Skip to main content

Conclusion: Revisiting the Public-Private Dichotomy

  • Chapter
Public and Private Social Policy
  • 194 Accesses

Abstract

The public-private dichotomy is a controversial analytical device used by experts and policymakers to designate responsibilities for social policy. It is prominently referred to in debates over the futures of both health care and pension policies. This volume shows that lines separating public from private social provisions can be hard to draw, not only in the United States but in other countries as well. The volume calls into question the utility of a strict analytical separation between public and private policies while suggesting that its application to health and pension policies is problematic. This is true largely because, due to major institutional and political variations, the public-private dichotomy takes a different meaning from one country to another—or even from one policy area to another within the same country. Adopting a simplistic understanding of the public-private dichotomy is inappropriate because it may thwart democratic efforts to reform and improve existing social policy systems by obscuring their inherent complexity.

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

Access this chapter

eBook
USD 16.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 16.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 54.99
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

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  • Béland, Daniel. 2007. “Ideas and Institutional Change in Social Security: Conversion, Layering, and Policy Drift.” Social Science Quarterly 88(1): 20–38.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brooks, Sarah M. 2002. “Social Protection and Economic Integration: The Politics of Pension Reform in an Era of Capital Mobility.” Comparative Political Studies 35(5): 491–525.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Esping-Andersen, Gøsta. 1990. The Three Worlds of Welfare Capitalism. Cambridge: Polity.

    Google Scholar 

  • Esping-Andersen, Gøsta. 1999. Social Foundations of Post-Industrial Economies. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Gran, Brian. 2003. “A Second Opinion.” International Journal of Health Services 33(2): 283–313.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hacker, Jacob S. 2002. The Divided Welfare State: The Battle over Public and Private Social Benefits in the United States. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Hacker, Jacob S. 2004. “Privatizing Risk without Privatizing the Welfare State: The Hidden Politics of Social Policy Retrenchment in the United States.” American Political Science Review 98(2): 243–60.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Howard, Christopher. 1997. The Hidden Welfare State. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jacobs, Alan M. and Steven M. Teles. 2007. “The Perils of Market Making: The Case of British Pension Reform.” In Marc Landy, Martin Levin, and Martin Shapiro (eds), Creating Competitive Markets: 157–83. Washington, DC: Brookings Institution Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Klein, Jennifer. 2003. For All These Rights: Business, Labor, and the Shaping of America’s Public-Private Welfare State. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Myles, John and Paul Pierson. 1997. “Friedman’s Revenge.” Politics and Society 25(4): 443–72.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Palier, Bruno and Giuliano Bonoli. 2000. “La montée en puissance des fonds de pension.” L’Année de la régulation 4: 71–112.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pierson, Paul. 1994. Dismantling the Welfare State? Reagan, Thatcher, and the Politics of Retrenchment. New York: Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Roberts, Andrew. 2005. “Pension Privatization in Eastern Europe and Beyond.” Paper Presented at the Annual Meeting of Research Committee 19 of the International Sociological Association.—September 8–10, 2005 (Chicago).

    Google Scholar 

  • Steinmo, Sven and Jon Watts. 1995. “It’s the Institutions, Stupid! Why Comprehensive National Insurance Always Fails in America.” Journal of Health Politics, Policy and Law 20(2): 329–72.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Streeck, Wolfgang and Kathleen Thelen. (eds). 2005. Beyond Continuity: Institutional Change in Advanced Political Economies. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Thelen, Kathleen. 2004. How Institutions Evolve: The Political Economy of Skills in Germany, Britain, the United States, and Japan. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Titmuss, Richard M. 1974. Social Policy: An Introduction. London: George Allen and Unwin.

    Google Scholar 

  • Trampusch, Christine. 2007. “Industrial Relations as a Source of Social Policy: A Typology of the Institutional Conditions for Industrial Agreements on Social Benefits.” Social Policy & Administration 41(3): 251–70.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Trampusch, Christine. 2008. The Privatization of Welfare States: Industrial Relations as a Source of Social Benefits (Project Description). Berne: University of Berne. Retreived on August 2, 2008 from http://www.ipw.unibe.ch/content/forschungsgruppen/prof_trampusch/index_eng.html

    Google Scholar 

  • Weyland, Kurt. 2007. Bounded Rationality and Policy Diffusion: Social Sector Reform in Latin America. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • White House. 2005. “Strengthening Social Security for the 21st Century.” February 2005.

    Google Scholar 

  • World Bank. 1994. Averting the Old Age Crisis: Policies to Protect the Old and Promote Growth. Washington, DC: The World Bank.

    Book  Google Scholar 

Download references

Authors

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Copyright information

© 2008 Brian Gran and Daniel Béland

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Gran, B., Béland, D. (2008). Conclusion: Revisiting the Public-Private Dichotomy. In: Béland, D., Gran, B. (eds) Public and Private Social Policy. Palgrave Macmillan, London. https://doi.org/10.1057/9780230228771_13

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics