Introduction
| Published date | 01 December 2013 |
| Date | 01 December 2013 |
| DOI | 10.1177/138826271301500401 |
| Author | Jon Kvist |
| Subject Matter | Introduction |
318 Intersentia
INTRODUCTION
J K*
Dominant approaches in comparative welfare state studies are increasingly out of
sync. e welfare state itself has changed with the increase of privatisation in social
security; the context of the welfare state has changed, with labour market careers
becoming more interrupted and heterogeneous; and the clientele of the welfare state
has changed, particularly as a result of changing family structures. In addition the
Eu rop ea n e con om ic c ri si s a nd a ge in g po pu la tio ns ma ke soc ia l s ec ur it y re fo rm s, r at he r
than ex pansions, top Eu ropean government a gendas. Again st this backg round it may
come as li ttl e sur pris e tha t the E U str ateg ies o f soci al pr otec tion r eform s chi e y aim at
creating modern, adequate and sustainable social sec urity systems. However, despite
these developments, a dire economic situ ation and hegemonic reform strategies, most
comparative studies of the generosity of state welfare schemes still look at the net
replacement rate of single public bene t schemes for stylised fami ly types – o en the
average net replacement rate for two family t ypes – focusing on an average production
worker. In this Special Issue, researchers report some of the ndings of a three year
international collaborative project on ‘new measures for new welfare states’ which
points to serious limitat ions in the current approaches and proposes new methods for
overcoming them. In part icular, the researchers show how the adoption of a stacking
analysis of bene ts, including bene ts provided through private schemes, for d i erent
groups, i.e. through pro ling, enables the identi cation of di erences in generosity
between welfare states, according to family structure, occupation and previous
earnings.
In Measurement Validity in Comparative Welfare State Research, Jon Kvist,
Simon Grundt Straubinger and A nders Freundt set out the challenges which are then
examined in more detail by the subsequent articles in this issue of the journal. ey
argue that conventional approaches which u se social expenditure or net replacement
rates as proxies for welfare state generosity are problematic in terms of both content
validation and their ability to ensure comparability across time and place. ey
also demonstrate how single-point, averages, composite measures and other typical
methods of operationali sing the measurement of generosity, not only mask important
information but also present a distorted picture of the generosity of bene ts and
* Jon Kvist, the gues t editor of this Spe cial Issue, is a Profe ssor at the Centre for Welfa re State Research
in the Department of Political Science and Public Management at the University of Southern
Denmark; Addr ess: Campusvej 55 5230 Odense M; phone : +45 51718561; e-mail: jon@sa m.sdu.dk.
To continue reading
Request your trial