During the  s, the Swedish welfare state was declared by some to be in a "crisis", due to both financial strain and loss of political support. Others have argued that the spending cuts and reforms undertaken during this period did slow down the previous increase in social spending, but left the system basically intact. The main argument put forward in this article is that the Swedish welfare state has been and is still undergoing a transforming process whereby it risks losing one of its main characteristics, namely the belief in and institutional support for social egalitarianism. During the  s, the public welfare service sector opened up to competing private actors. As a result, the share of private provision grew, both within the health-care and primary education systems as well as within social service provision. This resulted in a socially segregating dynamic, prompted by the introduction of "consumer choice". As will be shown in the article, the gradual privatization and market-orientation of the welfare services undermine previous Swedish notions of a "people's home", where uniform, high-quality services are provided by the state to all citizens, regardless of income, social background or cultural orientation.

No abstract

BackgroundA reform in 2010 in Swedish primary care made it possible for private primary care providers to establish themselves freely in the country. In the former, publicly planned system, location was strictly regulated by local authorities. The goal of the new reform was to increase access and quality of health care. Critical arguments were raised that the reform could have detrimental effects on equity if the new primary health care providers chose to establish foremost in socioeconomically prosperous areas.The aim of this study is to examine how the primary care choice reform has affected geographical equity by analysing patterns of establishment on the part of new private providers.MethodsThe basis of the design was to analyse socio-economic data on individuals who reside in the same electoral areas in which the 1411 primary health care centres in Sweden are established. Since the primary health care centres are located within 21 different county councils with different reimbursement schemes, we controlled for possible cluster effects utilizing generalized estimating equations modelling. The empirical material used in the analysis is a cross-sectional data set containing socio-economic data of the geographical areas in which all primary health care centres are established.ResultsWhen controlling for the effects of the county council regulation, primary health care centres established after the primary care choice reform were found to be located in areas with significantly fewer older adults living alone as well as fewer single parents – groups which generally have lower socio-economic status and high health care needs. However, no significant effects were observed for other socio-economic variables such as mean income, percentage of immigrants, education, unemployment, and children <5 years.ConclusionsThe primary care choice reform seems to have had some negative effects on geographical equity, even though these seem relatively minor.Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s12913-016-1259-z) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

The debate about the future of universal social programmes has been raging for years, both in social-democratic and in liberal welfare states. The objective of this article is to contribute to the literature on universality by analyzing the evolution of universal social programmes in two social-democratic and two liberal countries: Denmark, Sweden, Canada and the UK. This choice of countries provides the opportunity to investigate whether the principle and practice of universality has fared differently both within and between countries. The analysis focuses primarily on the national level while exploring three policy areas: pensions, healthcare and family policy, specifically child benefits and day care. The main conclusion of our comparative analysis is clear: among our two liberal and two social-democratic countries, the institutional strength of universality varies greatly from one policy area and one country to another. Considering this, there is no such a thing as a universal decline of universality.

BackgroundSwedish nursing home care has undergone a transformation, where the previous virtual public monopoly on providing such services has been replaced by a system of mixed provision. This has led to a rapidly growing share of private actors, the majority of which are large, for-profit firms. In the wake of this development, concerns have been voiced regarding the implications for care quality. In this article, we investigate the relationship between ownership and care quality in nursing homes for the elderly by comparing quality levels between public, for-profit, and non-profit nursing home care providers. We also look at a special category of for-profit providers; private equity companies.MethodsThe source of data is a national survey conducted by the Swedish National Board of Health and Welfare in 2011 at 2710 nursing homes. Data from 14 quality indicators are analyzed, including structure and process measures such as staff levels, staff competence, resident participation, and screening for pressure ulcers, nutrition status, and risk of falling. The main statistical method employed is multiple OLS regression analysis. We differentiate in the analysis between structural and processual quality measures.ResultsThe results indicate that public nursing homes have higher quality than privately operated homes with regard to two structural quality measures: staffing levels and individual accommodation. Privately operated nursing homes, on the other hand, tend to score higher on process-based quality indicators such as medication review and screening for falls and malnutrition. No significant differences were found between different ownership categories of privately operated nursing homes.ConclusionsOwnership does appear to be related to quality outcomes in Swedish nursing home care, but the results are mixed and inconclusive. That staffing levels, which has been regarded as a key quality indicator in previous research, are higher in publicly operated homes than private is consistent with earlier findings. The fact that privately operated homes, including those operated by for-profit companies, had higher processual quality is more unexpected, given previous research. Finally, no significant quality differences were found between private ownership types, i.e. for-profit, non-profit, and private equity companies, which indicates that profit motives are less important for determining quality in Swedish nursing home care than in other countries where similar studies have been carried out.