Advertisement

Welfare, Clientelism, and Inequality: Malaysia and Thailand, Indonesia and the Philippines

  • Jonathan D London
Chapter
Part of the Studies in the Political Economy of Public Policy book series (PEPP)

Abstract

This chapter seeks to illuminate determinants of welfare and inequality in marketizing Southeast Asia by examining the interdependent relations among political and economic institutions in four countries: Malaysia and Thailand, Indonesia and The Philippines. Within each, we treat politics and economy (domination and accumulation) as inseparable and interwoven aspects of social life. We examine how national and subnational interests within these countries have responded to and operated within the context of marketization and the implications of this with respect to economic restructuring, the selection and conduct of social policies, and the variegated and mediated effects of these on welfare, inequality, and livelihoods. Overall, this chapter makes the case that while the presence or formal democratic institutions generates distinctive logics of rule, clientelist and patrimonial relations and institutions within weak formal democratic institutions typically short circuit potentially ‘progressive effects’ of democratization while generating opportunities for predatory behaviors that generate adverse outcomes for those without requisite income, wealth, or status.

References

  1. Abidin, Mahani Zainal. “Competitive Industrialization with Natural Resource Abundance: Malaysia.” In Resource Abundance and Economic Development, edited by R. M. Auty, 147–164. Oxford and New York: Oxford Univeristy Press, 2002.Google Scholar
  2. Amir, Sulfikar. “Symbolic Power in a Technocratic Regime: The Reign of BJ Habibie in New Order Indonesia.” SOJOURN: Journal of Social Issues in Southeast Asia, 22 (2007): 83–106.Google Scholar
  3. Asher, Mukul G. “Malaysia: Pension System Overview and Reform Directions.” In Pension Systems and Old-Age Income Support in East and Southeast Asia: Overview and Reform Directions, edited by Donghyun Park, 101–123. London and New York: Routledge and ADB, 2011.Google Scholar
  4. Aspinall, Edward. “A Nation in Fragments: Patronage and Neoliberalism in Contemporary Indonesia.” Critical Asian Studies, 45 (2013): 27–54.Google Scholar
  5. ———. “Health Care and Democratization in Indonesia,” Democratization, 21 (2014): 1–21.Google Scholar
  6. Barraclough, S. “Women and Tobacco in Indonesia.” Tobacco Control 8, no. 3 (1999): 327–332.Google Scholar
  7. Bello, Walden F. “The Philippines: The Making of a Neo-Classical Tragedy.” In Politics and Markets in the Wake of the Asian Crisis, edited by Mark Beeson, Kanishka Jayasuriya, Hyuk-Rae Kim, and Richard Robison, 238–258. London and New York: Routledge, 2000.Google Scholar
  8. ———. “Neoliberalism as Hegemonic Ideology in the Philippines.” Transnational Institute, October 27, 2009. https://www.tni.org/en/article/neoliberalism-hegemonic-ideology-philippines, accessed May 1, 2017.
  9. Bello, Walden F., Marissa De Guzman, Mary Lou Malig, and Herbert Docena. The Anti-development State: The Political Economy of Permanent Crisis in the Philippines. London: Zed Books, 2005.Google Scholar
  10. Berenschot, Ward. “Clientelism, Trust Networks, and India’s Identity Politics: Conveying Closeness in Gujarat.” Critical Asian Studies, 47 (2015): 24–43.Google Scholar
  11. Bhattacharyya, Sambit, and Budy P. Resosudarmo. “Growth, Growth Accelerations, and the Poor: Lessons from Indonesia.” World Development, 66 (2015): 154–165.Google Scholar
  12. Brinkerhoff, Derick W., and Anna Wetterberg. “Performance-Based Public Management Reforms: Experience and Emerging Lessons from Service Delivery Improvement in Indonesia.” International Review of Administration Sciences, 79 (September 2013): 433–457.Google Scholar
  13. Brustad, Orin D. “Thailand: Pension System Overview and Reform Directions” In Pension Systems and Old-Age Income Support in East and Southeast Asia, edited by Donghyun Park, 176–202. Abingdon and New York: Routledge and ADB, 2011176-202.Google Scholar
  14. Capoccia, Giovanni, and R. Daniel Kelemen. “The Study of Critical Junctures: Theory, Narrative, and Counterfactuals in Historical Institutionalism.” World Politics, 59 (April 2007): 341–369.Google Scholar
  15. Caraher, Kevin. “Issues in Incomes Provision for the Elderly in Malaysia.” Paper Presented at the International Research Conference on Social Security, “Social Security in the Global Village,” Helsinki, 25–27 September 2000.Google Scholar
  16. Case, William. “Electoral Authoritarianism in Malaysia: Trajectory Shift.” The Pacific Review, 22 (2009): 311–333.Google Scholar
  17. Chua, Hong Teck, and Julius Chee Ho Cheah. “Financing Universal Coverage in Malaysia: A Case Study.” BMC Public Health, 12 (2012): S7. http://www.biomedicentral.com/1471–2458/12/S1/S7, accessed April 7, 2017.
