Samenvatting artikelen KCTTWS
Week 1: de Swaan: The beginnings of social security in Western Europe and the United States
Door sociale zekerheid werden mensen beschermd tegen de schaduwkanten van het werkende
leven. Alleen de staat leek de administratieve capaciteit te hebben en de grootte en het
doorzettingsvermogen. Bemoeienis zorgde voor een shift in de uitgaven van huishoudens en een
shift tussen werknemers en werkgevers. Kleine onafhankelijke ontwikkelaars verzetten zich hiertegen
en hoe sterker ze politiek stonden, hoe langer de legalisatie werd uitgesteld. Arbeiders stonden
achter de sociale zekerheid naarmate de organisaties meer gesetteld en ontwikkeld waren. Grote
werknemers waren tegen de kosten van het plan en de bureaucratische bemoeienis. Toch
realiseerden ze zich dat het goed zou zijn voor de industriële relaties en dat het hem vrij zou maken
van de verantwoording om te zorgen voor oud wordende en zieke werknemers. Voor zowel
werknemers als werkgevers was het een kosten-baten dilemma. Een vierde actor was de overheid,
het regime dat de macht had op dat moment. Niks kon zonder haar worden ingesteld, ze moesten
over de bourgeoisie komen en om daadwerkelijk het plan in werking te treden moest er
toestemming zijn van de staat. De staat kon wel over de vakbond heen een beslissing maken zoals in
Duitsland, maar alleen maar omdat zij wisten dat de werkgevers en de werknemers er uiteindelijk
mee in zouden stemmen. In de VS sloten ze een deal met de vakbonden en lieten ze de overheid
compromissen sluiten tussen de vakbonden en werkgevers. In Nederland en Frankrijk was sociale
zekerheid na een grote vertraging ontstaan door driezijdige samenwerking. In al deze landen was
verzet tegen sociale zekerheid weggevaagd door natuurlijke economische oorzaken, minder kleine
ondernemingen en meer werknemers die er wel achter stonden.
Leesvragen de Swaan:
In his chapter, De Swaan analyses the establishment of social security schemes in five countries by
the end of the nineteenth and the beginning of the twentieth centuries: Germany, Great Britain,
France, the USA and the Netherlands:
a. In his chapter, Cousins discusses six different theoretical approaches to welfare state development
(see above). Which of these six approaches does De Swaan apply in his chapter?
The power recourses approach between the government, the workforce, the employers and the
unions. There is a power struggle and class difference, they all have to look at the costs and the
winnings. Also a bit the institutional approach because it is the state that cannot be passed and
they have to make the final decision.
b. In Lecture 1 (11 Sept.), it has been explained that the sociologist Gøsta EspingAndersen (1990)
distinguishes three “welfare state regime” types, each with its own typical eligibility rules (who is
entitled to what and when?), compensation levels (how high are the benefits in case of
unemployment, sickness etc.) and administrative organization of welfare state schemes (who – the
government, employers, labor unions – provides, in daily practice, the benefits and services?). Which
welfare state regime type developed in each of the five countries De Swaan analyses?
- England: Marx theory, they wanted to secure the workers. Also the institutional approach
because it was about the policy for the working class. Also the industrialization because they
needed to be secured in the factories.
- France: power resources approach
- USA: Institutional and power struggle theory. At first, the society was very individualistic. Much
own responsibility. During the great depression there was a need for social security. Unions and
,employers could bargain for a different way of arranging the social plan, so they had a certain
autonomy. Roosevelt’s New Deal provided social security.
- Netherlands: power struggle, mostly between the different social and religious pillars.
- Germany: Institution and power struggle theory. Bismarck’s insurance plan against loss of income
became a model for other countries.
Week 1: Cousins, M. (2005). Welfare state theories. In: M. Cousins, European welfare states:
Comparative perspectives, pp. 19-40
Er zijn zes theses over de welvaartsstaat die representatief zijn voor de algemene kijk op welfare
state theorising welke in de laatste jaren is ontstaan. Deze worden hier onder besproken. De
theorieën zijn producten die afhangen van hoe er is gereageerd op de vorige theorie, afkeurend of
goedkeurend, hoeveel kennis er is en in welke tijd de theorie is ontstaan.
1. De welvaartsstaat is ontstaan als een deel van de ‘logic of industrialisation’
2. The welfare state develops in response to the needs of advanced capitalism (functionalist
Marxist approach).
3. The welfare state is a product of modernisation of societies.
4. The welfare state is shaped by struggles over politics and social class.
5. Welfare states are shaped by the social organization of production.
6. The welfare state is determined by the structure and interests of
the state or polity (institutional approach)
The logic of industrialisation thesis
De eerste theorieen waren vooral structureel en funtioneel en waren erop gebaseerd dat de
samenleving veranderingen doormaakte door bijvoorbeeld de industrialisatie, kapitalisme en
modernalisatie. Door de industrialisatie moesten veel arbeiders verhuizen naar de stad, weg van hun
families. In deze tijd was de familie het sociale vangnet, die nu dus wegviel. Daarom moest de staat
het nieuwe vangnet worden.
The functionalist Marxist approach
De kapitalistische staat moet twee tegenhangende dingen regelen, accumulatie en legitimisatie. Dit
wil zeggen dat de welvaartstaat zowel de voorzetting, stabiliteit en efficientie van het economische
system moet garanderen maar ook moet zorgen voor integratie van sociale klassen en groepen en
het behouden van de sociale orde.
Modernisation theory
Is a result of industrialisation, political mobilisation and social change. This is a natural result of
modernisation.
The power recourses approach
The class struggle approach, this one needs more attention. This one is one of the dominant theories.
There are different classes. Employees got pulled together and formed a union, they often a line
themselves with more left-wing politics. Employers same story, they pulled together etc and formed
union. And there is also the government. Voorbeeld: Toen de studiefinanciering werd afgeschaft
hebben mensen die al stufi kregen niet geprotesteerd, omdat zij het toch al hadden.
The social organization of production thesis
Welfare programmes have developed in response to the progression of industrial capitalism, and the
nature and form of welfare states is determined by the social organization of production.
The institutional approach
Institutionalism: In essence, there are all kind of formal and informal rules that form actors’
behaviours. But the state doesn’t mirror the different needs of the classes in society.
, Summary reading questions b&c: The theories can be combined. A new theory comes from bettering
an old theory. For example the Marxist approach, they want to keep the workers in check. In the
power recourses approach there is a power struggle between different groups. So they are not
mutually exclusive. Processes happened all at once. The focus of the theories are different but they
all work together and happened around the same time.
We can learn from earlier theories. There are class differences and they still go to either the right or
the left wing of politics. There are still power institutions and there is a lot more individualization,
people can’t rely on their families anymore. The amount of influence every actor has. The workers,
the state, the employers.
Week 2: Webster: the information society as post-industrialism: Daniel Bell
Post industrialization is often describes as the information society. The professor Bell appeared to
have foreseen the turmoil that computer communications technologies especially were bringing into
being. He has written about the need for a massive expansion of these information technologies and
here they were apparently fulfilling his prognosis. This made him populair, he had foreseen
something others didn’t. But, PIS is an unhelpful way of understanding the role and significance of
information in the present because Bells image of post-industrialism is so often appropriated by
shallow commentators on the ‘information society’. The post industrial society is characterized by a
heightened presence and significance of information. Features of PI lead to greater amounts of
information being in use. On the other hand there is more quality in the theoretical knowledge. So
more and better information. The writer of this article says Bell is correct in his perception of
increases in the part played by information in social, economic and political affairs. However he is
mistaken in interpreting this as signaling a new type of society, a post industrial age. Bells project is
empirically, theoretically and methodologically flawed. In his chapter, Webster describes and
analyses Bells’ theory of the “post-industrial society”. What, according to Webster, are the main
characteristics of Bells’ “post-industrial society”?
- More and better/different information than in the industrial society. Qualitatively as well as
quantitatively different
- 3 spheres indepentend from eachother (verzuiling).Being: agriculture, industry and service.
- Process of change, evolutionist thinking: agric industry services
- Technology as driver of change
-
Webster has objections to Bells’ description of PIS. The spheres are not independent, they are
interconnected. The view that technology shapes the society is too deterministic.
This is not a new type of society. The PI comes from social changes only. It is the same as the
information society. Also the growing of certain new jobs and certain sectors is not the product of
another sector that is doing really good.
Week 2: Bonoli: Postindustrialization, New Social Risks, and Welfare State Adaptation in Advanced
Industrial Democracies
Postindustrial labor markets are characterized by higher wage inequality with the result that for
those at the bottom end of the wage distribution, access to employment is not a guarantee of a
poverty-free existence. Family instability, resulting in increases in divorce rates and in single
parenthood, have reduced the relevance of the figure of the male breadwinner and created new
social problems for which
postwar welfare states are at best unprepared. Women’s entry into labor markets, if it has reduced
the dependence of households on the male breadwinner, also creates new problems and dilemmas.
Socioeconomic transformations have shifted the target of social policies away from the male
