Globalization, Gender Equality, & Welfare Sates

8/13/2019 Globalization, Gender Equality, & Welfare Sates

1/9

Brandon Walker

Globalisation and Social Policy

Globalisation, Gender Equality, Welfare States

The concept of the welfare state is deeply intertwined with sociological, economic, and

philosophical principles. To fully grasp the concept of a welfare state, it is crucial to first

identify certain prerequisites for the concept and define and acknowledge popular notions

associated with it. This section of the paper will address a brief historical context, the definition

of a welfare state (according to Esping-Andersen), and its purpose. Before its manifestation,

early philosophical thinkers had their own understanding of what was needed for a society to

function properly. Some scholars believed that the perpetuation of patriarchy and absolutism

would sustain social needs, while others, like Adam Smith, a prominent philosopher and political

economist, believed that the market was the best alternative to end inequality and privilege

(Esping-Andersen 1990). The school of thought here, which was common among early liberal

thinkers, was that maximizing free trade and minimizing state interference would establish

equality and prosperity. Many liberals feared that full democracy would potentially jeopardize

markets and lead to heavy state intervention, or simplysocialism. On the other hand, early

social democrats believed that equality and socialism was premised on two factors. The first

argued that workers require social resources, health, and education to participate effectively as

socialist citizens (Esping-Andersen 1990). The second factor states that social policy is not only

emancipator, but it is a precondition for economic efficiency (Esping-Andersen 1990). It was

argued that both factors would result in the mobilization of individuals. The ultimate goal was to

end suffering from unemployment, poverty, and wage dependency. However, what we discover

is that market domination is not suitable because of its innate ability to cater only to those who

are able to perform in it. For instance, maximizing markets can exclude certain groups (women,

the elderly, and the unemployed) from participation. Therefore, the function of welfare should beappropriated by the nation-state (Esping-Andersen).

In, The Three Worlds of Welfare Capitalism, Esping-Andersen defined a welfare state as

activities devoted to serving the welfare needs of households (Esping-Andersen 20). Moreover, it

involves state responsibility for securing basic, but essential, welfare for its citizens. Yet,


2/9

welfare states cannot be understood just in terms of the rights it grants, but also take into account

how state activities are interlocked with the markets and familys role in social provision

(Esping-Andersen 21). One goal of most welfare states is to de-commodify its citizens. De-

commodification occurs when a service is rendered as a matter of right, and when a person can

maintain a livelihood without reliance on the market (Esping-Andersen 21-22). Before this

process, workers were considered commodities, in the sense that their survival was contingent

upon the sale of their labor power. The first major welfare state initiatives occurred prior to

democracy (Esping-Andersen 22). I found that this can partially explain the distinction in welfare

state development between western countries. Nations with early democracy, such as the United

States, Australia, and Switzerland, were overwhelmingly agrarian and dominated by small

property owners who used their electoral powers to reduce (not raise) taxes (Esping-Andersen

15).The welfare state is more than a mechanism that intervenes in the structure of inequality; it is

also a system of stratification as well.

Esping-Andersen provides a typology of three distinct welfare state regimes. The first is

the Liberal welfare state. In this regimeused by the United States, Canada, and

Australiabenefits are means-tested and provide meek universal transfers, and social insurance

plans are dominate. These benefits cater mainly to low-income, working class, and state

dependents (Esping-Andersen 26). Furthermore, entitlement rules are strict, and recipients are

typically stigmatized. Free market (with little intervention) is preferred and encouraged by

subsidizing private welfare plans (Esping-Andersen 27). The consequence of the liberal regime

is that it minimizes de-commodification effects and erects an order of stratification that is a blend

of a relative equality of poverty among state-welfare recipients, market-differentiated welfare

among the majorities, and a class-political dualism between the two (Esping-Anderson 26). The

second welfare regime is Corporatist. Used in Austria, France, Germany, and Italy, this regime is

shaped by the church and strongly committed to the preservation of traditional family-hood. As a

result, private insurance and occupational benefits play a marginal role. Unfortunately, socialinsurance typically excluded non-working wives, and family benefits encourage motherhood.

