2024/12/06 by Jellen Olivares-Jirsell · 1 voice
Social Sciences · #Social Policy and Reform Studies
paper · pdf · doi:10.55271/pp0044
openalex publication_date 2024/12/06 · openalex created_date 2024/12/07 · openalex updated_date 2026/05/21
Welfare states have acted as societal equalisers. They have reduced poverty, improved living standards, promoted equality, and supported democracy. However, their alignment with market imperatives and exclusionary definitions of deservedness threatens the welfare state’s role as a social equalising force. This paper aims to diagnose a challenge facing welfare states through two arguments. The first is that four recalibrations have taken place within welfare states: settling for universality, redefining universality, outsourcing, and reducing public spending. These recalibrations aim for market compliance, savings, and competitiveness. The second is that welfare states may prevent unequal distributions and promote equity by focusing beyond universality and prioritising socially liberal policies. By examining OECD countries and beyond, the paper highlights the pitfalls: a myopic focus on universality exacerbates inequalities; neoliberal criteria that align welfare states with populism and lend credence to welfare chauvinism; and outsourcing and privatisation that increase costs without improving service quality, weakening democratic capacity due to reliance on private providers. Keywords: Recalibration, welfare states, austerity, producerism, populism, welfare chauvinism