Search results

In the social policy literature, it is often assumed that universal policies are more popular than selective ones among the public, because they supposedly generate broader self-interested coalitions and are considered morally superior. The present article revisits and challenges this assumption.

The article critically reviews the existing empirical literature on public support for universal and means-tested welfare schemes.

The main conclusion is that the popularity of universal vis-à-vis selective welfare remains very much an open question. First, the studies that are typically cited to support the claim that universalism is indeed more popular are inconclusive because they conflate the institutional design of welfare programs with their respective target groups. Second, there is considerable variation in public support for universal and selective welfare across countries, time and policy domains.

The findings suggest that future research should focus on scrutinizing under which circumstances – when, where and why – universal social policies are more popular than selective ones.

The article makes an original case for considering perceived welfare deservingness of social policies' target groups alongside the policy design when studying popular support for differently targeted welfare schemes.

Considers universal banking’s role in the evolution of national financial systems, notably with respect to their role in overall economic performance. Deals with conceptual and empirical evidence regarding mergers and acquisitions (M&A) in the financial services industry, with special relevance to the Asia‐Pacific region. Develops a typology of intra‐ and inter‐sectoral M&A transactions among banks, insurance companies and securities firms, and examines the global deal flow during the 11‐year 1985‐1995 period. Discusses the dynamics of M&A transactions in the financial services industry, notably with respect to exploitation of economies of scale and economies of scope that are core to the universal banking concept. Develops the implications for the Asia‐Pacific region, with reference to the static and dynamic efficiency properties of national financial systems.

Whether welfare provision should be broad-based or selectively targeted at the poor is one of the most common themes in social policy discourse. However, empirical evidence concerning people's preferences about these distributive justice principles is very limited. The current paper aims to bridge this gap, by analyzing Europeans' opinions about a hypothetical transformation of the welfare state that would provide social transfers and services only to people on low incomes.

The analysis draws on data from the 2016 European Social Survey and covers 21 countries. In order to understand what would motivate people to support the complete means testing of welfare provision, we use multilevel models with individual-level and contextual predictors.

The results show that the upper and middle classes are the most opposed to the idea, presumably as they would be the net losers from such a reform. Furthermore, our results indicate that more-egalitarian people show a higher level of support for means testing, even though the political left has traditionally promoted universalism. Some key characteristics of the welfare state also matter: People are more likely to endorse complete means testing in countries with less-generous provision and a higher incidence of poverty. However, the extent to which the existing welfare state relies on means testing has no influence on people's opinions about implementing a fully means-tested welfare model.

Some of the key findings are likely to be of interest to activists advocating on behalf of the poor and the socially vulnerable. Although it is generally assumed that universal provision is the best strategy to address the needs of disadvantaged people, our results suggest that from an electoral point of view, targeting within universalism may be a more appealing welfare strategy.

This paper details one of the very few studies to examine preferences for means-tested welfare provision in a comparative context. In addition, one of the contextual variables used in the analysis – the proportion of means-tested social benefits out of the total expenditure on social benefits – is unique to this study.

The present article deals with the topic of migrants’ exclusion from welfare benefits in European host countries from the angle of the research on the so-called “welfare chauvinism” (Andersen and Bjørklund 1990, p. 212). More specifically, it explores the political justifications behind welfare chauvinism in the policy debate surrounding some recent chauvinist-oriented social policies. Drawing on that, the article develops a theoretical argument to generate expectations about how politicians use different types of justifications. The fundamental proposition is that the chauvinistic arguments used are shaped by the different types of social programs, i.e. either universal or means-tested programs.

Qualitative content analysis of several selected parliamentary debates in the period 2017–2019 in Austria is carried out. In order to improve the efficiency of the research, the author relies on MAXQDA, an advanced piece of software for qualitative data analysis, to code the qualitative data and analyze them. The author prefers this to other similar programs as it is considered a valid and reliable tool within the academic research world.

The article points out that programs design works as an explanatory factor to highlight variations of welfare chauvinist arguments.

It develops for the first time a theoretical argument explaining the presence and variation of welfare chauvinist arguments based on social programs design.

The paper deals with the child benefits system in the Czech Republic, Slovak Republic and Sweden.

The authors describe the systems as the key baseline for subsequent qualitative and quantitative comparison. An essential element is the quantitative comparison of child benefits using their statistically stationarised values.

The Czech and Slovak systems provide a comparable rate of coverage as the Swedish system regarding the payment of both types of benefits, i.e. child benefits and tax allowances, for the first and second child; however, from the third child, the individual differences are considerable. Albeit the concepts of Czech and Slovak systems are framed by the same historical origins and conceptual approach, they differ significantly, with Slovakia providing the lowest aggregate level of child benefits.

