• Korean Journal of Social Welfare
• /
• v.57 no.1
• /
• pp.245-269
• /
• 2005

This paper purports to evaluate the public assistance programme of Korea in comparison with those of member states of the European Union, using the concept of poverty regime as a heuristic device. For this purpose, chapter two discusses notions of welfare-state regime (Esping-Andersen, 1990) and poverty regime(Sainsbury and Morissen, 2002). Chapter three examines poverty and income distribution in Korea and the member states of the EU, and chapter four compares and analyses the public assistance programme of those countries, using hierarchical cluster analysis. It claims that the 'welfare paradox' of $L{\empty}delmel$ (1997) is not based on evidence, and duly concludes that the overall level of welfare effort such as welfare expenditure is a main determinant for the development of public assistance programmes.

• Korean Journal of Social Welfare
• /
• v.59 no.3
• /
• pp.75-97
• /
• 2007

The purpose of this article is to explore French 'minima sociaux', focusing its scheme, benefit determination rule and its level appreciation. First, on the its structure domain, French 'minima sociaux' presents the plural system in which there is eight categorical benefits and one general benefit. Il is the representation of the intention to guarantee minimum income for the dead zone people out of the social insurance application and also a historical product in different period, by different logic of benefits implementation. Second, comparing nine benefits based on the benefit determination rule, level of benefits for the poor without work ability is higher than one for the poor with work ability. Il represents one polarized perception toward for the poor according to have or not its work ability. Third, comparing level of 'minima sociaux' with relative poverty line, the level of the most 'minima sociaux' is placed under the poverty line. Nevertheless, it must not forget that 'minima sociaux' plays its role as the fundamental alternative for poverty alleviation, but not the only alternative. Fourth and finally, comparing with minimum income guarantee(SMIC in french), level of RMI benefit is estimated merely on the 50% of SMIC. We can consider that it is the result of the interaction of the complex factors, as the limited role of the state toward the minimum income guarantee for the RMI beneficiary and the intervention the logic of status instead of the logic of need, etc..