Advertisement

Party Government, Institutions, and Social Protection in the Age of Austerity

  • Duane Swank
Chapter

Zusammenfassung

In a recent survey of the welfare state impacts of political parties, Manfred Schmidt concludes (2010: 223): “…partisan theory remains a valuable tool in the comparative study of the welfare state in economically advanced democratic states…” Schmidt cites, among other evidence, clear programmatic differences in the early 2000s between social democratic and secular center-right parties on the issue of raising taxes to support enhanced social protection, the mode of welfare state finance, and the overall balance between state and market in the production of welfare.

References

  1. Achen, Christopher. 2000. Why lagged dependent variables can suppress the power of other independent variables and what can be done about it. Paper presented at the Annual Meetings of the Midwest Political Science Association, 27.04.2000.Google Scholar
  2. Adams , James , Andrea Haupt, and Heather Stoll. 2009. What moves parties? The role of public opinion and global economic conditions in Western Europe. Comparative Political Studies 42: 611–639.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Allen, James, and Lyle Scruggs. 2004. Political partisanship and welfare state reform in advanced industrial societies. American Journal of Political Science 48: 496–512.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Armingeon, Klaus. 2006. Reconciling competing claims of the welfare state clientele: The politics of old and new social risk coverage in comparative perspective. In The Politics of Post-Industrial Welfare States: Adapting Post-war Social Policies to New Social Risks, eds. Klaus Armingeon and Giuliano Bonoli, 100–122. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  5. Armingeon, Klaus. 2007. Active labour market policy, international organizations and domestic politics. Journal of European Public Policy 14: 905–932.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Beramendi, Pablo, and Christopher Anderson (eds.). 2008. Democracy, Inequality, and Redistribution: A Comparative Perspective. New York: Russell Sage.Google Scholar
  7. Becher, Michael. 2010. Constraining ministerial power: The impact of veto players on labor market reforms in industrial democracies, 1973–2000. Comparative political studies 43: 33–60.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Beck, Nathaniel, and Jonathan Katz. 1996. Nuisance versus substance: Specifying and estimating timeseries- cross-section models. Political Analysis 6: 1–36.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Blais , André , Donald Blake, and Stéphane Dion. 1993. Do parties make a difference? Parties and the size of government in liberal democracies. American Journal of Political Science 37: 40–62.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Bonoli, Giuliano. 2001. Political institutions, veto points, and the process of welfare state adaption. In The New Politics of the Welfare State, ed. Paul Pierson, 238–264. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  11. Brady, David. 2009. Rich Democracies, Poor People: How Politics Explain Poverty. New York: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Brooks, Clem, and Jeff Manza. 2007. Why Welfare States Persist? The Importance of Public Opinion in Democracies. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Brooks, Sarah. 2005. Interdependent and domestic foundations of policy change: The diffusion of pension privatization around the world. International Studies Quarterly 49: 273–294.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Burgoon, Brian. 2012. Partisan embedding of liberalism: How trade, investment, and immigration affect party support for the welfare state. Comparative Political Studies 45: 606–635.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Busemeyer, Marius. 2009a. Social democrats and the new partisan politics of public investment in education. Journal of European Public Policy 16: 107–126.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Busemeyer, Marius. 2009b. From myth to reality: globalization and public spending in OECD countries revisited. European Journal of Political Research 48: 455–82.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Cameron, David. 1978. The expansion of the public economy: A comparative analysis. American Political Science Review 72: 1243–1261.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Castles, Francis G. 1978. The Social Democratic Image of Society. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul.Google Scholar
  19. Castles, Francis G. 1982a. The Impact of Parties: Politics and Policies in Democratic Capitalist States. London: Sage.Google Scholar
  20. Castles, Francis G. 1982b. The impact of parties on public expenditures. In The Impact of Parties: Politics and Policies in Democratic Capitalist States, ed. Francis G. Castles, 21–90. London: Sage.Google Scholar
