Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-2plfb Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-22T06:27:54.888Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The Diversity and Causality of Pension Reform Pathways: A Fuzzy-set Qualitative Comparative Analysis

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  04 November 2019

LEANDRO N. CARRERA  and
MARINA ANGELAKI
LEANDRO N. CARRERA
Affiliation:
Public Policy Group London School of Economics and Political Science Houghton St London WC2A 2AE United Kingdom email: [email protected]
MARINA ANGELAKI
Affiliation:
Department of Sociology Panteion University Leof. Andrea Siggrou 136 Athens Greece email: [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Pension reform is one of the top public policy priorities in advanced industrialized countries due to population ageing and the significant weight of pension spending in governments’ budgets. As a result of these concerns European countries have engaged in varying degrees of pension reforms over the last three decades. The extant literature on pension reform focuses on structural, institutional and blame avoidance theories to explain how pension reform take place. Yet, how do different conditions combine to lead to significant pension reform outcomes? To answer this question we analyze a set of 48 pension reform cases in eight European countries since the late 1980s up until 2014 by using fuzzy set qualitative comparative analysis (fsQCA). Our main finding is that institutional, structural or blame avoidance theories cannot account by themselves for instances of significant pension reform. Rather, we find three pathways that combine structural and institutional conditions to lead to significant pension reform.

Keywords

pension policyreformfsqcapoliticsinstitutions
Type
Article
Information
Journal of Social Policy , Volume 49 , Issue 3 , July 2020 , pp. 582 - 600
Copyright
© Cambridge University Press 2019

