Search results

The purpose of this paper is to compare the recent social welfare performance of old and new members of the European Union, and to establish whether a specific East‐European social model (ESM) is emerging.

The concept of social model is explored in the context of the historical development of economic and social policy integration in the European Union, with emphasis on reform measures and the EU enlargement process post‐1990. Guided by Sapir's typology of ESMs, the performance of 15 West‐European countries is analysed and compared with that of ten East‐European countries, relative to key economic and social indicators. The results are then used to determine whether a typology of East‐ESMs could be produced.

Social welfare performance in the new EU members indicates two different patterns and levels of development, which at this stage separate East‐European countries into two distinct groups. While two divergent trends may be emerging, it is perhaps too soon to conclude that any specific East‐ESM is taking shape. Results so far suggest that, in Eastern Europe, the influence of a welfarist social model appears more beneficial than that of market liberalism.

This paper is limited to the comparative analysis of social welfare performance in six country groups. To obtain a full picture of the current development of social models in the European Union, it should be complemented by a separate examination of deliberate efforts by national governments towards in integrating economic and social policies in normative social models. The analysis itself could be expanded to include other significant social indicators, such as the level of employment protection or the Human Development Index.

While deliberate policy efforts are not always necessary for a social model to emerge, public awareness of cultural and regional trends in social welfare performance, analysed through the filter of social model typology, can significantly inform future social and cultural practices, as well as national government policies, directed towards improving national welfare.

This analysis can provide a theoretical basis for the integration of national economic and social policies in a coherent philosophy of multi‐dimensional development in Eastern Europe.

The paper selects historically relevant indicators of economic and social performance, undertakes a comparative analysis of six European country groups, draws conclusions on the current state of social welfare in East‐European countries relative to their Western counterparts and makes recommendations regarding the development of social model conceptions in Eastern Europe.

In a globalised economy, the EU, being self-confident, could shape international standards by defending and promoting its own socioeconomic model. Social democratic parties rhetorically confess the need for a ‘European social model’, but meanings and ways to achieve it differ largely. In a comparative case study on the programmatic positioning of the German Sozialdemokratische Partei Deutschlands and the Spanish Partido Socialista Obrero Español, the parties' perspectives on the integration mode and their handling of the Economic and Monetary Union framework and its crisis over the last decade are traced. Although similar paths from neoliberal convictions of the ‘third way’ to a positive integration process in a fiscal union setting are found, the scope and levels vary, illustrating the abilities of both parties to meet new transnational challenges. The crisis of the Eurozone was a definitive turning point for the positioning of the Social Democrats in Spain in favour of more political and fiscal integration. In contrast, their German comrades already advocated increased social integration of the EU since 2005 but remained very cautious regarding reforms of the economic framework established by the Eurozone.

The purpose of this paper is to show evidence of the divergence of welfare outcomes in the European Union (EU) during the economic crisis, which made the European social model fail, and the convergence among European countries halt. This study reviews Sapir’s model for classifying European welfare state systems and adapts it to the new reality, taking into account Europe 2020 targets on poverty reduction and employment growth.

Two variables are used in the application of Sapir’s graphical analysis to European social models: the employment rate as efficiency indicator, and the people At Risk Of Poverty and/or Exclusion rate as equity indicator. Both efficiency and equity are present in Europe 2020 targets. In addition, a cluster analysis is applied.

The division of EU member states into four geopolitical social models has proved to be dynamic, changing in the period under analysis. As a consequence of the economic crisis and the fiscal consolidation, efficiency and equity levels across the EU are polarised between the Mediterranean and the Nordic models.

This paper shows the effects of the economic crisis in the EU, analysing the evolution between 2008 and 2014, and incorporating Eastern Europe new member states into the analysis.

EU social policy is perhaps the most controversial aspect of European integration yet, despite all the political clashes on the matter, concepts like “social Europe” or “social dimension” remain ill‐defined and imprecise terms. Intends to outline and clarify in detail the debate about whether or not the European Union should have competence with regard to labour market affairs. A key message is that social policy has been controversial because it has become embroiled in the debate about the future political direction of the EU. In particular, three contrasting political models –symbiotic integration, integrative federalism and neo‐liberalism – have been put forward as organizing principles for the EU and each has a coherent view of what form social policy should take at the European level. It is the clash between these three models that has caused EU social policy to be so contestable and intractable.

Looks at the 2000 Employment Research Unit Annual Conference held at the University of Cardiff in Wales on 6/7 September 2000. Spotlights the 76 or so presentations within and shows that these are in many, differing, areas across management research from: retail finance; precarious jobs and decisions; methodological lessons from feminism; call centre experience and disability discrimination. These and all points east and west are covered and laid out in a simple, abstract style, including, where applicable, references, endnotes and bibliography in an easy‐to‐follow manner. Summarizes each paper and also gives conclusions where needed, in a comfortable modern format.

