Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-dh8gc Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-17T22:23:52.888Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Opportunity and Solidarity

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  08 September 2010

PETER TAYLOR-GOOBY
PETER TAYLOR-GOOBY*
Affiliation:
School of School of Social Policy, Sociology and Social Research, University of Kent, Canterbury, Kent CT2 7NF email: [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Current restructuring of provision across European welfare states emphasises proactivity, individual responsibility and access to opportunities. Much established social protection rests on a more passive approach and seeks to provide security against the risks encountered during a normal life-course, together with some redistribution towards the poor. A more liberal individualism may suit a more globalised and post-industrial world in which the logic of markets is more powerful and the working class correspondingly weaker. From one perspective, it risks damaging the support for collective provision on which the welfare state rests. This paper uses data from the 2008 European Social Survey to examine whether the shift in responsibility for outcomes more towards individuals may threaten the political legitimacy of welfare states. It shows that a corresponding proactivity of government to secure good access to more equal opportunities for vulnerable groups is required to support individual proactivity in grasping opportunities.

Type
Articles
Information
Journal of Social Policy , Volume 40 , Issue 3 , July 2011 , pp. 453 - 470
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2010

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

Allan, J. and Scruggs, L. (2004), ‘Political partisanship and welfare state reform in advanced industrial societies’, American Journal of Political Science, 48: 3, 493–512.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Arndt, C. and Volkert, C. (2006), ‘Assessing capability determinants in Germany’, presented at 6th Human development and Capability Association Conference, Groningen, 29 August.Google Scholar
Arza, C. and Kohli, M. (2008), Pension Reform in Europe, London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Atkinson, A. (2007), ‘The distribution of earnings in OECD countries’, International Labour Review, 146: 2, 41–60.Google Scholar
Baldwin, P. (1990), The Politics of Social Solidarity, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Bardhan, P., Bowles, S. and Wallerstein, M. (2006), Globalization and Egalitarian Redistribution, Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Barnes, C. and Gill, D. (2000), Declining Government Performance? Wellington, NZ: New Zealand State Services Commission.Google Scholar
Blanden, J., Machin, S. and Gregg, P. (2005), ‘Final report to Sutton Trust: intergenerational mobility in Europe and North America’, CEP, London School of Economics.Google Scholar
Blekesaune, M. and Quadagno, J. (2003), ‘Public attitudes toward welfare state policies: a comparative analysis of 24 nations’, European Sociological Review, 19: 5, 415–27.Google Scholar
Boix, C. (2003), Democracy and Redistribution, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bonoli, G. and Palier, B. (2007), ‘When past reforms open new opportunities’, Social Policy and Administration, 41: 6, 555–73.Google Scholar
Bonoli, G., George, V. and Taylor-Gooby, P. (1999), European Welfare Futures, Cambridge: Polity Press.Google Scholar
Burchardt, T. and Vizard, P. (2007a), ‘Definition of equality and framework for measurement: final recommendations of the Equalities Review Steering Group on Measurement’, Equalities Review CASE paper 120.Google Scholar
Burchardt, T. and Vizard, P. (2007b), ‘Developing a capability list: final recommendations of the Equalities Review Steering Group on Measurement Equalities Review’, CASE paper 121.Google Scholar
Castles, F. (1998), Comparative Public Policy: Patterns of Post-war Transformation, Northampton, MA: Edward Elgar.Google Scholar
Cebulla, A., Ashworth, K., Greenberg, D. and Walker, R. (2005), Welfare to Work, Aldershot: Ashgate.Google Scholar
Clegg, D. (2007), ‘Continental drift: on unemployment policy change in Bismarckian welfare states’, Social Policy and Administration, 41: 6, 597–617.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Daly, M. and Rake, K. (2003), Gender and the Welfare State: Care, Work and Welfare in Europe and the USA, Cambridge: Polity Press.Google Scholar
Dean, H. (2009), ‘Critiquing capabilities’, Critical Social Policy, 29: 2.Google Scholar
Enthoven, A. (2002), Introducing Market Forces into Health Care, London: Nuffield Provincial Hospitals Trust.Google Scholar
European Science Foundation [ESF] (2008), European Social Survey Review Panel: Report, Luxembourg: European Science Foundation.Google Scholar
Esping-Andersen, G. (1990), Three Worlds of Welfare Capitalism, Cambridge: Polity Press.Google Scholar
Esping-Andersen, G. (2009), The Incomplete Revolution, Bristol: Policy Press.Google Scholar
ESS (2010), European Social Survey, http://ess.nsd.uib.no/, consulted 4 February 2010.Google Scholar
European Union [EU] (2008), Renewed Social Agenda, http://ec.europa.eu/social/main.jsp?catId=547, consulted 26.2.09Google Scholar
Ferrera, M. and Rhodes, M. (2000), ‘Recasting European welfare states’, West European Politics, 23: 2, 1–10.Google Scholar
Gamble, A. (2009), The Spectre at the Feast, Basingstoke: Palgrave.Google Scholar
Gelissen, J. (2000), ‘Popular support for institutionalised solidarity’, International Journal of Social Welfare, 9: 4, 285–300.Google Scholar
