Advertisement

Social Indicators Research

, Volume 142, Issue 2, pp 597–616 | Cite as

From Dependent to Independent Variable: A Critical Assessment of Operationalisations of ‘Welfare Stateness’ as Macro-Level Indicators in Multilevel Analyses

  • Katharina KunißenEmail author
Article

Abstract

This paper explores different ways to operationalise properties of the welfare state as explanatory variable in multilevel frameworks. Based on the observation that many common applications of welfare state measurements as independent macro-level variables lack standardised proceeding, differences between commonly used approaches (single indicators, regime typologies, and composite indices) are examined concerning their consequences for empirical results and their comparability. Each approach is first discussed regarding conceptual premises and practical applications in the literature. In a second step, differences are demonstrated empirically by performing several multilevel analyses using welfare attitudes as an exemplary dependent variable. The comparison shows that even slight differences in the operationalisation have an impact on the results and their explanatory contribution. Based on this, the paper offers possible points of departure for the development of more fitting operationalisations for the specific use as explanatory instruments. This includes criteria a measurement should meet and a stronger focus on capturing the relevant causal mechanisms assumed to be at work. The aim of this paper is thus twofold. On the one hand, it provides an overview of existing strategies and raises awareness to critical issues. On the other hand, it gives some initial pointers for a conceptual debate about how to turn characteristics of the welfare state into macro-level indicators, which can serve as independent variable.

Keywords

Welfare state Operationalisation Social policy Indicator Multilevel 

Notes

Acknowledgements

I am very grateful to Gunnar Otte, Lena Zimmer, my colleagues at the Working Group of Social Stratification Research in Mainz (especially Debora Eicher and Theresa Wieland), and the anonymous referees for valuable comments on an earlier version of this paper.

