Bossing or Protecting? The Integration of Social Regulation into the Welfare State

This article is an empirical analysis of how social regulation is integrated into the welfare state. I compare health, migration, and unemployment policy reforms in Australia, Austria, Canada, Belgium, France, Germany, Italy, the Netherlands, New Zealand, Sweden, Switzerland, the UK, and the United States from 1980 to 2014. Results show that the timing of reform events is similar among countries for health and unemployment policy but differs among countries for migration policy. For migration and unemployment policy, the integration of regulation and welfare is more likely to entail conditionality compared to health policy. In other words, in these two policy fields, it is more common that claimants receive financial support upon compliance with social regulations. Liberal or Continental European welfare regimes are especially inclined to integration. I conclude that integrating regulation and welfare entails a double goal: “bossing†citizens by making them take up available jobs while expelling migrants and refugees for minor offenses; and protecting citizens from risks, such as noncommunicable diseases.