The underlying problem here is that it does not allow women the freedom to choose work rather

than the household (Esping-Andersen 28). Women become dependent on their bread-winning

husbands. The principle of subsidiarity serves to emphasize that the state will only interfere

when the familys capacity to service its members is exhausted (Esping-Anderson 27). The last


3/9

of the typology presented by Esping-Andersen is the Social Democratic welfare regime. Pressure

is placed on the state to promote an equality of the highest standards, not an equality of minimal

needs. This regime is common among the Nordic countries. In this regime we are introduced to a

universalistic system, which promotes egalitarianism. All citizens are endowed with similar

rights, irrespective of class or market position, everyone benefits, and everyone feels obliged to

pay. The dominant force behind this social reform was social democracy. Manual workers enjoy

rights identical to those of salaried white-collar employees because this welfare state is highly

de-commodifying. Unlike the other two regimes, this welfare state supports full employment as a

fundamental part of their welfare state commitment.

Esping-Andersens The Three Worlds of Welfare Capitalism, provides a framework for

understanding notions of social policy, structures within the welfare state, and other concepts and

ideas associated with it. It does not, however, conceptualize these same practices and institutions

in a non-western context. Therefore, it is crucial to explore the role of welfare regimes under

different sets of societal conditions. In, A Comparative Welfare Regime Approach to Global

Social Policy, Wood and Gough shift attention away from western capitalism and towards

peripheral capitalism. As a result, a new awareness about social policies and the circumstances of

the country in which they are pertaining tois manifested. Here, practices concerning welfare

regimes become more complicated. For instance, Wood & Gough argue that neither markets, not

states, not communities alone can provide an adequate framework for meeting human needs. A

mix of these three provides a more sustainable and flexible framework for enhancing human

well-being (Wood & Gough 1697).

According to Wood & Gough, the welfare typology expands beyond the three regimes

developed by Esping-Andersen. The first is informal security regimes, which consist of

institutional arrangements where people rely heavily upon community and family relationships

to meet their security need (Wood & Gough 1699), which ultimately leaves people vulnerable.

Second are insecurity regimes. Here, arrangements generate gross inequality and block the

emergence of stable informal mechanisms to mitigate (Wood & Gough 1699). The result is a

vicious cycle of insecurity, suffering, and vulnerability. These two regimes present a stark

contrast between the infrastructures in western and peripheral countries. They illuminate the

realities underdeveloped countries suffer, and allow us to acknowledge the daunting


4/9

repercussions of colonialism, neocolonialism, and globalization. Wood & Goughs account of

welfare regimes also allow us to identify the privilege of western countries described in Esping-

Andersens welfare regimes. Unlike Scandinavia, the United States, and Canada, the state is not

the key institutional factor in, for instance, sub-Saharan Africa. It works much differently for

poorer countries. Many of these countries look to informal communities, civil societies, and local

government for services and assistance. As a result, the objective is not to promote de-

commodifcation, but de-clientelization. This refers to the process of de-linking client dependents

from their personalized, arbitrary, and discretionary entrapment to persons with intimate power

over them (Wood & Gough 1708). It is pivotal to understand this process as a necessity to

transform informal security regimes into welfare state regimes.

Shifting away from the 1960s and 70s, Mkandawire introduces the concept of targeting

in Targeting and Universalism in Poverty Reduction. Targeting was used to help transition from

welfare to workfare. Demographic shifts and widespread unemployment in the 1980s led to the

conclusion that there might be fiscal limitations within universalism (Mkandawire 4). Given the

circumstances of the fiscal crisis, targeting, which aimed resources at the deserving poor, was

seen as the most efficient solution. The privatization of social services helped relieve states of

financial hardship, but it also forced those who could pay for private services to transition.

Although targeting has helped alleviate fiscal burdens, it established an issue of under-coverage.

Moreover, the discourse on targeting led to two important realizations. First, targeting is not

effective in addressing issues of poverty. Lastly, targeting may not be a viable option for

peripheral or developing countries because targeting requires extreme administrative

sophistication, which does not really exist in developing countries. This limitation only reiterates

the effect globalization and neocolonialism has on poor countries implementation of social

policies. Echoing the same sentiment, in Globalization from Below: Social Movements and

Altermundism Reconceptualizing Security from a Latin American Perspective, Springarticulates the social, political, and economic restraints that oppression, globalization andneoliberal policies have placed on poor countries. Latin America, for example, has experienced

limited development due to the neoliberal polices placed on its government by multinational

corporations such as the World Bank and International Monetary Fund. Moreover, Africa is a

country that has experienced more extreme longstanding colonial rule, late independence, and

neocolonial control over its resources, deforestation, famine, and much more. It is therefore clear


5/9

to understand the structural disadvantages that some countries are subjected to, and the

intersectionality between regressive globalization and developing countries. On the other hand,

Springs article alludes the agency that poor people in developing countries are able to establish

through spaces such as the World Social Forum. This demonstrates the resilient nature of

developing and poor countries when certain infrastructures are not present.

