Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Private Sector Providers in Political Processes

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
New Private Sector Providers in the Welfare State

  • 370 Accesses

Abstract

This chapter zooms into the processes of welfare state reforms. It analyses the mechanisms and constraints of private sector providers as well as potential alternative explanations. What were the mechanisms of reform? How did private sector providers try to get a say in the political process? What channels could they use to exert power? The case studies confirm findings of the previous chapters that private sector providers can be an important part of explanations for privatizing reforms. Mechanisms range from the successful spread of ideas by business actors to a signalling strategy in the light of strong problem pressure. Additionally, the case studies also reveal constraining factors for private sector providers, namely, high topic salience and large majority governments.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 84.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    The approach violates two rules of post-QCA case selection as proposed by Schneider and Rohlfing (2013). First, I only analyse one term of the solution . Optimally, I would be able to analyse selected cases of each term. However, this is not possible due to practical reasons. Second, the 2001 German pension reform is not a unique member of only one term but is a typical case for all three terms. I still study the reform because it represents a paradigmatic change in German pension politics .

  2. 2.

    Original: ‘war irgendwo schon abzusehen, dass man im Bereich der kapitalgedeckten Vorsorge sich was einfallen lassen müsste’ (Wiß 2011, p. 156).

  3. 3.

    In 2005, the newly established Pension Protection Fund estimated a d eficit of pension funds amounting to 134 billion pounds sterling (Blackburn 2008).

  4. 4.

    Note that the reform is also member in a term that contains problem pressure, left-wing government, and powerful welfare industries.

Bibliography

  • Bawden, Tom. 2004a. Venture Capitalists Warn of Pension Disaster. The Times, May 19.

    Google Scholar 

  • ———. 2004b. Powerful Alliance Builds for Rethink on Pensions Bill. The Times, May 21.

    Google Scholar 

  • ———. 2004c. Lords Suspend Pension Bill Clauses After Minister’s U-Turn. The Times, July 9.

    Google Scholar 

  • BDPK. 2006a. BDPK-Mitteilungen. Führen und Wirtschaften 04/06.

    Google Scholar 

  • ———. 2006b. BDPK-Mitteilungen. Führen und Wirtschaften 06/06.

    Google Scholar 

  • ———. 2006c. BDPK-Mitteilungen. Führen und Wirtschaften 05/06.

    Google Scholar 

  • Berwick, Isabel, and Josephine Cumbo. 2004. Shift on Pensions Policy Welcomed. Financial Times, October 2.

    Google Scholar 

  • Blackburn, Robin. 2008. The Anglo-American Pension Regime: Failures of the Divided Welfare State. In Pension Reform in Europe. Politics, Policies and Outcomes, ed. Camila Arza and Martin Kohli, 155–174. Abingdon: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bönker, Frank. 2005. Der Siegeszug des Mehrsäulenparadigmas in der bundesdeutschen Rentenpolitik. Eine Analyse auf Grundlage der “Ideenliteratur”. Zeitschrift für Sozialreform 51 (3): 337–362.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bonoli, Giuliano, and Bruno Palier. 2007. When Past Reforms Open New Opportunities: Comparing Old-Age Insurance Reforms in Bismarckian Welfare Systems. Social Policy & Administration 41 (6): 555–573.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bream, Rebecca. 2004. Fund to Restore Trust in Pension Schemes. Financial Times, March 1.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bridgen, Paul, and Traute Meyer. 2009. The Politics of Occupational Pension Reform in Britain and the Netherlands: The Power of Market Discipline in Liberal and Corporatist Regimes. West European Politics 32 (3): 586–610.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brown, Steve. 2001. Private Health Care: The Issue Explained. The Guardian, March 19. http://www.theguardian.com/society/2001/mar/19/2.

  • Clasen, Jochen. 2005. Reforming European Welfare States. Germany and the United Kingdom Compared. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Cohen, Norma. 2004. The Pensions Bill. Financial Times, February 17.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cohen, Norma, Ben Hall, and David Turner. 2004. Ministers in Talks to Compensate Workers. Financial Times, May 14.

    Google Scholar 

  • Department of Health. 2000. The NHS Plan: A Plan for Investment, a Plan for Reform. London: Department of Health.

    Google Scholar 

  • Deutsche Krankenhausgesellschaft. 2006a. Das Krankenhaus, 05/06. Stuttgart: Kohlhammer.

    Google Scholar 

  • ———. 2006b. Das Krankenhaus, 08/06. Stuttgart: Kohlhammer.

    Google Scholar 

  • ———. 2006c. Das Krankenhaus, 09/06. Stuttgart: Kohlhammer.

    Google Scholar 

  • ———. 2006d. Das Krankenhaus, 10/06. Stuttgart: Kohlhammer.

