Contrast of the Liberal and Southern Models of Social Policy - Essay Example

Compare and contrast the liberal and Southern models of social policy, using at least one example of each. Introduction Social policies reflect the activities of governments in availing monetary resources, as well as services to their citizens in five core areas, which include social security, education services, health services, personal social services, and housing provision and subsidies. The OECD delineates social expenditure as the granting by both public and private institutions of benefits to either individuals or households so as to avail support, amid circumstances that may harmfully affect citizen’s welfare (Baldock 2011, p.8). Social benefits can be categorized broadly to include aspects such as cash benefits (in the form of pensions, social assistance, and maternity benefits), social services, and tax breaks with a social purpose. Social expenditure can be categorized into two; first, expenditures made directly by the government and secondly, private social expenditures made by non-government organizations (Arts and Gelissen 2002, p.175). Welfare States The term ‘welfare states’ describes societies in which a considerable part of the production of welfare is availed by the government; however, controversy still reigns within the academic circles of social policy on what essentially qualifies as a welfare state (Starke, Obinger and Castles 2008, p.975). There are four types of the welfare state systems mentioned in the literature of EU15 countries. These include the conservative model grounded in social contributions/the corporatist (Germany), the tax-financed Social-democratic welfare states with extensive public social security systems (Sweden), the neo-liberal market-based model (the U.S.), and the southern model (Spain, Greece) (Esping-Andersen 2002, p.2). The paper explores two models utilized in Sweden (the Scandinavian or social democratic universal welfare model) and Germany (Bismarckian/Continental European) and probes their impact on inequality and poverty, as well as on healthcare. Key Features Germany and Sweden’s Welfare Model The post-war German settlement pursued the notion of a social state (social market economy). The first principle details economic development as the best means to attain social welfare. The structure of the social services mirrors this priority and embodies a close relationship of services to people’s position within the labour market. Social benefits are earnings-related, which means that individuals without work records may not be covered for significant contingencies. Germany’s corporatist welfare state infers the social insurance programs introduced by Bismarck, with eligibility for earnings-related benefits grounded in contributions and occupational category (Baldock 2011, p.9). There is a considerable emphasis on the principle of “subsidiarity” that translates to the assertion that services should be decentralized or autonomously sustained and that the degree of states intervention ought to be essentially residual. The principle derives from the close relationship of services to individual’s position within the labour market. Social insurance covers the costs of health plus some social care, as well as income maintenance system managed by a system of independent funds (Spain, Greece) (Esping-Andersen 2002, p.3). Swedish: The Institutional-Redistributive Model The Swedish model can be regarded as an ideal mode of the welfare state availing institutional care, with respect that it avails universal welfare benefits to all citizens. The Swedish model goes further than the British model by having a strong commitment towards social equality (Spain, Greece) (Esping-Andersen 2002, p.4). Indeed, Sweden manifests the highest level of social protection spending within the OECD, as well as the lowest proportion of income, left for independent households (close to less that 50% of its national income). Sweden’s model, institutional-redistributive, merges the principles of comprehensive social provision with those of egalitarianism (Baldock 2011, p.10). Social protection is not merely associated with equality, whereby the French and German systems avail differential protection according to an individual’s position within the labour market. Although the Swedish model manifests a close link to the German model (in selective by occupational experience), the system places significant importance on equality (solidarity) in the form of organized cooperation. German Welfare Model with Sweden Welfare Model: A Comparison Inequality and poverty In terms of level and trend in social spending, Sweden is a high spending country reflecting large spending rates and its per capita income. Germany, on the other hand, is a medium spending country and lies halfway in between high and low spending countries as per economic and social characteristics. Sweden welfare system has been able to deliver comparatively low social inequality and poverty (Copeland and Daly 2012, p.283). Sweden has maintained a low income inequality country at the same level as Denmark, Finland, and Austria. The German welfare system (corporatism) makes it possible to coordinate economic and social objectives. However, the system has not been overly successful in reducing income inequalities (Guogis and Bernotas 2008, p.14). Social inequality and poverty have increased significantly in Germany in recent years compared to other countries. A report by OECD indicates that income inequality and poverty in Germany has grown fast compared to other OECD countries. The increase was estimated to be more in half a decade (2000-2005) than in the previous one and half decades (1985-2000). From 1998 to 2005, the policies of the government centred on generous tax handouts to large businesses and the rich while simultaneously slashing welfare and social benefits (Hartz IV). This might have been responsible for the surge in social inequality in Germany (Copeland and Daly 2012, p.283). Health care At the heart of Sweden’s benefit programs is the provision of healthcare through the public service. Germany’s health care system is predominantly insurance-based and residual. Sweden’s healthcare model can be considered as lying between universal coverage model (National Health Service) and entrepreneurial model of healthcare. Sweden’s mandated insurance model features compulsory universal coverage that is