Reclaiming Welfare: The Politics of French Social Protection Reform

Bonoli, Giuliano; Palier, Bruno

doi:10.1080/13608749608539491

Cited by 61 publications

(18 citation statements)

References 5 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…France) could be defined as corporatist, systems of organized interest intermediation are generally important: ' across Europe, four out of five workers receive wages that reflect the outcome of a process of collective bargaining' (Golden, Wallerstein, and Lange 1999:204). In many cases, such as France, organized labour' s role in social insurance confers a degree of influence which it might not be able to achieve through wage bargaining systems (Bonoli and Palier 1996). These systems differ, however, in the extent to which the social partners are willing and able to negotiate over broad issues of relevance to the welfare state.…”

Section: The Conservative Regimementioning

confidence: 99%

Coping with Permanent Austerity: Welfare State Restructuring in Affluent Democracies

Pierson¹

2002

Revue Française de Sociologie

326

275

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

THE welfare states of the affluent democracies now stand at the centre of political discussion and social conflict. Analysts frequently portray these conflicts as fundamental struggles between supporters and opponents of the basic principles of the post-war social contract. They often emphasize that the politics of social policy are played out against the backdrop of a transformed global economy that has undercut the social and economic foundations of the welfare state. While containing elements of truth, such portrayals distort crucial characteristics of the contemporary politics of the welfare state. Changes in the global economy are important, but it is primarily social and economic transformations occurring within affluent democracies that produce pressures on mature welfare states. At the same time, support for the welfare state remains widespread almost everywhere. In most countries, there is little sign that the basic commitments to a mixed economy of welfare face a fundamental political challenge. Nor is there much evidence of convergence towards some neoliberal orthodoxy.Yet the chapters in this volume have also stressed that welfare states are undergoing quite significant changes. In this conclusion, I argue that the contemporary politics of the welfare state take shape against a backdrop of both intense pressures for austerity and enduring popularity. In this context, even strong supporters of the welfare state may come to acknowledge the need for adjustment, and even severe critics may need to accept the political realities of continuing popular enthusiasm for social provision. Thus, in most of the affluent democracies, the politics of social policy centre on the renegotiation, restructuring, and modernization of the terms of the postwar social contract rather than its dismantling. The crucial issue is whether particular national settings facilitate the emergence of such a centrist reform effort, and if so, on what terms.Thanks to Andrew Karch and Effi Tomaras for research assistance. I have benefited from many conversations with participants in the New Politics project and the European Forum at the EUI. I owe special thanks to John Myles and Ann Orloff, although I suppose it would be unfair to hold them responsible for the end result.

show abstract

Section: The Conservative Regimementioning

confidence: 99%

Coping with Permanent Austerity: Welfare State Restructuring in Affluent Democracies

Pierson¹

2002

Revue Française de Sociologie

326

275

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In 1945, the management of the social insurance system was given to the social partners to avoid bureaucratization and the subordination of social policy to purely budgetary considerations. As budgetary control became an important issue during the 1980s, the devolved management of social insurance also became problematic: experts and civil servants accused the social partners of hav-ing hijacked the social security funds, of abusing their position within the system at the expense of the common good and of not taking responsibility for containing costs (Bonoli and Palier 1996). As seen above, the strongest opposition to retrenchment was not through political confrontation, but through social and trade union mobilization.…”

Section: A New Distribution Of Powermentioning

confidence: 99%

“…If they wanted to implement any change, governments had to take the unions ' views into account, limiting the scope for reform. Within the governmental sphere, the perception developed that the state would be better at containing the expenditure increase (Bonoli and Palier 1996).…”

Section: A New Distribution Of Powermentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The acceptance by the social partners of reductions in benefits relied on a quid pro quo (Bonoli 1997) based on the distinction between what should be financed through contribution and what should be financed through taxation . The government committed to paying for the 'charges indues' through the financing of non-contributory benefits -flat-rate social minima for the elderly , the handicapped, the long-term unemployed; and contribution credits for periods out of work because of unemployment or child rearing -in exchange for a reduction of social insurance benefits (Bonoli and Palier 1996). Finally, for old-age and unemployment insurances, these reforms reduced the level of protection by the strengthening of the link between the amount of contribution and the volume of the benefits.…”

