Search

Redistribution is one of the key elements of contemporary social order, and research has dealt with it in various ways. Most welfare state research mixes in its analysis the regulations on redistribution and actual outcomes. However, to adequately understand redistribution, one needs to distinguish between regulations and outcomes. Measuring unequal conversion in terms of deviations between redistributions as regulated and redistributive outcomes shows how far a redistribution corresponds to what has been officially agreed upon in societies and who is actually better or worse off in the end. Empirically focusing on family-related redistribution, our analysis was based on European Union Statistics on Income and Living Conditions data and the European microsimulation tool EUROMOD. First, we assumed that differences between regulations and outcomes vary depending on the family type. Thus, we compared the actual and simulated disposable household income for various family types. Second, we assumed that differences between regulations and outcomes vary by country. Consequently, we analysed a variety of European countries. Our findings showed that there are substantial differences between regulations on redistribution and outcomes. These differences increase income inequalities between families. This held true for all of our study countries, although to a different degree. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Ein zentrales Element wohlfahrtsstaatlicher Tätigkeit ist Umverteilung. Familie stellt dabei ein wichtiges Kriterium in der Umverteilung europäischer Wohlfahrtsstaaten dar. Bisher wurde Familie als eigenständiges Prinzip wohlfahrtsstaatlicher Umverteilung jedoch kaum analysiert. Die vorliegende Studie untersucht auf Basis des europäischen Simulationsmodells EUROMOD am Fallbeispiel Deutschland, in welchem Ausmaß Familie Ressourcen gewährt bzw. von ihr eingefordert werden. Umverteilung in Bezug auf Familie wird also in Hinblick auf Rechte und Pflichten analysiert. Unsere Ergebnisse zeigen, dass der deutsche Wohlfahrtsstaat in Bezug auf Familie als Umverteilungsprinzip komplexer ist als gemeinhin angenommen. Zwar bestätigt unsere Studie, dass der deutsche Wohlfahrtsstaat verheiratete Paare finanziell besonders unterstützt, zugleich wird jedoch deutlich, dass die wohlfahrtsstaatliche Umverteilung von zahlreichen familienbezogenen Kriterien abhängt und bei der konkreten Zuweisung von Ressourcen mittels spezifischer Umverteilungsregelungen systematisch nach Familienformen unterschieden wird. Die wohlfahrtsstaatliche Umverteilung ist somit geprägt von ungleichen Zuweisungen und Einforderungen von Ressourcen, abhängig von der Familienform, in der man lebt. Die Studie leistet einen wichtigen Beitrag zur Analyse wohlfahrtsstaatlicher Umverteilungslogiken. Central to welfare states is redistribution. One of the important criteria of redistribution in European welfare states is family. But so far, family has hardly been analysed as a redistributive principle of the welfare state. This study analyses for the case of Germany in how far resources are granted and requested from family by welfare state regulations. Consequently, redistribution in terms of family is analysed covering both rights and obligations. The study is based on the European simulation model EUROMOD. The findings show that the German welfare state is, in terms of family as a redistributive principle, more complex than generally expected. The study confirms that the German welfare state financially supports married couples in a particularly advantageous way. At the same time, though, we see that welfare state redistribution depends on numerous family-based criteria and that the concrete allocation of resources by means of specific regulations systematically differs depending on the family form. Welfare state redistribution, in other words, is characterized by an unequal granting and request of resources, depending on the family form one lives in. This study contributes to the analysis of the redistributive logics of the welfare state. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Family is one of the major principles of welfare state redistribution. It has, however, rarely been at the centre of welfare state research. This contribution intends to help remedy the research gap in family-related redistribution. By examining the German welfare state which is known to be both redistributive and family-oriented, we want to answer the question of how and how far the German welfare state institutionalises family as a redistributive principle. Our case-study of German welfare state regulations in terms of family is based on the tax-benefit microsimulation model EUROMOD and its Hypothetical Household Tool (HHoT). We differentiate 54 family forms to adequately reflect our three theoretical assumptions, which are: (1) redistributive logics differ across family forms, and in part markedly; (2) these differences are not the result of one coherent set of regulations, but of an interplay of partially contradictory regulations; (3) family as a redistributive principle manifests itself not only in terms of additional benefits to families, but also in terms of particular obligations of families to financially support family members before they are entitled to public support. These aspects have hardly been analysed before and combining them allows a clear evaluation of family-related redistribution. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Self-responsibility is a prominent keyword in social policy and in welfare state reforms. The concept of self-responsibility, though, has never been clearly dissected for welfare state analysis. In particular, the debate on the turn toward self-responsibility in welfare states has not been adequately conceptualized, nor has the institutionalization of the family in welfare states been correspondingly analyzed, though all welfare states, to different degrees, apply family-related conditions to social rights. In other words, welfare states have treated individuals with family differently from individuals without family, and this has an impact on the interpretation of the turn toward self-responsibility. In this contribution, we systematically and comparatively analyze welfare state change in the family-related conditions applied to social rights, in order to identify shifts in financial responsibility for social rights from the public realm to either the individual or the family. We analyze changes occurring between 1993 and 2013 for two social security levels and two target groups in six European countries. Our findings show that trends toward reducing public financial responsibility, as in shifting financial responsibility for social security from the public realm back to citizens, have not prevailed. On the contrary, public financial responsibility for social rights has in part increased and in part been reshifted onto the family, so that self-responsibility is subsumed here under the concept of subsidiarity, and therewith refers to a nonindividualized "self". Citizens, in other words, are not increasingly conceived by welfare state regulations as isolated and self-reliant individuals, but as subjects embedded in both the public and family spheres. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Current societies have undergone a many-faceted but also general turn toward self-responsibility. This is hardly contested, as shown by societal analyses of different kinds. Up to now though, the literature on self-responsibility has either focused on specific areas of society or hardly discussed the concept in sociological depth. In this special issue, we aim to do both. From a broad sociological and societal perspective the special issue analyses differences and communalities in the turn toward self-responsibility and highlights the challenges and perspectives it presents. The aim is a new discussion of the concept of self-responsibility that draws on actors' embeddedness in institutional environments and emphasizes the consequences of the development for individuals and societies. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

European welfare states used to be based on the principle of the family. Since the 1990s, however, ‘individual responsibility’ has been promoted, which fundamentally alters the traditional welfare-institutional framing of the family and the corresponding construction of the social citizen. One policy field that has been heavily influenced by this development is old-age security. The literature assumes a convergence towards institutional individualisation. We show this however to be incorrect. We empirically analyse and classify welfare-institutional change in old-age security with regard to individualisation. An innovative methodological approach for institutional analysis allows a nuanced identification of the welfare-institutional trends towards individualisation of the social citizen above pension age both within and between welfare states. We conclude that there has been no general and no partial convergence towards individualisation. Instead, on average, family elements in old-age security have either increased or persisted. Also, our analysis suggests that welfare-institutional change with regard to family is far from being a linear process and in part even displays contradictions. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]