Search results
21 – 30 of over 25000Deservingness theory is gaining popularity in the study of European welfare attitudes but has found little application in the United States. In this article, the author explores…
Abstract
Purpose
Deservingness theory is gaining popularity in the study of European welfare attitudes but has found little application in the United States. In this article, the author explores what happens if deservingness theory is applied in the study of American perceptions of deservingness and ask which criteria Americans use when deciding the deservingness of needy individuals.
Design/methodology/approach
To capture the variation in American perceptions of deservingness, the author compared qualitative data from two cases. The first case is the liberal northeastern city of Boston, Massachusetts, where 19 interviews were collected, and the second case is the conservative southern city of Knoxville, Tennessee, where 26 interviews were collected. To ensure that any differences in the use of deservingness criteria are due to differences in moral culture, the author chose to interview a similar segment in both cases – the white middle class.
Findings
The author found that interviewees in both cases defined deserving individuals as those whose neediness is due to factors beyond their control and undeserving individuals as those whose neediness is caused by their own poor work ethic. Furthermore, the author found three so-called context-related criteria that do not fit into the existing deservingness framework: a criterion following a cost-benefit logic, the principle of universalism and a principle based on family obligations.
Originality/value
These findings confirm trends in recent deservingness studies indicating that the sensitivity of deservingness theory to the importance of moral culture in the use of both deservingness criteria and context-related criteria must continue to develop.
Details
Keywords
Tijs Laenen and Dimitri Gugushvili
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…
Abstract
Purpose
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.
Design/methodology/approach
The article critically reviews the existing empirical literature on public support for universal and means-tested welfare schemes.
Findings
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.
Research limitations/implications
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.
Originality/value
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.
Details
Keywords
Explores key trends explaining consumer concerns and actions onanimal welfare. Concludes that concerns are not a fad, but deep‐seatedand here to stay. UK livestock production…
Abstract
Explores key trends explaining consumer concerns and actions on animal welfare. Concludes that concerns are not a fad, but deep‐seated and here to stay. UK livestock production, distribution and processing systems and practices have evolved, will and should evolve to allow farm animals “to enjoy a decent life” and to satisfy reasonable consumer concerns on animal welfare matters. Presents the UK industry with both threats and opportunities. Livestock products that are animal welfare‐friendly, produced with traditional/natural methods and carry “passports” offer important consumer benefits that can provide a competitive edge. The farm sector needs to forge alliances with organizations, such as the RSPCA, which are viewed as credible on welfare matters by consumers. However, addressing consumer concerns about animals, per se, will not reverse the declining domestic market for livestock products – this will require more comprehensive, industry‐wide efforts to deliver the full range of benefits to consumers that they demand from food products in the twenty‐first century.
Details
Keywords
This paper aims to examine how population heterogeneity contributes to poverty in 17 high-income Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development countries during 1980-2005…
Abstract
Purpose
This paper aims to examine how population heterogeneity contributes to poverty in 17 high-income Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development countries during 1980-2005.
Design/methodology/approach
The operational strategy involves linking poverty with heterogeneity directly as well as indirectly through welfare state policies as a latent variable in a structural equation framework.
Findings
Findings support the widely held poverty-reducing roles of welfare state policies. Ethno-racial and religious diversities are found to positively contribute to welfare state policies and, through them, lower poverty, whereas immigration assumes opposite roles.
Research limitations/implications
Data limitations on population and especially ethno-racial and religious heterogeneity caution against definitiveness.
Originality/value
The findings are useful in understanding the heterogeneity connection of welfare state policies and poverty.
Details
Keywords
Nazim Habibov, Chi Ho Cheung and Alena Auchynnikava
The purpose of this paper is to explore factors which may explain support for redistribution for different groups of the needy in 28 post-communist countries.
Abstract
Purpose
The purpose of this paper is to explore factors which may explain support for redistribution for different groups of the needy in 28 post-communist countries.
Design/methodology/approach
Using a cross-country survey (n=25,845), the authors evaluate preferences for redistribution to the elderly, the disabled, families with children, the working poor, and the unemployed.
