Advertisement

The Variable Selection Problem in the Three Worlds of Welfare Literature

  • Erdem YörükEmail author
  • İbrahim Öker
  • Kerem Yıldırım
  • Burcu Yakut-Çakar
Article

Abstract

Based on a quantitative meta-analysis of empirical studies, this article points out a significant flaw in the Three Worlds of Welfare literature, the “variable selection problem.” Compiling, classifying, and quantitatively analysing all variables that have been employed in this literature, the article shows first that variable selection has depended more on case selection than on theory. Scholars tend to employ variables based on data availability, rather than selecting variables according to theoretical frameworks. Second, the use of welfare policy variables is mostly limited to the analysis of Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) countries, while studies analysing non-OECD countries, where data is limited, tend to use developmental outcome variables as a proxy. This tendency harms conceptualization and operationalization of welfare regimes, as well as blur the boundary between development and welfare regimes studies. Third, the use of original Esping-Andersen variables remains very limited, undermining continuity, comparability, and reliability within the literature.

Keywords

Welfare modelling Case selection Methodology Comparative analysis Welfare regime 

Notes

Acknowledgements

We thank the team members of Emerging Welfare ERC project (emw.ku.edu.tr) for their comments and criticisms, the editor of Social Indicators Research for her continuous support and the anonymous reviewers for their very constructive criticisms and suggestions.

Funding

This work was supported by the European Research Council (ERC) (Grant Number: 714868).