    Google Scholar 

  • ———. 2006e. Das Krankenhaus, 12/05. Stuttgart: Kohlhammer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dünn, Sylvia, and Stephan Fasshauer. 2001. Die Rentenreform 2000/2001—Ein Rückblick. Deutsche Rentenversicherung 5: 266–275.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ebbinghaus, Bernhard, Mareike Gronwald, and Tobias Wiß. 2011. Germany: Departing from Bismarckian Public Pensions. In The Varieties of Pension Governance. Pension Privatization in Europe, ed. Bernhard Ebbinghaus, 119–150. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Gerlinger, Thomas. 2009. Competitive Transformation and the State Regulation of Health Insurance Systems: Germany, Switzerland and the Netherlands Compared. In Governance of Welfare State Reform. A Cross National and Cross Sectoral Comparison of Policy and Politics, ed. Irene Dingeldey and Heinz Rothgang, 145–175. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.

    Google Scholar 

  • Giaimo, Susan. 2002. Markets and Medicine: The Politics of Health Care Reform in Britain, Germany, and the United States. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Gingrich, Jane R. 2011. Making Markets in the Welfare State. The Politics of Varying Market Reforms. New York: Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Greener, Ian. 2009. Healthcare in the UK: Understanding Continuity and Change. Bristol: The Policy Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Greener, Ian, and Martin Powell. 2008. The Changing Governance of the NHS: Reform in a Post-Keynesian Health Service. Human Relations 61 (5): 617–636.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hall, Ben. 2004a. Opposition Win on Pension Safety Net. Financial Times, November 5.

    Google Scholar 

  • ———. 2004b. Pensions Act Fails to Dispel Worry About Rescue Plan: The New Law Has Arrived Despite Determined Opposition in the House of Lords. Financial Times, November 20.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ham, Christopher. 2009. Health Policy in Britain. 6th ed., Public Policy and Politics. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hartmann, Anja. 2010. Die Gesundheitsreform der Großen Koalition: Kleinster gemeinsamer Nenner oder offenes Hintertürchen? In Die zweite Große Koalition, ed. Christoph Egle and Reimut Zohlnhöfer, 327–349. Wiesbaden: VS Verlag für Sozialwissenschaften.

    Google Scholar 

  • Häusermann, Silja. 2010. The Politics of Welfare State Reform in Continental Europe: Modernization in Hard Times. New York: Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Heins, Detlev. 2009. Die Krankenhäuser und die Gesundheitsreform 2007. In Gesundheitsreform 2007, ed. Wolfgang Schroeder and Robert Paquet, 152–158. VS Verlag für Sozialwissenschaften.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hencke, David. 2001. Chance Chat over Dinner Led Blair to Order U-Turn on Private Beds. The Guardian, July 28.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hinrichs, Karl. 2004. Alterssicherungspolitik in Deutschland: Zwischen Kontinuität Und Paradigmenwechsel. In Gesellschaft Mit Beschränkter Hoffnung, ed. Petra Stykow and Jürgen Beyer, 266–286. Wiesbaden: VS Verlag für Sozialwissenschaften.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Hoffmann, Andreas. 2006. Streit um Gesundheitsreform. Süddeutsche Zeitung, August 17.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jones, Rupert, and Philip Inman. 2004. Pensions Insurance Attacked: Scrupulous Companies to Foot Bill for Negligent Rivals. The Guardian, February 12.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jones, Rupert, and Michael White. 2004. Pensions Protest Takes to Streets: Critics Say Bill Is Lost Opportunity to Redress Bigger Problems. The Guardian, February 13.

    Google Scholar 

  • Klein, Rudolf. 2013. The New Politics of the NHS: From Creation to Reinvention. London: Radcliffe.

    Google Scholar 

  • Laing & Buisson. 2013. Laing’s Healthcare Market Review 2011–2012. London: Laing & Buisson.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lamping, Wolfram, and Friedbert W. Rüb. 2004. From the Conservative Welfare State to an “Uncertain Something Else”: German Pension Politics in Comparative Perspective. Policy & Politics 32 (2): 169–191.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • ———. 2006. “Experimental Law-Making” and the Politics of German Pension Reforms. German Policy Studies 3 (3): 446–491.

    Google Scholar 

  • Leifeld, Philip. 2013. Reconceptualizing Major Policy Change in the Advocacy Coalition Framework: A Discourse Network Analysis of German Pension Politics. Policy Studies Journal 41 (1): 169–198.

    Google Scholar 

  • Leys, Collin, and Stewart Player. 2011. The Plot Against the NHS. Pontypool: Merlin Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Miles, Helen. 2004a. Bill Should Protect Our Savings. The Times, February 17.

    Google Scholar 

  • Miles, Richard. 2004b. Pension Benefits May Be Cut to Pay for Safety Net. The Times, February 13.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mittler, Dietrich. 2006. Protest gegen die Gesundheitsreform. Süddeutsche Zeitung, December 4.

    Google Scholar 

  • Natali, David, and Martin Rhodes. 2008. The “New Politics” of Pension Reform in Continental Europe. In Pension Reform in Europe. Politics, Policies and Outcomes, ed. Camila Arza and Martin Kohli, 25–46. Abingdon: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nullmeier, Frank, and Friedbert W. Rüb. 1993. Die Transformation der Sozialpolitik. Vom Sozialstaat zum Sicherungsstaat. Frankfurt a.M./New York: Campus.