Findings
People in post-communist countries made the distinction between deserving groups of the needy – the aged, the disabled, and families with children, and undeserving groups – the unemployed and the working poor. Among the individual-level factors, adherence to equality and attributing poverty to structural problems increased the probability of supporting redistribution. Among country-level factors, the authors’ results stress the positive influence of income inequality on support for redistribution for all groups of the needy under investigation. Notably, the authors did not find a negative influence of the business cycle on support for the working poor and unemployed.
Originality/value
This is the first paper that examines support for the needy in a diverse sample of 28 post-communist countries. The findings will help policy-makers and social administrators to better understand factors influencing support for redistribution toward different groups of the needy.
Details
Keywords
Annabell Franz, Ingke Deimel and Achim Spiller
The Federal Government of Germany, as well as the European Commission, are discussing the enhancement of animal welfare requirements. This study aims to explore different groups…
Abstract
Purpose
The Federal Government of Germany, as well as the European Commission, are discussing the enhancement of animal welfare requirements. This study aims to explore different groups of conventional German pig farmers with respect to their understanding of animal welfare. Based on the results, a target group is determined that is willing to take part in an animal welfare programme in accordance with the current state of research, i.e. considering the four “Welfare Quality” principles: good housing, good feeding, good health and especially appropriate behaviour.
Design/methodology/approach
Data were collected from 160 German pig farmers between March and May 2010 using an online questionnaire. Data analysis combines two quantitative methods. To reduce complexity and to identify the animal welfare perceptions of the farmers first an explorative factor analysis was conducted. Subsequently, based on the determined factors, the sample was divided into different groups by means of a cluster analysis.
Findings
Three groups of pig farmers were defined with regard to the establishment of an animal welfare programme according to the current state of research. While a broad acceptance of the principles good housing, good feeding and good health exists among the farmers, the appropriate animal behaviour is only important for a small group of pig farmers. Therefore, the three groups should be addressed by the developers of an animal welfare programme, using different strategies to gain the support of all farmers.
Originality/value
To successfully introduce new animal welfare requirements, farmers are important actors to take into account. This paper is the first analysis of the animal welfare perceptions of conventionally producing German pig farmers and determines different groups for a comprehensive animal welfare husbandry system as currently discussed by scientists and politics.
Details
Keywords
Sofia Alexopoulou, Joachim Åström and Martin Karlsson
Technology access, digital skills, and digital services are increasingly prerequisites for public life and accessing public services. The digital divide in contemporary societies…
Abstract
Purpose
Technology access, digital skills, and digital services are increasingly prerequisites for public life and accessing public services. The digital divide in contemporary societies matters for efforts to digitalize the welfare state. Research has already mapped individual determinants of digital exclusion and the existence of an age-related digital divide. However, far less attention has been paid to variations in digital inclusion between countries and to their potential explanations related to political systems. This study explores the influence of variations in welfare regimes on the digital divide among seniors (aged 65+) in Europe.
Design/methodology/approach
This article presents time-series cross-sectional analyses of the relationship between welfare state regimes and digital inclusion among seniors in European countries. The analyses are based on data from Eurostat, the World Bank, and the UN E-Government Survey.
Findings
The authors find extensive variation in the digital inclusion of citizens between welfare regimes and argue that considering regime differences improves the understanding of these variations. The findings indicate that the age-related digital divide seems to be least evident in countries with more universalistic welfare regimes and most evident in countries where seniors rely more on their families.
Originality/value
This is the first comparative study of the association between welfare state regimes and digital inclusion among seniors.
Details
Keywords
Filip Chybalski, Agnes Orosz and Radosław Kurach
The article examines the interplay between welfare state regimes and the distribution of welfare between generations.
Abstract
Purpose
The article examines the interplay between welfare state regimes and the distribution of welfare between generations.
Design/methodology/approach
Using data from 2017 for 24 European countries on six standard of living dimensions, the authors investigate the intergenerational welfare distribution in a two-stage procedure: (1) the authors compare the intergenerational welfare distribution across welfare state regimes using their existing typologies and find a moderate nexus. Therefore, (2) the authors employ clustering procedure to look for a new classification that would better reflect the cross-country variation in the intergenerational welfare division.
Findings
The authors find a complex relationship between the welfare state model and welfare distribution across generations and identify the policy patterns that shape it. Continental and liberal regimes are quite similar in these terms and favour the elderly generation. Social-democratic and CEE regimes seem to be a bit more balanced. COVID-19 pandemic will probably increase the intergenerational imbalance in terms of welfare distribution in favour of the elderly.
