Britain and Europe: Separate worlds of welfare?

Government and Opposition

Volumn 33, Issue 2, 1998, Pages 183-198

  Evans, Geoffrey ^a  

^a NONE

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 0041177673     PISSN: 0017257X     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/j.1477-7053.1998.tb00789.x     Document Type: Article

References (41)

1. On the difficulties involved in this project, see Ingalill Jarensjo Montanari, 'Harmonization of Social Policies and Social Regulation in the European Community', European Journal of Political Research, 27 (1995), pp. 21-45.
2. Geoffrey Evans, 'The State of the Union: Attitudes towards Europe', in Roger Jowell, Lindsay Brook and Daphne Ahrendt (eds), British Social Attitudes: The 12th Report, Aldershot, Dartmouth, 1995.
3. Jim Northcott, The Future of Britain and Europe, London, Policy Studies Institute, 1995, p. 92.
4. See Peter Taylor-Gooby, 'Eurosclerosis in European Welfare States: Regime Theory and the Dynamics of Change', Policy and Politics, 24 (1996), pp. 109-23.
5. Ibid., pp. 116-20.
6. Anthony B. Atkinson, Lee Rainwater and Timothy Smeeding, Income Distribution in OECD Countries: The Evidence from the Luxembourg Income Study (LIS), Paris, OECD, 1995.
7. Gosta Esping-Andersen, The Three Worlds of Welfare Capitalism. Cambridge, Polity Press, 1990, p. 33. See also Francis G. Castles and Debra Mitchell, 'Identifying Welfare State Regimes: The Links between Politics, Instruments and Outcomes', Governance, 5 (1992), pp. 1-26.
8. Gosta Esping-Andersen, The Three Worlds of Welfare Capitalism. Cambridge, Polity Press, 1990, p. 33. See also Francis G. Castles and Debra Mitchell, 'Identifying Welfare State Regimes: The Links between Politics, Instruments and Outcomes', Governance, 5 (1992), pp. 1-26.
9. e.g. Ralf Dahrendorf, 'Changing Social Values under Mrs Thatcher', in Robert Skidelsky (ed.), Thatcherism, London, Chatto & Windus; Stuart Hall and Martin Jacques (eds), The Politics of Thatcherism, London, Lawrence & Wishart, 1983; John Rentoul, Me and Mine: The Triumph of the New Individualism, London, Unwin Hyman, 1989.
10. e.g. Ralf Dahrendorf, 'Changing Social Values under Mrs Thatcher', in Robert Skidelsky (ed.), Thatcherism, London, Chatto & Windus; Stuart Hall and Martin Jacques (eds), The Politics of Thatcherism, London, Lawrence & Wishart, 1983; John Rentoul, Me and Mine: The Triumph of the New Individualism, London, Unwin Hyman, 1989.
11. e.g. Ralf Dahrendorf, 'Changing Social Values under Mrs Thatcher', in Robert Skidelsky (ed.), Thatcherism, London, Chatto & Windus; Stuart Hall and Martin Jacques (eds), The Politics of Thatcherism, London, Lawrence & Wishart, 1983; John Rentoul, Me and Mine: The Triumph of the New Individualism, London, Unwin Hyman, 1989.
12. See Ivor Crewe and Donald Searing, 'Mrs Thatcher's Crusade: Conservativism in Britain, 1972-1986', in Barry Cooper, Allan Kornberg and William Mishler (eds), The Resurgence of Conservatism in Anglo-American Democracies, Durham, NC, Duke University Press, 1988; Anthony Heath, Roger Jowell, John Curtice, Geoffrey Evans, Julia Field and Sharon Witherspoon, Understanding Political Change, Oxford, Pergamon, 1991, pp. 171-85; and Peter Taylor-Gooby, 'Attachment to the Welfare State', in Roger Jowell, Lindsay Brook and Bridget Taylor (eds), British Social Attitudes: The 8th Report, Aldershot, Gower, 1991.
13. See Ivor Crewe and Donald Searing, 'Mrs Thatcher's Crusade: Conservativism in Britain, 1972-1986', in Barry Cooper, Allan Kornberg and William Mishler (eds), The Resurgence of Conservatism in Anglo-American Democracies, Durham, NC, Duke University Press, 1988; Anthony Heath, Roger Jowell, John Curtice, Geoffrey Evans, Julia Field and Sharon Witherspoon, Understanding Political Change, Oxford, Pergamon, 1991, pp. 171-85; and Peter Taylor-Gooby, 'Attachment to the Welfare State', in Roger Jowell, Lindsay Brook and Bridget Taylor (eds), British Social Attitudes: The 8th Report, Aldershot, Gower, 1991.
14. See Ivor Crewe and Donald Searing, 'Mrs Thatcher's Crusade: Conservativism in Britain, 1972-1986', in Barry Cooper, Allan Kornberg and William Mishler (eds), The Resurgence of Conservatism in Anglo-American Democracies, Durham, NC, Duke University Press, 1988; Anthony Heath, Roger Jowell, John Curtice, Geoffrey Evans, Julia Field and Sharon Witherspoon, Understanding Political Change, Oxford, Pergamon, 1991, pp. 171-85; and Peter Taylor-Gooby, 'Attachment to the Welfare State', in Roger Jowell, Lindsay Brook and Bridget Taylor (eds), British Social Attitudes: The 8th Report, Aldershot, Gower, 1991.
