Sage Journals: Discover world-class research

Abstract

As the EU economies and societies become increasingly integrated, and as labour market behaviour patterns converge across borders, the EU is striving to develop a substantially common social identity. To this end, it is seeking to promote the development of a sustainable institutional framework that facilitates flexibility and structural change in the economy and the labour market, and, at the same time, to provide a meaningful social safety net (‘flexicurity’). However, while there are such great differences in social organisation among EU countries, it would be unrealistic to try to establish a common social protection model. The more immediate goals for the EU should be to identify a mechanism for ensuring social protection, the developments that jeopardise the continuation of universal coverage for all members of society, the factors that are responsible for the exclusion of certain groups of people and how this is affected by different models of social organisation and, last but not least, the gaps are in the statistical data that prevent a proper evaluation of economic well-being under different welfare models. These are the questions that are addressed in this paper.

The argument advanced in this paper is that the well-being of every society depends upon the interaction of the market, the household/family and the state. The exclusion of the household sector from the conventional statistical framework – and its exclusion from orthodox economic theory – ignores the fact that the various models of social organisation give different relative weights to – and impose different roles on – the three pillars of social organisation. A different set of taxes, transfer payments and public services in the various welfare models that are found in the EU leads to a divergence of incentives to the private sector and/or the household to provide social services. This results in a different degree of integration of the working age population into the labour force, the quality of work and the price and quality of social protection. Models that allow for the targeting of individual needs are best able to cope with the current trends of increasing flexibility of work and family relationships and the concomitant challenge of universal social protection.

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Abramovici

(2002a), Der Sozialschutz in Europa, Statistik kurz gefasst: Bevölkerung und soziale Bedingungen, Thema No. 3-1/2002, EUROSTAT.

Abramovici

(2002b), Der Sozialschutz: Bar- und Sachleistungen, Statistik kurz gefasst: Bevölkerung und soziale Bedingungen, Thema No. 3 - 16/2002, EUROSTAT.

Abramovici

(2003), Der Sozialschutz in Europa, Statistik kurz gefasst: Bevölkerung und soziale Bedingungen, Thema No. 3-3/2003, EUROSTAT.

Aiginger

(2002), The New European Model of the Reformed Welfare State, European Forum Working Paper 2/2002, Stanford University.

Anker

(1998), Gender and Jobs, Sex segregation of occupations in the world. ILO, Geneva.

Aoki

(1995), ‘Towards a Comparative Institutional Analysis’, Japanese Economic Review 47 (1).

Atkinson

A.B.

(1999), Is rising income inequality inevitable? A critique of the transatlantic consensus, World Institute for Development Economics Research (WIDER) Annual Lecture No.3.

Atkinson

A.B.

Rainwater

Smeeding

T. M.

(1995), Income Distribution in OECD Countries: Evidence from the Luxembourg Incomes Study (LIS), OECD Social Policy Studies No. 18.

Atkinson

A.B.

Brandolini

(2001), ‘Promise and Pitfalls in the Use of “Secondary” Data-Sets: Income Inequality in OECD Countries as a Case Study’, Journal of Economic Literature, 39 (3), pp. 771–799.

10.

Bassanini

Scarpetta

Hemmings

(2001), Economic Growth: The Role of Policies and Institutions. Panel Data Evidence from OECD Countries, Economics Department Working Paper No. 283, OECD, Paris.

11.

Behrens

(2000), Das BIP pro Kopf in 50 der 211 Regionen der EU unter 75per cent des EU-Durchschnitts, Statistik kurz gefasst: Allgemeine Statistik, Thema No. 1 - 1/2000, EUROSTAT.

12.

Behrens

(2003), Regionales Bruttoinlandsprodukt in der Europäischen Union 2000, Statistik kurz gefasst: Allgemeine Statistik, Thema 1 – 1/2003, EUROSTAT.

13.

Biffl

(1996), ‘Towards a social reproduction model’, Transfer – European Review of Labour and Research, Volume 2/1, February 1996.

14.

