Social Indicators Research

, Volume 36, Issue 1, pp 1–48 | Cite as

Livability of the welfare-state

Appreciation-of-life and length-of-life in nations varying in state-welfare-effort
  • Ruut Veenhoven
  • Piet Ouweneel
Article

Abstract

One issue in the debate on the welfare-state is whether state-care renders society more livable or not. The positive view is that people flourish in the welfare-state, the negative view is that people thrive better without. This article approaches the dispute empirically, by comparing livability of nations that differ in state-welfare-effort. The livability of nations is measured by the degree to which its citizens live long and happily. State-welfare-effect is measured by the scope of welfare-laws and the size of state-welfare-expenditures.

Data on average appreciation-of-life around 1980 are available for 28 nations; mostly rich ones. Appreciation-of-life appears somewhat greater in the nations that provide most state-welfare. However, that difference is entirely due to parallel differences in economic affluence. Data on change in life-satisfaction between 1950 and 1980 are available for only 10 nations, all rich ones. Life-satisfaction did not increase more in the nations where state-welfare expanded most.

Data on length-of-life in 1980 are available for 97 nations, of which 28 rich ones. Life-expectancy appears to be greater in the nations that provide most state-welfare, but again the difference disappears when income per head is controlled. Data on change in life-expectancy 1965–1985 are available for 35 nations. Gains in life-expectancy appear not greater in the nations were state-welfare expanded most.

It is concluded that state involvement in welfare provision does not create a more livable society. Apparently, non-state welfare works out equally well in present day conditions.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Alber, J.: 1988, Is there a crisis of the welfare state? Cross-national evidence from Europe, North America, and Japan', European Sociological Review 4, pp. 181–183.Google Scholar
  2. Borenstein, L.: 1993, Comparative GDP levels, Physical Indicators, phase III (United Nations: New York).Google Scholar
  3. Chelf, C. P.: 1992, Controversial Issues in Social Welfare Policy; Government and the Pursuit of Happiness (Sage: London).Google Scholar
  4. Douglas, J. D.: 1989, The Myth of the Welfare State (Transaction Publisher: New Brunswick).Google Scholar
  5. Esping-Anderson, G.: 1990, The Three World of Welfare Capitalism (Polity Press: Cambridge).Google Scholar
  6. Estes, R.: 1984, The Social Progress of Nations (Preager: New York).Google Scholar
  7. George, V. and Wilding, P.: 1984, The Impact of Social Policy (Routledge: London).Google Scholar
  8. Gordon, M. S.: 1988, Social Security Policies in Industrial Countries (Cambridge University Press: New York).Google Scholar
  9. Hayek, F. A.: 1946, The Road to Serfdom (Routledge: London).Google Scholar
  10. ILO: 1988, ‘The costs of social security: 12th international inquiry 1981–1983’, International Labour Organization: Geneva.Google Scholar
  11. IMF: 1986, Manual on Government Finance Statistics (International Monetary Fund: Washington).Google Scholar
  12. Mishra, R.: 1984, The Welfare State in Crisis (Harvester: Brighton).Google Scholar
  13. Murray, G.: 1984, Loosing Ground: American Social Policy 1950–1980 (Basic Books: New York).Google Scholar
  14. Naroll, R.: 1983, The Moral Order: An Introduction to the Human Situation (Sage: New York).Google Scholar
  15. OECD: 1990, Social Expenditures 1960–1990 (Organization for Economic Development: Paris).Google Scholar
  16. Ouweneel, P. and R. Veenhoven: 1990, ‘Differences in happiness across nations: Cultural bias or societal quality?’ in: N. Bleichrotdt and P. J. Drenth (eds.), Contemporary Issues in Cross-Cultural Psychology (Swets & Zeitlinger: Amsterdam), pp. 168–184.Google Scholar
  17. Summers, R. and A. Heston: 1988, ‘A new set of international comparisons of real product and price level estimates for 130 countries, 1950–1985’, National Income and Wealth 34, pp. 1–25.Google Scholar
  18. UNDP: 1990, World Development Report (Oxford University Press: London).Google Scholar
  19. Veenhoven, R.: 1984, Conditions of Happiness (Kluwer Academic: Dordrecht).Google Scholar
  20. Veenhoven, R.: 1986, ‘Cultural bias in rating of perceived life quality’, Social Indicator Research 19, pp. 329–334.Google Scholar
  21. Veenhoven, R.: 1991, ‘Is happiness relative?’, Social Indicators Research 24, pp. 1–34.Google Scholar
  22. Veenhoven, R.: 1993, ‘Happiness in nations: subjective appreciation of life in 56 nations 1946–1992’, RISBO, Erasmus University, Rotterdam (electronically published on ftp.eur.nlpub\database.happiness\nations).Google Scholar
  23. Veenhoven, R.: 1994, ‘Is happiness a trait? Tests of the theory that a better society does not make people an happier’, Social Indicators Research 32, pp. 101–160.Google Scholar
  24. Veenhoven, R.: 1995, ‘The cross-national pattern of happiness: Tests of predications implied in three theories of happines’, Social Indicators Research 34, pp. 33–68.Google Scholar
  25. Veenhoven, R. and P. Ouweneel: ‘Equality in the welfare-state: dispersion in satisfaction-with-life and length-of-life in nations varying in state-welfare-effect’, (in preparation).Google Scholar
  26. WHO: 1988, World Health Statistics Annual (World Health Organization: Geneva).Google Scholar
  27. Zapf: 1994, Modernisierung, Wohlfahrtsentwicklung und Transformation: Soziologische Aufsätze 1987–1994 (Edition Sigma, Berlin).Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Kluwer Academic Publishers 1995

Authors and Affiliations

  • Ruut Veenhoven
    • 1
  • Piet Ouweneel
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of SociologyErasmus University RotterdamRotterdamThe Netherlands

Personalised recommendations