  18. Cook, Sarah, and Jonathan Pincus. “Poverty, Inequality and Social Protection in Southeast Asia: An Introduction,” Journal of Southeast Asian Economics, 31 (2014): 1–17.Google Scholar
  19. Coxhead, Ian, and Sisira Jayasuriya. “Development Strategy and Trade Liberalization: Implications for Poverty and Environment in the Philippines.” Environment and Development Economics, 9 (2004): 613–644.Google Scholar
  20. Crouch, Harold. “Patrimonialism and Military Rule in Indonesia.” World Politics, 31 (1979): 571–587.Google Scholar
  21. Cuesta, José, and Lucia Madrigal. “Equity in Education Expenditure in Thailand.” Development Policy Review, 32 (February 2014): 239–258.Google Scholar
  22. Eichengreen, Barry, Donghyun Park, and Kwanho Shin. “When Fast-Growing Economics Slow Down: International Evidence and Implications for China.” Asian Economic Papers, 11 (Spring 2012): 42–87.Google Scholar
  23. Emmerson, Donald K. “The Bureaucracy in Political Context: Weakness in Strength.” Political Power and Communications in Indonesia, edited by Karl D. Jackson and Lucian W. Pye, 82–136. Berkeley and Los Angeles: University of California Press, 1978.Google Scholar
  24. ———. “Understanding the New Order: Bureaucratic Pluralism in Indonesia.” Asian Survey, 23 (1983): 1220–1241.Google Scholar
  25. Fernandez, Lusia, and Rashiel Velarde. “Who Benefits from Social Assistance in the Philippines?: Evidence from the Latest National Household Surveys.” The Philippine Social Protection Note No. 4. World Bank and AusAid, 2012. http://www.worldbank.org.ph, accessed April 1, 2017.
  26. Flaaen, Aaron, Syed Ejaz Ghani, and Saurabh Mishra. “How to Avoid Middle Income Traps? Evidence from Malaysia.” World Bank Policy Research Working Paper No. 6427. The World Bank, April 2013.Google Scholar
  27. Ford, Michele, and Lenore Lyons, eds. Men and Masculinities in Southeast Asia. London and New York: Routledge, 2012.Google Scholar
  28. Fossati, Diego. “Beyond “Good Governance”: The Multi-level Politics of Health Insurance for the Poor in Indonesia.” World Development, 87 (2016): 291–306.Google Scholar
  29. Gera, Weena. “The Politics of Ethnic Representation in Philippine Bureaucracy.” Ethnic and Racial Studies, 39 (2016): 858–877.Google Scholar
  30. Guérard, Yves. “Indonesia: Pension System Overview and Reform Directions.” In Pension Systems and Old-Age Income Support in East and Southeast Asia, edited by Donghyun Park, 49–75. Abingdon and New York: Routledge and ADB, 2011.Google Scholar
  31. Hadiz, Vedi R. “The Rise of Neo-Third Worldism? The Indonesian Trajectory and the Consolidation of Illiberal Democracy.” Third World Quarterly, 25 (2004): 55–71.Google Scholar
  32. Hadiz, Vedi, and Richard Robison. “Neo-liberal Reforms and Illiberal Consolidations: The Indonesian Paradox.” The Journal of Development Studies 41, no. 2 (2005): 220–241.Google Scholar
  33. ———. “The Political Economy of Oligarchy and the Reorganization of Power in Indonesia.” Indonesia, 96 (2013): 35–57.Google Scholar
  34. Haggard, Stephen, and Robert R. Kaufman. Development, Democracy, and Welfare States: Latin America, East Asia, and Eastern Europe. Princeton and Oxford: Princeton University Press, 2008.Google Scholar
  35. Hewison, Kevin. “Weber, Marx and Contemporary Thailand.” TRaNS: Trans-Regional and-National Studies of Southeast Asia, 1 (2013): 177–198.Google Scholar
  36. ———. “Considerations on Inequality and Politics in Thailand.” Demoratization, 21 (2014): 846–866.Google Scholar
  37. Hewison, Kevin, and Kengkij Kitirianglarp. “Thai-Style Democracy.” In Saying the Unsayable: Monarchy and Democracy in Thailand, edited by Søren Ivarsson and Lotte Isager, 179–220. Copenhagen: NIAS Press, 2010.Google Scholar