Section: The Politics Of First Retrenchmentsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…those who benefit from welfare programs and their representatives. This can of course be the beneficiaries of welfare systems themselves, those who receive (or will receive) social benefits, but it can also be those whose organizations depend on, or at least are linked to, the structure of the welfare system (Bonoli and Palier 1996). In our cases, due to the historical development of social insurances and their governance arrangements (see below), the 'social partners ' (trade unions and employers' representatives) have long been in a position to act as the most important 'veto players ' .…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

The Politics of welfare reform

Norris¹,

Thompson²

1995

Choice Reviews Online

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A m s t e r d a m U n i v e r s i t y P r e s s a long goodbye to bismarck? CHANGING WELFARE STATESAdvanced welfare states seem remarkably stable at fi rst glance. Although most member states of the European Union (EU) have undertaken comprehensive welfare reform, especially since the 1990s, much comparative welfare state analysis portrays a 'frozen welfare landscape' . Social spending is stable. However, if we interpret the welfare state as more than aggregate social spending and look at long-term trends, we can see profound transformations across several policy areas, ranging from labor market policy and regulation, industrial relations, social protection, social services like child care and education, pensions, and long-term care. Th is series is about trajectories of change. Have there been path-breaking welfare innovations or simply attempts at political reconsolidation? What new policies have been added, and with what consequences for competitiveness, employment, income equality and poverty, gender relations, human capital formation, and fi scal sustainability? What is the role of the European Union in shaping national welfare state reform? Are advanced welfare states moving in a similar or even convergent direction, or are they embarking on ever more divergent trajectories of change? Th ese issues raise fundamental questions about the politics of reform. If policy-makers do engage in major reforms (despite the numerous institutional, political and policy obstacles), what factors enable them to do so? While the overriding objective of the series is to trace trajectories of contemporary welfare state reform, the editors also invite the submission of manuscripts which focus on theorizing institutional change in the social policy arena. All rights reserved. Without limiting the rights under copyright reserved above, no part of this book may be reproduced, stored in or introduced into a retrieval system, or transmitted, in any form or by any means (electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording or otherwise) without the written permission of both the copyright owner and the author of the book.  AcknowledgmentsAs shown in this book, the Conservative corporatist road to welfare reforms was long and difficult. The journey to the completion of this book was also long and consisted of many phases. It started in Paris in December 2005, where the team of authors first met, before going to Harvard in 2006, where our first drafts were intensely discussed, and then back to Paris in 2007 and 2008, where chapters were harmonized. For me, it also passed via Berlin, Chicago and other conference locations in 2008, where the results were tested, and finally Stockholm in 2009, where final editing and writing was undertaken. The journey was long but much less difficult than the 'Bismarckian ' welfare trajectory itself, thanks to the considerable and generous support we received from various institutions, and thanks to interested colleagues and their inspirational ideas .Many institutions provided us with both financial and ...

show abstract

The Silver Age of the Welfare State: Perspectives on Resilience

Taylor‐Gooby¹

2002

J. Soc. Pol.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The circumstances which favoured the expansion of state welfare in the post-war ‘golden age’ – secure growth, full employment, moderate welfare needs and national politico-economic autonomy – have been reversed in the ‘silver age’ of labour market restructuring, demographic transition and economic globalisation. Most researchers argue that the European welfare settlement is (so far) surprisingly resilient in the face of current challenges. This article argues that analysis of welfare states has been approached from two basic directions – quantitative analysis and comparative case study – and that each approach has its merits and difficulties. Using the example of pensions policy it show that quantitative methods tend to produce findings which place greater emphasis on continuity and resilience, while case studies focus attention more on political processes. The latter approach is likely to provide greater insight into shifts that may lead to new policy directions in the immediate future. The picture presented by the quantitative method tends to predominate in comparative cross-national studies of the response of welfare states to current pressures, and this may overemphasise stability and resilience against discontinuity and change.

show abstract

Reclaiming Welfare: The Politics of French Social Protection Reform

Cited by 61 publications

References 5 publications

Coping with Permanent Austerity: Welfare State Restructuring in Affluent Democracies

Coping with Permanent Austerity: Welfare State Restructuring in Affluent Democracies

The Politics of welfare reform

The Silver Age of the Welfare State: Perspectives on Resilience

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About