The unequal distribution of economic activities, transposed in economic, social and territorial disparities is the general characteristic of the European economy. Gaps increased in the context of European Union (EU) enlargement towards Eastern and Central Europe and of the economic crisis, thus bringing new differentiations among member states’ economies. The main aim of the chapter is to emphasise the centre-periphery differentiations in the European economy, by using a composite index of peripherality, in order to better understand the determinants of growth and convergence in Central and Eastern European countries and to reach normative conclusions for increasing Cohesion Policy (CP) effectiveness. The first part of the chapter provides a short overview of the main theories and models of the peripherality analysis and the relationships between the centre and the periphery, in order to find out how this analysis relates to the research in the field. The second part provides a comparative analysis of the evolution of European economies during 2003–2014, in order to find out whether the EU enlargement process stabilised the EU core-periphery pattern or, on the contrary, the process of core-periphery structural convergence occurred. The third part includes the suggested model of analysis (methodology, data, and main results) from a multidisciplinary perspective, underlining the centre-periphery differentiations on the two axes, North–South and West–East. The results have been interpreted in conclusions, with a focus on their relevance for the European CP challenges.

There appears to be some doubt about the future direction of both the theory and the practice of employment relations. This article therefore speculates about the prospects of the “new” European social model becoming the orthodoxy in the field. This model, which has strong similarities with the UK’s “partnership” agreements, stands up very well to many of the criticisms levelled at the “HRM” paradigm that was the most recent contender. The plausibility of the “new” model is in doubt, however, given the prevailing economic and political context in the UK and other EU countries. Even so, if people are looking for a dominant focus for analysis and policy, this “new” model has much to recommend. In particular, it is especially relevant to handling the implications of the restructuring likely to be the main concern for the foreseeable future.

This chapter explores the notion of the European Social Model (ESM) and examines the EU-level social policy reforms that have taken place since the 1950s. ESM is taken to be distinct from but intimately related to the web and patchwork of rules explored in this volume. After sketching out the development of ESM since the 1950s, up to and including its near-death experience in the context of the Great Recession and the EU's turn to austerity, the chapter considers the social and political consequences of the EU's lurch to austerity as well as the consequences this might have for the web and patchwork of rules. The chapter ultimately reflects on whether another ESM might be possible in the context of the EU's response to the economic and social consequences following the onset of COVID-19, particularly in the context of the EU's Next Generation EU programme whereby the EU provides financial assistance directly to the regions worst affected by the pandemic.

This paper suggests that an adequate understanding of the notion of the social market economy, which has become a prominent aspect of debates on the social model of the European Constitution, is to be assessed in the context of the historist tradition in German economic and social thought.

The paper explores the intellectual history of the notion of the social market economy and its conceptual relevance for a dynamic European social model by highlighting Alfred Müller‐Armack's contributions to ordoliberalism and their relationship with German historism, in particular with Gustav von Schmoller's approach to Socialpolitik.

The paper finds that the decisive concern of the notion of the social market economy is the reconciliation of economic dynamism and social cohesion in a basic setting of legal rules and cultural values, reaching beyond common interpretations that focus more narrowly on institutional aspects of social policy.

By highlighting the interplay of economic, social and cultural dimensions, the paper suggests an extension of the conceptual horizon of current debates on the social model of the European Union, promoting policy implications that account for the possibilities of balancing conflicting social interests in the process of integration.

The paper applies a reconstruction of the intellectual history of the notion of the social market economy to the problem of designing a social order for the European Union with its underlying discourse on the constitutional status of a European social market economy.

Poverty is one of the most significant economic and social problems that European countries have to face. In recent years, it has become widely accepted that poverty is a multidimensional concept and now many studies use indicators of deprivation to examine the phenomenon. The focus on financial resources alone does not capture people’s quality of life as being poor means a lack of access to resources enabling a minimum standard of living and participation in the society within which one belongs. The paper aims to discuss this issue.

Using a longitudinal component (2006-2010) of EU Statistics on Income and Living Conditions data on 26 European countries, the author apply a second-order confirmatory factor analysis to estimate deprivation. To describe the patterns of change over time and to evaluate the role of household characteristics in deprivation level, the author employ a set of multilevel growth curve models.

Three findings clearly stand out from my analysis. First, there is great variability in deprivation between European countries. Second, European countries show various patterns of change in deprivation over time. Third, households with different characteristics have quite different deprivation levels; moreover, the impact of household characteristics on deprivation can vary over time and between countries.

This paper sheds light on the importance of analysing deprivation from a longitudinal perspective and that financial resources alone does not capture people’s quality of life.