The paper provides insight into the child benefit systems in the respective countries. These systems are at the centre of attention of policymakers who are attempting to maintain birth rates and reduce child poverty. The Czech Republic has the lowest level of at-risk-of-poverty rates for persons under 16 years of age, while natality rates are comparable.

This paper aims to describe China's need for old‐age pension coverage in its rural areas, to highlight the strengths and weaknesses of the new rural pension system currently being implemented, and to suggest some needed reforms.

This paper's analysis is based largely on evidence from Chinese government documents, newspaper reports, and research reports including those discussing related programs in rural areas of other developing countries. This evidence is supplemented with a small number of interviews with government officials, Chinese academics, and farmers living in rural China.

China has recently started a major effort to bring old‐age pension coverage to rural China. While it is too early to know how successful this effort will be, there are some structural issues that should be addressed. The paper's major conclusion is that the current funded accounts component needs to be supplemented with a modest social pension scheme.

To date next to nothing has been published for an academic audience about this major new and first ever countrywide old‐age pension program for rural China. If successful, this program has the potential to stimulate efforts in many other developing nations around the world to provide pension coverage in rural areas. The paper analyzes the program, uncovers some serious limitations, and proposes changes to deal with those limitations.

Poverty dynamics and the ability of the Italian welfare system to reduce poverty are investigated by using the 1991‐1995 panel of the Bank of Italy’s Survey of Household Income and Wealth. Households most exposed to poverty live in the South, have a larger size, a young or female head, with a low educational level or a discontinuous work profile. The dynamic and static effectiveness (in terms of poverty reduction) of social transfers is analysed, as well as the factors affecting exclusion from the safety net. A closer look is taken at the effects of a minimum income guarantee in the experimental phase in Italy.

The purpose of this paper is to explain the rather large difference in the take-up of the cash-for-childcare (CFC) benefit between Norway and Sweden.

A quantitative approach is employed, including the analysis of descriptive statistics of data on parents’ attitudes concerning the distribution of paid work and care and a robust regression analysis of data on parents’ behaviour regarding the distribution of paid work and care.

The results show that attitudes regarding childcare and mothers’ and fathers’ employment differ in the two countries. Swedish parents support public childcare and a gender equal employment distribution more than Norwegians. Thereby, attitudinal differences explain why Norwegian parents use the benefit more frequently. The findings indicate that in Sweden, parents’ socioeconomic background affects the duration of public childcare to a lesser extent than in Norway. Nevertheless, the economic incentives of the CFC benefit are more attractive for families with lower socioeconomic status. This explains why Swedes respond less to the incentives of the CFC benefit than Norwegians.

While previous research has focussed on the effect of policies on the take-up of the CFC benefit, this study shows that parents’ attitudes and behaviour are important explanatory variables to explain differences in the take-up of the benefit.

This paper aims to illustrate realities of homeless people's lives during a time of significant change in UK public sector funding and welfare policy.

A participatory research approach was used including working with two co‐researchers; two people who have direct experience of homelessness. A sustainable livelihoods approach was adapted to provide a framework for analysis. The research was undertaken during May to October 2011.

The paper interrogates five areas of assets held by people themselves that support sustainable livelihoods, an existing approach used in other research. Life journey narratives show that a connected range of services, operating through an empowerment model, promote human dignity.

Findings resonate with issues identified in larger studies; however, as the funding and policy context is rapidly changing it is recommended that additional local qualitative studies could be conducted during the next three years to illustrate impacts in people's lives.

The paper suggests front‐line services must include resettlement as well as crisis and stabilising services in order to ensure homeless people can successfully move from home to home.

The research identified negative attitudes towards homeless people. By illustrating homeless people's achievements the study provides evidence of the impact of, and the value of continuing to fund, homeless services.

The paper suggests that people who have experienced homelessness achieve a successful life with support by drawing on their considerable life experience and personal talents. This message is important for practitioners, commissioners and policy makers working through a period of change for homeless services.

Coronavirus has accentuated the cracks within the fragile UK food system. Empty shelves and empty stomachs, the damaging consequences of coronavirus have led to an unprecedented increase in food insecurity and food access. The purpose of this paper is to provide in-depth insight into varied and innovative rural localised responses to food access during the pandemic.

This study draws on multiple perspectives of those working to combat food insecurity, inequality and inaccessibility in Gwynedd, exploring food access initiatives and their responses to the pandemic, innovative food distribution collaborations and the role of maintaining already fragile rural communities.

This study concludes that the need for transformative place-making to build stronger, more resilient communities has never been more pressing, with support from public sector funding to help alleviate some of the hardships and pressure with the rise in poverty and austerity, coronavirus imposed or not.

This study focuses on a single local authority area in North Wales, Gwynedd, an area where little food research has been published to date. The coronavirus pandemic also places the timely research within the scope of food access and distribution during hardship. This study discusses the impacts exposed by the pandemic and lessons that can be drawn and reflected on for future benefit.