publicly financed, and healthcare delivered by both public and private entities. Sweden, in particular, features a national health insurance/single- payer model. Germany, on the other hand, features a multiple- payer/health insurance model that depends on sickness funds to avail universal health coverage. The principle of prevention remains strongly anchored in healthcare policies of both Sweden and Germany. Converse to developments in Germany, however, health policy in Sweden is more strongly institutionalised and rigorously integrated with other policy areas. Sweden’s healthcare policy pursues the amalgamation of education, family, and labour market policy. The Swedish government views exclusion from the labour market as a probable source of health problems, and based on that philosophy, the policy of full employment is also a mode of preventive healthcare policy. Family Sweden’s welfare policies manifest high community mindedness leading a growth in social capital. Sweden’s benefit programs meet virtually all contingencies including social provision for high quality services to the elderly, children, the sick, and disabled. Moreover, Swedish women remain among the highest labour force participation rates within OECD countries. Swedish welfare model recognizes the family as an important area of cooperation, as well as a fundamental social community that exemplifies and shapes its citizenry. In fact, Sweden has strong gender equality policies inclusive of childcare and parental leave provisions. Unlike Germany, the country offers comprehensive state-run child care usually funded by local authorities (Henninger, Wimbauer and Dombrowski 2008, p.288). Sweden’s welfare model responds to family issues from diverse angles; the welfare system works towards the promotion of children and young people wellbeing the model guarantees safe living conditions to the citizens, besides developing gender equality policies that promote family life and improve older people’s participation in society. Germany’s spending in early childhood care is significantly lower than in Sweden (Henninger, Wimbauer and Dombrowski 2008, p.287). It is no surprise then that the majority of Swedish children are raised in state child care institutions while, in Germany, only a small percentage (less that 10%) of children under three years are cared for in childcare institutions. Male Breadwinner Policies in Germany Germany has traditionally been perceived as typically conservative welfare state embodying a male-breadwinner familial plan; however, the country has recently diverted from this path (Nill and Schultz 2010, p.375). Sweden has built a social democratic state with a family policy that pursues gender equality, but with some conservative elements (Snower, Brown, and Merkl 2009, p.136). For a majority of Germans, the values behind the male-breadwinner paradigm no longer avail guidelines for daily decisions; thus, the continual erosion of the normative foundations of family policy in Germany avails greater equality of opportunity. Shared Challenges to Welfare Systems Welfare systems in contemporary society face two main problems; first, the continuing viability of the welfare state structure is increasingly being a question across all Europe. This arises from the reality maintenance of the status quo is expected to be difficult to maintain, especially in the face of adverse demographic and tough financial conditions (Starke, Obinger and Castles 2008, p.976). Secondly, the status quo appears to be increasingly out of date and ill-matched to satisfy the formidable challenges ahead. In fact, some people argue that the existing systems of social protection may deter, rather than facilitate employment increase and competitive knowledge-intensive economies. Other challenges affecting the two welfare systems include rising elder costs and increasing hostilities towards refugees and asylum seekers. Over the years, hostilities towards refugees and asylum seekers have been growing, perhaps contingent upon contemporary social and political activities. For Sweden, though, the national policy and legislation have remained fairly constant. Elderly care has undergone considerable reorganization and reconstruction. Families, in particular, are encouraged to take an enhanced responsibility for the care of the elderly. Conclusion Since German manifests high inequality, the system subsequently promotes poverty and social exclusion, both of which are distinct but interconnected concepts. The Germany welfare system promotes, rather than weakening inequalities. German’s economic and social policies are not attentive to their influence on social-economic inequalities. The Sweden welfare system, on the other hand, has been successful in weakening social inequalities, which makes it an ideal welfare model. References List Andersen, T. (2004). Challenges to the Scandinavian welfare model, European Journal of Political Economy 20. pp.743-754. Arts, W. & Gelissen, J. (2002). Three worlds of welfare capitalism or more? A state-of-the-art report, Journal of European Social Policy 12. pp.137-159. Baldock, J. (2011). ‘Social policy, social welfare and the welfare state’ in Baldock, J. et al Social Policy, Oxford University Press. pp.7-26. Copeland, P. & Daly, M. (2012).Varieties of poverty reduction: Inserting the poverty and social exclusion target into Europe 2020, Journal of European Social Policy 22 (3). pp.273-287. Esping-Andersen, G. (2002). Why We Need a New Welfare State. Oxford, Oxford University Press. pp.1-8. Guogis, A. & Bernotas, D. (2008). Lithunian social policy model: Why does it not resemble the Swedish one? Philosophy, Sociology, Psychology, and History 7 (1). pp.13-23. Henninger, A., Wimbauer, C., & Dombrowski, R. (2008). Demography as a push toward gender equality? Current reforms of German family policy. Social Politics 15 (3). pp.287-314. Nill, A. & Schultz, C. (2010). Family policy in Germany: Is the romanticized idealization of the male breadwinner losing its relevance? Journal of Macromarketing 30 (4). pp.375-383. Snower, D., Brown, A. & Merkl, C. (2009). Globalization and the welfare state: A review of Hans-Werner Sinn’s can Germany be saved, Journal of Economic Literature 47 (1). pp.136-158. Starke, P., Obinger, H. & Castles, F. G. (2008). Convergence towards where: In what ways, if any, are welfare states becoming more similar? Journal of European Public Policy 15 (7). pp.975-1000. Read More