References

  1. Abrahamson, P. (1999). The welfare modelling business. Social Policy & Administration, 33, 394–415.  https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-9515.00160.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Abu Sharkh, M. (2009). Global welfare mixes and wellbeing: cluster, factor and regression analyses from 1990 to 2000. Retrieved from Centre for Democracy, Development and the Rule of Law (CDDRL) at Stanford University website: http://cddrl.fsi.stanford.edu/sites/default/files/No_94_Sharkh_Global_welfare.pdf.
  3. Abu Sharkh, M., & Gough, I. (2010). Global welfare regimes: A cluster analysis. Global Social Policy, 10, 27–58.  https://doi.org/10.1177/1468018109355035.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Appadurai, A. (1988). Putting hierarchy in its place. Cultural Anthropology, 3(1), 36–49.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Araghi, F. A. (1995). Global depeasantization, 1945–1990. The Sociological Quarterly, 36(2), 337–368.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Arts, W., & Gelissen, J. (2010). Models of the welfare state. In F. G. Castles, S. Leibfried, & J. Lewis (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of the welfare state (pp. 569–583). Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  7. Bambra, C. (2004). The worlds of welfare: Illusory and gender blind? Social Policy and Society, 3, 201–211.  https://doi.org/10.1017/s147474640400171x.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Bambra, C. (2005). Cash versus services: ‘Worlds of welfare’ and the decommodification of cash benefits and health care services. Journal of Social Policy, 34, 195–213.  https://doi.org/10.1017/s0047279404008542.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Bambra, C. (2006). Research note: Decommodification and the worlds of welfare revisited. Journal of European Social Policy, 16, 73–80.  https://doi.org/10.1177/0958928706059835.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Bambra, C. (2007). Defamilisation and welfare state regimes: A cluster analysis. International Journal of Social Welfare, 16(4), 326–338.  https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2397.2007.00486.x.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Barrientos, A. (2015). ‘A veritable mountain of data and years of endless statistical manipulation’: Methods in the three worlds and after. Social Policy and Society, 14, 259–270.  https://doi.org/10.1017/s1474746414000578.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Bernstein, H. (2010). Class dynamics of agrarian change. Hartford: Kumarian Press.Google Scholar
  13. Castles, F. G., & Obinger, H. (2008). Worlds, families, regimes: Country clusters in European and OECD area public policy. West European Politics, 31, 321–344.  https://doi.org/10.1080/01402380701835140.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Chakrabarty, D. (2007). Provincializing Europe: Postcolonial thought and historical difference—new edition (1st ed.). Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
  15. Clasen, J., & Siegel, N. A. (2007). Comparative welfare state analysis and the ‘dependent variable problem’. In J. Clasen & N. A. Siegel (Eds.), Investigating welfare state change: The ‘dependent variable problem’ in comparative analysis (pp. 3–12). Retrieved from http://rszarf.ips.uw.edu.pl/welfare-state/clasen.pdf.
  16. Danforth, B. (2014). Worlds of welfare in time: A historical reassessment of the three-world typology. Journal of European Social Policy, 24, 164–182.  https://doi.org/10.1177/0958928713517919.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Ebbinghaus, B. (2012, September). Comparing welfare state regimes: Are typologies an ideal or realistic strategy? Paper presented at European Social Policy Analysis Network Conference, Edinburgh, UK. Retrieved from http://www.cas.ed.ac.uk/__data/assets/pdf_file/0005/89033/Ebbinghaus_-_Stream_2.pdf.
  18. Eger, M. A., & Breznau, N. (2017). Immigration and the welfare state: A cross-regional analysis of European welfare attitudes. International Journal of Comparative Sociology, 58(5), 440–463.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Elyachar, J. (2005). Markets of dispossession: NGOs, economic development, and the state in Cairo (49320th ed.). Durham: Duke University Press Books.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Emmenegger, P., Kvist, J., & Marx, P. (2015). Three worlds of welfare capitalism: The making of a classic. Journal of European Social Policy, 25, 3–13.  https://doi.org/10.1177/0958928714556966.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Esping-Andersen, G. (1990). The three worlds of welfare capitalism. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
  22. Esping-Andersen, G. (1996). Welfare states in transition: National adaptations in global economies. London: Sage.Google Scholar
  23. Esping-Andersen, G. (1999). Social foundations of post-industrial economies. New York: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Fabian, J., & Bunzl, M. (2002). Time and the other: How anthropology makes its object (unknown ed.). New York: Columbia University Press.Google Scholar
  25. Ferguson, J. (2006). Global shadows: Africa in the neoliberal world order (1st ed.). Durham, NC: Duke University Press Books.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Ferragina, E., & Seeleib-Kaiser, M. (2011). Thematic review: Welfare regime debate: past, present, futures? Policy and Politics, 39(4), 583–611.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Ferragina, E., Seeleib-Kaiser, M., & Spreckelsen, T. (2015). The four worlds of ‘welfare reality’: Social risks and outcomes in Europe. Social Policy and Society, 14, 287–307.  https://doi.org/10.1017/s1474746414000530.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Ferragina, E., Seeleib-Kaiser, M., & Tomlinson, M. (2012). Unemployment protection and family policy at the turn of the 21st century: A dynamic approach to welfare regime theory. Social Policy and Administration, 47(7), 783–805.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Ferrera, M. (1996). The ‘southern model’ of welfare in social Europe. Journal of European Social Policy, 6, 17–37.  https://doi.org/10.1177/095892879600600102.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Franzoni, J. M. (2008). Welfare regimes in Latin America: Capturing constellations of markets, families, and policies. Latin American Politics and Society, 50, 67–100.  https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1548-2456.2008.00013.x.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Goodin, R. E. (2001). Work and welfare: Towards a post-productivist welfare regime. British Journal of Political Science, 31, 13–39.  https://doi.org/10.1017/s0007123401000023.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Gough, I. (2004). Welfare regimes in development contexts: a global and regional analysis. In I. Gough & G. Wood (Eds.), Insecurity and Welfare Regimes in Asia, Africa and Latin America (pp. 15–48). New York: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Gough, I. (2013). Social policy regimes in the developing world. In P. Kennett (Ed.), A handbook of comparative social policy (pp. 205–224). Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.Google Scholar
  34. Gough, D., Oliver, S., & Thomas, J. (2012). An introduction to systematic reviews. London and Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
  35. Gough, I., & Wood, G. (2004). Insecurity and Welfare Regimes in Asia, Africa and Latin America. New York: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Gough, I., & Wood, G. (2006). A comparative welfare regime approach to global social policy. World Development, 34, 1696–1712.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.worlddev.2006.02.001.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Green-Pedersen, C. (2004). The dependent variable problem within the study of welfare state retrenchment: Defining the problem and looking for solutions. Journal of Comparative Policy Analysis: Research and Practice, 6, 3–14.  https://doi.org/10.1080/1387698042000222763.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Harvey, D. (2006). Spaces of Global Capitalism: A Theory of Uneven Geographical Development. London: Verso.Google Scholar
