Four Questions:

1. Wolfgang Merkel(WZB & Humboldt-University Berlin)Social Justice and the Welfare StateBratislava, March 2008Excelentná Univerzita

2. Four Questions: 1. Normative question: which guiding concepts? 2. Action question: which prefernces? 3. Empirical question: How just are welfare states? 4. Question of reform: Which logic of reform?

3. Friedman Hayek Libertarian Justice Communitarian Justice MacIntire Walzer Individual Community Against distribution Pro distribution Marxism Anarchism Marx Kropotkin Social-liberal Justice Rawls Sen

4. Libertarian concept of justice • Autonomy of individual as prerogative • Limits: few, need justification • Strictly against re-distribution • „Evolutionary Morality“ of market is superior • Meritocratic principle • Consequences: equality before the law, maximal freedom of contract, minimal social security • Marginal welfare state

5. Communitarian concept of justice • Priority of community • Imperative of cohesive communities • Social capital • Civil society instead of state • Pro re-distribution within the community • Social benefits: rather charitable, than rights • Small, homogenous communities

6. Social-liberal concept of justice(Rawls) • Individual as reference point • In favor of distribution • Against the „scandalous lottery“ of nature • 1. Justice principle: fundamental pol. rights must be equally distributed • 2. Justice principle: difference principle • inequality: if to the benefits of the least advantaged

7. Social democratic (?) concept of justice (Sen) • Starting point: individual • Substantial capabilities: poverty, health • Instrumental capabilities: abilities, empowerment, possibility to choose • Strong state: social investment, education, inclusion into the labour market • Life chances

8. Hierarchy of preferences Hierarchy: • Poverty prevention • Education • Inclusion into the labour market • Compensatory social benefits • Distribution of income and wealth • Generational justice • Gender justice • No mutual exclusion of preferences; scarcity is answered by hierarchy of preferences

9. Liberal anglo-saxon welfare state (USA, NZ, AUS (marginal) Conservative continental w. s. (FRA, BEL, GER, AUT: (christ. Dem/ conservat.) Social dem. Scandinavian w. s. (SWE, DEN, NOR (universalist model) Further models: Southern European model (mixed) Eastern European model (mixed) Welfare state models

10. Welfare states‘ capabilities of adaption and reform • Liberal WS: Adaptability to market; de-reg.of labour market; justice (-) economy (+); low financial requirements • Conservative WS: Lowest capabilities to reform; reg. labour markets; insider-outsider-problem; social insurance principle; strong focus on pensions; ageing electorate protects passive WS; justice (+-) economy (-); high financial requirements ; demohraphic problem • Social democratic WS: High capability to reform; partly de-reg. labour markets; „welfare to work“ combined with generous social services; conditioning; investment in human capital; high taxes; high financial requirements

11. Reform of the welfare state: learning from the North

13. Weighted Index of Social Justice in OECD-Countries (1990-2004)

14. Three logics of reform • Normative logic • Economic logic • Political logic

15. Normative logic • Fairness • A priori: life chances • Life chances & meritocratic principle • No structural discrimination: women, young/old, migrants Ranking: • Scandinav. WS • Continental WS • Liberal WS

16. Economic logic • Compatibility of economy and justice • Investment in human capital • Social capital increases productivity Ranking: 1.Scandinav. WS 2.Liberal WS 3. Continental WS (Arguments: ancillary labour costs; monetary transfers, discriminating: women, social classes, migrants)

17. Political logic • Majorities necessary • Middle class: critical mass, therefore: • Good quality of social benefits • Easy to access • Universal services (children, education, health) Ranking: • Scandinav. WS • Continental WS • Liberal WS