1 / 24

Olli Kangas

Strenghts and weaknesses of the Nordic and Continental Welfare State Models: What can We Learn from Each Other?. Olli Kangas Danish National Institute of Social Research & Department of Social Policy, University of Turku. Content of the presentation. important values and importance of values

seth-bright
Download Presentation

Olli Kangas

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript


  1. Strenghts and weaknesses of the Nordic and Continental Welfare State Models:What can We Learn from Each Other? Olli Kangas Danish National Institute of Social Research & Department of Social Policy, University of Turku

  2. Content of the presentation • important values and importance of values • social insurance • labour markets • social services • poverty, social exclusion

  3. ein einzig Volk von Brüdern? • ”Now let us take the oath of this new federation. We will become a single land of brothers, nor shall we part in danger or distress.” • Friedrich Schiller (1759-1805): Wilhelm Tell • EU: a federation of brothers / sisters? • members may have common interests but • what about common values / solidarity?

  4. The Nordics trust on their national institutions (parties, parliament, government, police and justice system) but distrust on the EU • Italians trust on EU but not on their national institutions • Estonians trust neither on national nor EU institutions

  5. there are big differences in general trust • Nordics high-trust societies • Belgians trust in their welfare state system • how to increase trust in EU in the Nordics? • how to increase trust in national institutions in the other countries? • how to increase trust in other nations within the EU?

  6. Workers’ insurance versus national insurance • a long term convergence between models • in the Nordics income-relatedness has taken over and unconditional benefits have lost relatively • in the Continental model (notably so in Belgium) basic security has been improved • consequently, differences in financing has been diminished • employees’contributions have been introduced in the Nordics • Fin/Swe vs. Den • is it the level of social security contributions or the structure of financing or the structure of labour market & welfare state that is important for employment? • the latter

  7. Central European corporatism:a hindrance for reforms? • participation of social partners makes the system robust • not directly open for political manipulation • high degree of legitimacy ”our system” • harder to change, if needed, than politically administred systems • In Sweden and Finland a number of important reforms were carried through; in Denmark welfare comission is preparing its proposals

  8. the Finnish example

  9. the Nordic have been able to cut public debts (that are among the lowest in OECD hemisphere) • budgets are in surplus • Economic growth has been pretty good since the mid 1990s (in Fin & Nor extremely good) • Unemployment rates are low (Den, Nor, Swe) • Employment rates are highest in the world • female lf-participation due to the public sector

  10. Maternal employment rates by the age of youngest child 2002 (OECD)

  11. Probability not to be employed after care-taking period (ECHP / Koistinen 2005)

  12. Some Danish lessons • high wages • financed via taxes and SOCIAL security contributions • easy to dismiss, easy to get social security • high employment mobility • 30% of employees change their jobs annually! • effects of globalization may be more severe e.g. in Fin & Swe than in Den

  13. How to finance social services? • social insurance vs. tax financing • user fees vs. tax financing • problems in tax financing • tax levels are high • EU sets limits for the Nordics to use previously proven devices • discrepancy between risk pool and financial pool • User fees • how to guarantee access to the poorest sections • income-tested user fees • pros & cons

  14. Rowntree's poverty cycle in York 1899 and 2000's cycle in Continental Europe / Scandinavia and the United States and the United Kingdom.

  15. third sector as a provider of social services • traditionally in C-E the 3rd sector has been important • it has played a role in the Nordics, too • state-subsidized • EU directives on competition hollow up the possiblities of the 3rd sector that bifurgates into the private for-profit systems or into the public sector • private legislation penetrates into the social legislation • EU • municipal tenders (subject to law suits) • common-law takes over the codified law?

  16. the old are not poor and the poor are not old; problem of social exclusion: youth and immigrants

  17. The Belgian tax experiment • the dilemma between decent income from work and too high wage levels for unqualified labor • in the US also analfabetics get job • how to avoid the working but poor situation • the experiences from the Belgian experiments?

  18. Countries Problem solving Mathematics Reading Science SWE 22 17 18 15 DEN 12 12 13 20 FIN 6 7 1 4 1 8 1 6 BEL GER 19 20 12 16 FRA 17 16 21 5 AUS 9 8 7 9 CAN 10 9 8 8 IRE 18 25 6 17 UK 19 18 10 7 USA 28 28 15 21 KOR 2 5 2 4 JAP 3 3 19 12 PISA: pupils’ acievement results

  19. COGNITIVE PERFORMANCE AMONG 15-YEAR OLDS. USA U.K. GER NL DEN NOR SWE Constant 421.34*** 444.86*** 375.97*** 465.29*** 388.85*** 406.06*** 433.92*** Gender 18.68*** 15.53*** 25.57*** 10.04*** 20.24*** 27.51*** 27.51*** Immigrant - 15.98* - 14.01** -40-92*** -30.87*** -25.48*** -35.25*** -35.66*** Father Education 3.57* .76 7.52*** .58 8.19*** 2.98* - .27 Mother educ: Secondary 13.79* 10.31 43.61*** 27.24*** 37.87*** 30.83*** 20.59* Mother educ: Tertiary 13.88* 15.42* 50.01*** 22.34*** 52.72*** 20.44** 17.07* Socio-economic Level 1.10*** 1.17*** .90*** .92*** .50*** 1.01*** 1.06*** Cultural Capital 34.21*** 40.65*** 36.39*** 35.82*** 34.17*** 38.73*** 30.84*** Mother part-time 16.84** 12.92*** 5.00 9.55** 8.24 4.76 5.05 Mother full-time - 8.91* 5.99** - 3.09 -10.66* - .77 2.91 7.41 R2 .182 .200 .247 .230 .199 .170 .170 N 2571 7458 3933 2169 3933 3470 3836 Espinng-Andersen 2005

  20. Challenges for educational systems • those countries with good performance display low social inheritance • problems of education / segregation in Den & Swe • In Europe education more evenly distributed than e.g. in the U.S. • but top-education more succesfull in the US

  21. What can we learn from each other? • to be small and clever • national strategies • the common European welfare project? • what are the smallest denominators for the European project?

More Related