The American Welfare State in Comparative Perspective: Reflections on Alberto Alesina and Edward L. Glaeser, Fighting Poverty in the US and Europe

Abstract

Alberto Alesina and Edward Glaeser's recent book, Fighting Poverty in the US and Europe, exemplifies the recent incursion of economists into the domains of political science and sociology. In thinking about welfare states, economists have traditionally been interested in their effects on the distribution of income and, above all, their implications for efficiency and growth. Alesina and Glaeser instead set out to explain why the American welfare state is so small by comparison to European welfare states. This, then, is a book about American exceptionalism in the realm of social policy, but Alesina and Glaeser's discussion also addresses the general problem of accounting for cross-national variation in the public provision of social welfare. Their project is to provide an account of the exceptional nature of the American welfare state that is consistent with and sheds light on differences among other welfare states as well. This makes for an audacious book that deserves critical scrutiny

Retracted: The heterogeneous effect of diversity: Ascriptive identities, class and redistribution in developed democracies

“…Although highly influential, this argument has been challenged both theoretically and empirically (for a comprehensive critique, see Pontusson 2006). Taylor-Gooby (2005) and Mau and Burkhardt (2009), for example, argue that the negative correlation loses its…”

“…The growing attention to this question by comparative social scientists, and particularly the influential work by Alesina and Glaeser (2004), has cemented the notion that diverse countries redistribute less than homogeneous ones. Yet, although widely accepted, this straightforward theoretical prediction has mixed empirical support, particularly in developed democracies (Mau & Burkhardt 2009;Pontusson 2006;Taylor-Gooby 2005). Moreover, newer research on individual-level preferences finds that the negative relationship between diversity and popular support for redistribution depends upon additional demographic and socioeconomic factors (e.g., Alt & Iversen 2017;Burgoon 2014;Dahlberg et al 2012;Finseraas 2012).…”

The Impact of Immigration on the Size of Government: Empirical Evidence from Danish Municipalities

“…They report a reduced public goods provision "when a significant fraction of tax revenues collected on one ethnic group are used to provide public goods shared with other ethnic groups". Their 1 Other studies that are critical of Alesina and Glaeser (2004) are Taylor-Gooby (2005) and Pontusson (2006). 2 To be clear on this point, this study does not focus on the direct financial impact of immigration on public coffers, such as in Storesletten (2003).…”

“…1 1 Other studies that are critical of Alesina and Glaeser (2004) are Taylor‐Gooby (2005) and Pontusson (2006). …”

The Heterogeneity Politics of the Welfare State: Changing Population Heterogeneity and Welfare State Policies in High‐Income OECD Countries, 1980‐2005

“…Events such as the First and Second World Wars and Great Depression have also triggered a greater embrace of social risks and vulnerabilities, drawing attention to provide political commitments for social protection of the old, sick, disabled, unemployed, and poor (Esping‐Andersen , ; Hicks ; Marshall ; Pierson ). Welfare states are also a result of path‐dependent institutional arrangements with extant policies, providing the context for further policy developments and changes (Huber and Stephens ; North ; Pierson , ; Pontusson ). Whereas austerity and retrenchments have besieged the politics of contemporary welfare states given the renewed context of growing budget deficits and fiscal distress, this notion of path‐dependence suggests that the longer term commitments made by existing policies make major departures highly unlikely (Pierson , ).…”