The focus of this article is how the basic knowledge that is used to determine legal changes in the area of social security changed between 1950 and 2000 in Nordic social security systems, especially in Sweden. It also examines whether trust in the ability of the state to govern has declined, and if so, what has replaced it. The article evaluates legal changes regarding the shaping of social rights and their administration, using the principles of subsidiarity and solidarity as tools. The idea that the welfare of the individual must always be balanced against the welfare of society as a whole means that power must sometimes be relocated upwards to the level where it will do most good for ‘the benefit of everyone’. Hence, the principle of subsidiarity must be supplemented by the principle of solidarity, which entails a collective responsibility for everyone's good and thus contributes to the realisation of the common good. Individual and collective responsibility must be balanced in order for the good of the individual and the common good to be fulfilled from the point of view of the prevailing values of justice and effectiveness. The article concludes that, for demographic, financial, legal, and above all, ethical reasons a reconstruction of the social project is needed.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
AnderssonJ. (2002), ‘Do social reforms cost money? Aspects on the 20th century discussion of productive social policy’ (Kostar sociala reformer pengar? Synpunkter på 1900-talets diskussion om produktiv socialpolitik) in the anthology Population and Welfare. Perspectives on welfare politics in the future.
2.
AnderssonJ. (2002), Between Growth and Security. Ideas in Social Democratic social policy during the period after the 2nd World War (Mellan tillväxt och säkerhet. Tankar om socialdemokratisk socialpolitik under tiden efter andra världskriget).
3.
BaumanZ. (1995), Life in Fragments: Essays in Post-Modern Morality, Oxford: Blackwell.
4.
BerntJ. F.DoubletD.R. (1998), Philosophy of Science for Lawyers – an introduction (Vitenskapsfilosofi för jurister – en innføring), Bergen–Sandviken: Fagboksforlaget.
5.
BerntJ. F.KjellevoldA.HoveH. (2000), Social Security and the Rule of law (Sosial trygghet og rettssikkerhet), 2nd edition, Bergen: Fagbokforlaget.
6.
CastellsM. (1998), The Information Age. Economy, Society and Culture, Volume 2: The Power of Identity (Informationsåldern. Ekonomi, samhälle och kultur, Band II, Identitetens makt), Göteborg: Daidalos.
7.
Dahlberg-LarsenJ. (1991), Rights, Administration and Self-administration. Articles on Sociological Jurisprudence and an Introduction to the Subject (Ret, styrning og selvforvaltning. Retssociologiske artikler og en introduktion til emnet. Jfr även K. Ketscher, Social Ret, 1998.
8.
DahlgrenG. (1994), The Health-Care Markets of the Future: Winners and Losers, (Framtidens sjukvårdsmarknader. Vinnare och förlorare). Stockholm: Natur och kultur in co-operation with Institutet för framtidsstudier.
9.
EwaldF. (1989), ‘The Insurance Company’ (‘Die Versicherungsgesellschaft’) in Kritische Justiz, pp. 385–393.
10.
GlavåM.PetrussonU. (2002), The Illusion Regarding the Law! – The Legal Profession and Responsibility for the Legal Constructions (Illusionen om rätten! – juristprofessionen och ansvaret för rättskonstruktionerna) in Erkjennelse og Engasjement. Minnesseminar for David Roland Doublet (1954–2000). Bergen: Fagbokforlaget.
11.
GraverH.P. (2000), ‘Between individualism and collectivism – the administrative law at the beginning of a new century’ (‘Mellom individualisme og kollektivisme – forvaltningsretten ved ingangen til et nytt århundrade’) in Lov og rett. Norsk Juridisk Tidsskrift, 8, pp. 451–482.
12.
GustafssonH. (2002), The Polyvalence of law. A legal scientific study of social rights and the rule of law (Rattens polyvalens. En rättsvetenskaplig studie av sociala rättigheter och rättssäkerhet), Lund University.
13.
HöjerK. (1953), A Swedish Citizen's Protection against Want (En svensk medborgares trygghet mot nöd), 5th edition, Stockholm: Norstedts.
