Since the Golden Age of the Welfare State ended, the male-breadwinner family model traditionally supported by conservative parties has been put under pressure. Familialism appears to be no longer attractive to a changing, more volatile constituency. By comparing four different European countries -namely, Denmark, Germany, Italy and the United Kingdom -this work investigates the evolution of the conservative parties' family policy positions in the post-Fordist era (1990s-2010s). The article has two goals. First, relying on a multidimensional theoretical framework where both social consumption and social investment policy instruments are at stake, it probes whether conservatives have switched their positions by backing de-familialism and thus the dual-earner family model. Second, it explains policy position change or stability over time and cross-country differences through a multicausal analytical framework.The content analysis of party manifestos shows that, in the post-Fordist era, the conservative parties have supported 'optional familialism', thus upholding both familiarizing and de-familiarizing measures. However, such positions are not static. In the 1990s, support for familialism was higher while, since the 2000s, there has been a constant, increasing backing of de-familialism. While the shift is evident for all the parties, cross-country differences remain. The comparative historical analysis has pointed out that the specific 'optional familialism' positions taken by the conservative parties over time result from the interaction of constituency-oriented, institutional, contextual and political factors.
The literature concerning active labour market policy (ALMP) in advanced economies during the post-Fordist Age is very informative. Nevertheless, surprisingly, we know little about ALMP politicization. By focusing on two archetypes of the Mediterranean countries, Italy and Spain, this study argues that the geographical distribution of social stratification affects ALMP politicization at the national level. Analysing the party manifestos of the main nationwide parties in the most recent electoral turnouts (2013–2019), this article shows that while the issue is highly politicized in Spain, it is almost completely neglected in Italy. We demonstrate that when outsiderness is concentrated in a delimited geographical area, as in Italy, it hinders ALMP politicization on a national level, since it becomes a regional issue. On the contrary, when it is spread across the whole national territory, as in Spain, ALMP politicization is more likely, since the issue is nationally relevant. However, the concentration of outsiders is not sufficient to trigger a change in the electoral competition dynamic and the intervening effect of policy legacy may enhance or constrain ALMP politicization.
The paper analyses the pension reforms implemented during and after the Great Crisis in Italy (2011-2019), and evaluates whether a recalibration of the pension system and, more in general, of the Italian welfare state was involved. More specifically, through a multidimensional theoretical framework, the article assesses the distributive implications of the pension reforms not only within the pension realm but also by considering their interplay with those reforms that occurred in three specific sectors-namely, the labour market, the family, and anti-poverty policies. Pension reforms therefore are analysed in terms of welfare reform packages, where old and new policy instruments from different social policy fields are included. The work shows that recalibrating the Italian welfare state is still very difficult.
The positions of the radical right parties (RRPs) concerning the family have generally been examined through a socio-cultural lens, but very little is known about their distributive preferences. Based on the theoretical insights from the literature on varieties of familialism and social investment, the article investigates the RRPs' family policy agenda in terms of preference and support for familialism and de-familialism. Furthermore, cross-country similarities and differences will be investigated through an explanatory framework that combines the literature on partisan politics with that on historical institutionalism. A content analysis of party manifestos has shown that the RRPs adopt a male-breadwinner policy agenda, mostly intended to please their authoritarian electorate. However, comparative empirical research has highlighted some cross-country differences. These are explained by considering the counter-feedback mechanism triggered by the policy legacies, which provides RRPs with divergent electoral incentives and disincentives to promote their family policy agenda.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.