Log -exam, group 3

1. LOCAL AND GLOBAL WELFARE POLICIES,
GROUP EXAM, 5 CR
Alex Brown, Anastasiia
Ivanova, Olawale Oyebade,
Delia Manea
Diaconia University of Applied Sciences
Diak, Kalasatama
Local and Global welfare poli-
cies Group Exam, Group #3
16 December 2016

2. 2
1. The Five welfare models (Author: Alex Brown)
There are a variety of different welfare models, of which I will discuss the follow-
ing three: The Nordic welfare system (Social Democratic), the Liberal welfare
regime, and the Conservative regime.
The Nordic welfare system is implemented in countries like Sweden, Denmark,
Norway, and Finland. The Nordic welfare system is generally focused on im-
plementing a large amount of benefits to the general population in comparison
with the others I will be discussing. Such a system fosters economic collabora-
tion between social classes. Social insurance in the Nordic welfare systems of-
ten aims to provide basic health care to its citizens. Still, the benefits are not
limited to health care; for instance, education might be included, and even pub-
lic transportation. This system stems from a public interest in leftist politics, as
well as widespread public interest in the equality of all citizens.
The Liberal welfare regime, also called the Beveridge system, can be said to be
currently implemented in the USA. It might be said to be a general idea of the
liberal welfare regime that it is heavily focused on individuals taking care of
themselves and accumulating the wealth they need to survive individually. This
is in stark contrast with the Nordic welfare system where it is implied that taxes
are to be used mainly for the benefit of all citizens, and where it is often viewed
as a social right to be equally treated regardless of income. Benefits of the Lib-
eral welfare regime are low taxes for all, with social security benefits aimed to
be used, for the most part, only by the poor or people that haven't been able to
succeed at taking care of themselves. One example of this could be food
stamps in the states for people who can't afford to buy food.
The Conservative regime can be said to be implemented, for example, in coun-
tries like Italy, Spain, and Greece. In contrast with the Nordic welfare system,
the conservative regime might be said to be more similar to the Liberal welfare
regime in the sense that taxes are low. Also, much like the Liberal welfare re-
gime, it is operated on a free market economy. However, unlike the liberal wel-
fare regime there is a strong social attitude that community is extremely impor-

3. 3
tant, i.e. everyone takes care of everyone else when in need. The social atti-
tudes of the Conservative regime is probably more similar to the attitudes one
might find in the Nordic welfare system--there is universal caring for all. How-
ever, unlike the Nordic systems, many things are not regulated so strictly so
there is likely more freedom in this regard. However, despite such reliance on
community, there is also a more prevalent attitude that is focused on individual-
ism and taking care of oneself. This is perhaps contradictory, and in many
senses it is both similar and very different than both the Nordic welfare system
and the Liberal welfare regime.
2. Economics of Welfare (Author: Anastasiia Ivanova)
The Social Democratic/ Nordic Welfare Regime
High taxes with progressive type of taxation – the more income is then more
tax is.
The Liberal welfare regime
- Support the poor by giving food SSI, HUD, TANF
- Low taxes
- Not too relied on labour market
- Easy to implement economically
- Supports entry-level labour
Conservative regime
The free market system means more economic growth
Lower taxes
Strong role for community organization
• Dependency on social contribution instead of on taxes
• Supports people to be more individual and solve problems individually
• Encourage people to be self-reliant and then depend on government
provisions.
The main similarity between the Liberal and Conservative is the low taxation
compare to Nordic system.

4. 4
Concerning the main differences we can point that Nordic system has a lot of
tax-funded welfare projects while the other two systems, especially the Con-
servative, is concerned on encouraging people to be more independent from
the government.
3. Universality versus Selectivity (Author: Olawale Oyebade)
THE ARGUMENT ABOUT WELFARE METHOD:
When universality and selectivity are considered as methods, however, things
get more complicated. One key question is:
 Whether people are better receiving goods and services, like water or
medical care, or
 Whether they are better receiving the money to buy things, which is what
we do for food.
 Another is whether a service should be ‘targeted’, focusing on people in
need, or
 Whether it should go to everyone.
Sometimes the best services are personal; sometimes they are general, like
providing schools and hospitals.
The arguments about universality and selectivity are about principles like:
 What kind of society we want to live in
 What methods how things can practically be done.
It was designed to hold provision to the minimum, and to deal only with people
who could not manage in any other way. The Welfare State was supposed to do
things differently, providing welfare for everyone at the best level possible. The
core of this model was the idea of ‘institutional’ welfare, accepting welfare as a
normal part of everyday life, in the same way that roads, or street lights, or
drains are ‘normal’. Welfare was ‘universal’ because it was comprehensive and
extensive, meeting needs ‘from the cradle to the grave’.
It does not do the same things for everyone, but it provides everyone (including
people who do not use it) with something in common, a service equivalent to
health insurance. There are other things that people may want to see beyond
institutional welfare, rights and empowerment for citizens, solidarity and mutual
support, or the commitment to equality implicit in the idea of the ‘people’s
home’. In the most basic sense, however, the institutional principle is fundamen-
tal to common decency. Few people who believe in the Common Weal are not
also universalists.

