Premium
Universalism versus targeting: The vulnerability of social insurance and means‐tested minimum income protection in 18 countries, 1990‐2002
Author(s) -
Nelson Kenneth
Publication year - 2007
Publication title -
international social security review
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 0.349
H-Index - 28
eISSN - 1468-246X
pISSN - 0020-871X
DOI - 10.1111/j.1468-246x.2007.00259.x
Subject(s) - retrenchment , vulnerability (computing) , universalism , public economics , welfare state , social vulnerability , social insurance , social policy , economics , social benefits , social welfare , actuarial science , business , political science , law , public administration , market economy , psychology , materials science , computer security , psychological resilience , tailings , politics , computer science , psychotherapist , metallurgy
The stagnation and retrenchment of social policies in recent decades raise considerable interest and concern in writings on the welfare state. This study examines differences in the development of means‐tested benefits and social insurance provisions. Questions relating to the measurement of policy retrenchment and the vulnerability of social benefits are addressed. Two conflicting hypotheses are discerned: one stating that the development of means‐tested benefits resembles that of social insurance; and another more recent one claiming that the evolution of means‐tested benefits follows a unique pattern. The empirical analyses are based on institutional data on the level of social benefits. It is shown that social insurance stands a better chance of surviving periods of retrenchment and that the greater vulnerability of means‐tested benefits is related to the organization of social insurance provisions.