1 / 22

The European Social Model: different typologies under a single term

The European Social Model: different typologies under a single term. Karl Aiginger, Thomas Leoni. Madrid 09.06.2009. Contents of the presentation.

azra
Download Presentation

The European Social Model: different typologies under a single term

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript


  1. The European Social Model: different typologies under a single term Karl Aiginger, Thomas Leoni Madrid 09.06.2009

  2. Contents of the presentation • Definition of the european socio-economic model(s) and clustering of countries according to typologies • Differences in performance (in terms of economic and social indicators): • Between Europe and the US • Within EU15 – different typologies • Investigation of causes for success/failure • Flexibility and capability to adapt • Reforms and fiscal prudence (to find resources) • Investment in human capital and in innovation • Outlook and perspectives: new risks • Conclusions

  3. The European socio-economic model Definition of the European socio-economic model in terms of: • Responsibility (health, sickness, unemployment, old age, education,…) • Regulation (institutionalised industrial relations, regulated product markets, …) • Redistribution (monetary transfers and in-kind benefits, inclusive policies) • The European model is the most ambitious attempt to keep together economic, social (and ecological) goals • From an insider perspective, we observe the great institutional and socio-cultural differences within Europe Following Esping-Andersen’s well-known classification of welfare models, we can cluster European countries in groups (Scandinavian, Anglo-Saxon, Continental, Mediterranean)

  4. European socio-economic models

  5. Scandinavian Model • High employment rates and emphasis on gender equality • Tax financed unemployment benefits and health system • Highest de-commodification, redistributive feature • Progressive taxation, taxes on property and bequests • Low taxes for business • High replacement rates with generous minimum standards • Cooperation between social partners (business, unions and government) • Generous social-services infrastructure Sweden, Finland, Denmark, (Norway)

  6. Continental Model • Based on preservation of social status, dominance of money transfers • Income-related transfers with low minimum standards • Contribution-based social insurance system for health, pensions and unemployment • Low re-distributive efforts, regressive tax structure (low wealthtaxation, high taxes on labour and consumption) • Co-operative industrial relations and coordinated wage bargaining Germany, France, Belgium, Netherlands, Austria

  7. Anglo-Saxon Model • Pre-dominant role of markets, minimal role of the State • Low degree of regulation • High competition, sophisticated regulation of utilities • Selective social transfers; i.e. means tested benefits • Welfare-to-work strategies • Public health system (UK, US only for the poor) and (partly) publicly-financed schools (UK not US) United Kingdom, Ireland (and USA, Australia, New Zealand)

  8. Mediterranean Model • Important role of supportive family networks • Low level of social transfers • High gender inequality, low participation rates • Strong insider-outsider dynamics Italy, Spain, Portugal, Greece

  9. Central and Eastern European countries • Heterogeneous welfare state mix: • elements of institutions that were in place before the Soviet era • universalistic values that were in place during communism • new post-communist consensus (market-based schemes) • Comparatively low levels of social expenditure • Low levels of taxations • Absence of strong employer and employee representations Baltic States, Slovakia Slovenia, Czech Republic, Hungary, Poland, Bulgaria, Rumania

  10. The European growth problem Source: EUROSTAT (AMECO); WIFO-calculations

  11. Economic performance Source: EUROSTAT; WIFO calculations

  12. Employment indicators Source: EUROSTAT; WIFO calculations. Figures for the US employment rate of women and older person (in light blue) refer to 2006.

  13. Product and labour market regulation 0 ... unregulated, 6 ... regulated Source: EUROSTAT; WIFO calculations

  14. Indicators of social performance Source: Eurobarometer; EUROSTAT; UNDP; WIFO calculations

  15. Indicators of social performance - continued Source: Eurobarometer; EUROSTAT; UNDP; WIFO calculations

  16. CEE countries – a brief overview Source: EUROSTAT; WIFO calculations

  17. Main results of social models comparison • Substantial differences between Europe and the US and between socio-economic typologies in Europe, especially over the last 10 to 15 years • Large Continental countries and Scandinavian countries provide the starkest contrast in terms of their ability to cope with changing circumstances. • Since 1990 the two “extreme” types of socio-economic models have had the best economic performance: • the Anglo-Saxon countries with flexibility, openness and a service-oriented economy • the Scandinavian countries with a strategy aimed at reform and adaptation of the welfare state • In Scandinavian (and to a lesser extent Continental) countries social performance and indicators show the better picture (poverty rates, infant mortality, social inclusion)

  18. Elements of the Scandinavian success story • Many of the distinguishing features of Scandinavian economies were in place long before they started to represent a model for other countries • Scandinavian countries developed their success story after painful reform processes following their crisis at beginning of the 1990s • Reforms of the 1990s were based on the following cornerstones: • Balanced flexibility (“flexicurity”) • Active labour market policy based on “sticks and carrots” • Reform, not demise of the welfare state • Investment in innovation, education and lifelong learning • Fiscal stability => Scandinavian countries are now in a better position and have more room for adjustment than other EU countries

  19. New risks: gender inequalities Source: EUROSTAT; WIFO calculations

  20. New risks: child poverty and exclusion Source: EUROSTAT; WIFO calculations

  21. Investment in the future Source: EUROSTAT, EITO; WIFO calculations.

  22. A few conclusions • The Scandinavian states offer good examples of best practices in combining inclusive social institutions and well-functioning labour markets with incentives for education and employment. • The welfare state can be considered a productive force (rather then being solely a financial burden) for the development of a competitive, knowledge-based economy. • The question is not whether to allow collective risk sharing, but rather how to do it while maintaining the right incentive structure and the capability to adapt. • The welfare state of the future will have to be more service oriented, guaranteeing equality of opportunities at early stages of life rather than equalising income at later stages. • Fast technological change and international competition demand a proactive role from government and public institutions in promoting competition, innovation and structural change.

More Related