According to Dingeldey in Between workfare and enablement The different paths to

transformation of the welfare state: A comparative analysis of activating labor market policies,

activation involves a mix of the enforcement of labor market participation, the conditioning of

rights and growing obligations of the individual at one side, and an increase of services in order

to promote employability and restore social equity at other (Dingeldey 823). Activation is also

regarded as positive and based on the idea of seeking economic opportunity and activity for

everyone in order to combat poverty, dependency, and social exclusion (Dingeldey 826).

Activation is accompanied by a paradigm shift in welfare state policies where activating labor

market policy places a central role. What I find to be activating about this concept is the

emphasis placed on the pressure for the unemployed to enter (or re-enter) the labor market.

Dingeldey argues that the focus on labor force participation and individual responsibility

constitutes a new form of citizenship. The individual is supposed to be involved actively in the

production of social welfare and participate in decision making processes (Dingeldey 825). One

characteristic of activation that is worth mentioning is its special emphasis on support for women

seeking to enter the labor market. Fostering the inclusion of women sets the foundation for more

women-friendly policies, which shall be discussed later. To gain a firm understanding of

activation, Dingeldey provides examples for labor market reform in Denmark, the United

Kingdom, and Germany. One implication of activation that I found to be productive was the

development of training programs. Education and training programs had a profound effect on

individuals entrance into the workforce. This can potentially be the result of apprenticeships and

vocational qualifications that followed. What is more interesting is the reverse effect traininghad in Germany. There has been a steady decline in training provisions since the adoption of

activating labor market policies. Another promising outcome of activating labor market policies

is the economic empowerment it has granted women. In Denmark, women are able to stay home

with their child six months after birth. This is possible because activation has allowed for the

expansion of childcare facilities. As a result, Denmark has the highest employment rate of


6/9

women with children (Dingeldey 842). In the United Kingdom, the development of working tax

credit (WTC) and child tax credit (CTC) has helped eliminate poverty traps for individuals on

benefits and to increase disposable market income by transfers that vary according to the number

of children to be maintained. Consequently, I believe the increase in the activity rate of single

mother (to over fifty five percent in 2004) to be attributed to this policy (Dingeldey 842). I

found that Yeates article, Globalization and Social Policy: From Global Neoliberal Hegemony

to GlobalPolitical Pluralism, focused on activation techniques deployed by poorer countries,primarily because many of them lack the economic capacity and political clout to position

themselves to benefit from globalization. It is crucial to keep in mind that globalization can be an

oppressive force if countries are ill equipped to handle its repercussions. Although globalization

causes a shift in welfare systems from being controlled by states to external economic

constraints, the vocal presence and actions of civil society groups may in certain instances

strengthen the hand of the state (Yeates 74). Furthermore, Yeates article explains the

relationship of activation between international actors and political action. In sum, activation in

social policy can be understood as a reformation of ideas about the need for a new balance of

rights and responsibilities between the welfare state and benefit recipients.

So far, the structure of this paper mirrors the evolution of social policy discourse.

Therefore, it is appropriate to conclude with a discussion on gender equality, and its impact,

rather significant or marginal, on welfare states and social policies. I argue that gender equality

has been a vital component to social policies, especially within the past three decades. Majority

of the discussion concerning gender equality has been centered around care and women-

friendly policies. Before an analysis is conducted, it is pivotal to define both of these concepts.

Found in Woman-friendly policies and state feminism: Theorizing Scandinavian gender equality,

Borchorst and Siim define women-friendliness as:

A state [which] would enable women to have a natural relationship to their

children, their work and public life . . . A woman-friendly state would notforce harder choices on women than on men, or permit unjust treatment on the

basis of sex. In a woman-friendly state women will continue to have children,

yet there will also be other roads to self-realization open to them. In such astate women will not have to choose futures that demand greater sacrifices

from them than are expected of men. (Borchorst and Siim 4-10, 209).