15. Most recently, see Jorgen Rasmussen, 'What Kind of Vision is that? British Public Attitudes towards the European Community during the Thatcher Era', British Journal of Political Science, 27 (1997), pp. 111-18.
16. An internal comparison of attitudes towards welfare in EU countries can be found in publications forming part of the Beliefs in Government programme. See various chapters in Ole Borre and Elinor Scarbrough, (eds), The Scope of Government, Oxford, Oxford University Press, 1995; and the summing up in Max Kaase and Kenneth Newton, Beliefs in Government, Oxford, Oxford University Press, 1995. However, the implications of these attitudes for EU harmonization have not been examined either in this work or in the volume directly concerned with attitudes towards European integration - Oscar Niedermayer and Richard A. Sinnott (eds), Public Opinion and Internationalized Governance, Oxford, Oxford University Press, 1995. Also, the focus of the Beliefs in Government programme is primarily on Western Europe, which inhibits more general comparisons, including the important question of whether British public opinion shares more characteristics with opinion in the Anglo-democracies than it does with opinion in other EU countries.
17. An internal comparison of attitudes towards welfare in EU countries can be found in publications forming part of the Beliefs in Government programme. See various chapters in Ole Borre and Elinor Scarbrough, (eds), The Scope of Government, Oxford, Oxford University Press, 1995; and the summing up in Max Kaase and Kenneth Newton, Beliefs in Government, Oxford, Oxford University Press, 1995. However, the implications of these attitudes for EU harmonization have not been examined either in this work or in the volume directly concerned with attitudes towards European integration - Oscar Niedermayer and Richard A. Sinnott (eds), Public Opinion and Internationalized Governance, Oxford, Oxford University Press, 1995. Also, the focus of the Beliefs in Government programme is primarily on Western Europe, which inhibits more general comparisons, including the important question of whether British public opinion shares more characteristics with opinion in the Anglo-democracies than it does with opinion in other EU countries.
18. An internal comparison of attitudes towards welfare in EU countries can be found in publications forming part of the Beliefs in Government programme. See various chapters in Ole Borre and Elinor Scarbrough, (eds), The Scope of Government, Oxford, Oxford University Press, 1995; and the summing up in Max Kaase and Kenneth Newton, Beliefs in Government, Oxford, Oxford University Press, 1995. However, the implications of these attitudes for EU harmonization have not been examined either in this work or in the volume directly concerned with attitudes towards European integration - Oscar Niedermayer and Richard A. Sinnott (eds), Public Opinion and Internationalized Governance, Oxford, Oxford University Press, 1995. Also, the focus of the Beliefs in Government programme is primarily on Western Europe, which inhibits more general comparisons, including the important question of whether British public opinion shares more characteristics with opinion in the Anglo-democracies than it does with opinion in other EU countries.
19. For illustrative comparison, see Tom Smith, 'Inequality and Welfare', in Roger Jowell, Sharon Witherspoon and Lindsay Brook (eds), British Social Attitudes: Special International Report, Aldershot, Gower, 1989; and Peter Taylor-Gooby, 'What Citizens Want from the State', in Roger Jowell, Lindsay Brook and Lizanne Dowds (eds), International Social Attitudes: The 10th BSA Report, Aldershot, Dartmouth, 1993, pp. 81-101.
20. For illustrative comparison, see Tom Smith, 'Inequality and Welfare', in Roger Jowell, Sharon Witherspoon and Lindsay Brook (eds), British Social Attitudes: Special International Report, Aldershot, Gower, 1989; and Peter Taylor-Gooby, 'What Citizens Want from the State', in Roger Jowell, Lindsay Brook and Lizanne Dowds (eds), International Social Attitudes: The 10th BSA Report, Aldershot, Dartmouth, 1993, pp. 81-101.