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Abou-Chadi, T. and Immergut, E. M. (2018), ‘Recalibrating social protection: Electoral competition and the new partisan politics of the welfare state’, European Journal of Political Research, 15 October 2018.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Anderson, K. M. and Immergut, E. M. (2007), ‘Sweden: After social democratic hegemony’, in Immergut, E., Anderson, K. and Schulze, I. (eds), The handbook of west European pension politics. New York: Oxford University Press: 349–386.Google Scholar
Beland, D. (2009), ‘Ideas, institutions, and policy change.’ Journal of European Public Policy 16(5): 701–718.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bonoli, G. (2000), The Politics of Pension Reform. Institutions, Policy Change in Western Europe, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bonoli, G. and Palier, B. (2007), ‘When past reforms open new opportunities: comparing old age insurance reforms in Bismarckian welfare systems’, Social Policy and Administration, 41: 6, 555–73.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brooks, S. (2009), Social Protection and the Market in Latin America: the transformation of Social Security Institutions. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Datz, G. and Dancsi, K. (2013), ‘The Politics of Pension Reform Reversal: A Comparative Analysis of Hungary and Argentina’, East European Politics, 29(1): 83–100.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ebbinghaus, B. (2011), ‘The role of trade unions in European pension reform: From ‘old’ to ‘new politics?’ European Journal of Industrial Relations 17(4): 315–331.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Esping-Andersen, G. (1990), The Three Worlds of Welfare Capitalism. Cambridge: Polity Press.Google Scholar
Eurostat (2017), Unemployment Rates by Sex, Age and Citizenship, Eurostat: European Commission. Available at: https://appsso.eurostat.ec.europa.eu/nui/show.do?dataset=lfsa_urgan&lang=enGoogle Scholar
Gallagher, M. (2017), Election indices dataset. Available at: http://www.tcd.ie/Political_Science/staff/michael_gallagher/ElSystems/index.phpGoogle Scholar
Gelepithis, M. (2018), ‘Three paths to more encompassing supplementary pensions’ Journal of Social Policy, 47, 3, 603–623.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gemenis, K. and Nezi, R. (2015), ‘Government–Opposition Dynamics during the Economic Crisis in Greece.’ The Journal of Legislative Studies 21 (1): 14–34.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Green-Pedersen, C. (2003), ‘Small States with Big Success. Party Politics and Governing the Economy in Denmark and the Netherlands 1973-2000’, Socio-Economic Review 1, 3: 411–437.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hall, P.A. (1993), ‘Policy Paradigms, Social Learning and the State: the case of economic policymaking in Britain’, Comparative Politics, 25(3): 275–296.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hick, R. (2017), ‘Enter the Troika: The politics of social security during Ireland’s bailout’, Journal of Social Policy. 47, 1, 1–20.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hinrichs, K. (2000), ‘Elephants on the Move: Patterns of Public Pension Reform in OECD Countries’, European Review 8, 353–378.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hinrichs, K. and Kangas, O. (2003), ‘When Is a Change Big Enough to Be a System Shift? Small System-shifting Changes in German and Finnish Pension Policies’, Social Policy and Administration, 37(6): 573–591.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hinrichs, K. (2005), ‘New Century-New Paradigm. Pension Reforms in Germany’, in Bonoli, G. and Shinkawa, T. (eds.) Ageing and Pension Reform Around the World. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.Google Scholar
Huber, E. and Stephens, J (2001), Development and Crisis of the Welfare State. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
International Monetary Fund IMF (2017), World Economic Outlook Database. Washington: IMF. Available at: https://www.imf.org/external/pubs/ft/weo/2017/02/weodata/download.aspxGoogle Scholar
Immergut, E., Anderson, K. and Schulze, I. (2007), The Handbook of West European Pension Politics. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Korpi, W. and Palme, J. (2003), ‘New Politics and Class Politics in the Context of Austerity and Globalisation’, American Political Science Review 97 (3): 425–46.Google Scholar
Müller, K. (1999), The Political Economy of Pension Reform in Central-Eastern Europe. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.Google Scholar
Myles, J. and Pierson, P. (2001), ‘The Comparative Political Economy of Pension Reform’, in Pierson, P. (ed.) The New Politics of the Welfare State, Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Natali, D. (2004), ‘Europeanization, Policy Arenas, and Creative Opportunism: The Politics of Welfare State Reforms in Italy’, Journal or European Public Policy, 11(6): 1077–1096.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Natali, D. and Rhodes, M. (2007), ‘The New Politics of Pension Reforms in Continental Europe’, in Arza, C. and Kohli, M. (eds) The Political Economy of Pensions: Politics, Policy Model and Outcomes in Europe, pp. 25–46. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Ochel, W. and Rohwer, A. (2009), ‘Reduction of Employment Protection in Europe: A Comparative Fuzzy-Set Analysis.’ CESifo Working Paper, (2828).Google Scholar
O’Connor, J. and Olsen, G. (eds) (1998), Power Resources Theory and The Welfare State: A Critical Approach, Toronto: University of Toronto Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Orenstein, M. (2011), ‘Pension privatization in crisis: Death or rebirth of a global policy trend?’, International Social Security Review, 64(3): 65–80CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Orenstein, M. (2005), ‘The New Pension Reform as Global Policy’, Global Social Policy, 5, 2, 175–202.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Orenstein, M. (2000), ‘How Politics and Institutions Affect Pension Reform in Three Post-Communist Countries’, Policy Research Working Paper 2310, Washington, DC: World Bank.Google Scholar
Pensions Policy Institute – PPI (2014), Automatic Enrolment Report 3: How Will Automatic Enrolment Affect Pension Saving? London: PPI. Available at: https://www.pensionspolicyinstitute.org.uk/media/2118/20140717-ae3-how-will-automatic-enrolment-affect-pension-saving.pdfGoogle Scholar
Pierson, P. (2001), ‘Post-industrial Pressures on Mature Welfare States,’ in Pierson, P. (ed.) The New Politics of the Welfare State. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pierson, P. (1996), ‘The New Politics of the Welfare State’ World Politics 48, 2.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pierson, P. (1994), Dismantling the Welfare State: Reagan, Thatcher and the Politics of Retrenchment. New York: Cambridge University PressCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ragin, C. (2008), Redesigning Social Inquiry: Fuzzy Sets and Beyond. Chicago and London: The University of Chicago Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ragin, C. (2006), User’s guide to fuzzy-set/qualitative comparative analysis 2.0. Tucson, AZ: Department of Sociology, University of Arizona. Available online at: http://www.u.arizona.edu/~cragin/fsQCA/.Google Scholar
Ragin, C. (2000), Fuzzy Set Social Science. Chicago, IL and London: The University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Rihoux, B. and Ragin, C. (eds.) (2009), Configurational Comparative Methods: Qualitative Comparative Analysis (QCA) and Related Techniques. Thousand Oaks, CA: SageCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rodrik, D. (1996), ‘Understanding Economic Policy Reform’, Journal of Economic Literature, vol. 34(1): 9–41.Google Scholar
Schmidt, V. (2003), ‘How, Where and When does Discourse Matter in Small States’ Welfare State Adjustment,’ New Political Economy, 8(1), March.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schmidt, V. and Radaelli, C. (2004), ‘Policy Change and Discourse in Europe: Conceptual and Methodological Issues’, West European Politics, 27(2): 183–210.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schneider, C. and Wagemann, C. (2012), Set Theoretic Methods for the Social Sciences. A guide to Qualitative Comparative Analysis. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Simonovits, A. (2011), ‘The Mandatory Private Pension Pillar in Hungary: An Obituary’, International Social Security Review 64(3): 81–98.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sotiropoulos, D. (2004), ‘The EU’s Impact on the Greek Welfare State: Europeanization on paper?’ Journal of European Social Policy 14 (3):267–284.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Starke, P. (2006), ‘The Politics of Welfare State Retrenchment: A Literature Review’, Social Policy & Administration, 40, 1, 104–120.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Theodoropoulou, S. (2014), ‘Has the EU become more intrusive in shaping national welfare state reforms? Evidence from Greece and Portugal’ ETUI Working Paper 2014.04CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tsebelis, G. (2002), Veto Players: How Political Institutions Work. Princeton University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Vis, B. (2009), ‘Governments and Unpopular Social Policy Reform: Biting the Bullet or Stearing Clear.’ European Journal of Political Research 48 (1): 31–57.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Visser, J. (2009), ‘The Quality of Industrial Relations and the Lisbon Strategy.’ In: European Commission (ed.) Industrial Relations in Europe 2008. Luxembourg: Office for Official Publications of the European Communities.Google Scholar
Visser, J (2016), ICTWSS: Database on Institutional Characteristics of Trade Unions, Wage Setting, State Intervention and Social Pacts in 34 countries Available: http://www.uva-aias.net/208Google Scholar
Supplementary material: File

Carrera and Angelaki supplementary material

Online Appendix 1

Download Carrera and Angelaki supplementary material(File)
File 114.7 KB
Supplementary material: File

Carrera and Angelaki supplementary materials

Online Appendix 2

Download Carrera and Angelaki supplementary materials(File)
File 109.1 KB