7/9


8/9

breadwinning was seen as the primary route to achieve gender equality. Conversely, this agenda

was challenged and criticized by non Scandinavian feminist scholars as being narrow and not

exploring other routes to gender equality (Borchorst and Siim 211).

Nancy Fraser identified three different visions for achieving gender equality: universal

breadwinner model, caregiver parity model, and the universal caregiver model. The model I find

to be the most affective is the latter because it acknowledges that equality must be constructed

around the woman; women must be the cornerstone for gender equality. The goal is to remove

gendered segregation by making womens life pattern the norm and principles of shared parental

role-playing are encouraged (Borchorst and Siim 211). Denmark, Sweden and Norway serve as

examples to demonstrate how the adoption of these models is manifested. It is apparent that

Scandinavia serves as a leading model for gender equality, but what is unclear is the effect

migration has on gender equality. Does ethnic diversity now pose as a threat to equitability? In

Sweden, the DPP seldom supports policies of gender equality because it claims that gender

equality has already been achieved for the majority population. Their claim is that gender

inequality only exists among the immigrant minority (Borchorst and Siim 213). Then shall we

assume fragmentation is acceptable? Although equability for immigrant women may not be a top

priority on the political agenda, the presence of this group certainly created a platform for

matters gender equality to be discussed. For instance, increased migration, growing inequalities

among women and the lack of immigrant women in political parties have inspired debates about

representation from the perspective of ethnic minorities. Moreover, distinction in equality

between women and ethnic minority women creates fragmentation within feminism; there is no

longer a unified womens movement that speaks for all women (Borchorst and Siim 218).

Borchorst and Siims comments regarding the communal change among women,

increased immigration, and presence of ethnic diversity allow for a smooth transition into

Hassims critique of the western view of gender equality. Hassim claims that despite womens

increasing participation in paid work, labor markets still produce inequalities and reproduce

gender-based segregation. In the context of developing countries, Hassim explores hurdles that

prevent them from establishing gender equality. For instance, poorer countries have very small

formal economies where job security and benefits are privileges reserved for men. As a result,

many women enter the informal economy, which is not covered by labor legislation for social


9/9

protection and earn far less (Hassim 9). Revisiting Frasers universal caregiver model, she

claimed that daddy leave quotas were designed to be gender-neutral, but to the contrary,

Hassim reveals that while women have added paid work to their existing responsibilities of care,

men have decreased the amount of paid work they do and increased their care-work only slightly

(Hassim 10). Because women occupy employment in informal by the masses, there is a huge

demand for informal services, which are granted through family and ties of kinship. It is pivotal

to gender equity then, that this process be reversed and the degree, to which individual adults can

uphold a socially acceptable standard of living independently of family relationships either

through paid labor or through social security provision, should be the standard. Hassim refers to

this process as defamilialization (Hassim 24). Since many developing countries lacked

institutions established by colonialism, institutions that could have expanded the legitimacy of

the state and its captivity to represent women were either severely restricted or actively repressed

(Hassim 28). This lack of infrastructure demonstrates its importance for establishing equality.

In Gender and Social Policy in a Global Context: Uncovering the Gendered Structure of

the Social, Hassim reveals the inevitability of gender inequality among poor and developing

countries with histories of colonial rule. He provides specific barriers to equality that is only

present in poor countries, and thus, creates different realities for women in western countries and

women in developing countries. Furthermore, his work points to that fact that certain institutions

and infrastructures that are needed in order to ensure equalitymany of which are not present in

developing countries. For instance, both economic and political rights are important prerequisites

for gender equality, but they are often nonexistent for women. Yet Hassim reveals how women

establish agencydespite the many adverse conditions they are placed under. For example,

women have successfully made claims on the state, very often by harnessing their maternal roles

to political claims-making advocacy for better conditions and social support for women (Hassim

31). In order to ensure to long-term equality of women, states must continue to improve its

infrastructures (electricity, multi-party elections, pipes, and roads, childcare) because the state is

a key institution as an organizer and provider of social protection, provisioning, and change.

Globalization, Gender Equality, & Welfare Sates

Documents

Transcript of Globalization, Gender Equality, & Welfare Sates