21. Recent years have also seen widespread political and ideological attacks on the cost of these sorts of policy, thus heightening their political significance: see, for example, Douglas A. Hibbs and Henrijk J. Madsen, 'Public Reaction to the Growth of Taxation and Government Expenditure', World Politics, 33 (1981), pp. 413-35; and Claus Offe, Contradictions of the Welfare State, London, Hutchinson, 1984. It is clear, however, that claims about the degree of public opposition to welfare and taxation have been exaggerated: even in the 1980s there was evidence of broad popular support for a variety of social policies, with majorities also in favour of explicit redistribution. See, for example, Richard Coughlin, Public Opinion and Welfare Policy, Berkeley, University of California Press, 1980; and Robert Shapiro and John Young, 'Public Opinion and the Welfare State: The United States in Comparative Perspective', Political Science Quarterly, 104 (1989), pp. 59-89.
22. Recent years have also seen widespread political and ideological attacks on the cost of these sorts of policy, thus heightening their political significance: see, for example, Douglas A. Hibbs and Henrijk J. Madsen, 'Public Reaction to the Growth of Taxation and Government Expenditure', World Politics, 33 (1981), pp. 413-35; and Claus Offe, Contradictions of the Welfare State, London, Hutchinson, 1984. It is clear, however, that claims about the degree of public opposition to welfare and taxation have been exaggerated: even in the 1980s there was evidence of broad popular support for a variety of social policies, with majorities also in favour of explicit redistribution. See, for example, Richard Coughlin, Public Opinion and Welfare Policy, Berkeley, University of California Press, 1980; and Robert Shapiro and John Young, 'Public Opinion and the Welfare State: The United States in Comparative Perspective', Political Science Quarterly, 104 (1989), pp. 59-89.
23. Recent years have also seen widespread political and ideological attacks on the cost of these sorts of policy, thus heightening their political significance: see, for example, Douglas A. Hibbs and Henrijk J. Madsen, 'Public Reaction to the Growth of Taxation and Government Expenditure', World Politics, 33 (1981), pp. 413-35; and Claus Offe, Contradictions of the Welfare State, London, Hutchinson, 1984. It is clear, however, that claims about the degree of public opposition to welfare and taxation have been exaggerated: even in the 1980s there was evidence of broad popular support for a variety of social policies, with majorities also in favour of explicit redistribution. See, for example, Richard Coughlin, Public Opinion and Welfare Policy, Berkeley, University of California Press, 1980; and Robert Shapiro and John Young, 'Public Opinion and the Welfare State: The United States in Comparative Perspective', Political Science Quarterly, 104 (1989), pp. 59-89.
24. Recent years have also seen widespread political and ideological attacks on the cost of these sorts of policy, thus heightening their political significance: see, for example, Douglas A. Hibbs and Henrijk J. Madsen, 'Public Reaction to the Growth of Taxation and Government Expenditure', World Politics, 33 (1981), pp. 413-35; and Claus Offe, Contradictions of the Welfare State, London, Hutchinson, 1984. It is clear, however, that claims about the degree of public opposition to welfare and taxation have been exaggerated: even in the 1980s there was evidence of broad popular support for a variety of social policies, with majorities also in favour of explicit redistribution. See, for example, Richard Coughlin, Public Opinion and Welfare Policy, Berkeley, University of California Press, 1980; and Robert Shapiro and John Young, 'Public Opinion and the Welfare State: The United States in Comparative Perspective', Political Science Quarterly, 104 (1989), pp. 59-89.
25. These surveys were conducted as part of the Economic and Social Research Council's 'East-West' research programme, phase II: Grant no. Y 309 25 3025, 'Emerging Forms of Political Representation and Participation in Eastern Europe'.
26. These were worded as follows: 'It is the responsibility of the government to reduce the differences in income between people with high incomes and those with low incomes.' 'The government should provide a job for everyone who wants one.' [Responses: strongly agree; agree; neither agree nor disagree; disagree; strongly disagree; can't choose.]
27. To avoid any difficulties in the cross-national comparability of intensity expressions (i.e. the difference between 'agree' and 'agree strongly' may vary across language groups) when comparing distributions, responses to these items have been recoded from a 5 to a 3 point scale (agree/neither/disagree).
28. Respondents were asked: 'Do you think that people with high incomes should pay a larger share of their income in taxes than those with low incomes, the same share, or a smaller share?' [much larger share; larger, the same share; smaller; much smaller share; can't choose].
