Correlates of Social Security Policy
| Date | 01 January 1981 |
| Published date | 01 January 1981 |
| DOI | 10.1177/019251218100200105 |
| Subject Matter | Articles |
57
CORRELATES
OF
SOCIAL
SECURITY
POLICY
East
and
West
Europe
C.
BRADLEY SCHARF
Comparative
politics
allows
us
to
appraise
the
policy
relevance
of
political
variables
as
distinct
from
those
of
cultural,
societal,
and
economic
variables.
Recent
research
has
made
an
initial
contribution
to
what
may
be
called
comparative
public
policy;
in
the
field
of
welfare
policy,
it
has
raised
questions
concerning
the
measurement
of
welfare
needs,
the
relationship
between
resources
and
benefits,
the
role
of
political
values,
and
the
likelihood
of
policy
diffusion
among
neighboring
states.
This
study
reviews
four
environmental
variables,
four
political
variables,
and
three
measures
of
social
security
as
applied
to
eight
countries.
In
doing
so,
new
information
is
brought
to
light
concerning
the
significance
of the
variables
and
the
direction
further
research
should
take.
From
the
viewpoint
of
comparative
politics
scholars,
the
study
of
public
policy
is
an
effort
to
overcome
our
earlier
paradigmatic
preoccupation
with
the
input
side
of
political
processes,
to
specify
more
clearly
who
gets
what.
A
number
of
research
perspectives
can
be
adopted,
including
those
developed
primarily
in
single-country
studies
(e.g.,
policy
evaluation,
tradeoffs
among
policy
areas).
But
the
distinctive
contribution
of
comparative
politics
lies
in
our
effort
to
appraise
the
policy
relevance
of
political
variables
as
distinct
from
that
of
cultural,
societal,
and
economic
variables.
It
may
be
premature
to
speak
of
a
subdiscipline
of
comparative
public
policy;
far
too
many
basic
conceptual issues
remain
unresolved
(Greenberg
et
al.,
1977).
Over
the
last
decade,
however,
several
important
works
have
emerged
to
give
this
area
recognizable
form.
Among
the
most
wide-ranging
efforts
are
those
by
Heldenheimer
et
al.
( 1975)
and
Siegel
and
Weinberg
( 1977).
By
covering
a
variety
of
policies
and
systems,
their
studies
illustrate
the
methodological
and
data
hazards
of
such
research.
Some
suggestive
hypotheses
are
included
with
58
reference
to
discrete
policy
areas,
but
both
works
prudently
refrain
from
proposing
any
scheme
for
generalizing
across
policy
categories.
It
may
be
intrinsically
interesting
to
compare
extractive,
distributive,
and
regulative
policies
in
diverse
systems
(as
Siegel
and
Weinberg
attempt
to
do),
but
the
theoretical
potential
of
such
an
exercise
is
far
from
evident.
APPROACHES
TO
WELFARE
POLICY
COMPARISON
Sufficient
complications
are
encountered
even
in
approaching
a
smaller
compass
of
public
policy.
Welfare
policy
is
one
area
which
has
attracted
special
attention,
usually
taking
one
of
three
approaches.
The
first
approach
is
essen-
tially
parallel
description,
exemplified
in
the
work
of
Rodgers
(1968),
Kaim-
Caudle
( 1973),
and
Woodsworth
( 1977),
which
together
cover
fifteen
different
nations.
Although
lacking
analytical
precepts,
this
scholarship
is
rich
in
detail,
revealing
nuances
in
policy
rationales,
administrative
modes,
and
benefit
schemes.
More
than
the
other
two
approaches,
the
descriptive
approach
reveals
a
multitude
of
dimensions
according
to
which
welfare
policies
may
vary.
The
second
approach,
evident
in
the
work
of
Rimlinger
(1971)
and
Heclo
( 1974),
concentrates
on
fewer
cases
and
omits
some
policy
attributes
in
favor
of
a
more
dynamic
view
of
policy
evolution
and
a
consequent
emphasis
upon
policy
decisions,
a
mingling
of
political
and
nonpolitical
variables
in
what
Heclo
describes
as
a
process
of
&dquo;institutional
learning.&dquo;
The
result
is
something
of
a
developmental
perspective,
a
prerequisite
to
understanding
policy
change.
A
variant
of
this
approach
is
Peters’s
( 1974,
1976;
Peters
and
Heisler,
1978)
effort
to
establish
the
varying
relevance
of
different
explanatory
hypotheses
according
to
a
particular
stage
of
a
nation’s
historical
political
development.
The
third
approach,
exemplified
by
Wilensky
(1975),
aims
at
a
model
or
set
of
interrelated
hypotheses
appropriate
to
middle-range
theory.
Adapting
the
earlier
findings
of
Pryor
(1968),
Wilensky
tests
variations
of
the
conven-
tional
&dquo;needs-plus-resources&dquo;
model
of
public
policy.
Employing
social
security
&dquo;effort&dquo;
(social
security
expenditure
as
a
percentage
of
GNP)
as
the
dependent
variable
in
a
multiple
regression,
he
finds
strong
correlations
with
(I)
GNP
per
capita,
(2)
percentage
of
the
population
over
64,
and
(3)
age
of
the
social
security
system.
In
summary,
economic
level
is
the
root
cause
of
welfare-state
development,
but
its
effects
are
felt
chiefly
through
demographic
changes
of
the
past
century
and
the
momentum
of
the
programs
themselves,
once
established
[Wilensky,
1975:
47].
In
a
series
of
tests
employing
12
to
60
cases,
Wilensky
also
finds
that
political
system
type,
elite
ideology,
and
(under
most
circumstances)
military
expendi-
ture
add
virtually
nothing
to
the
explanatory
model.
He
also
accepts
Pryor’s
finding
that
the
type
of
economic
system
is
irrelevant.
To continue reading
Request your trial