Subjective Well-Being and the Welfare State: Giving a Fish or Teaching to Fish?

2015 ◽  
Author(s):  
Alexander Jakubow
2021 ◽  
pp. 588-605
Author(s):  
Lane Kenworthy

Social scientists and policymakers traditionally have viewed the welfare state as a means of achieving economic security, equality of opportunity, and redistribution. In the past three decades, an additional goal has become prominent: employment. Policy has more and more aimed to increase paid work. The turn towards employment promotion has a number of causes: funding the welfare state, fairness, poverty reduction, social inclusion and subjective well-being, women’s independence and fulfilment, and external encouragement by the OECD and other institutions. Policy tools include benefit conditionality, assistance with job search and placement, assistance with transportation, employment-conditional earnings subsidies, employer subsidies, public employment, promotion of part-time work and flexible work schedules, tax incentives for second earners, adjustment of wage levels and wage inequality, reduction of non-wage labour costs, moderation of employment protection regulations, family-friendly policies, support for human capital, and career ladders. Has employment promotion succeeded? Since 1990, the overall employment rate, the rate for women of prime working age, and the rate for fifty-five-to-sixty-four-year-olds have increased in most of the rich democratic nations, and in some instances the rise has been quite large. These countries’ experience over the past several decades suggests there is little, if any, trade-off between low inequality and high employment.


2002 ◽  
Vol 19 (1) ◽  
pp. 36-54 ◽  
Author(s):  
Tyler Cowen

Does the welfare state help the poor? This surprisingly simple question often generates more heat than light. By the welfare state, I mean transfer programs aimed at helping the poor through the direct redistribution of income. (This excludes general economic policy, antitrust, the volunteer military, and many other policies that affect the well-being of the poor.) Defenders of the welfare state often assume that the poor benefit from it, while critics suggest that the losses outweigh the gains. The most notable of such criticisms is Charles Murray's Losing Ground, which suggests that the welfare state has failed to achieve its stated ends.


2016 ◽  
Vol 51 (4) ◽  
pp. 564-586 ◽  
Author(s):  
Janine Jongbloed ◽  
Ashley Pullman

1985 ◽  
Vol 2 (1) ◽  
pp. 43-55 ◽  
Author(s):  
Alan G. Ingham

What follows here is an essay—a rather one-sided viewpoint that is both tentative and, within the limits of a journal article, incomplete. I attempt to understand how our recent preoccupation with our bodies is being mobilized as one solution to the fiscal crisis of the welfare state. The deep-rooted assumptions of voluntarism that characterize liberal ideology, I claim, are surfacing again in the debate over lifestyle. And lifestyle, it appears, has become an ideological construction which diverts attention from the structural impediments to well-being by framing health issues in terms of personal, moral responsibilities—a “pull yourself up by the bootstraps” alternative to state intervention in health care. Some implications of the lifestyle ideology for physical educationists are presented.


2018 ◽  
Vol 16 (4) ◽  
pp. 235-245 ◽  
Author(s):  
Victor Koziuk ◽  
Oleksandr Dluhopolskyi ◽  
Yurij Hayda ◽  
Oksana Shymanska

In the 21st century, in addition to the generally well-known indicators of material well-being, in the modern paradigm of the welfare state, the quality of the ecological environment is gaining an ever-increasing role. Besides that, the modern definition of welfare state takes into account not only environmental dimension, but also the quality of institutions through the governance system that affects the supply of environmental goods. The study provides the classification of countries according to indicators that can ensure the identification of welfare states and the assessment of the classification role of the criteria for environmental state.The strong direct correlation between environmental state and government efficiency has been established. The results of the classification of the studied countries obtained by k-means clustering methods indicate the possibility of using the Environmental Performance Index (EPI), Government Effectiveness Index (GEI) and government expenditures indicators as complementary attributes to the classical criteria for the welfare state.The level of country EPI can be regarded as an important complementary criterion for the welfare state. The country environmental state is much more determined by the government efficiency, the quality of state institutions and their activities, rather than by an extensive increase in the funding of such institutions and environmental measures.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document