  21. Castles, Francis. 2004. The Future of the Welfare State: Crisis Myths and Crisis Realities. New York: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Castles, Francis G., and Robert McKinlay. 1979. Does politics matter? An analysis of the public welfare commitment in advanced democratic states. European Journal of Political Research 7: 169–86.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Crepaz, Markus, and Vickie Birchfield. 2000. Global economics, local politics: Globalization and Lijphart’s theory of consensus democracy and the politics of inclusion. In Democracy and Institutions: the Life Work of Arend Lijphart, eds. Markus Crepaz, Thomas Koelble and David Wilsford, 197–224. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.Google Scholar
  24. Cusack, Thomas. 1997. Partisan politics and public finance: change in public spending in industrialized democracies, 1955–89. Public Choice 91: 375–95.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Cusack , Thomas , Torben Iversen, and Philipp Rehm. 2006. Risks at work: the demand and supply sides of government redistribution. Oxford Review of Economic Policy 22: 365–89.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Esping-Andersen, Gøsta. 1990. Three Worlds of Welfare Capitalism. London: Polity Press.Google Scholar
  27. Franzese, Robert J. Jr. 2002. Macroeconomic Policies of Developed Democracies. New York: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Franzese, Robert J. Jr., and Jude C. Hays. 2008. Interdependence in comparative politics: substance, theory, empirics, substance. Comparative Political Studies 41: 742–80.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Garrett, Geoffrey. 1998. Partisan Politics in a Global Economy. New York: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Giger, Nathalie, and Moira Nelson. 2010. The electoral consequences of welfare state retrenchment: Blame avoidance or credit claiming in the era of permanent austerity? European Journal of Political Research 50: 1–23.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Gingrich, Jane. 2011. Making Markets in the Welfare State: The Politics of Varying Market Reforms. New York: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Green-Pedersen, Christopher. 2002a. The Politics of Justification: Party Competition and Welfare State Retrenchment in Denmark and the Netherlands from 1982–1998. Amsterdam: University of Amsterdam Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Green-Pedersen, Christoffer. 2002b. New public management reforms of the Danish and Swedish welfare states: the role of different social democratic responses. Governance 15: 271–94.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Hall, Peter, and David Soskice (eds.). 2001.Varieties of Capitalism: The Institutional Foundations of Comparative Advantage. New York: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Häusermann, Silja. 2010. The Politics of Welfare State Reform in Continental Europe: Modernization in Hard Times. New York: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Hibbs, Douglas. 1977. Political parties and macroeconomic policy. American Political Science Review 71: 1467–1487.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Hibbs, Douglas. 1992. Partisan theory after fifteen years. European Journal of Political Economy 8: 361–373.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Hicks, Alexander. 1999. Social Democracy and Welfare Capitalism. Ithaca: Cornell University Press.Google Scholar
  39. Hicks, Alexander, and Kendralin Freeman. 2009. Pension income replacement: Permanent and transitory determinants. Journal of European Public Policy 16: 127–143.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Hicks, Alexander, and Lane Kenworthy. 1998. Cooperation and political economic performance in affluent democratic capitalism. American Journal of Sociology 103: 1631–1672.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Hicks, Alexander, and Duane Swank. 1984. On the political economy of welfare expansion: A comparative analysis of 19 advanced capitalist democracies, 1960–1971. Comparative Political Studies 17: 81–120.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Hicks, Alexander, and Duane Swank. 1992. Politics, institutions, and welfare spending in industrialized democracies, 1960–1992. American Political Science Review 86: 659–74.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Hicks, Alexander, and Christopher Zorn. 2005. Economic globalization, the macro economy, and reversals of welfare expansion in affluent democracies 1978–1994. International Organization 59: 631–62.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Huber, Evelyne, and John D. Stephens. 1998. Internationalization and the social democratic welfare model: Crises and future prospects. Comparative Political Studies 33: 353–397.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Huber, Evelyne, and John D. Stephens. 2001. Partisan Choice in Global Markets: Development and Crisis of Advanced Welfare States. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Huber, Evelyne, and John D. Stephens. 2006. Combating old and new social risks. In The Politics of Post- Industrial Welfare States: Adapting Post-war Social Policies to New Social Risks, eds. Klaus Armingeon and Giuliano Bonoli, 143–168. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  47. Huber , Evelyne , Charles Ragin, and John D. Stephens. 1993. Social democracy, Christian democracy, constitutional structure and the welfare state. American Journal of Sociology 99: 711–49.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Huo, Jingjing. 2009. Third Way Reforms: Social Democracy after the Golden Age. New York: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Immergut, Ellen, and Tarik Abou-Chadi. 2012. Beyond veto points and veto players: the role of electoral vulnerability in pension politics. Typescript, Humboldt University, Berlin.Google Scholar
  50. Iversen, Torben 2005 Capitalism, Democracy and Welfare. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Iversen, Torben, and Thomas Cusack. 2000. The causes of welfare expansion: deindustrialization or globalization? World Politics 52: 313–49.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Iversen, Torben, and David Soskice. 2001. An asset theory of social preferences. American Political Science Review 95: 875–93.Google Scholar
  53. Iversen, Torben, and David Soskice. 2006. Electoral institutions and the politics of coalitions: why some democracies redistribute more than others. American Political Science Review 100: 165–81.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Iversen, Torben, and Divid Soskice. 2009. Dualism and political coalitions: inclusionary versus exclusionary reforms in an age of rising inequality. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Political Science Association, 3–6 Sept. 2009.Google Scholar
  55. Iversen, Torben, and Anne Wren. 1998. Equality, employment, and budgetary restraint: The trilemma of the service economy. World Politics 50: 507–546.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Jahn, Detlef. 2006. Globalization as ‘Galton’s Problem’: The missing link in the analysis of diffusion patterns in welfare state development. International Organization 60: 401–431.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Jensen, Carsten. 2011. Conditional contraction: globalization and capitalist systems. European Journal of Political Research 50: 168–89.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Kam, Cindy D., and Robert Franzese. 2009. Modeling and Interpreting Interactive Hypotheses in Regression Analysis. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.Google Scholar
  59. Kenworthy, Lane. 2009. The effect o f public opinion social policy generosity. Socio-Economic Review 7: 727–740CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. Keman , Hans , Kees van Kersbergen, and Barbara Vis. 2006. Political parties and new social risks: the double backlash against Social Democracy and Christian Democracy. In The Politics of Post-Industrial Welfare States: Adapting Post-war Social Policies to New Social Risks, eds. Klaus Armingeon and Giuliano Bonoli, 27–51. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  61. Kim, HeeMin, and Richard C. Fording. 1998. Voter ideology in Western democracies, 1946–1989. European Journal of Political Research 33: 73–97Google Scholar
  62. Kim, HeeMin, and Richard C. Fording. 2003. Voter ideology in Western democracies: An update. European Journal of Political Research 42: 95–105CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. Kitschelt, Herbert, and Philipp Rehm. New social risks and political preferences. In The Politics of Post- Industrial Welfare States: Adapting Post-war Social Policies to New Social Risks, eds. Klaus Armingeon and Giuliano Bonoli, 53–82. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  64. Kittel, Bernhard, and Herbert Obinger. 2003. Political parties, institutions, and the dynamics of social expenditure in times of austerity. Journal of European Public Policy 10: 20–45.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  65. Kittel, Bernhard, and Hannes Winner. 2005. How reliable is pooled analysis in political economy? The globalization-welfare state nexus revisited. European Journal of Political Economy 44: 269–93.Google Scholar
  66. Korpi, Walter. 1980. Social policy and distributional conflict in the capitalist democracies. West European Politics 3: 296–315.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  67. Korpi, Walter. 2006. Power resources and employer-centered approaches in explanations of welfare states and varieties of capitalism. World Politics 58: 167–206.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  68. Korpi, Walter, and Joakim Palme. 2003. New politics and class politics in the context of austerity and globalization. American Political Science Review 97: 425–46.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  69. Kühner, Stephan. 2010. Do party governments matter after all? Executive ideology, constitutional structures and their combined effect on welfare state change. Journal of Comparative Policy Analysis 12: 395–415.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  70. Kwon , Hyeok Yong, and Jonas Pontusson. 2012. Globalization, labour power, and partisan politics revisited. Socio-Economic Review 8: 251–281.Google Scholar