  38. Horowitz, Donald L. Ethnic Groups in Conflict, 2nd edition. Berkeley and Los Angeles: Univeristy of California Press, 2000.Google Scholar
  39. Hutchcroft, Paul D. Booty Capitalism: The Politics of Banking in the Philippines. Ithaca and London: Cornell University Press, 1998.Google Scholar
  40. ———. “Understanding ‘Source’ and ‘Purpose’ in Processes of Democratic Change: Insights from the Philippines and Thailand.” TRaNS: Trans-Regional and -National Studies of Southeast Asia, 1 (2013): 145–175.Google Scholar
  41. Hutchinson, Jane. “The ‘Disallowed’ Political Participation of Manila’s Urban Poor.” Democratization 14, no. 5 (2007): 853–72.Google Scholar
  42. Jarvis, Darryl S. L. “The State and Development in Malaysia: Race, Class and Markets,” In Asia After the Developmental State: Disembedding Autonomy, edited by Darryl S. L. Jarvis and Toby Carroll, 201–236. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2017.Google Scholar
  43. Jomo, K. S. “The New Economic Policy and Interethnic Relations in Malaysia,” Identities, Conflict and Cohesion Programme Paper Number 7, Geneva: United Nations Research Institute for Social Development, 2004.Google Scholar
  44. ———. “Growth with Equity in East Asia?.” DESA Working Paper No. 33. Department of Economic and Social Affairs (DESA), United Nations, 2006.Google Scholar
  45. Kanbur, Ravi, and Juzhong Zhuang. “Urbanization and Inequality in Asia.” Asian Development Review, 30 (March 2013): 131–147.Google Scholar
  46. Kharas, Homi, and Surjit Bhalla. “Growth and Equity in Malaysia: Policies and Consequences.” In Malaysia’s Economic Vision: Issues and Challenges, edited by The Hoe Yoke and Goh Kim Leng. Petaling Jaya: Pelanduk Publications, 1992.Google Scholar
  47. Kristiansen, Stein, and Purwo Santoso. “Surviving Decentralization?: Impacts of Regional Autonomy on Health Service Provision in Indonesia.” Health Policy, 77 (2006): 247–259.Google Scholar
  48. Kristiansen, Stein, and Pratikno. “Decentralising Education in Indonesia.” International Journal of Educational Development, 26 (2006): 513–531.Google Scholar
  49. Kwon, Huck-Ju, and Woorim Kim. “The Evolution of Cash Transfers in Indonesia: Policy Transfer and National Adaptation.” Paper Presented at the Annual RC 19 Conference at the University of Bath, “Frontiers of Inequality, Social Policy and Welfare,” 26–28 August 2015.Google Scholar
  50. Lande, Carl H. “The Philippine Political Party System.” Journal of Southeast Asian History, 8 (1967): 19–39.Google Scholar
  51. Lane, Max R. Decentralization and Its Discontents: An Essay on Class, Political Agency and National Perspective in Indonesian Politics. Singapore: Institute of Southeast Asian Studies, 2014.Google Scholar
  52. Larsson, Tomas. “The Strong and the Weak: Ups and Downs of State Capacity in Southeast Asia.” Asian Politics & Policy, 5 (2013): 337–358.Google Scholar
  53. Maharani, Asri, Devi Femina, Gindo Tampubolon. “Decentralization in Indonesia: Lessons from Cost Recovery Rate of District Hospitals.” Health Policy Plan 30 (2015): 718–727.Google Scholar
  54. Markussen, Thomas. “Property Rights, Productivity, and Common Property Resources: Insights from Rural Cambodia.” World Development, 36 (2008): 2277–2296.Google Scholar
  55. McCoy, Alfred W. An Anarchy of Families: State and Family in the Philippines. Madison, WI: University of Wisconsin Press, 2009.Google Scholar
  56. McLeod, Ross H. “Soeharto’s Indonesia: A Better Class of Corruption.” Agenda: A Journal of Policy Analysis and Reform, 7 (2000): 99–112.Google Scholar
  57. Mohd, Saidatulakmal. “Social Protection in Malaysia.” Paper for Arab Forum on Social Policy, UN Economic and Social Commission for Western Asia. Beirut, 28–29 October 2009.Google Scholar