Biffl

(1999), ‘Der Arbeitsmarkt der Zukunft, Implikationen für die Sozialpartnerschaft’, in Karlhofer

Talos

(eds.), Zukunft der Sozialpartnerschaft, Veränderungsdynamik und Reformbedarf, ZAP, Wien.

15.

Biffl

(2001), ‘Coordination of Migration, Employment and Education Policy in the EU-Labour Market’, The Journal of Contemporary Issues in Business and Government, Vol. 7 (2).

16.

Biffl

(2002), Reorganisation of Employees' Legal Protection. Cause and Effect of Flexible Employment Relationships in the Labour Market, WIFO-Working Papers, 189, Vienna. http://titan.wsr.ac.at/wifosite/wifosite.get_abstract_type?p_language=1&pubid=23118&pub_language=-1&p_type=0

17.

Biffl

Bock-Schappelwein

Ruhs

(2002), Systeme der Förderung des Universitätsstudiums im Ausland, WIFO Monograph, Vienna. http://titan.wsr.ac.at/wifosite/wifosite.get_abstract_type?p_language=1&pubid=21203&pub_language=-1&p_type=0

18.

Borland

Gregory

Sheehan

(eds.) (2001), Work Rich, Work Poor, Inequality and Economic Change in Australia, Centre for Strategic Economic Studies, Victoria University.

19.

Burtless

Smeeding

T.M.

(2000), The Level, Trend and Composition of Poverty, Brookings Working Papers, Washington D.C.

20.

Castillo

M.D.

(1998), ‘Persons outside the labor force who want a job’, Monthly Labor Review, July 1998, pp. 34–42.

21.

Castles

F.G.

(2002), ‘The European Social Policy Model: Progress since the Early 1980s’, European Journal of Social Security, 3 (4), pp. 299–313.

22.

Dawkins

(2002), Getting Jobs into Jobless Households: Tax Credits, Welfare Reform and Wage Setting, Melbourne Institute of Applied Economic and Social Research, University of Melbourne.

23.

De Villota

Ferrari

(2002), ‘The Impact of the Tax/Benefit System on Women's Work’, in De Villota (ed.) Politica economica desde una perspectiva de genero, la individualizacion de los derechos sociales y fiscales en la Union Europea, Madrid. http://europa.eu.int/comm/employment_social/equ_opp/women_work.pdf

24.

Duncan

(2002), Promoting Employment through Welfare Reform: Lessons from the past, prospects for the future; The 2002 Downing Lecture, University of Melbourne.

25.

Esping-Andersen

(1990), The Three Worlds of Welfare Capitalism, Polity Press, Cambridge.

26.

Esping-Andersen

Gallie

Hemerijck

Myles

(2001), A New Welfare Architecture for Europe?, Report submitted to the Belgian Presidency of the European Union.

27.

European Commission (2001), Beschreibung der sozialen Lage in Europa 2000, Luxemburg.

28.

European Commission (2002a), Soziale Sicherheit in Europa 2001, Luxemburg.

29.

European Commission (2002b), Die soziale Lage in der Europäischen Union 2002 (Kurzfassung), EUROSTAT, Luxemburg.

30.

Fagan

Burchell

(2002), Gender, Jobs and Working Conditions in the European Union, European Foundation for the Improvement of Living and Working Conditions, Office for Official Publications of the European Communities, Luxembourg.

31.

Ferrani

Nelson

(2002), The Impact of taxation on the equalising effect of social insurance to income inequality: A comparative analysis of ten Welfare States, Luxembourg Income Study Working Paper No. 327.

32.

Forster

M.F.

(2000), Trends and driving factors in income distribution and poverty in the OECD area, OECD Social Policies Study Division, Labour Market and Social Policy Occasional Papers No. 42.

33.

Gornick

J.C.

Jacobs

J.A.

(1998), Gender, the Welfare State, and Public Employment: A Comparative Study of Seven Industrialized Countries, LIS Working Paper No. 168.

34.

Gottheil

(2003), ‘Ireland: What's Celtic about the Celtic Tiger’, The Quarterly Review of Economics and Finance, Vol. 43 (5), pp. 720–37.