  71. Lijphart, Arend. 1999. Patterns of Democracy: Government Forms and Performance in Thirty-Six Countires. New Haven: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
  72. Lindvall, Johannes. 2010. Power sharing and reform capacity. Journal of Theoretical Politics 22: 359–76.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  73. Lynch, Julia, and Mikko Myrskylä. 2009. Always the third rail? Pension income and policy preferences in European Democracies. Comparative Political Studies 42: 1068–1097.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  74. Martin , Cathie Jo, and Duane Swank. 2004. Does the organization of capital matter? American Political Science Review 98: 593–612.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  75. Martin , Cathie Jo, and Duane Swank. 2012. The Political Construction of Business Interests: Coordination, Growth, and Inequality. New York: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  76. Moene , Karl Ove, and Michael Wallerstein. 2003. Earnings inequality and welfare spending: A disaggregated analysis. World Politics 55: 485–516.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  77. Palier, Bruno. 2010. The long conservative corporatist road to welfare reforms. In A long goodbye to Bismark? The politics of welfare reform in continental Europe, ed. Bruno Palier, 333–388. Amsterdam: Amsterdam University Press.Google Scholar
  78. Pierson, Paul. 1994. Dismantling the Welfare State: Reagan, Thatcher and the Politics of Retrenchment in Britain and the United States. New York: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  79. Pierson, Paul. 1996. The new politics of the welfare state. World Politics 48: 143–79.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  80. Pierson, Paul. 2001. Coping with permanent austerity: Welfare state restructuring in affluent democracies. In The New Politics of the Welfare State, ed. Paul Pierson, 410–456. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  81. Plümper, Thomas, and Vera Troeger. 2007. Efficient estimation of time-invariant and rarely changing variables in finite sample panel analyses with unit fixed effects. Political Analysis 15: 124–139.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  82. Quinn, Dennis. 1997. The Correlates of Change in International Financial Regulation. American Political Science Review 91: 531–552.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  83. Rehm, Philipp. 2011. Social policy by popular demand. World Politics 63: 271–299.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  84. Ross, Fiona. 2000. †Beyond left and right’: the new partisan politics of welfare. Governance 13: 155–183.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  85. Rueda, David. 2005. Insider-outsider politics in industrialized democracies. American Political Science Review 99: 61–74.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  86. Rueda, David. 2006. Social democracy, and active labour-market policies: insiders, outsiders and the politics of employment protection. British Journal of Political Science 36: 385–406.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  87. Rueda, David. 2007. Social Democracy Inside Out: Partisanship and Labor Market Policy in Industrialized Democracies. New York: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  88. Schmidt, Manfred G. 1982a. Wohlfahrtsstaatliche Politik unter bürgerlichen und sozialdemokratischen Regierungen. Ein internationaler Vergleich. Frankfurt a.M.: Campus.Google Scholar
  89. Schmidt, Manfred G. 1982b. The role of parties in shaping macroeconomic policy. In The Impact of Parties: Politics and Policies in Democratic Capitalist States, ed. Francis G. Castles, 97–176. London: Sage.Google Scholar
  90. Schmidt, Manfred G. 1996. When parties matter: a review of the possibilities and limits of partisan influence on public policy. European Journal of Political Research 30: 155–83.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  91. Schmidt, Manfred G. 1997. Determinants of social expenditure in liberal democracies: the post World War II experience. Acta Politica 32: 153–73.Google Scholar
  92. Schmidt, Manfred G. 2002. The impact of political parties, constitutional structures and veto players in public policy. In Comparative Democratic Politics: A Guide to Contemporary Theory and Research, ed. Hans Keman, 166–84. London: Sage.Google Scholar
