Introduction: Analysing Organized Interests and Public Opinion Towards Welfare Reforms



The status quo defence of organized interests and the reform unwillingness of public opinion are seen as the main reasons why welfare states persist. Building upon these two perspectives, this introduction develops an analytical approach to systematically study the role of organized interests and public opinion in the political economy of welfare state reform. It covers three important social policy areas (pension, healthcare, and labour market policies) and briefly maps the main institutional differences between our two country cases, Britain and Germany. Finally, it discusses the method mix applied in the nine empirical studies collected in this volume: ranging from qualitative to quantitative, from interview to text analysis, from cross-sectional micro-level data to survey experiments using online panels.


Interest Organizations Welfare State Reform Social Policy Areas Labour Market Insiders Experiences Survey 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


  1. Avdagic, S., M. Rhodes, and J. Visser. 2011. Social pacts in Europe. Emergence, evolution, and institutionalization. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Boeri, T., A. Börsch-Supan, and G. Tabellini. 2002. Pension reforms and the opinions of European citizens’. American Economic Review 92 (2): 396–401.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Bonoli, G. 2000. The politics of pension reform. Institutions and policy change in Western Europe. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Brooks, C., and J. Manza. 2008. Why welfare states persist. The importance of public opinion in democracies. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  5. Buss, C., E. Naumann, and B. Ebbinghaus. 2017. Making deservingness of the unemployed conditional. In The social legitimacy of targeted welfare, ed. W. van Oorschot, F. Roosma, B. Meuleman, and T. Reeskens. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar Publishing.Google Scholar
  6. Chong, D., and J.N. Druckman. 2007. Framing theory. Annual Review of Political Science 10: 103–126.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Druckman, J.N., and K.R. Nelson. 2003. Framing and deliberation. How citizens’ conversations limit elite influence. American Journal of Political Science 47 (4): 729–745.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Ebbinghaus, B. 2005. When less is more selection problems in large-N and small-N cross-national comparisons. International Sociology 20 (2): 133–152.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. ———. 2006. Trade union movements in post-industrial welfare states. In The politics of post-industrial welfare states. Adapting post-war social policies to new social risks, ed. K. Armingeon and G. Bonoli. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  10. ———. 2010a. Reforming Bismarckian corporatism: The changing role of social partnership in continental Europe. In A long goodbye to Bismarck? The politics of welfare reform in Western Europe, ed. B. Palier. Amsterdam: Amsterdam University Press.Google Scholar
  11. ———. 2010b. Unions and employers. In The Oxford handbook of the welfare state, ed. F.G. Castles, S. Leibfried, J. Lewis, H. Obinger, and C. Pierson. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  12. ———., ed. 2011. Varieties of pension governance. The privatization of pensions in Europe. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  13. Ebbinghaus, B., and J. Visser. 1999. When institutions matter. Union growth and decline in Western Europe, 1950–1995. European Sociological Review 15 (3): 135–158.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Elster, J. 1989. Nuts and bolts for the social sciences. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Emmenegger, P., S. Häusermann, B. Palier, and M. Seeleib-Kaiser, eds. 2012. The age of dualization. The changing face of inequality in deindustrializing societies. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  16. Esping-Andersen, G. 1990. The three worlds of welfare capitalism. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
  17. ———., ed. 1996. Welfare states in transition. National adaptations in global economies. London: Sage.Google Scholar
  18. Fernandez, J.J., and A.M. Jaime-Castillo. 2013. Positive or negative policy feedbacks? Explaining popular attitudes towards pragmatic pension policy reforms. European Sociological Review 29 (4): 803–815.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Fraile, M., and M. Ferrer. 2005. Explaining the determinants of public support for cuts in unemployment benefits spending across OECD countries. International Sociology 20 (4): 459–481.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Gelissen, J. 2002. Worlds of welfare, worlds of consent? Public opinion on the welfare state. Leiden: Brill.Google Scholar