  58. Montinola, Gabriella. “Change and Continuity in a Limited Access Order: The Philippines.” In The Shadow of Violence: Politics, Economics and the Problems of Development, edited by Douglass C. North, John Wallis, and Barry Weingast, and Steven Webb, 149–197. New York: Cambridte Univeristy Press, 2012.Google Scholar
  59. Osada, Hiroshi. “Trade Liberalization and FDI Incentives in Indonesia: The Impact on Industrial Productivity.” The Eeveloping Economies, 32 (1994): 479–491.Google Scholar
  60. Pierson, Paul, and Theda Skocpol. “Historical Institutionalism in Contemporary Political Science.” In Political Science: State of the Discipline, edited by I. Katznelson and H.V. Milner, 693–721. New York: W. W. Norton, 2002.Google Scholar
  61. Prashad, Vijay. The Poorer Nations: A Possible History of the Global South. London and New York: Verso, 2013.Google Scholar
  62. Quimpo, Nathan Gilbert. “Oligarchic Patrimonialism, Bossism, Electoral Clientelism, and Contested Democracy in the Philippines.” Comparative Politics, 37 (2005): 229–250.Google Scholar
  63. Ramasamy, Rajakrishan. “Racial Inequality and Social Reconstruction in Malaysia.” Journal of Asian and African Studies, 28 (1993): 217–229.Google Scholar
  64. Ramesh, Mishra. Social Policy in East and Southeast Asia: Education, Health, Housing and Income Maintenance. London: Routledge, 2004.Google Scholar
  65. Ramesh, M. “Healthcare Reforms in Thailand: Rethinking Conventional Wisdom.” In Transforming Asian Governance, edited by M. Ramesh and Scott Fritzen, 154–167. London: Routledge, 2009.Google Scholar
  66. ———. “Social Protection in Indonesia and the Philippines: Work in Progress,” Journal of Southeast Asian Economics, 31 (2014): 40–56.Google Scholar
  67. Ramesh, M., and Xun Wu. “Realigning Public and Private Health Care in Southeast Asia.” The Pacific Review, 21 (2008): 171–187.Google Scholar
  68. Rao, V. V. Bhanoji. “East Asian Economies: Trends in Poverty and Income Inequality.” Economic and Political Weekly, 34 (May 1999): 1029–1039.Google Scholar
  69. Raynolds, Christopher. “A Conceptual Model of Global Business Growth in Southeast Asia.” Journal of the Asia Pacific Economy, 6 (2001): 76–98.Google Scholar
  70. Robison, Richard. Indonesia: The Rise of Capital. Sydney: Allen and Unwin, 1986.Google Scholar
  71. ———. “Authoritarian States, Capital-Owning Classes, and the Politics of Newly Industrializing Countries: The Case of Indonesia.” World Politics, 41 (1988): 52–74.Google Scholar
  72. Rosser, Andrew. “Towards a Political Economy of Human Rights Violations in Post-New Order Indonesia.” Journal of Contemporary Asia, 43 (2013): 243–256.Google Scholar
  73. Schipke, Alfred, ed. Frontier and Developing Asia: The Next Generation of Emerging Markets. Washington, DC: The International Monetary Fund (IMF), 2015.Google Scholar
  74. Scoufias, Emmanuel, Ambar Narayan, Basab Dasgupta, and Kai Kaiser. “Electoral Accountability, Fiscal Decentralization and Service Delivery in Indonesia.” World Bank Policy Research Working Paper No. 5614. The World Bank, March 2011.Google Scholar
  75. Shari, Ishak. “Globalisation and Economic Insecurity: A Need for a New Social Policy in Malaysia.” Asian Journal of Social Science, 31 (2003): 251–270.Google Scholar
  76. Shin‚ Jae Hyeok. “Voter Demands for Patronage: Evidence from Indonesia.” Journal of East Asian Studies 15, no. 1 (2015): 127–151.Google Scholar
  77. Sidel, John T. “Philippine Politics in Town, District, and Province: Bossism in Cavite and Cebu.” Journal of Asian Studies, 56 (1997): 947–966.Google Scholar
  78. Sumarto, Sudarno, and Asep Suryahadi. “Indonesia’s Experience with Social Safety Nets: Lessons Learned and Future Prospects,” In Towards Asia’s Sustainable Development: The Role of Social Protection, edited by the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD), 155–188. Paris: OECD, 2002.Google Scholar