References

  1. Angel, S., & Heitzmann, K. (2015). Over-indebtedness in Europe: The relevance of country-level variables for the over-indebtedness of private households. Journal of European Social Policy, 25(3), 331–351.Google Scholar
  2. Arikan, G., & Ben-Nun Bloom, P. (2015). Social values and cross-national differences in attitudes towards welfare. Political Studies, 63(2), 431–448.Google Scholar
  3. Arts, W., & Gelissen, J. (2001). Welfare states, solidarity and justice principles: Does the type really matter? Acta Sociologica, 44(4), 283–299.Google Scholar
  4. Arts, W., & Gelissen, J. (2002). Three worlds of welfare capitalism or more? A state-of-the-art report. Journal of European Social Policy, 12(2), 137–158.Google Scholar
  5. Arundel, R., & Lennartz, C. (2017). Returning to the parental home: Boomerang moves of younger adults and the welfare regime context. Journal of European Social Policy, 27(3), 276–294.Google Scholar
  6. Bambra, C. (2005). Cash versus services: ‘Worlds of welfare’ and the decommodification of cash benefits and health care services. Journal of Social Policy, 34(2), 195–213.Google Scholar
  7. Bambra, C. (2006). Decommodification and the worlds of welfare revisited. Journal of European Social Policy, 16(1), 73–80.Google Scholar
  8. Bambra, C. (2007). ‘Sifting the wheat from the chaff’: A two-dimensional discriminant analysis of welfare state regime theory. Social Policy & Administration, 41(1), 1–28.Google Scholar
  9. Bambra, C., Lunau, T., van der Wel, K. A., Eikemo, T. A., & Dragano, N. (2014). Work, health, and welfare: the association between working conditions, welfare states, and self-reported general health in Europe. International Journal of Health Services, 44(1), 113–136.Google Scholar
  10. Bergqvist, K., Yngwe, M. Å., & Lundberg, O. (2013). Understanding the role of welfare state characteristics for health and inequalities: An analytical review. BMC Public Health, 13(1), 1–20.Google Scholar
  11. Bolukbasi, H. T., & Öktem, K. G. (2018). Conceptualizing and operationalizing social rights: Towards higher convergent validity in SCIP and CWED. Journal of European Social Policy, 28(1), 86–100.Google Scholar
  12. Bonoli, G. (1997). Classifying welfare states: a two-dimension approach. Journal of Social Policy, 26(3), 351–372.Google Scholar
  13. Castles, F., & McKinlay, R. D. (1979). Does politics matter: An analysis of the public welfare commitment in advanced democratic states. European Journal of Political Research, 7(2), 169–186.Google Scholar
  14. Castles, F. G., & Obinger, H. (2008). Worlds, families, regimes: country clusters in European and OECD area public policy. West European Politics, 31(1–2), 321–344.Google Scholar
  15. Clasen, J., & Siegel, N. A. (Eds.). (2007). Investigating welfare state change: The “dependent variable problem” in comparative analysis. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.Google Scholar
  16. Cruz-Martínez, G. (2014). Welfare state development in Latin America and the Caribbean (1970s–2000s): Multidimensional welfare index, its methodology and results. Social Indicators Research, 119(3), 1295–1317.Google Scholar
  17. Cruz-Martínez, G. (2017). Welfare state development, individual deprivations and income inequality: A Cross-country analysis in Latin America and the Caribbean. Social Indicators Research, 134(3), 955–979.Google Scholar
  18. Deeming, C., & Jones, K. (2015). Investigating the macro determinants of self-rated health and well-being using the european social survey: Methodological innovations across countries and time. International Journal of Sociology, 45(4), 256–285.Google Scholar
  19. Ebbinghaus, B. (2011). Case selection in medium-N comparative welfare state analysis. Qualitative & Multi-Method Research. APSA Section Newsletter (Fall), pp. 15–20.Google Scholar
  20. Eger, M. A., & Breznau, N. (2017). Immigration and the welfare state: A cross-regional analysis of European welfare attitudes. International Journal of Comparative Sociology, 30, 002071521769079.Google Scholar
  21. Esping-Andersen, G. (1990). The three worlds of welfare capitalism. Cambridge, UK: Polity Press.Google Scholar
  22. Esping-Andersen, G. (1999). Social foundations of postindustrial economies. Oxford, New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  23. European Social Survey. (2008). Round 4 (ESS 4).Google Scholar
  24. Eurostat. (2018a). Social expenditure in 2008 (% GDP): Last updated: March 2018.Google Scholar
  25. Eurostat. (2018b). Social expenditure unemployment (% GDP): Last updated: March 2018.Google Scholar
  26. Ferragina, E., & Seeleib-Kaiser, M. (2011). Welfare regime debate: Past, present, futures? Policy & Politics, 39(4), 583–611.Google Scholar