  93. Schmidt, Manfred G. 2010. Parties. In The Oxford Handbook of the Welfare State, eds. Francis G. Castles, Stephan Leibfried, Jane Lewis, Herbert Obinger, and Christopher Pierson, 111–26. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  94. Scruggs, Lyle. 2008. Social rights, welfare generosity, and inequality. In Democracy, Inequality, and Representation, eds. Pablo Beramendi, and Christopher Anserson, 62–90. New York: Russell Sage.Google Scholar
  95. Scruggs, Lyle. 2011. Unemployment benefits, policy retrenchment, and global economic crises, 1980–2011. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Political Science Association, 1–4 Sept 2011.Google Scholar
  96. Simmons , Beth , Frank Dobbin, and Geoffrey Garrett. 2008. Introduction: The diffusion of liberalism. In The Global Diffusion of Markets and Democracy, eds. Beth Simmons, Frank Dobbin, and Geoffrey Garrett, 1–63. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  97. Starke , Peter , Herbert Obinger, and Francis G. Castles. 2008. Convergence towards where: In what ways, if any, are welfare states becoming more similar? Journal of European Public Policy 15: 975–1000.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  98. Stephens, John D. 1979. The Transition from Capitalism to Socialism. Atlantic Highlands, NJ: Humanities Press.Google Scholar
  99. Svallfors, Stefan. 2010. Public attidtudes. In The Oxford Handbook of the Welfare State, eds. Francis G. Castles, Stephan Leibfried, Jane Lewis, Herbert Obinger, and Christopher Pierson, 241–251. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  100. Swank, Duane. 1988. The political economy of government domestic expenditure in the affluent democracies, 1960–1980. American Journal of Political Science 32: 1120–1150.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  101. Swank, Duane. 2001. Political institutions and welfare state restructuring. In The New Politics of the Welfare State, ed. Paul Pierson, 197–237. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  102. Swank, Duane. 2002. Global Capital, Political Institutions, and Policy Change in Developed Welfare States. New York: Cambridge University PressCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  103. Swank, Duane. 2006. Tax policy in an era of internationalization: Explaining the spread of neoliberalism. International Organization 60: 883–910.Google Scholar
  104. Swank, Duane. 2010. Globalization. In The Oxford Handbook of the Welfare State, eds. Francis G. Castles, Stephan Leibfried, Jane Lewis, Herbert Obinger, and Christopher Pierson, 318–332. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  105. Swank, Duane. 2011. Activating change? The political economy of active social policy in developed capitalist democracies. In Comparing European Workers Part B: Policies and Institutions (Research in the Sociology of Work, Volume 22), ed. David Brady, 9–51. Bingley, UK: Emerald Group Publishing.Google Scholar
  106. Swank, Duane, and Cathie Jo Martin. 2001. Employers and the welfare state. Comparative Political Studies 34: 889–923.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  107. Tsebelis, George. 1995. Decision making in political systems: veto players in presidentialism, parliamentarism, multicameralism and multipartyism. British Journal of Political Science 25: 289–325.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  108. Tsebelis, George. 2002. Veto Players. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
  109. Van Kersbergen, Kees. 1995. Social Capitalism: A Study of Christian Democracy and the Welfare State. New York: Routledge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  110. Wagschal, Uwe, and Georg Wenzelburger. 2008. Roads to success: budget consolidations in OECD countries. Journal of Public Policy 28: 309–39.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  111. Wagschal, Uwe and Georg Wenzelburger. 2012. When do governments consolidate? A quantitative analysis of 23 OECD countries (1980–2005). Journal of Comparative Policy Analysis 14: 45–71.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  112. Wilensky, Harold. 1981. Leftism, Catholicism, and democratic corporatism: The role of political parties in recent welfare state development. In The Development of Welfare States in Europe and America, eds. Peter Flora, and Arnold Heidenheimer, 345–382. New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction.Google Scholar
  113. Wilensky, Harold. 2002. Rich Democracies: Political Economy, Public Policy, and Performance. Berkeley: University of California Press.Google Scholar
  114. Wilensky, Harold. 2012. American Political Economy in Global Perspective. New York: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  115. Zehavi, Amos. 2012. Welfare state politics in privatization of delivery: Linking program constituencies to Left and Right. Comparative Political Studies 45: 194–219.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Fachmedien Wiesbaden 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  • Duane Swank
    • 1
  1. 1.MilwaukeeUSA

Personalised recommendations