35.

Gottschalk

Smeeding

T.M.

(1997), ‘Cross-National Comparisons of Earnings and Income Inequality’, Journal of Economic Literature, 35 (2), pp. 633–687.

36.

Gottschalk

Smeeding

T.M.

(2000), ‘Empirical Evidence on Income Inequality in Industrialized Countries’, in Atkinson

A. B.

Bourguignon

(eds.), Handbook of Income Distribution, Handbook in Economics Volume 5, Amsterdam, pp. 261–308.

37.

Gottschalk

Gustafsson

Palmer

(1997), The Distribution of Economic Welfare in the 1980s, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.

38.

Gustafsson

(1996), ‘Tax regimes and Labour Market Performance’ in Schmid

O'Reilly

Schömann

(eds.), International Handbook of Labour Market Policy and Evaluation, Edward Elgar, Cheltenham and Brookfield, pp. 811–839.

39.

Gill

(1990), ‘Social Justice and the Low-Paid Worker’, Australian Journal of Social Issues, 25, pp. 83–102.

40.

Hollingsworth

J.R.

Boyer

(1997), ‘Coordination of Economic Actors and Social Systems of Production’, in Hollingsworth

J.R.

Boyer

(eds.) Contemporary Capitalism, the Embeddedness of Institutions. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

41.

ILO (2002), Decent Work and the Informal Sector, International Labour Conference, 90^th Session 2002, Geneva.

42.

Ironmonger

(1996), ‘Counting outputs, capital inputs and caring labour: Estimating gross household product’, Feminist Economics, 2 (3), pp. 37–64.

43.

Mejer

Linden

(2000), Dauernde Einkommensarmut und soziale Ausgrenzung in der Europaäischen Union, Statistik kurz gefasst: Bevaölkerung und soziale Bedingungen, Thema 3 - 13/2000, EUROSTAT.

44.

North

(1990), Institutions, Institutional Change and Economic Performance, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.

45.

OECD (1998a), The Battle against Exclusion, Volume 1, Social assistance in Australia, Finland, Sweden and the United Kingdom, Paris.

46.

OECD (1998b), The Battle against Exclusion, Volume 2, Social assistance in Belgium, the Czech Republic, the Netherlands and Norway, Paris.

47.

OECD (1999a), The Battle against Exclusion, Volume 3, Social assistance in Canada and Switzerland, Paris.

48.

OECD (1999b), Implementing the OECD jobs strategy: Assessing performance and policy, Paris.

49.

OECD (1999c), Benefit Systems and Work Incentives, Paris.

50.

OECD (2003), The Sources of Economic Growth in OECD Countries, Paris.

51.

Scharpf

F. W.

(2000), Sozialstaaten in der Globalisierungsfalle? Lehren aus dem internationalen Vergleich, Max-Planck-Gesellschaft zur Förderung der Wissenschaften e.V., Jahrbuch 2000, Köln, pp. 59–73. http://www.mpg.de/doku/ahrbuch/2000/jahrbuch2000.pdf

52.

Soskice

(1999), ‘Divergent Production Regimes: Coordinated and Uncoordinated Market Economies in the 1980s and 1990s’ in Kitschelt

Lange

Marks

Stephens

J.D.

(eds.) Continuity and Change in Contemporary Capitalism. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

53.

Visser

(1998), ‘Two cheers for corporatism, one for the market: Industrial Relations, wage moderation and job growth in the Netherlands’, British Journal of Industrial Relations, 36 (2), pp. 669–692, June.

54.

Visser

(2000), ‘From Keynesianism to the Third Way: Labour relations and Social Policy in Postwar Western Europe’, Economic and Industrial Democracy, 21, pp. 421–56.

55.

Visser

(2002), ‘The first part-time economy in the world: A model to be followed?’, Journal of European Social Policy, 12 (1), pp. 23–42.

Diversity of Welfare Systems in the EU: A Challenge to Policy Coordination

Abstract

Get full access to this article

References