5. 5
UNIVERSITY WELFARE METHOD:
Universal services and benefits are services which go to everyone, or at least to
everyone in a category (such as older people, or children, or residents in a
community) without a test of need.
Examples are schools, libraries, bus passes for older people. The basic argu-
ments for universal benefits are, in principle:
a. That they represent rights which everyone has, and
b. They meet common basic needs.
The basic practical arguments are that they are simple to administer, and mini-
mally intrusive. The main arguments against are that they divert resources away
from people in greater need, and they can be expensive. However, universal
benefits are also often austere, it was introduced when there was no money to
waste on complex administration or the luxuries of choice, and in the developing
world universal Basic Health Care Packages have been introduced as the sim-
plest, cheapest and most effective way of spending what one plans to spend
and no more.
SELECTIVE WELFARE METHOD:
Selective services and benefits are services which are preserved for people in
need. Examples include free personal care for older people, benefits for people
with disabilities, and benefits for people who are unemployed.
Selection implies a test that some people will receive the benefit, and others will
not. This should, in principle, lead to greater efficiency, and greater fairness;
selectivity is supposed to be responsive to need.
However, selection is difficult in practice: selective systems tend to be complex
and intrusive, the boundaries are difficult to maintain fairly, and the process of
exclusion means that the systems run the risk of becoming divisive and stigma-
tising. Mistakes are frequent. At the same time, some element of selectivity is
unavoidable, we cannot not have some extra provision for the needs of people
with disabilities.
The arguments about universality and selectivity are not well served by suppos-
ing that we ought to have entirely one kind of system or another. The main ar-
gument for universalism is that we should be trying to shift the balance towards
greater simplicity, less intrusion, and a sense that the public provision of bene-
fits and services should be accepted as a normal part of social life.

6. 6
4. Welfare models and Political ideologies (Delia Manea)
"In social studies, a political ideology is a certain set of ethical ideals, principles,
doctrines, myths or symbols of a social movement, institution, class, and/or
large group that explains how society should work, and offers political and cul-
tural for a certain social order."
According to Esping-Andersen, who wrote the book titled "The Three Worlds of
Welfare Capitalism, published in 1990, they are there main types of welfare
states :liberal, social democrat and corporatist-statist.
The Social-Democratic welfare state model is based on the principle of univer-
salism, giving access to benefits and services based on citizenship. Democratic
socialists believe that both, the economy and society should be run democrati-
cally ,the public need must be meet, and not just a few to have the possibility of
a good life. This type of welfare state is said to provide a high degree of citizen
autonomy, less dependence on family and market. Organization for Economic
Co-Operation and Development (OECD) shows that happiness levels are high-
est in northern European countries. Denmark, Finland and Netherlands rated at
top of the list, Finland is the second.
Democracy and socialism go hand in hand, around the world wherever the idea
of democracy has taken root, socialism has taken root as well. Socialists have
been among the harshest critics of authoritarian Communist states and demo-
cratic socialists always opposed the ruling party-states of those societies, just
as we oppose the ruling classes of capitalist societies. The democratic revolu-
tions were very welcomed, the revolutions helped to transform the former com-
munist countries, like Romania. However, it's not enough, to improve the people
life requires real democracy without new forms of authority or ethnical interfer-
ences. It's very important to not allow all radicalism to be dismissed as com-
munism". We can all learn from the comprehensive welfare state maintained by
Canada's national health care system or from France's nationwide childcare
program.
Among the northern European countries the relative economic equality is be-
cause of the polices pursued by social democratic parties. Countries like Fin-
land, Denmark, Norway or the Netherlands use their relative health to insure a
high standard of life for their citizens, like health care, and subsidized education.
Also social democratic parties are supporting strong labor movements that be-
came central players in economic decision-making. However, the globalization
of capitalism is a real threat to the old social democratic model and because of
that it even harder to be maintain.

7. 7
REFERENCES (Where no counterpart for a title is found in English, the original
title is given in parenthesis.)
Spicker, P. Issue 82 Journal of Scottish Left Review: It can be better than this -
Universality vs Selectivity
Lisa, Binod, Nnaeto, Mike, Vivian N & Tayo. (2016). Welfare Models/Regimes.
Local and Global Welfare Policies: Group Assignment.
http://www.dsausa.org/what_is_democratic_socialism, Accessed Dec. 16, 2016.
Sheikh, L. Models of Welfare States. Accessed Dec. 16, 2016