new supporting coalitions for welfare state reform in Western Europe?Journal of European Public Policy25(6): 844–861.
21.
GingrichJHäusermannS (2015) The decline of the working-class vote, the reconfiguration of the welfare support coalition and consequences for the welfare state. Journal of European Social Policy25(1): 50–75.
22.
HäusermannS (2012) The politics of old and new social policies. In: BonoliGNataliD (eds) The Politics of the New Welfare State. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 111–132.
23.
HäusermannSKurerTSchwanderH (2015) High-skilled outsiders? Labor market vulnerability, education and welfare state preferences. Socio-Economic Review13(2): 235–258.
24.
HäusermannSPinggeraMAresM, et al. (2022) Class and social policy in the knowledge economy. European Journal of Political Research61(2): 462–484.
25.
HemerijckA (2013) Changing Welfare States. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
26.
HemerijckA (2015) The quiet paradigm revolution of social investment. Social Politics: International Studies in Gender, State & Society22(2): 242–256.
JacobsAMMatthewsJS (2017) Policy attitudes in institutional context: rules, uncertainty, and the mass politics of public investment. American Journal of Political Science61(1): 194–207.
29.
JensonJ (2012) Redesigning citizenship regimes after neoliberalism: moving towards social investment. In: MorelNPalierBPalmeJ (eds) Towards a Social Investment Welfare State? Ideas, Policies and Challenges. Bristol: Policy Press, 61–87.
30.
KarrethJPolkJTAllenCS (2013) Catchall or catch and release? The electoral consequences of social democratic parties’ march to the middle in Western Europe. Comparative Political Studies46(7): 791–822.
31.
KorpiW (1983) The Democratic Class Struggle. London: Routledge.
32.
KühnerS (2018) Partisan ideology, veto players and their combined effect on productive and protective welfare policy: how the left still matters after all?Policy Studies39(2): 165–187.
33.
KuittoK (2016) From social security to social investment? Compensating and social investment welfare policies in a life-course perspective. Journal of European Social Policy26(5): 442–459.
34.
LindvallJRuedaD (2014) The insider–outsider dilemma. British Journal of Political Science44(2): 460–475.
35.
LoxboKHinnforsJHageviM, et al. (2019) The decline of Western European social democracy: exploring the transformed link between welfare state generosity and the electoral strength of social democratic parties, 1975–2014. Party Politics27(3): 430–441.
36.
MarxP (2014) Labour market risks and political preferences: the case of temporary employment. European Journal of Political Research53(1): 136–159.
37.
MarxPPicotG (2013) The party preferences of atypical workers in Germany. Journal of European Social Policy23(2): 164–178.
38.
NegriF (2019) Economic or cultural backlash? Rethinking outsiders’ voting behavior. Electoral Studies59: 158–163.
39.
NeimannsE (2022) Preferences, vote choice, and the politics of social investment: addressing the puzzle of unequal benefits of childcare provision. Journal of Social Policy51(4): 945–964.
40.
NelsonMStephensJD (2009) Human capital policies and the social investment perspective: explaining the past and anticipating the future. In: MorelNPalierBPalmeJ (eds) What Future for Social Investment?Copenhagen: Institute for Futures Studies Research Report, 67–78.
41.
NolanB (2013) What use is ‘social investment. Journal of European Social Policy23(5): 459–468.
42.
OeschD (2006) Redrawing the Class Map: Stratification and Institutions in Britain, Germany, Sweden and Switzerland. London: Palgrave Macmillan.
43.
OeschD (2012) The class basis of the cleavage between the new left and the radical right: an analysis for Austria, Denmark, Norway and Switzerland. In: RydrenJ (ed) Class Politics and the Radical Right. London: Routledge, 49–69.
44.
PiersonP (1996) The new politics of the welfare state. World Politics48(2): 143–179.
45.
RehmP (2009) Risks and redistribution: an individual-level analysis. Comparative Political Studies42(7): 855–881.
46.
RehmPHackerJSSchlesingerM (2012) Insecure Alliances: risk, inequality, and support for the welfare state. American Political Science Review106(2): 386–406.
47.
RovnyAERovnyJ (2017) Outsiders at the ballot box: operationalizations and political consequences of the insider–outsider dualism. Socio-Economic Review15(1): 161–185.
48.
RuedaD (2005) Insider–outsider politics in industrialized democracies: the challenge to social democratic parties. American Political Science Review99(1): 61–74.
49.
SchwanderH (2019) Labor market dualization and insider–outsider divides: why this new conflict matters. Political Studies Review17(1): 14–29.
50.
SchwanderHHäusermannS (2013) Who is in and who is out? A risk-based conceptualization of insiders and outsiders. Journal of European Social Policy23(3): 248–269.
51.
ThelenK (2014) Varieties of Liberalization and the New Politics of Social Solidarity. Cambridge: Cambridge 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.
