• Korean Journal of Social Welfare Studies
• /
• v.41 no.3
• /
• pp.403-442
• /
• 2010

This study aims to configurate the contents of social policy strategies of European welfare states in the postindustrial society. The social policy strategy of the socialdemocratic regime consists of 'maintenance of statecentrism' and 'inclusion'. The contents of social policy strategy of the liberal regime are 'expansion of market forces' and 'increase of individual' self-responsibility'. The conservative regime adheres to the 'protection of male breadwinner; and 'income maintenance programs'. Due to these social policy strategies, the conservative regime has very high rate of unemployment. In the liberal regime, the high rate of poverty exists. In contrast, the socialdemocratic regime has low rates of unemployment and poverty and shows best social outcomes among the welfare regimes.

• 한국사회정책
• /
• v.24 no.4
• /
• pp.3-29
• /
• 2017

The study checked whether the trade-off relationship between the home ownerhip and welfare by Kemeny and Castles was still valid in four welfare regimes, and analysed the factors of change and stability on rate of home ownership between social democratic states and southern european states. Based on the results of the study, the relationship between housing ownership and public expenditure was confirmed only in the liberal welfare regime and in the conservative welfare regime, as evidenced by the 2014 data collection. Second, social democratic states have dramatically increased housing mortgage loans and showed signs of housing commodification but southern european states have showed pre commodification of housing, maintained comparatively whole home ownership and low mortgage loans. Third, social democratic states has resulted in a rise in housing demand and housing prices, through reduced new housing and social rented housing construction, home owenership friendly taxation and generous lending policies, but southern european states have maintained a stable housing demand and housing prices thanks to the rich housing stocks, extended family, self provision and self promotion by close relatives, and intergenerational inheritance and transfers of housing. Although sequence of the equity ownership and welfare are still unclear, it is not a rational alternatives to induce housing ownership through large mortgage loans.

• Korean Journal of Social Welfare
• /
• v.57 no.2
• /
• pp.205-230
• /
• 2005

This study empirically examines if there is a certain linkage between the production regimes and welfare systems; and if linked, how they are linked. It also investigates what the different regimes performed in terms of economic growth and redistribution. As a matter of fact, we have a series of studies that explores structural diversity of production and welfare. However, the existing studies are limited in that they consider only specific facets of the structure, although the structure of welfare capitalism should be studied as a comprehensive whole. This is the gap which this study tries to overcome. The study is composed of two major parts. The first one is the cluster analysis that examines if Esping-Andersen's notion about three different welfare regime and the thesis of diversity of capitalism can be dealt within a single research framework. The second is the ANOVA analysis investigating if variables of production and welfare are to be statistically different in the trichotomy framework. According to the result of the analyses, we can find at least two important evidences about institutional complementaries of production and welfare. First, Esping-Andersen's framework is useful to comprehensively deal with production as well as welfare. Secondly, there are statistically different regimes of production and welfare in the context of political economic and social policy variables. What is the most striking conclusion of the study is that there is no difference among the regimes in terms of the level of economic efficiency; while we can find a huge differences in terms of the level of welfare effectiveness. In conclusion, there is no substantive evidence to argue that welfare is innately antithesis of economic growth.

• Korean Journal of Social Welfare
• /
• v.62 no.2
• /
• pp.87-107
• /
• 2010

This paper purports to compare the differences and similarities of social exclusions in Korea with those in the European countries, notably Germany, France, Sweden, Finland, Ireland and U.K. For this purpose, chapter two examines political and social origins of social exclusion as an alternative concept to poverty or unemployment. Chapter three discusses social exclusion paradigms of Silver(1994) in reference to welfare regime theories of Esping-Andersen(1990). Subsequently chapter four, using two artificial social exclusion indicators by principal component analysis, defines the basic nature of social exclusion of Korea in comparison with those of the six European countries. Chapter five duly concludes that social exclusions in Korea are very similar to those of liberal countries (Ireland and U.K.) in that income indicators (poverty and inequality) of Korea are much worse, whereas unemployment rate is relatively low.

• Korean Journal of Social Welfare Studies
• /
• no.37
• /
• pp.319-344
• /
• 2008

The Purpose of this study is to observe the existence of welfare attitude split between welfare regimes clique and to explore the effect of institutional(regime) characteristics on welfare attitude. And Second purpose is to find the characteristics of structure of welfare attitude and then to clarify the characteristics of welfare attitude in Korea. This work contribute to find the point of solidarity and split and to work out the strategical clues for constructing pro-welfare politics. To compare the attitude on the state responsibility about the welfare, Sweden, France, US, and Korea is selected. And the effect of sex, age, education level, income class, and labor status which are abstracted from existing welfare state comparative study are analyzed. The result show the difference in welfare attitude score between countries. The welfare attitude score is Sweden, France and US in order. the Score in Korea is lowest. In the case of the effect structure of welfare attitude between countries, there are no differences between Sweden and France. But the specific characteristics in US and Korea, are observed. And the effect structure of sex, class, labor status is equal in Sweden, France, and US. That is, women, people in low class, and people in low labor status more emphasize the state responsibility on the welfare. But the effect structure of age of US is different comparing other countries. In US, the old age is tend to less support the state responsibility. The education level operate as the effect factor in only US. And Korea show the different effect structure on the welfare attitude. This understanding about structure of welfare consciousness become the basis to construct the strategy for welfare state by proposing the point of consensus and conflict to conversion of welfare paradigm.