Abstract
In Human Needs and the Welfare State, Bent Greve undertakes the ambitious task of addressing, in only just over 140 pages, some of the most intricate and profound questions underpinning the architectures of welfare states – namely, who are the needy and do we know what their needs are? This approach is reasoned on the basis of a perceived gap in welfare state discussions: although welfare state provision has expanded significantly over time and has come to encompass a varying but wide range of responsibilities, there has been little reflection on whether we truly understand who the needy are and whether their needs are genuinely being met.
The book thus seeks to provide an analysis of these concerns, through three core research questions: Can we meaningfully calculate and measure the need for welfare benefits and services in modern societies? Who should have their needs covered and in what way? How and in which way can we best determine who will carry out these tasks (who is the most effective provider of the services)? As the book explores these issues, it gradually develops a series of more specific, yet still complex and value-laden questions. The core research questions themselves, however, show that the book not only embraces the challenge of tackling the ‘big issues’, but also explores matters that in themselves do not draw a line between the practical mechanics of welfare delivery and deeper normative concerns about justice, fairness, legitimacy and the role of the state versus other providers. This complexity underscores even further the ambitious nature of the task undertaken.
The book is divided into 10 chapters, each tackling a complex theme or posing a challenging question. Chapter 2 explores the foundational question of what needs exist within the welfare state. It sets the stage for the subsequent discussions, through a conclusion and stance that there is no single and uniform interpretation of what the needs are (not even the basic needs) – but that a good starting point might be to combine expert understanding of need with a comparative one. In the following chapters (3–9), the author deals with this ambiguity by exploring facets of ‘needs’. Especially recurrent are the reflections on the prospects of enabling, or at least approaching, the measurability of these facets to allow for more systematic comparison and evaluation. Yet, in each chapter, the author also highlights significant obstacles to measurability, such as the complex interplay of quality expectations and the dependency on legitimacy, particularly in the presence of populist pressures. Additionally, individual perspectives on the distinction between needs and wants, along with differing priorities regarding resource allocation and financial capacities or willingness, further complicate the issue. What is shown is that even when needs – whether material, emotional, individual, or collective – are clearly defined, this definition often fails to provide clear solutions to the deeper tensions surrounding fairness and redistribution.
In Chapter 10, the author concludes by summarising the analysis and exploring better ways to measure and understand the concept of needs in welfare states, including how to prioritise scarce resources. He asserts that while it is possible to describe and indicate what the needs are, it is challenging to achieve a clear and objective assessment, especially since different interest groups may advocate for their own priorities. Nonetheless, he argues that implementing a need-assessment procedure can provide a framework for determining service needs and evaluating income transfers, which can help prevent poverty.
In Human Needs and the Welfare State, Bent Greve manages to pose a multitude of questions. It is impossible to capture them all adequately in the confines of this review. I would argue that the book does not provide many straightforward answers; rather, it emphasizes, in my view, the importance of asking such questions as a first step in structuring our understanding of needs. It would have been overly ambitious for Greve to seek to resolve ‘once and for all’ the foundational questions surrounding social insurance, both in general and in the concise format of this book.
In grappling with these questions, the author, throughout the book, adopts an interdisciplinary approach, relying on empirical data where possible while also recognising the limitations of such measurements. He engages with a rich literature, from the welfare state classics such as Beveridge and Titmuss, to contemporary theoretical and empirical research related to aspects of human needs. This, in itself, is a quality that enriches the exploration, allowing the reader to appreciate the complexity and contextuality of the ontologies and epistemologies of ‘needs’.
However, my critique is that the author's reasoning occasionally leaps too quickly between different perspectives and issues. This creates a narrative that, despite (or perhaps because of) its many references to other studies and theoretical frameworks from various scientific disciplines, does not always maintain consistency. As a result, the arguments behind the conclusions are sometimes not fully convincing or clear. Nonetheless, the book presents an impressively broad and thought-provoking overview of a complex subject, in an easily accessible, compact format. It is certainly worth reading for those looking to expand or deepen their understanding of human needs as a fundamental aspect of social insurance, particularly given the range of questions it raises and nuances it presents. Through these inquiries, the work becomes a valuable contribution to the ongoing discourse surrounding welfare and societal needs.