29. All participating ISSP countries except the Philippines were included in the analysis. The Philippines is a relatively unknown quantity both in terms of its political culture and the characteristics of the survey carried out there.
30. These were the items on support for redistribution and full employment policy shown in Figure 1, plus a third item on minimum wage legislation: 'The government should provide everyone with a guaranteed basic income.'
31. These checks were concerned to assess whether responses to the items were closely related to each other and formed a uni-dimensional structure. Principal components analyses indicated that this was the case. Cronbach's alphas averaged comfortably over 0.70 across the countries (details available on request).
32. 'Differences in income in [respondent's country] are too large' [strongly agree; agree; neither agree nor disagree; disagree, strongly disagree; can't choose].
33. Stanley Feldman and John Zaller, 'The Political Culture of Ambivalence: Ideological Responses to the Welfare State', American Journal of Political Science, 36 (1992), pp. 268-307; Paul Sniderman, E. Tetlock and Richard A. Brody, Reasoning and Choice: Explorations in Political Psychology, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1991.
34. Stanley Feldman and John Zaller, 'The Political Culture of Ambivalence: Ideological Responses to the Welfare State', American Journal of Political Science, 36 (1992), pp. 268-307; Paul Sniderman, E. Tetlock and Richard A. Brody, Reasoning and Choice: Explorations in Political Psychology, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1991.
35. In the analysis presented in Figure 4 the three items concerning government's role in redistribution, full employment and minimum wage were used to obtain information on distances between countries. Other analyses using more items produce similar results.
36. More specifically, we used hierarchical cluster analysis with the average linked method employing squared Euclidean distance estimates: see Mark S. Aldenderfer and Roger K. Blashfield, Cluster Analysis, Beverly Hills, Calif., Sage, 1984. Other analyses using different methods of estimation produce similar patterns.
37. More detailed examination of the attitudes of many of these countries is given in Geoffrey Evans, 'Mass Political Attitudes and the Development of Market Democracy in Eastern Europe', in Allan McCutcheon, (ed.), Survey Research, Democracy and Democratization, Lincoln, Nebr., University of Nebraska Press, forthcoming. Evidence on their economic circumstances and political character is presented in Geoffrey Evans and Stephen Whitefield, 'The Politics and Economics of Democratic Commitment: Support for Democracy in Transition Societies', British Journal of Political Science, 25 (1995), pp. 485-514.
38. More detailed examination of the attitudes of many of these countries is given in Geoffrey Evans, 'Mass Political Attitudes and the Development of Market Democracy in Eastern Europe', in Allan McCutcheon, (ed.), Survey Research, Democracy and Democratization, Lincoln, Nebr., University of Nebraska Press, forthcoming. Evidence on their economic circumstances and political character is presented in Geoffrey Evans and Stephen Whitefield, 'The Politics and Economics of Democratic Commitment: Support for Democracy in Transition Societies', British Journal of Political Science, 25 (1995), pp. 485-514.
39. A cluster analysis examining just the Western countries also indicates that the Anglo-democracies of USA, Australia, New Zealand and Canada, plus Switzerland, are clearly distinct from the other European states, including Britain, with Italy and Norway forming their own sub-group within the European cluster.
40. A more detailed analysis of the sources of American exceptionalism in this respect is presented in Geoffrey Evans, 'Why is America Different? Explaining Cross-national Variation in Support for Redistributive Policies', Centre for Research into Elections and Social Trends (CREST) Working Paper No. 36, London, Nuffield College and SCPR, 1995.
41. Evidence from Taylor-Gooby's comparative study of elites indicates that his British interviewees were aware of this characteristic of public opinion, which they saw as a constraint upon effective policy-making. This would suggest the presence of a gap between the policy goals of political and economic elites and the British public - at least at the time the study was undertaken in 1994-95. See Taylor-Gooby, 'Eurosclerosis in European Welfare States', p. 116.