    Google Scholar 

  • Olesen, Jeppe Dørup. 2010. Adapting the Welfare State: Privatisation in Health Care in Denmark, England and Sweden. EUI PhD Theses, European University Institute, Florence.

    Google Scholar 

  • Palier, Bruno, and Claude Martin. 2007. From “a Frozen Landscape” to Structural Reforms: The Sequential Transformation of Bismarckian Welfare Systems. Social Policy & Administration 41 (6): 535–554.

    Google Scholar 

  • Paquet, Robert, and Wolfgang Schroeder. 2009. Gesundheitsreform 2007—Akteure, Interessen und Prozesse. In Gesundheitsreform 2007, ed. Wolfgang Schroeder and Robert Paquet, 11–29. VS Verlag für Sozialwissenschaften.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pollock, Allyson M. 2005. NHS Plc: The Privatisation of Our Health Care. London/New York: Verso Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Powell, Martin. 2014. Making Markets in the English National Health Service. Social Policy & Administration 49 (1): 109–127.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schludi, Martin. 2005. The Reform of Bismarckian Pension Systems: A Comparison of Pension Politics in Austria, France, Germany, Italy and Sweden. Amsterdam: Amsterdam University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • ———. 2008. Between Conflict and Consensus: The Reform of Bismarckian Pension Regimes. In Pension Reform in Europe. Politics, Policies and Outcomes, ed. Camila Arza and Martin Kohli, 47–69. Abingdon: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schneider, Carsten Q., and Ingo Rohlfing. 2013. Combining QCA and Process Tracing in Set-Theoretic Multi-Method Research. Sociological Methods & Research 42 (4): 559–597.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schulze, Isabelle, and Sven Jochem. 2007. Germany: Beyond Policy Gridlock. In The Handbook of West European Pension Politics, ed. Ellen M. Immergut, Karen M. Anderson, and Isabelle Schulze, 660–710. New York: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schulze, Isabelle, and Michael Moran. 2007. United Kingdom: Pension Politics in an Adversarial System. In The Oxford Handbook of West European Pension Politics, ed. Ellen M. Immergut, Karen M. Anderson, and Isabelle Schulze, 49–96. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Seib, Christine. 2004. Directors Face Loss of Personal Assets in New Pension Powers. The Times, May 15.

    Google Scholar 

  • Seib, Christine, and Philip Webster. 2004. Solution Starts with a Radical Reform of State System. The Times, October 13.

    Google Scholar 

  • Senior, Antonia. 2004. New Proposals Will Not Solve Savings Crisis, Experts Say. The Times, February 13.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shaw, Eric. 2008. Losing Labour’s Soul?: New Labour and the Blair Government 1997–2007. New Ed ed. London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • The Guardian. 2004. Pensions Crisis: The Policies. Who Wants to Do What? The Guardian, October 13.

    Google Scholar 

  • Thelen, Peter. 2006. Kassen warnen vor Beitragserhöhung auf über 16 Prozent bis 2009. Handelsblatt, November 7.

    Google Scholar 

  • Timmins, Nicholas. 2001. The Five Giants: A Biography of the Welfare State. London: HarperCollins.

    Google Scholar 

  • ———. 2004a. Healthy Companies Face Paying Bulk of Pensions Bail-Out Scheme. Financial Times, February 11.

    Google Scholar 

  • ———. 2004b. Fund Plans Hit by Chorus of Complaints—More Oversight, a Clear Code and a Duty to Blow the Whistle. Financial Times, February 13.

    Google Scholar 

  • ———. 2005. Challenges of Private Provision in the NHS. British Medical Journal 331 (7526): 1193–1195.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wehlau, Diana. 2009. Lobbyismus und Rentenreform. Der Einfluss der Finanzdienstleistungsbranche auf die Teil-Privatisierung der Alterssicherung. Wiesbaden: VS Verlag für Sozialwissenschaften.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wheatcroft, Patience. 2004. Pensions Bill May Be Too Expensive. The Times, July 7.

    Google Scholar 

  • White, Michael. 2004. Ministers Refuse to Budge on Pensions Payout. The Guardian, April 7.

    Google Scholar 

  • Willert, Michaela. 2013. Regulierte Wohlfahrtsmärkte: Private Altersvorsorge in Deutschland und Großbritannien. Frankfurt am Main: Campus.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wiß, Tobias. 2011. Der Wandel der Alterssicherung in Deutschland. Die Rolle der Sozialpartner. Wiesbaden: VS Verlag für Sozialwissenschaften.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Observatory for Sociopolitical Developments in Europe, Institute for Social Work and Social Education, Berlin, Germany

    Jonas Pieper

Authors
  1. Jonas Pieper
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2018 The Author(s)

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Pieper, J. (2018). Private Sector Providers in Political Processes. In: New Private Sector Providers in the Welfare State. Palgrave Macmillan, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-62563-8_6

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation