Search

Migrant inclusion in a society is a process that ultimately succeeds or fails at the local level and cities have increasingly taken a proactive stance in delivering their own policies for integration. The literature on the topic has focused particularly on the cooperation between local political institutions and civil society organizations, underestimating the key role played by social partners. This paper demonstrates the participation of social partners in the local governance of migrant integration in three European cities: Barcelona, Lyon and Gothenburg. Drawing on process tracing analysis and qualitative interviews, the article illustrates the different responses of local unions and employers' organizations to immigration and the variety of approaches to supporting migrant integration into employment and society. The article argues that these approaches, which take place within different institutional and structural contexts, shape different patterns of migrant inclusion and allow us to explain the new and traditional ways in which social partners operate as social and political actors. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

There are competing theoretical expectations and conflicting empirical results concerning the impact of partisanship on spending on active labour market policies (ALMPs). This paper argues that one should distinguish between different ALMPs. Employment incentives and rehabilitation programmes incentivize the unemployed to accept jobs. Direct job creation reduces the supply of labour by creating non-commercial jobs. Training schemes raise the human capital of the unemployed. Using regression analysis this paper shows that the positions of political parties towards these three types of ALMPs are different. Party preferences also depend on the welfare regime in which parties are located. In Scandinavia, left-wing parties support neither employment incentives nor direct job creation schemes. In continental and Liberal welfare regimes, left-wing parties oppose employment incentives and rehabilitation programmes to a lesser extent and they support direct job creation. There is no impact of partisanship on training. These results reconcile the previously contradictory findings concerning the impact of the Left on ALMPs. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In what social contexts are rich people more likely to support government redistribution of income? Motivated by the literature on inequality aversion and the literature on the relationship between ethnic fractionalization and redistribution, the paper examines whether the relationship between own income and redistributive preferences depends on the regional level of poverty and the ethnic composition of the poor. Using data from the European Social Survey, the paper demonstrates that support for redistribution among the rich is lower when the proportion of ethnic minorities among the poor is high. Several possible mechanisms to account for this relationship are examined. The paper finds no support for explanations based on more animosity towards the poor or towards ethnic minorities and no support for explanations based on lower social trust or social capital: instead, rich people are less concerned with downward income mobility when the proportion of minorities among the poor is high. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]

This paper provides an empirical study of the between-individual and between-country differences in the popular legitimacy of European healthcare systems. In order to explain two dimensions of popular legitimacy (satisfaction and support for state responsibility), we assess the impact of self-interest motives (income and personal health), ideology (egalitarianism) and institutional arrangements (level of service provision, and private and government health expenditure). For this purpose, data from the European Social Survey Round 4 (ESS-4, 2008–2009) are analysed by means of multilevel models. Universal high support for state responsibility is found, while satisfaction varies considerably, with particularly low levels found in Eastern European and former Soviet Union countries. It appears that individuals are not guided by self-interest motives and ideology alone. In addition to these factors interacting, the results suggest that state-provided healthcare might be in everyone’s interest. Introducing a patient perspective could advance our understanding of healthcare legitimacy. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]

This paper analyses the effect of macroeconomic and social conditions on the demand for redistribution. Using a synthetic cohort design to generate panel data at the level of socio-demographic groups, analysis of fives waves of data from the European Social Survey (2002–2010) shows that differences across countries in macroeconomic and social conditions have an effect on the demand for redistribution. Consistent with theoretical expectations, economic growth generates a lower demand for redistribution, while higher income inequality generates a higher demand. By contrast, differences across countries in unemployment levels and social expenditure are unrelated to the demand for redistribution. The analysis also suggests that empirical results depend to a considerable extent on the assumptions underlying different methodological approaches. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]

Welfare state typologies are generally based on the institutional design of welfare policies. In this paper we analyse whether such typologies also persist when they are applied to effective redistributive outcomes of welfare states’ tax and transfer policies. In contrast to the widespread use of macro indicators, our empirical analysis relies on internationally comparable microdata in order to account for the distribution of resources across households. We perform a hierarchical cluster analysis and check whether the classical typology for Western European welfare states reproduces the typical patterns when it comes to effective economic outcomes. We find that the established welfare regimes not only differ in their welfare state institutions as is known, but also in their economic outcomes. In particular, we identify the social-democratic, conservative, liberal and southern welfare regimes. Belgium and the Netherlands emerge as hybrid cases lying between the social-democratic and conservative model. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]

The aim of this paper is to test whether motivations characteristic of homo reciprocans, as described in experimental economics, can account for the support for the redistributive role of the State. Using data from the 2008 European Social Survey, we show how this picture of human motivations provides a fertile framework to interpret support for redistribution among the general public. We test this claim through two ordinary least squares (OLS) regression models. The evidence clearly shows that variables associated with ‘reciprocity’ are better predictors of support for the redistributive role of the State than those associated with ‘self-interest’, including the traditional socioeconomic variables, although both types of variables offer useful insights into the question of why people give support for redistribution. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]

Working-age households where no-one is in work have become an increasing focus of policy concern even before the economic crisis, and the European Union (EU) has included household joblessness in its new poverty reduction target for 2020. This paper focuses on the variation across EU countries in the prevalence of household joblessness and its impact on income poverty and deprivation, and on the implications for the new EU poverty reduction target. It highlights first that there are some divergences across key data sources in the extent of joblessness. The prevalence of household joblessness varies substantially across EU countries, but there is little evidence of a consistent pattern among groupings of countries often categorized together in terms of welfare regime or geographically. In aggregate there is little association between the overall extent of household joblessness in a country and the percentage in relative income poverty or above a material deprivation threshold. At a micro level, being in a jobless household has a substantial impact on the likelihood of being in relative income poverty or deprived, but the scale of these impacts is shown to be very much greater in some countries than in others, and to vary between single-adult and multiple-adult households. In most EU countries little more than half the working-age adults in jobless households are either income-poor or deprived, so including joblessness in the poverty reduction target does make a difference, without a clearly articulated rationale. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]