Advanced Search

Journal Navigation

Journal Home

Subscriptions

Archive

Contact Us

Table of Contents

Click here to submit your manuscript to SPPS

Click here to sign up for SAGE Journal Email Alerts today!

Sign In to gain access to subscriptions and/or personal tools.
American Behavioral Scientist
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow References
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to Saved Citations
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Request Reprints
Right arrow Add to My Marked Citations
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Right arrow Citing Articles via Scopus
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by ROTHSTEIN, B.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
Social Bookmarking
 Add to CiteULike   Add to Complore   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati   Add to Twitter  
What's this?

Cooperation for Social Protection

Explaining Variation in Welfare Programs

BO ROTHSTEIN

University of Göteborg

The welfare state can be seen as a measure of the social protection. A major finding within the comparative welfare state research is the differences in scope, institutionalization, and effectiveness against poverty between the institutionalized forms of social protection among the industrialized Western democracies. The major question in this article is, How can we understand and explain the causal mechanism between such institutions, social norms, and human behavior? A model is presented to show that if voters/taxpayers act out of self-interest, both a selective/minimal and an encompassing/universal welfare state are likely outcomes. The different outcomes cannot be explained by the importance of the ideology of ruling political parties or that citizens in these different countries have different basic values about social justice. Instead, the argument is that the puzzle why structurally similar countries vary so much in their systems of social protection can be solved by institutional theory.

American Behavioral Scientist, Vol. 45, No. 5, 901-918 (2002)
DOI: 10.1177/0002764202045005010


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Complore Complore   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati   Add to Twitter Twitter    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
Progress in Development StudiesHome page
S. Hickey
The return of politics in development studies I: getting lost within the poverty agenda?
Progress in Development Studies, October 1, 2008; 8(4): 349 - 358.
[PDF]


Home page
American Behavioral ScientistHome page
M. VAN VUGT and M. SNYDER
Introduction: Cooperation in Society: Fostering Community Action and Civic Participation
American Behavioral Scientist, January 1, 2002; 45(5): 765 - 768.
[PDF]