Sweden has always been regarded as ‘the archetype of a universal model’ (Palme, 2002) as well as ‘the most expensive welfare state’ (Rothstein, 1998, p 6). After comparing a wide range of welfare states, Doyal and Gough (1991, p 290) conclude that the Swedish welfare state ‘emerges as the global leader, the country most closely approximating optimum need-satisfaction at the present time’. Sweden was also ranked second on the United Nations’ Human Development Index (United Nations Development Programme, 2004). The Swedish government has consistently attributed this to class and gender equality and the dominant role of government in welfare provision. The Social Services Act clearly states that it is the responsibility of the Swedish government to ‘promote people's financial and social security’ (National Board of Health and Welfare, 2000). In pursuing this welfare goal, the Swedish government has provided comprehensive welfare services to meet the needs of different age groups at different stages of their lives.

To fulfil its welfare objectives, the Swedish government allocates substantial public resources to the social services; nearly one third of Sweden's GDP is devoted to welfare expenditure, and progressive taxation measures have been adopted. The social expenditure in Sweden is 32.3% of its GDP, in contrast to 26.8% in the UK and 20.1% in Spain in 2001 (Nordic Social-Statistical Committee, 2003). As a result of progressive taxation and cash transfers favouring deprived social groups, the gap between rich and poor in Sweden is smaller than that in other countries (Behrendt, 2002). As illustrated in the earlier part of this book, human dignity consists of more than economic well-being; it also includes human autonomy and development, and social relationships. This chapter attempts to examine the effectiveness of the Swedish model in enhancing the dignity of unemployed persons.

The Swedish government's policies on unemployment

Sweden is one of the most developed economies in the world. With a population of 8,878,000, Sweden's GDP per capita in 2003 was ranked 22 (US$25,400) (CIA World, 2003). Compared with other countries, Sweden ‘stands out as a country that spends large resources on active market policy’ (Holmlund, 2003, p 16). The Swedish labour movement has been guided primarily by the ‘Rehn-Meidner model’, characterised by ‘an active labour market policy’, ‘a restrictive finance policy and a solidaristic wage policy’ (Green-Pedersen and Linbom, 2002, p 16).