  21. Gingrich, J., and B. Ansell. 2012. Preferences in context micro preferences, macro contexts, and the demand for social policy. Comparative Political Studies 45 (12): 1624–1645.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Goldthorpe, J.H. 1997. Current issues in comparative macrosociology. A debate on methodological issues. Comparative Social Research 16: 1–26.Google Scholar
  23. Gontthier, F. 2017. L’État providence face aux opinions publiques. Grenoble: PUG.Google Scholar
  24. Grimmer, J., and B.M. Stewart. 2013. Text as data. The promise and pitfalls of automatic content analysis methods for political texts’. Political Analysis 21 (3): 267–297.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Hall, P.A., and D. Soskice. 2001. Varieties of capitalism. The institutional foundations of comparative advantage. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Häusermann, S. 2010. The politics of welfare state reform in continental Europe. Modernization in hard times. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Hemerijck, A. 2013. Changing welfare states. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  28. Hofäcker, D., M. Hess, and S. König, eds. 2016. Delaying retirement. Progress and challenges of active ageing in Europe, the United States and Japan. London: Palgrave.Google Scholar
  29. Iversen, T., and D. Soskice. 2001. An asset theory of social policy preferences. American Political Science Review 95 (4): 875–893.Google Scholar
  30. Katzenstein, P.J. 1984. Corporatism and change. Austria, Switzerland, and the politics of Industry. Ithaca: Cornell University Press.Google Scholar
  31. Kay, A., and P. Baker. 2015. What can causal process tracing offer to policy studies? A review of the literature. Policy Studies Journal 43 (1): 1–21.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Kersbergen, K., B. Vis, and A. Hemerijck. 2014. The great recession and welfare state reform. Is retrenchment really the only game left in town? Social Policy & Administration 48 (7): 883–904.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Kim, S. E., and Y. Margalit. 2016. Informed preferences? The impact of unions on workers’ policy views. American Journal of Political Science, online first. doi: 10.1111/ajps.12280.
  34. King, G., R.O. Keohane, and S. Verba. 1994. Designing social inquiry. Scientific inference in qualitative research. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
  35. Klüver, H. 2013. Lobbying in the European Union. Interest groups, lobbying coalitions, and policy change. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Kollman, K. 1998. Outside lobbying. Public opinion and interest group strategies. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
  37. Korpi, W. 1983. The democratic class struggle. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  38. Larsen, C.A. 2008. The institutional logic of welfare attitudes. How welfare regimes influence public support. Comparative Political Studies 41 (2): 145–168.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Laver, M., K. Benoit, and J. Garry. 2003. Extracting policy positions from political texts using words as data. American Political Science Review 97 (2): 311–331.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Luskin, R.C., J.S. Fishkin, and R. Jowell. 2002. Considered opinions. Deliberative polling in Britain. British Journal of Political Science 32: 455–487.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Mares, I. 2003. The politics of social risk. Business and welfare state development. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  42. Marmor, T., and C. Wendt. 2011. Reforming healthcare systems. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar Publishing.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Mau, S. 2004. the moral economy of welfare states. Britain and Germany compared. London: Routledge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Missinne, S., B. Meuleman, and P. Bracke. 2013. The popular legitimacy of European healthcare systems. A multilevel analysis of 24 countries. Journal of European Social Policy 23 (3): 231–247.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Mutz, D.C. 2011. Population-based survey experiments. Princeton: Princeton University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Naczyk, M. 2013. Agents of privatization? Business groups and the rise of pension funds in Continental Europe. Socio-Economic Review 11 (3): 441–469.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Natali, D., and M. Rhodes. 2008. The ‘new politics’ of pension reforms in Continental Europe. In Pension reform in Europe. Politics, policies and outcomes, ed. C. Arza and M. Kohli. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  48. Page, B.I., and R.Y. Shapiro. 2010. The rational public. Fifty years of trends in Americans’ policy preferences. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  49. Palier, B., ed. 2010. A long goodbye to Bismarck? The politics of welfare reform in Western Europe. Amsterdam: Amsterdam University Press.Google Scholar