  79. Swamy, Arun Ranga. “Can Social Protection Weaken Clientelism?: Considering Conditional Cash Transfers as Political Reform in the Philippines.” Journal of Current Southeast Asian Affairs, 35 (2016): 59–90.Google Scholar
  80. Thompson, Mark R. “The Moral Economy of Electoralism and the Rise of Populism in the Philippines and Thailand.” Journal of Developing Societies, 32 (2016): 246–269.Google Scholar
  81. Thurbon, Elizabeth. Developmental Mindset: The Revival of Financial Activism in South Korea. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press, 2016.Google Scholar
  82. Valenzuela, Maria Rebecca, Wing-Keung Wong, and Zhu Zhen Zhen. “Income and Consumption Inequality in the Philippines: A Stochastic Dominance Analysis of Household Unit Records.” ADBI Working Paper Series, No. 662. Tokyo: Asian Development Bank Institute, 2017.Google Scholar
  83. van Klinken, Gerry, and Ward Berenschot. In Search of Middle Indonesia: Middle Classes in Provincial Towns. Leiden: Brill, 2014.Google Scholar
  84. Vu, Tuong. “State Formation and the Origins of Developmental States in South Korea and Indonesia.” Studies in Comparative International Development 41, no. 4 (2007): 27–56.Google Scholar
  85. Wade, Geoff. The Origins and Evolution of Ethnocracy in Malaysia. Asia Research Institute, National University of Singapore, 2009.Google Scholar
  86. Walker, Andrew. “The Rural Constitution and the Everyday Politics of Elections in Northern Thailand.” Journal of Contemporary Asia 38, no. 1 (2008): 84–105.Google Scholar
  87. Welander, Anna, Carl Hampus Lyttkens, and Therese Nilsson. “Globalization, Democracy, and Child Health in Developing Countries.” Social Science & Medicine 136–137 (July 2015): 52–63.Google Scholar
  88. Wibisono, Bambang Hari. “The Slow and Chaotic Cities of Indonesia: A Study of Urban Morphology, Crowding and Inefficiencies in a Developing Country.” Spaces & Flows: An International Journal of Urban & Extra Urban Studies 1, no. 4 (2011).Google Scholar
  89. Wilson, Ian. “Morality Racketeering: Vigilantism and Populist Islamic Militancy in Indonesia.” In Between Dissent and Power: The Transformations of Islamic Politics in the Middle East and Asia, edited by Khoo Boo Teik, Vedi R. Hadiz, and Yoshihiro Nakanishi, 248–274. London and New York: Palgrave Macmillan, 2014.Google Scholar
  90. Winters, Jeffrey A. Oligarchy. Hoboken, NJ: Wiley, 2011.Google Scholar
  91. World Bank. Resilience, Equity, and Opportunity: The World Bank’s Social Protection and Labor Strategy 2012–2022. The World Bank, April 2012.Google Scholar
  92. ———. Malaysia Economic Monitor: The Quest for Productivity Growth. Kuala Lumpur: The World Bank, December 2016a. http://documents.worldbank.org/curated/en/773621481895271934/pdf/111103-WP-PUBLIC-MEM-15-December-2016-Final.pdf, accessed January 1, 2017.
  93. ———. Indonesia’s Rising Divide. Jakarta and Washington, DC: World Bank, 2016b.Google Scholar
  94. ———. Republic of the Philippines Review of the Social Security System: Considerations for Strengthening Sustainability and Coverage. Washington DC: The World Bank, 2016c. https://openknowledge.worldbank.org/handle/10986/24671, accessed January 1, 2017.
  95. Zin, Ragayah Haji Mat. “Malaysia: Towards a Social Protection System in an Advanced Equitable Society.” ASEAN Economic Bulletin, 29 (2012a): 197–217.Google Scholar
  96. ———. “Poverty Eradication and Income Distribution.” In Malaysia’s Development Challenges: Graduating from the Middle, edited by Hal Hill, Tham Siew Yean, and Ragayah Haji Mat Zin, 233–254. Abingdon and New York: Routledge, 2012b.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© The Author(s) 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Leiden UniversityLeidenThe Netherlands

Personalised recommendations