English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

This paper has two objectives. The first is to discuss three related views on the ethnocentric bias in the comparative studies of social welfare. The second objective is to demonstrate how these views can increase our understanding of the pluralistic ways in which non-western societies organise social welfare. Two analytical tasks are carried out. The first is to discuss the studies focusing on welfare regimes, cultural sensitivity of social welfare and the double attachment strategy used by governments to organise social welfare. These studies provide theoretical foundations of the three views on the ethnocentric bias. The second analytical task is to discuss the pro-market welfare reforms in Hong Kong. These reforms provide a concrete case of showing how non-western societies organise social welfare in a pluralistic way and how this pluralistic way is related to the three views on the ethnocentric bias in the comparative studies of social welfare.

Studying the Ethnocentric Bias in the Comparative Studies of Social Welfare