IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/zbw/zeswps/012005.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

What Do Parties Want? An Analysis of Programmatic Social Policy Aims in Austria, Germany, and the Netherlands

Author

Listed:
  • van Dyk, Silke
  • Seeleib-Kaiser, Martin
  • Roggenkamp, Martin

Abstract

Comparative welfare state research has argued for some time that it makes a difference in regards to the specific welfare state design whether Social Democrats or Christian Democrats are in government. The theory is based on the fact that historically the social policy aims of Social Democrats and Christian Democrats have differed. But can these policy differences still be assumed after almost three decades, which have been characterised by a discourse about necessary welfare state retrenchment, adaptation, and modification? More specifically, in which way have 'new' ideas altered the social and economic policy concepts? We hypothesise that the differences among the two welfare state parties in formerly conservative welfare states have largely faded away. Moreover, we argue that, in the meantime Social Democrats as well as Christian Democrats pursue a more or less common liberal-communitarian approach in welfare state policies in these countries. Our study is based on an in-depth analysis of programmatic approaches by Social Democrats and Christian Democrats in Austria, Germany, and the Netherlands since 1975. Based on Christian-Democratic and Social Democratic ideal types, we pay special attention to the development of employment, social security, and family policies.

Suggested Citation

  • van Dyk, Silke & Seeleib-Kaiser, Martin & Roggenkamp, Martin, 2005. "What Do Parties Want? An Analysis of Programmatic Social Policy Aims in Austria, Germany, and the Netherlands," Working papers of the ZeS 01/2005, University of Bremen, Centre for Social Policy Research (ZeS).
  • Handle: RePEc:zbw:zeswps:012005
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.econstor.eu/bitstream/10419/22987/1/AP_1_2005.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Hibbs, Douglas A., 1977. "Political Parties and Macroeconomic Policy," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 71(4), pages 1467-1487, December.
    2. Guger, Alois, 1998. "Economic Policy and Social Democracy: The Austrian Experience," Oxford Review of Economic Policy, Oxford University Press and Oxford Review of Economic Policy Limited, vol. 14(1), pages 40-58, Spring.
    3. Korpi, Walter & Palme, Joakim, 2003. "New Politics and Class Politics in the Context of Austerity and Globalization: Welfare State Regress in 18 Countries, 1975–95," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 97(3), pages 425-446, August.
    4. Esping-Andersen, Gosta, 1999. "Social Foundations of Postindustrial Economies," OUP Catalogue, Oxford University Press, number 9780198742005.
    5. Kittel, Bernhard & Obinger, Herbert, 2002. "Political parties, institutions, and the dynamics of social expenditure in times of austerity," MPIfG Discussion Paper 02/1, Max Planck Institute for the Study of Societies.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Andreas Kuhn, 2009. "Demand for Redistribution, Support for the Welfare State, and Party Identification in Austria," IEW - Working Papers 440, Institute for Empirical Research in Economics - University of Zurich.
    2. Andreas Kuhn, 2010. "Demand for redistribution, support for the welfare state, and party identification in Austria," Empirica, Springer;Austrian Institute for Economic Research;Austrian Economic Association, vol. 37(2), pages 215-236, May.
    3. Kuhn, Andreas, 2009. "Demand for Redistribution, Support for the Welfare State, and Party Identification in Austria," IZA Discussion Papers 4449, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    4. Andreas Kuhn, 2009. "Demand for Redistribution, Support for the Welfare State, and Party Identification in Austria," NRN working papers 2009-17, The Austrian Center for Labor Economics and the Analysis of the Welfare State, Johannes Kepler University Linz, Austria.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Niklas Potrafke, 2012. "Is German domestic social policy politically controversial?," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 153(3), pages 393-418, December.
    2. Potrafke, Niklas, 2017. "Partisan politics: The empirical evidence from OECD panel studies," Journal of Comparative Economics, Elsevier, vol. 45(4), pages 712-750.
    3. Castles, Francis G., 2011. "Has three decades of comparative public policy scholarship been focusing on the wrong question?," TranState Working Papers 155, University of Bremen, Collaborative Research Center 597: Transformations of the State.
    4. Paetzold, Jörg, 2012. "The Convergence of Welfare State Indicators in Europe: Evidence from Panel Data," Working Papers in Economics 2012-4, University of Salzburg.
    5. Helmut Herwartz & Bernd Theilen, 2014. "Health Care And Ideology: A Reconsideration Of Political Determinants Of Public Healthcare Funding In The Oecd," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 23(2), pages 225-240, February.
    6. Niklas Potrafke, 2012. "Political cycles and economic performance in OECD countries: empirical evidence from 1951–2006," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 150(1), pages 155-179, January.
    7. Kati Kuitto, 2018. "Measuring Welfare Entitlement Generosity in Transitional Welfare States: The Case of Post-communist Countries in Central and Eastern Europe," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 136(1), pages 203-224, February.
    8. Chung, Haejoo & Muntaner, Carles, 2007. "Welfare state matters: A typological multilevel analysis of wealthy countries," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 80(2), pages 328-339, February.
    9. Starke, Peter & Kaasch, Alexandra & van Hooren, Franca, 2011. "Explaining the variety of social policy responses to economic crisis: How parties and welfare state structures interact," TranState Working Papers 154, University of Bremen, Collaborative Research Center 597: Transformations of the State.
    10. Christian Bjørnskov & Niklas Potrafke, 2012. "Political Ideology and Economic Freedom Across Canadian Provinces," Eastern Economic Journal, Palgrave Macmillan;Eastern Economic Association, vol. 38(2), pages 143-166.
    11. Baptiste Françon, 2013. "Who turned their back on the SPD? Electoral disaffection with the German Social Democratic Party and the Hartz reforms," Documents de travail du Centre d'Economie de la Sorbonne 14019, Université Panthéon-Sorbonne (Paris 1), Centre d'Economie de la Sorbonne.
    12. Helmut Herwartz & Bernd Theilen, 2021. "Government ideology and fiscal consolidation: Where and when do government parties adjust public spending?," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 187(3), pages 375-401, June.
    13. Andrea Ceron & Luigi Curini & Fedra Negri, 2019. "Intra-party politics and interest groups: missing links in explaining government effectiveness," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 180(3), pages 407-427, September.
    14. Bove, Vincenzo & Efthyvoulou, Georgios & Navas, Antonio, 2017. "Political cycles in public expenditure: butter vs guns," Journal of Comparative Economics, Elsevier, vol. 45(3), pages 582-604.
    15. Niklas Potrafke, 2009. "Did globalization restrict partisan politics? An empirical evaluation of social expenditures in a panel of OECD countries," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 140(1), pages 105-124, July.
    16. Niklas Potrafke, 2011. "Does government ideology influence budget composition? Empirical evidence from OECD countries," Economics of Governance, Springer, vol. 12(2), pages 101-134, June.
    17. Kai Jäger, 2017. "Economic Freedom in the Early 21st Century: Government Ideology Still Matters," Kyklos, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 70(2), pages 256-277, May.
    18. Potrafke, Niklas, 2020. "General or central government? Empirical evidence on political cycles in budget composition using new data for OECD countries," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 63(C).
    19. Abel Bojar, 2015. "Intra-governmental bargaining and political budget cycles in the European Union," European Union Politics, , vol. 16(1), pages 90-115, March.
    20. Potrafke, Niklas, 2010. "The growth of public health expenditures in OECD countries: Do government ideology and electoral motives matter?," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 29(6), pages 797-810, December.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:zbw:zeswps:012005. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/zesbrde.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.