  27. Ferragina, E., Seeleib-Kaiser, M., & Tomlinson, M. (2013). Unemployment protection and family policy at the turn of the 21st century: A dynamic approach to welfare regime theory. Social Policy & Administration, 47(7), 783–805.Google Scholar
  28. Ferrera, M. (1996). The ‘Southern model’ of welfare in social Europe. Journal of European Social Policy, 6(1), 17–37.Google Scholar
  29. Garcés Ferrer, J., Ródenas Rigla, F., & Vidal Figueroa, C. (2016). Application of Social Policy Index (SPI) amended in three OECD countries: Finland, Spain and Mexico. Social Indicators Research, 127(2), 529–539.Google Scholar
  30. Green-Pedersen, C. (2004). The dependent variable problem within the study of welfare state retrenchment: Defining the problem and looking for solutions. Journal of Comparative Policy Analysis: Research and Practice, 6(1), 3–14.Google Scholar
  31. Howell, D. R., & Rehm, M. (2009). Unemployment compensation and high European unemployment: A reassessment with new benefit indicators. Oxford Review of Economic Policy, 25(1), 60–93.Google Scholar
  32. ISSP Research Group. (2017). International social survey programme: Social inequality IV - ISSP 2009. GESIS Data Archive, Cologne. ZA5400 Data file Version 4.0.0. Mannheim: ISSP Research Group.Google Scholar
  33. Jæger, M. M. (2006). Welfare regimes and attitudes towards redistribution: The regime hypothesis revisited. European Sociological Review, 22(2), 157–170.Google Scholar
  34. Jæger, M. M. (2009). United but divided: Welfare regimes and the level and variance in public support for redistribution. European Sociological Review, 25(6), 723–737.Google Scholar
  35. Jæger, M. M. (2013). The effect of macroeconomic and social conditions on the demand for redistribution: A pseudo panel approach. Journal of European Social Policy, 23(2), 149–163.Google Scholar
  36. Jaime-Castillo, A. M. (2013). Public opinion and the reform of the pension systems in Europe: The influence of solidarity principles. Journal of European Social Policy, 23(4), 390–405.Google Scholar
  37. Jakobsen, T. G. (2010). Public versus private: The conditional effect of state policy and institutional trust on mass opinion. European Sociological Review, 26(3), 307–318.Google Scholar
  38. Jakobsen, T. G. (2011). Welfare attitudes and social expenditure: Do regimes shape public opinion? Social Indicators Research, 101(3), 323–340.Google Scholar
  39. Jensen, C. (2011). Less bad than its reputation: Social spending as a proxy for welfare effort in cross-national studies. Journal of Comparative Policy Analysis: Research and Practice, 13(3), 327–340.Google Scholar
  40. Jordan, J. (2013). Policy feedback and support for the welfare state. Journal of European Social Policy, 23(2), 134–148.Google Scholar
  41. Kühner, S. (2007). Country-level comparisons of welfare state change measures: another facet of the dependent variable problem within the comparative analysis of the welfare state?: ESPA net/JESP Doctoral Researcher Prize Essay. Journal of European Social Policy, 17(1), 5–18.Google Scholar
  42. Kuitto, K. (2011). More than just money: Patterns of disaggregated welfare expenditure in the enlarged Europe. Journal of European Social Policy, 21(4), 348–364.Google Scholar
  43. Kuitto, K. (2016). Measuring welfare entitlement generosity in transitional welfare states: The case of post-communist countries in central and Eastern Europe. Social Indicators Research, 136, 1–22.Google Scholar
  44. Kulin, J., & Meuleman, B. (2015). Human values and welfare state support in Europe: An east-west divide? European Sociological Review, 31(4), 418–432.Google Scholar
  45. Kvist, J. (2011). One-size-fits-all? Measurement issues in medium-N comparative welfare analysis. Qualitative & Multi-Method Research. APSA Section Newsletter, 9(Fall), 20–25.Google Scholar
  46. Lohmann, H., & Zagel, H. (2016). Family policy in comparative perspective: The concepts and measurement of familization and defamilization. Journal of European Social Policy, 26(1), 48–65.Google Scholar
  47. Mattila, M., & Rapeli, L. (2018). Just sick of it?: Health and political trust in Western Europe. European Journal of Political Research, 57(1), 116–134.Google Scholar
  48. Menahem, G. (2007). The decommodified security ratio: A tool for assessing European social protection systems. International Social Security Review, 60(4), 69–103.Google Scholar
  49. Motel-Klingebiel, A., Romeu Gordo, L., & Betzin, J. (2009). Welfare states and quality of later life: Distributions and predictions in a comparative perspective. European Journal of Ageing, 6(2), 67–78.Google Scholar
