Social Insurance and Path Dependence: ‘A Long Hello to Beveridge’

  • Anthony McCashinEmail author


This discussion focuses on a critical juncture in the mid-late 1980s when policymakers again chose social insurance as a model. The chapter shows how the Commission on Social Welfare influenced this choice, and that the choice was mediated by contingent events, political factors and the emergence of national partnership.


Path-dependence Social insurance Social partnership 


  1. Andersen, J. (2002). Change Without Challenge? Welfare States, Social Construction of Challenge and Dynamics of Path Dependency. In J. Clasen (Ed.), What Future for Social Security? Bristol: Policy Press.Google Scholar
  2. Baldwin, P. (1990). The Politics of Social Solidarity. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Blyth, M. (2002). Great Transformations. New York: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Carey, S. (2008). Social Security in Ireland 1939–1952; The Limits to Solidarity. Dublin: Irish Academic Press.Google Scholar
  5. Commission on Social Welfare. (1986). Report. Dublin: Government Publications.Google Scholar
  6. Cook, G. (1983). Models and Strategies of Social Security. Dublin: Commission on Social Welfare Background Paper (unpublished).Google Scholar
  7. Dukelow, F. (2011). Economic Crisis and Welfare Retrenchment: Comparing Policy Responses in the 1970s and 1980s with the Present. Social Policy and Administration, 45(4), 408–429.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Hardiman, N. (2000). Social Partnership, Wage Bargaining and Growth. In B. Nolan, P. O’Connell, & C. T. Whelan (Eds.), Bust to Boom? The Irish Experience of Growth and Inequality. Dublin: Institute of Public Administration.Google Scholar
  9. McCashin, A. (1992). The Politics of Social Security in the Republic of Ireland: A Case Study of the Report of the Commission on Social Welfare. Conference Paper, University College Cork (unpublished).Google Scholar
  10. NESC. (1986). A Strategy for Development, 1986–1990 (Report No. 83). Dublin: National Economic and Social Council.Google Scholar
  11. Obinger, H., Starke, P., Moser, J., Bodegan, C., Gindulus, E., & Leibfried, S. (2010). Transformations of the Welfare State. Small States, Big Lessons. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  12. O’Brien, M. (2008). Poverty, Policy and the State: The Changing Face of Social Security. Bristol: Policy Press.Google Scholar
  13. Palier, B. (Ed.). (2010). A Long Goodbye to Bismarck? The Politics of Welfare Reform in Continental Europe. Amsterdam: Amsterdam University Press.Google Scholar
  14. Pierson, P. (2004). Politics in Time. History, Institutions and Social Analysis. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Roche, W. K. (2009). Social Partnership from Lemass to Cowen. Economic and Social Review, 40(2), 183–205.Google Scholar
  16. Schmidt, V. A. (2002). Does Discourse Matter in the Politics of Welfare State Adjustment? Comparative Political Studies, 35(2), 168–193.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Schmidt, V. A. (2003). How, Where and When Does Discourse Matter in Small States’ Welfare State Adjustment? New Political Economy, 8(1), 127–146.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Schmidt, V. A. (2008). Discursive Institutionalism: The Explanatory Power of Ideas and Discourse. Annual Review of Political Science, 11, 303–326.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© The Author(s) 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.School of Social Work and Social PolicyTrinity CollegeDublin 2Ireland

Personalised recommendations