Originality/value
In contrast to the majority of previous studies, which employ inputs (social expenditures) or outputs (benefits, incomes), the authors use intergenerational balance indicators reflecting living conditions of a given generation as compared to the reference point defined as an average situation of all generations.
Details
Keywords
Nazim Habibov, Alena Auchynnikava, Rong Luo and Lida Fan
The purpose of this paper is to focus on the effects of interpersonal and institutional trust on welfare state support in the countries of Eastern Europe and the former Soviet…
Abstract
Purpose
The purpose of this paper is to focus on the effects of interpersonal and institutional trust on welfare state support in the countries of Eastern Europe and the former Soviet Union (FSU).
Design/methodology/approach
The authors use micro-data from two rounds of a multinational survey conducted in these countries in 2010 and 2016. The outcome variable of interest is the willingness to pay more taxes to support the welfare state. The authors define the welfare state broadly, and focus on support for three main domains of the welfare state, namely, support for the needy, public healthcare and public education. Binomial regression is used to establish influence of interpersonal and institutional trust on welfare state support.
Findings
The authors find that both interpersonal and institutional trust have positive influences on strengthening support for the welfare state against a number of alternative explanations for public support for the welfare state. These positive effects remain the same for all three domains under investigation, namely, helping the needy, public healthcare and public education. Furthermore, these positive effects were observed both in the relatively less developed countries of the FSU and in the more developed Eastern European countries. Moreover, the positive effects of interpersonal and institutional trust on support for the needy, public healthcare and public education were found to grow over time.
Research limitations/implications
The findings indicate that the benefits of nurturing social capital will likely be substantial. Decision-makers, politicians, welfare state administrators and multinational founders (e.g. the UN and World Bank) should acknowledge the role played by trust in influencing the citizenry’s support for the allocation of financial resources toward the development and maintenance of the welfare state. The findings imply that welfare state reforms could prove be more effective within a social context where levels of trust are high. Thus, special attention should be paid to initiatives aimed at developing strategies to build trust.
Practical implications
Social welfare reforms in post-communist transitional countries may fail without active strategies aimed at nurturing institutional trust. One way to nurture institutional trust is through making additional efforts at enhancing the levels of accountability and transparency within a society as well as through increasing citizen engagement. Another way to build increased levels of trust is to take part in a variety of initiatives in good governance put forth by multinational initiatives.
Originality/value
As far as the authors know, this is the first paper which studies effect of interpersonal and institutional trust on support of the welfare state using a large and diverse sample of 27 countries over the period of five years. This is the first study which focuses on post-communist countries where trust is inherently low.
Details
Keywords
Monika Senghaas, Christopher Osiander, Gesine Stephan and Olaf Struck
In many countries, individuals can receive welfare support whilst simultaneously being employed. The level of earned income that welfare recipients are allowed to keep has long…
Abstract
Purpose
In many countries, individuals can receive welfare support whilst simultaneously being employed. The level of earned income that welfare recipients are allowed to keep has long been a subject of debate. Core issues include whether in-work benefit regulations provide incentives for individuals to expand labour market participation and are thus also socially effective and whether the population perceives welfare benefits for individuals who earn own income as fair. This article contributes to the debate about the social legitimacy of in-work benefit regulations by shedding light on the principles guiding judgements about an adequate amount of in-work benefit receipt.
Design/methodology/approach
The authors use a factorial survey experiment to investigate which factors guide judgements about an adequate level of in-work benefit receipt. In the authors' factorial survey, the household composition, health status, and monthly earnings of a hypothetical in-work benefit recipient were varied experimentally. The study investigates Germany's basic income support programme, a means-tested social policy programme that targets both unemployed and employed individuals.
Findings
The results show that respondents consider higher earnings retention rates for lower-income earners to be fair. This preference mirrors the German legislation, which is based on the principle of need. Furthermore, the presence of children and of physical as well as mental health impairments are associated with support for higher earnings retention rates.
Originality/value
The findings suggest that citizens support the core features of in-work benefit regulations but do not consider in-work benefit recipients as a homogenous group when assessing the adequate level of benefit receipt.
Details