  50. Obinger, H., & Wagschal, U. (1998). Drei Welten des Wohlfahrtsstaates? Das Stratifizierungskonzept in der clusteranalytischen Überprüfung. In S. Lessenich & I. Ostner (Eds.), Welten des Wohlfahrtskapitalismus: Der Sozialstaat in vergleichender Perspektive (Vol. 40, pp. 109–135)., Theorie und Gesellschaft Frankfurt: Campus.Google Scholar
  51. Orloff, A. S. (1993). Gender and the social rights of citizenship: The comparative analysis of gender relations and welfare states. American Sociological Review, 58(3), 303–328.Google Scholar
  52. Pfau-Effinger, B. (2005). Culture and welfare state policies: reflections on a complex interrelation. Journal of Social Policy, 34(1), 3–20.Google Scholar
  53. Pierson, P. (1996). The new politics of the welfare state. World Politics, 48(02), 143–179.Google Scholar
  54. Raudenbush, S. W., & Bryk, A. S. (2012). Hierarchical linear models: Applications and data analysis methods (2nd ed., Vol. 1)., Advanced quantitative techniques in the social sciences Thousand Oaks: Sage.Google Scholar
  55. Rice, D. (2013). Beyond welfare regimes: From empirical typology to conceptual ideal types. Social Policy & Administration, 47(1), 93–110.Google Scholar
  56. Roosma, F., van Oorschot, W., & Gelissen, J. (2014). The preferred role and perceived performance of the welfare state: European welfare attitudes from a multidimensional perspective. Social Science Research, 44, 200–210.Google Scholar
  57. Schneider, C. Q., & Makszin, K. (2014). Forms of welfare capitalism and education-based participatory inequality. Socio-Economic Review, 12(2), 437–462.Google Scholar
  58. Schuck, B., & Steiber, N. (2017). Does intergenerational educational mobility shape the well-being of young Europeans?: Evidence from the European Social Survey. Social Indicators Research, 37, 307.Google Scholar
  59. Scruggs, L. (2013). Measuring and validating social program replacement rates. Journal of European Public Policy, 20(9), 1267–1284.Google Scholar
  60. Scruggs, L. (2014). Social welfare generosity scores in CWED 2: A methodological genealogy: CWED working paper 01, February 2014.Google Scholar
  61. Scruggs, L., & Allan, J. P. (2006). Welfare-state decommodification in 18 OECD countries: A replication and revision. Journal of European Social Policy, 16(1), 55–72.Google Scholar
  62. Scruggs, L., Jahn, D., & Kuitto, K. (2014). Comparative welfare entitlements dataset 2. version 2014-03.Google Scholar
  63. Segura-Ubiergo, A. (2007). The political economy of the welfare state in Latin America. The political economy of the welfare state in Latin America: Globalization, democracy, and development. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  64. Snijders, T. A. B., & Bosker, R. J. (2012). Multilevel analysis: An introduction to basic and advanced multilevel modeling (2nd ed.). Los Angeles: Sage.Google Scholar
  65. Social Policy Indicator Database (SPIN). (2015). Social Insurance Entitlements Dataset (SIED).Google Scholar
  66. Steele, L. G. (2015). Income inequality, equal opportunity, and attitudes about redistribution. Social Science Quarterly, 96(2), 444–464.Google Scholar
  67. Stephens, J. D. (2010). The social rights of citizenship. In F. G. Castles, S. Leibfried, J. Lewis, H. Obinger, & C. Pierson (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of the welfare state (pp. 511–525). Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  68. Svallfors, S. (1997). Worlds of welfare and attitudes to redistribution: A comparison of eight western nations. European Sociological Review, 13(3), 283–304.Google Scholar
  69. Titmuss, R. M. (1974). Social policy. An introduction: Edited by Brian Abel-Smith and Kay Titmuss. London: George Allen & Unwin Ltd.Google Scholar
  70. van Kersbergen, K., & Vis, B. (2015). Three worlds’ typology: Moving beyond normal science? Journal of European Social Policy, 25(1), 111–123.Google Scholar
  71. Visser, M., Gesthuizen, M., & Scheepers, P. (2018). The crowding in hypothesis revisited: New insights into the impact of social protection expenditure on informal social capital. European Societies, 20, 1–24.Google Scholar
  72. von dem Knesebeck, O., Vonneilich, N., & Kim, T. J. (2016). Are health care inequalities unfair? A study on public attitudes in 23 countries. International Journal for Equity in Health, 15(1), 61.Google Scholar
  73. Wenzelburger, G., Zohlnhöfer, R., & Wolf, F. (2013). Implications of dataset choice in comparative welfare state research. Journal of European Public Policy, 20(9), 1229–1250.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V., part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Institute of SociologyJohannes Gutenberg-University MainzMainzGermany

Personalised recommendations