14.
HydénH. (2002), Normative Science (Normvetenskap), Lund: Lund Studies in Sociology of Law.
15.
IngheG. (1960), The Poor in the People's Home: A Study of Long-term Benefit Receivers in Stockholm (Fattiga i folkhemmet; en studie av långvarigt understödda i Stockholm), Stockholm: Stadsarkivet.
16.
LandeliusA-C. (2002), ‘Private Law Subjects within Social Service' (Privaträttsliga subject inom socialtjänsten) in WesterhällL. (ed.) Issues of Legal Security in Social Law (Rattssakerhetsfrågor inom socialrätten), Stockholm: Norstedts Juridik.
17.
LindqvistR. (1989), ‘Conflict and Compromise at the Creation of the General Illness Insurance’ (Konflikt och kompromiss vid den allmänna sjukförsäkringens tillkomst), in Archive for Studies of the history of the workers’ movement (Arkiv för studier i arbetarrörelsens historia).
18.
MichelattiM. (1994), The Civic Society and the State. The Role of the Civic Associations in Swedish Politics (Det civila samhället och staten. Medborgarsammanslutningarnas roll i svensk politik).
19.
OlssonS-E. (1990), Social Policy and Welfare State in Sweden, Lund: Arkiv.
20.
PeczenikA. (1995), What is Right? On Democracy, Legal Safety, Ethics and Legal Argumentation (Vad är rätt? Om demokrati, rättssäkerhet, etik och juridisk argumentation), Stockholm: Fritze.
21.
PeterssonO. (1996), The State of Law (Rättsstaten), Stockholm: Publica; Frändberg.
22.
PeterssonO. (2000), ‘On Legal Security’ (Om rättssäkerhet), JT, pp. 269ff.
23.
RothsteinB. (1996), The Social Democratic State: The Swedish model and the bureaucratic problem of social reforms, Pittsburgh: University of Pittsburgh Press.
24.
RothsteinB.BergströmJ. (1999), The Fall of Corporatism – and the Crisis of the Swedish model (Korporatismens fall – och den Norstedts Juridik Norstedts Juridik svenska modellens kris), Stockholm: Näringsliv och Samhälle.
25.
SimmondsN. E. (1988), Legal Matters of Principle. Justice, Current Law and Rights (Juridiska principfrågor. Rättvisa, gällande rätt och rättigheter), Stockholm: Norstedts.
26.
SommestadL. (2002), Demography and political culture. An economic-historic perspective of ‘the fall of the strong state’, Uppsala (mimeograph).
27.
SundbergH. (1935), The Administration and the Legal Security (Förvaltningen och rättssäkerheten), Svensk Juristtidning.
28.
TuoriK. (1992), ‘The Welfare State, Risk Society and Social Law’ (Välfärdsstaten, risksamhället och den sociala rätten) Retfærd, 58, Nordic Legal Series (Juridisk Tidsskrift), 3, pp. 3ff.
29.
WesterhällL. (1987), ‘Normative Power and Normative Consideration in Social Security Law’ (Normgivning och normprövning inom social-försäkringsrätten), Förvaltningsrättslig Tidskrift, pp. 104–124.
30.
WesterhällL. (2000), ‘Legal Security in the State of Law/Welfare State – the example of need for support’ (Rättssäkerhet i rättsstaten/välfärdsstaten – exemplet försörjningsbehov), Nybrott og Odling. Festskrift till Nils Nygaard. Bergen.
31.
WesterhällL. (2002), The Fall of the Strong State? A jurisprudential study concerning Swedish social security 1950–2000 (Den starka statens fall? En rättsvetenskaplig studie av svensk social trygghet 1950–2000), Stockholm: Norstedts Juridik.
32.
WilhelmssonT. (2001), Late Modern Law of Liability. Private Law as tool for Micro Politics (Senmodern ansvarsrätt. Privaträtt som redskap för mikropolitik), Uppsala: Iustus.