Giddens, A. (1994), Beyond Left and Right, Cambridge: Polity Press.Google Scholar
Gilley, B. (2006), ‘The determinants of political legitimacy’, International Political Science Review, 27: 1, 47–71.Google Scholar
Glyn, A. (2007), Capitalism Unleashed: Finance, Globalization, and Welfare, Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Hassenteufel, P. and Palier, B. (2007), ‘Towards neo-Bismarckian health care states?’, Social Policy and Administration, 41: 6, 574–96.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Huang, M., Chang, Y. and Chu, Y. (2007), ‘Identifying sources of democratic legitimacy’, Electoral Studies, 27, 45–62.Google Scholar
International Monetary Fund [IMF] (2009), World Economic Outlook, October, New York: IMF.Google Scholar
Jessop, B. (2002), The Future of the Capitalist State, Cambridge: Polity Press.Google Scholar
Kahane, L. (2001), Regression Basics, London: Sage.Google Scholar
Korpi, W. (1983), The Democratic Class Struggle, London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Kumlin, S. (2007), ‘The welfare state’, in Dalton, K. and Klingemann, H.-D. (eds.), The Oxford Handbook of Political Behaviour, Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Lane, J.-E. (2000), New Public Management, London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Le Grand, J. (2007), The Other Invisible Hand, Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Lewis, J. (2008), ‘Gender and welfare state change’, in Leibfried, S. and Mau, S. (eds.), Welfare States: Construction, Deconstruction, Reconstruction, Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.Google Scholar
Linos, K. and West, M. (2003), ‘Self-interest, social beliefs and attitudes to redistribution’, European Sociological Review, 19: 4, 393–409.Google Scholar
Lodomel, I. and Trickey, H. (2001), An Offer You Can't Refuse, Bristol: Policy Press.Google Scholar
Marquand, D. (2004), The Decline of the Public, Cambridge: Polity Press.Google Scholar
Mau, S. (2003), The Moral Economy of Welfare States: Britain and Germany Compared, London: Routledge.Google Scholar
McLaughlin, K., Osborne, P. and Ferlie, E. (2002), The New Public Management: Current Trends and Future Prospects, London: Routledge.Google Scholar
McNamara, K. (1998), The Currency of Ideas: Monetary Politics in the European Union, Ithaca: Cornell University Press.Google Scholar
Norris, P. (ed.) (1999), Critical Citizens, Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Nussbaum, M. (2003), ‘Capabilities as fundamental entitlements’, Feminist Economics, 9: 2–3, 33–59.Google Scholar
O'Connor, J., Orloff, A. and Shaver, S. (1999), Markets, Families: Gender, Liberalism and Social Policy in Australia, Canada, Great Britain and the United States, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development [OECD] (2005), Modernising Government, Paris: OECD.Google Scholar
Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development [OECD] (2009), Economic Outlook, 85, June, Paris: OECD.Google Scholar
Osmani, S. (2008), ‘The Sen system of social evaluation’, in Basu, K. and Kanbur, R. (eds.), Arguments for a Better World, Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Palier, B. and Martin, C. (2008), Reforming the Bismarckian Welfare Systems, Oxford: Blackwell.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pierson, P. (2001), The New Politics of the Welfare State, Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Prime Minister's Strategy Unit [PMSU] (2006), ‘The UK Approach to Public Sector Reform’, July, http://www.cabinetoffice.gov.uk/strategy/work_areas/public_service_reform.aspx, consulted 21.2.08.Google Scholar
Pope John Paul II (1987), Sollicitudo rei socialis, Rome: Vatican.Google Scholar
Putnam, R. (2000), Bowling Alone, New York: Simon & Schuster.Google Scholar
Roemer, J. (1996), Theories of Distributive Justice, Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Roemer, J. (2005), ‘Equality of opportunity’, New Palgrave Dictionary, Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar
Roller, E (1998), ‘The welfare state: the equality dimension’, in Borre, O. and Scarborough, E. (eds.), The Scope of Government, Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Rothstein, B. and Uslaner, E. (2005), ‘All for all’, World Politics, 58: 41–72.Google Scholar
Scharpf, F. and Schmidt, V. (eds.) (2001), Welfare and Work in the Open Economy, Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Sen, A. (1979), ‘Equality of What?’, Tanner Lecture, Harvard, http://www.tannerlectures.utah.edu/lectures/documents/sen80.pdf, consulted 14.8.09.Google Scholar
Soskice, D. (1999), ‘Divergent production regimes’, in Kitschelt, H., Lange, P., Marks, G. and Stephens, J. D. (eds.), Continuity and Change, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 101–34.Google Scholar
Standing, G. (2009), Work after Globalisation, Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Svallfors, S. (2007), ‘Class and attitudes in market inequality’, Svallfors, S. (ed.), The Political Sociology of the Welfare State, Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar
Swank, D. (2005), ‘Globalisation, domestic politics and welfare state retrenchment in capitalist democracies’, Social Policy and Society, 4: 183–95.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
United Nations [UN] (2009), Millennium Development Goals Report, New York: UN.Google Scholar
Van Berkel, R. and Valkenburg, B. (2007), Making it Personal: Individualising Activation Services in the EU, Bristol: Policy Press.Google Scholar
Van Parijs, P. (1995), Real Freedom for All, Oxford: Clarendon Press.Google Scholar
Zaidi, A. (2009), Fiscal and Pension Sustainability, Policy Brief 10, Vienna: European Centre.Google Scholar