  50. Petmesidou, M., and A.M. Guillén. 2014. Can the welfare state as we know it survive? A view from the crisis-ridden South European periphery. South European Society and Politics 19 (3): 295–307.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Pierson, P., ed. 2001. The new politics of the welfare state. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  52. Rabe-Hesketh, S., and A. Skrondal. 2008. Multilevel and longitudinal modeling using Stata. College Station, TX: STATA Press.Google Scholar
  53. Radl, J. 2013. Labour market exit and social stratification in Western Europe. The effects of social class and gender on the timing of retirement’. European Sociological Review 29 (3): 654–668.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Rhodes, M. 2001. The political economy of social pacts: ‘Competitive corporatism’ and European welfare reform. In The new politics of the welfare state, ed. P. Pierson. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  55. Rueda, D. 2006. Social democracy and active labour-market policies. Insiders, outsiders and the politics of employment promotion. British Journal of Political Science 36 (3): 385–406.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Scarbrough, E. 2000. West European welfare states. The old politics of retrenchment. European Journal of Political Research 38 (2): 225–259.Google Scholar
  57. Schmitter, P.C., and W. Streeck. 1981. The organization of business interests. IIMV-IIM discussion papers, Wissenschaftszentrum Berlin.Google Scholar
  58. Stegmueller, D. 2013. How many countries for multilevel modeling? A comparison of frequentist and Bayesian approaches’. American Journal of Political Science 57 (3): 748–761.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. Svallfors, S. 2003. Welfare regimes and welfare opinions. A comparison of eight western countries. Social Indicators Research 64 (3): 495–520.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. ———. 2012. Contested welfare states. welfare attitudes in Europe and beyond. Stanford: Stanford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. van Oorschot, W. 2006. Making the difference in social Europe. Deservingness perceptions among citizens of European welfare states. Journal of European Social Policy 16 (1): 23–42.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. van Oorschot, W., F. Roosma, B. Meuleman, and T. Reeskens, eds. 2017. The social legitimacy of targeted welfare. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar Publishing.Google Scholar
  63. Velladics, K., K. Henkens, and H.P. van Dalen. 2006. Do different welfare states engender different policy preferences? Opinions on pension reforms in Eastern and Western Europe. Ageing and Society 26 (3): 475–495.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. Weishaupt, J.T., B. Ebbinghaus, and C. Wendt. 2013. Der Umbau des Wohlfahrtsstaates in Krisenzeiten. Institutioneller Wandel in Deutschland im intemationalen Vergleich. Zeitschrift für Sozialreform 59 (3): 279–290.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  65. Wendt, C. 2015. Healthcare policy and finance. In The Palgrave international handbook of healthcare policy and governance, ed. E. Kuhlmann, R. Blank, I. Bourgeault, and C. Wendt. Basingstoke: Palgrave.Google Scholar
  66. Wendt, C., and J. Kohl. 2010. Translating monetary inputs into health care provision. A comparative analysis of the impact of different modes of public policy. Journal of Comparative Policy Analysis 12 (1–2): 11–31.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  67. Wendt, C., J. Kohl, M. Mischke, and M. Pfeifer. 2010. How do Europeans perceive their healthcare system? Patterns of satisfaction and preference for state involvement in the field of healthcare. European Sociological Review 26 (2): 177–192.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  68. Wendt, C., M. Mischke, and M. Pfeifer. 2011. Welfare states and public opinion. Perceptions of healthcare systems, family policy and benefits for the unemployed and poor in Europe. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar Publishing.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© The Author(s) 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Social Policy and InterventionUniversity of OxfordOxfordUK
  2. 2.SFB 884 “Political Economy of Reforms”University of MannheimMannheimGermany

Personalised recommendations