This book has taken an in-depth look at social risk protection within the Dutch corporatist welfare state. The approach of this volume differs from previous studies because it has addressed the question of risk perception, relating risk perception to risk management within one welfare state. Consequently, this study has investigated within-country differences across different types of social risks, explaining changing risk perceptions and welfare state responses to different social risks. It has been assumed, in particular, that ‘new’ social risks are less likely to be treated as collective social risks in the modern welfare state as these same welfare states struggle to reform or retrench the collective protection of ‘old’ social risks. The question of why certain social risks are dealt with collectively and other social risks are not and how these perceptions change across time remained unanswered. Yet the issue of collective versus individual responsibility for social risks lies at the heart of the debate in modern welfare states. This study has analysed how both old and new social risks are perceived within the welfare state, demonstrating how these perceptions lead to variation in risk protection across different risk forms, thereby addressing the core of the debate regarding modern divisions of welfare responsibility. In doing so, it demonstrates the relative unique capacity of the Dutch welfare state to address changing and emerging social risks. This final chapter considers the implications of these findings for our understanding of old and new social risks, how they are analysed and the ability of modern welfare states to manage these risks.

The findings presented in this book challenge ideas put forth in previous welfare state studies, for example, those that assume that new social risk protection is difficult to create given path dependent institutions or financial constraints related to the timing of post-industrialisation (Bonoli, 2007). Moreover, the findings show that collective protection for social risks varies – not because of the distinction between ‘old’ and ‘new’ social risks, but because the perceptions of social risks vary. Within the Dutch welfare state, social risk policies have varied from a decollectivisation of an old social risk, the semicollectivisation of a new social risk to a continued absence of collective welfare state protection for a new social risk.