Über die Autorin bzw. den Autor

Stephan Haggard & Robert R. Kaufman

Von der hinteren Coverseite

"While many authors cannot see beyond the borders of their own country, Haggard and Kaufman masterfully compare Latin America, East Asia, and East Europe from a global perspective. These two great scholars analyze urgent contemporary problems, the status and future fate of the welfare state, and the relationship of changes with the creation and development of democracy with remarkable expertise, precision, and human empathy."--János Kornai, professor emeritus, Harvard University and Collegium Budapest

"This ambitious book extends the theoretical framework of the literature on welfare states in the advanced capitalist countries, and situates the experience of these countries in a broader comparative context. Haggard and Kaufman bring out the multifaceted implications of development models and regime types for social policy. Their synthetic account is truly a tour de force and a testimony to the fruitfulness of cross-regional comparison."--Jonas Pontusson, Princeton University

"A masterly analysis of how political interests, economic circumstances, development strategies, and local history have shaped what are surprisingly different versions of the welfare state across the developing world. The authors combine fine-grained country analyses with intelligent use of data, and explain and extend the theory and literature on the modern welfare state. The book is both scholarly and readable."--Nancy Birdsall, president of the Center for Global Development

"This book has no equal in the welfare-state literature, a truly impressive achievement. Haggard and Kaufman combine meticulous scholarship with sophisticated theoretical guidance in this study of welfare state evolution in Latin America, Asia, and East Europe. The book not only fills a huge void in our knowledge, it also compels us to seriously rethink prevailing theory."--Gøsta Esping-Andersen, Universitat Pompeu Fabra, Barcelona

"A very, very valuable book. Haggard and Kaufman are up to their old tricks--helping establish a new line of investigation in a desperately understudied field. This book will be widely read, heavily cited, and will inspire a generation of research. It is going to have an important impact in comparative politics and beyond."--Erik Wibbels, Duke University

"A major undertaking that will make a significant contribution to the scholarship on welfare states in political science and sociology. This ambitious book provides a wealth of information on twenty-one countries' social welfare trajectories from the end of World War II to the present. Haggard and Kaufman provide quantitative analysis of trends with detailed country histories, which makes for an empirically rich account."--Nina Bandelj, University of California, Irvine

Auszug. © Genehmigter Nachdruck. Alle Rechte vorbehalten.

Development, Democracy, and Welfare States

Princeton University Press

Introduction

The comparative study of social policy in developing countries is of recent vintage. Yet the middle-income countries of Latin America, East Asia, and Eastern Europe have welfare systems that originated in the early postwar period. The questions posed by these systems are the same as those that motivate the literature on the advanced welfare state: Why did governments undertake the provision of social insurance and services? How have welfare systems evolved over time, and how are benefits distributed?

The relevance of these questions has been heightened by epochal political and economic changes that occurred in the developing and formerly socialist world in the 1980s and 1990s. Most countries in the three regions democratized during this period, raising hopes that new governments would be more attentive to social issues. At the same time, most countries also experienced financial crises, recession, and associated fiscal constraints. These problems triggered wide-ranging reforms, including, but by no means limited to, liberalization and increased economic openness.

Economic crisis and market reforms entailed serious social dislocations and raised questions about the viability of existing welfare commitments. Could social spending be sustained in the face of severe fiscal constraints? Or would economic crises and reform force new democracies to limit, or retrench, social-policy commitments?

In this book, we analyze the development and reform of social policy among the middle-income countries of Latin America, East Asia, and Eastern Europe. By 1980, at the onset of the major economic and political changes of the late twentieth century, the three regions had developed distinctive social-welfare models. Eastern European welfare systems, though increasingly strained, provided comprehensive protections and services to almost all of their populations. East Asian welfare systems offered minimal social insurance, but a number placed a high priority on investment in education. In Latin America, the urban middle class and some blue-collar workers enjoyed access to relatively generous systems of public protection, but peasants and informal-sector workers were generally excluded or underserved.

These welfare legacies had a strong influence on both the politics and the economics of social policy as the countries of the three regions democratized. Past policies-or the absence of them-created constituencies and generated demands on incoming democratic governments. Prior welfare commitments also had important fiscal implications. In Eastern Europe and Latin America, entitlements placed heavy burdens on governments and generated strong pressures for reform and even retrenchment. In the high-growth Asian countries, by contrast, new democratic governments were relatively unencumbered by prior welfare commitments and had room to expand social insurance and services.

In exploring these distinctive welfare trajectories, we build on three lines of theoretical argument that have motivated the literature on the advanced welfare state. The first, and arguably the most basic, is the significance of distributive coalitions and economic interests. Following the power-resource approach, we consider the extent to which political elites incorporate or exclude organizations and political parties representing urban labor and the rural poor. We focus initially on critical political realignments that resulted in the long-term repression of these groups in some countries and allowed space for them to operate in others. Over time, as Pierson (1994) has argued with respect to advanced welfare states, the commitments established through these initial political choices created stakeholders and constituencies that influenced the subsequent course of social policy.

The second set of factors we consider are economic; this set includes both the performance of the economy and its organization. Economic performance exerts a crucial influence on social policy, particularly through its effect on the fiscal capacity of the state. High growth is at least a permissive condition for an expansion of entitlements and spending, slow growth, crises, and attendant fiscal constraints, by contrast, place political as well as economic limits on the ability to sustain welfare entitlements and services.

Our focus on the "organization" of the economy follows and modifies the varieties of capitalism literature. We show how the development strategies of governments, and the resultant production strategies of firms, are complementary to particular social policies and labor-market institutions. Over time, the sustainability of these different economic models also had a crucial impact on the path of social policy. The crisis and transformation of Latin America's import-substitution model during the 1980s and the rapid implosion of state socialism in the early 1990s undermined import-substituting firms and state-owned enterprises that had been central pillars of social policy in both regions. Privatization, restructuring, and greater exposure to international competition had important implications for the social contract.

Political institutions constitute the third cluster of factors that influence social policy. Given the political heterogeneity of the countries in our sample, and the "third wave" of democratization that began in the 1970s, we are particularly interested in the influence of regime type. To what extent did democracy and democratization affect the responsiveness of governments to the interests of low-income groups?

Regime type is an important component of any explanation of social policy. Dictatorship and democracy determine the extent to which competing parties can enter the electoral arena and the freedom interest groups enjoy in organizing and exercising influence. However, we also emphasize the limitations of a purely institutional approach. Institutional rules of the game-the supply side of the political market-are not sufficient to account for the character of social policy without consideration of underlying interests and their organization-the demand side of the political market-and the economic context in which governments operate.

THE SCOPE OF SOCIAL POLICIES AND VARIATIONS IN WELFARE SYSTEMS

What do we mean by social or welfare policy? An expansive view of the social contract between states and citizens would arguably begin with the capacity of governments to deliver economic growth. However, the question of growth is analytically distinct from the question of how governments choose to redistribute income, either through insurance schemes that mitigate risk or through spending on basic social services that are of particular significance to the poor. We focus on these two broad areas of social policy and on the particular way they are combined in broader policy complexes.

In principle, social insurance can offer protection against the full range of life-cycle and market risks, including sickness, work-related injury and disability, maternity and childbearing, unemployment, retirement, and death (through survivors' benefits). However, pensions and health insurance are the most significant forms of social insurance in the countries in our sample, and we pay particular attention to them. In our consideration of more recent reforms in part...