British Politics and the Labour Question, 1868–1990

Powell, David

doi:10.1007/978-1-349-22464-7

Cited by 6 publications

(3 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The government introduced the Employment and Training Programme in 1988, which linked the receipt of unemployment benefits for young people with training. From 1991 on, very long-term unemployed people had to attend mandatory job courses, and in 1994 the sanctions for jobseekers in cases of non-compliance were doubled in connection to a strategy called the 'stricter benefit regime' (King 1992;Powell 1992;Trickey and Walker 2000;Clasen 2002;Finn 2003: 711;Van Reenen 2003: 6). The next important step toward strengthening the 'welfare-to-work' approach in the UK was the introduction of the Jobseeker's Allowance (JSA) by the conservative government in 1996.…”

Section: The United Kingdommentioning

confidence: 98%

New Governance in European Social Policy

Büchs

2007

103

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: The United Kingdommentioning

confidence: 98%

New Governance in European Social Policy

Büchs

2007

103

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…These cultural predispositions may have their roots in reformed forms of Protestantism, which underscore individual responsibility, prudence, and skepticism toward authority and the state (Manow 2004; Van Kersbergen and Manow 2010). Even in the case of the United Kingdom, which in some foundational works stands out as a mixed case of the liberal type (Esping‐Andersen 1990:87), left‐liberalism was infused with religious practicality and a mission orientation during the welfare state's foundational years (Manow 2004; Powell 1992). Thus, it is possible that underlying attitudes toward work and welfare could have their origins in religion.…”

Section: Welfare Regime Types and Their Religious Foundationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Religious Foundations of Welfare, Social Inclusion, and Anti‐Immigrant Attitudes in Europe

Ponce,

Marquart‐Pyatt

2023

Scientific Study of Religion

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper unites disparate literature to test the influence of religious belonging and behavior characteristics along with secular welfare boundaries on anti‐immigrant attitudes. We suggest that welfare states varied in their religious foundations during the transition from religious‐based solidarity to modern state‐based solidarity and formulate a novel analytical framework to hypothesize effects across individuals and welfare regime types. Using eight waves of the European Social Survey (2002–16), we find that religious effects are strongest in welfare states with the most religious foundations, the Southern European welfare states, and weak in the universalist welfare states, which lacked historical state‐church tensions. Other welfare types show a mix of religious effects, with some challenging expectations. Furthermore, Christian majority membership is often associated with heightened anti‐immigrant attitudes, most consistently in contrast to the non‐Christian minority. For welfare‐based forms of inclusion, we find consistent institutional trust effects and two competing logics for secular boundaries: a propensity for welfare chauvinism and a culture of inclusion.

show abstract

“…They were so strong that they were able to deadlock any negotiation with the government until all their requests were secured. Indeed, the excessive power of the unions featured prominently in the Conservative program and was one of the main arguments put forward by the Tories to support their requests for a demise of peak-level concertation as well as unions' reform (Dale, 2000;Powell, 1992). However, in so doing, they reversed a long-standing tradition that considered policy concertation a crucial tool to keep society stable and united (Letwin, 1992;Thomsen, 1996).…”

Section: Great Britain: the Shift To Neoliberal Orthodoxymentioning

confidence: 99%

Policy Concertation in Europe

Baccaro

Simoni

2007

Comparative Political Studies

102

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper focuses on the European governments' decision to involve unions and employers in the design and implementation of public policy. Based on new measures of the phenomenon, it argues that between 1974 and 2004 no convergence on a pluralist model of policy formation is visible. The paper then uses these measures to identify and analyze the clearest cases of adoption or demise of concertation, namely the contrasting responses of the British and Irish governments to wage policy, and of the Austrian and Italian governments to pension reform. It argues that governments are willing to share their policy-making prerogatives when they are politically weak, and when unions, while still representing a credible threat to policy implementation, have been declining in the recent past. Additionally, a combination of partisanship and policy learning reinforces the push for change. 1 Policy Concertation in Europe: Understanding Government ChoiceThe literature on corporatism and policy concertation has shown a tendency to conflate a number of questions that it would be best to keep separate: (1) Why are governments willing (or unwilling in some cases) to share their policy making prerogatives with trade unions and employer associations, not just informally, by incorporating their inputs, but, formally, by setting up a bargaining table and engaging in negotiations with them over the content of public policy? Despite its massive size, most of the literature has focused so far on questions two and four, while it has been much less vocal on the other two. Possibly due to an implicit assumption of corporatist convergence (see Streeck, 2004), much of the neo-corporatist literature of the 1970s and 1980s did not systematically distinguish between the reasons motivating governments and those motivating unions and employers. Policy concertation was assumed to be a functional necessity of advanced societies (Schmitter, 1974;Lehmbruch, 1979), such that all governments would, sooner or later, want to engage in it. From this vantage point, the interesting questions were not those about the conditions in which certain governments (and not others) would develop a demand for policy concertation, but those about the conditions in which policy concertation would be supplied by the interest group system (Schmitter and Lehmbruch, 1979;Lehmbruch and Schmitter, 1982;Berger, 1981;Goldthorpe, 1984;Molina and Rhodes 2002).Another strand of research (by now probably larger than the former) dealt with the 2 macroeconomic consequences of policy concertation, especially centralized or coordinated collective bargaining (for recent analyses, see Garrett, 1998;Iversen, 1999;Traxler et al., 2001;Kenworthy, 2003;Traxler, 2003;Mares, 2006).In this paper we are interested in question number one, which we regard as analytically prior to the others. Governments, accountable to national parliaments (or directly to the electorate), are the sole institutions with a clear mandate to take binding decisions. The constitutional standing and democratic legit...

show abstract

British Politics and the Labour Question, 1868–1990

Cited by 6 publications

References 0 publications

New Governance in European Social Policy

New Governance in European Social Policy

The Religious Foundations of Welfare, Social Inclusion, and Anti‐Immigrant Attitudes in Europe

Policy Concertation in Europe

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About