  39. Howlett, M., & Cashore, B. (2009). The dependent variable problem in the study of policy change: Understanding policy change as a methodological problem. Journal of Comparative Policy Analysis: Research and Practice, 11, 33–46.  https://doi.org/10.1080/13876980802648144.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Hudson, J., & Kühner, S. (2009). Towards productive welfare? A comparative analysis of 23 OECD countries. Journal of European Social Policy, 19, 34–46.  https://doi.org/10.1177/0958928708098522.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Hudson, J., & Kühner, S. (2012). Analysing the productive and protective dimensions of welfare: Looking beyond the OECD. Social Policy & Administration, 46, 35–60.  https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9515.2011.00813.x.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Kangas, O. (1994). The politics of social security: On regressions, qualitative comparisons, and cluster analysis. In T. Janosk & A. M. Hicks (Eds.), The comparative political economy of the welfare state (pp. 346–364). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Kim, K. (2015). From worlds to cases: Case selection and ‘other worlds’ in the welfare modelling business. Social Policy and Society, 14, 309–321.  https://doi.org/10.1017/s1474746414000554.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Korpi, W., & Palme, J. (1998). The paradox of redistribution and strategies of equality: Welfare state institutions, inequality, and poverty in the western countries. American Sociological Review, 63, 661–687. Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org/stable/2657333.
  45. Kühner, S. (2007). Country-level comparisons of welfare state change measures: Another facet of the dependent variable problem within the comparative analysis of the welfare state. Journal of European Social Policy, 17, 5–18.  https://doi.org/10.1177/0958928707071875.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Minas, C., Jacobson, D., Antoniou, E., & McMullen, C. (2014). Welfare regime, welfare pillar and Southern Europe. Journal of European Social Policy, 24, 135–149.  https://doi.org/10.1177/0958928713517917.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Obinger, H., & Wagschal, U. (2001). Families of nations and public policy. West European Politics, 24, 99–114.  https://doi.org/10.1080/01402380108425419.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Piot, C. (1999). Remotely global: Village modernity in West Africa (1st ed.). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  49. Portes, A., Castells, M., & Benton, L. A. (1989). The informal economy: Studies in advanced and less advanced countries. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press.Google Scholar
  50. Powell, M., & Barrientos, A. (2004). Welfare regimes and the welfare mix. European Journal of Political Research, 43, 83–105.  https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1475-6765.2004.00146.x.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Powell, M., & Barrientos, A. (2011). An audit of the welfare modelling business. Social Policy & Administration, 45(1), 69–84.  https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9515.2010.00754.x.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Powell, M., & Kim, K. (2014). The ‘Chameleon’ Korean welfare regime. Social Policy & Administration, 48(6), 626–646.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Ragin, C. (1994). A qualitative comparative analysis of pension systems. In T. Janosk & A. M. Hicks (Eds.), The comparative political economy of the welfare state (pp. 320–345). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Rice, D. (2013). Beyond welfare regimes: From empirical typology to conceptual ideal types. Social Policy & Administration, 47(1), 93–110.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Rudra, N. (2007). Welfare states in developing countries: Unique or universal? Journal of Politics, 69, 378–396.  https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2508.2007.00538.x.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Said, E. W. (1979). Orientalism (1st Vintage Books ed edition). New York: Vintage.Google Scholar
  57. Saint-Arnaud, S., & Bernard, P. (2003). Convergence or resilience? A hierarchical cluster analysis of the welfare regimes in advanced countries. Current Sociology, 51, 499–527.  https://doi.org/10.1177/00113921030515004.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Schröder, M. (2009). Integrating welfare and production typologies: How refinements of the varieties of capitalism approach call for a combination of welfare typologies. Journal of Social Policy, 38, 19–43.  https://doi.org/10.1017/s0047279408002535.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. Scruggs, L., & Allan, J. P. (2006). The material consequences of welfare states: Benefit generosity and absolute poverty in 16 OECD countries. Comparative Political Studies, 39, 880–904.  https://doi.org/10.1177/0010414005281935.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. Scruggs, L., & Allan, J. P. (2008). Social stratification and welfare regimes for the twenty-first century: Revisiting the three worlds of welfare capitalism. World Politics, 60, 642–664.  https://doi.org/10.1353/wp.0.0020.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. Shalev, M. (1996). The privatization of social policy? Occupational welfare and the welfare state in America, Scandinavia, and Japan. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar
  62. Shalev, M. (2007). Limits and alternatives to multiple regression in comparative research. In L. Mjøset & T. H. Clausen (Eds.), Capitalisms compared. Comparative social research (Vol. 24, pp. 261–308). Emerald Group Publishing Limited. Retrieved from http://www.emeraldinsight.com/doi/abs/10.1016/S0195-6310(06)24006-7.
  63. Siaroff, A. (1994). Work, welfare and gender equality: A new typology. In D. Sainsbury (Ed.), Gendering welfare states (pp. 82–100). London: Sage.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. Silver, B. J. (2003). Forces of labor: Workers’ movements and globalization since 1870. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  65. Talme, L. (2013). Do capitalist welfare states still consist of the good, the bad and the ugly? Unpublished thesis. Sweden: Lund University.Google Scholar
  66. Vrooman, J. C. (2012). Regimes and cultures of social security: Comparing institutional models through nonlinear PCA. International Journal of Comparative Sociology, 53, 444–477.  https://doi.org/10.1177/0020715212469512.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  67. Walker, A., & Wong, C. (1996). Rethinking the western construction of the welfare state. International Journal of Health Services, 26(1), 67–92.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  68. Wood, G., & Gough, I. (2006). A comparative welfare regime approach to global social policy. World Development, 34(10), 1696–1712.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  69. Xu, Z. (2017). The development of capitalist agriculture in China. Review of Radical Political Economics, 49(4), 591–598.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature B.V. 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of SociologyKoç UniversityIstanbulTurkey
  2. 2.Department of Social Policy and InterventionUniversity of OxfordOxfordUK
  3. 3.Department of Political ScienceUniversity of MinnesotaTwin CitiesUSA
  4. 4.Department of Political ScienceSabancı UniversityIstanbulTurkey
  5. 5.IstanbulTurkey

Personalised recommendations