Roads and Barriers towards Social Investments: Comparing Labour Market and Family Policy Reforms in Europe and East Asia

References

• An, M. Y., & Peng, I. (2016). Diverging paths? A Comparative look at childcare policies in Japan, South Korea and Taiwan. Social Policy & Administration, 50(5), 540–558.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Anderson, K. M. (2001). The politics of retrenchment in a social democratic welfare state: Reform of Swedish pensions and unemployment insurance. Comparative Political Studies, 34(9), 1063–1091.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bengtsson, M., de la Porte, C., & Jacobsson, K. (2017). Labour market policy under conditions of permanent austerity: Any sign of social investment? Social Policy & Administration, 51(2), 367–388.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bleses, P., & Seeleib-Kaiser, M. (2004). The dual transformation of the German welfare state. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.
   Google Scholar
• Boling, P. (2015). The politics of work-family policies: Comparing Japan, France, Germany and the United States. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Card, D., Kluve, J., & Weber, A. (2018). What works? A meta analysis of recent active labor market program evaluations. Journal of the European Economic Association, 16(3), 894–931.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Clasen, J. (2000). Motives, means and opportunities: Reforming unemployment compensation in the 1990s. West European Politics, 23(2), 89–112.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cox, R. H. (1998). From safety net to trampoline: Labor market activation in the Netherlands and Denmark. Governance, 11(4), 397.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dingeldey, I. (2007). Between workfare and enablement – The different paths to transformation of the welfare state: A comparative analysis of activating labour market policies. European Journal of Political Research, 46(6), 823–851.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Durazzi, N. (2017). Inclusive unions in a dualized labour market? The challenge of organizing labour market policy and social protection for labour market outsiders. Social Policy & Administration, 51(2), 265–285.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Durazzi, N., Fleckenstein, T., & Lee, S. C. (2018). Social solidarity for all? Trade union strategies, labor market dualization, and the welfare state in Italy and South Korea. Politics & Society, 46(2), 205–233.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Durazzi, N., & Geyer, L. (forthcoming). Social inclusion in the knowledge economy: Unions’ strategies and institutional change in the Austrian and German training systems. In Socio-economic review. https://academic.oup.com/ser/advance-article-abstract/doi/10.1093/soceco/mwz010/5381717?redirectedFrom=fulltext
   Google Scholar
• Esping-Andersen, G. (1985). Politics against markets: The social democratic road to power. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Esping-Andersen, G. (1990). The three worlds of welfare capitalism. Cambridge: Polity.
   Google Scholar
• Fargion, V. (2009). Italy: Still a pension state? In P. Alcock & G. Craig (Eds.), International social policy (pp. 171–189). New York: Palgrave Macmillan.
   Google Scholar
• Ferrera, M. (1996). The ‘Southern Model’ of welfare in social Europe. Journal of European Social Policy, 6(1), 17–37.
   Google Scholar
• Fleckenstein, T. (2011a). Institutions, ideas and learning in welfare state change: Labour market reforms in Germany. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.
   Google Scholar
• Fleckenstein, T. (2011b). The politics of ideas in welfare state transformation: Christian democracy and the reform of family policy in Germany. Social Politics, 18(4), 543–571.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fleckenstein, T., & Lee, S. C. (2014). The politics of postindustrial social policy: Family policy reforms in Britain, Germany, South Korea, and Sweden. Comparative Political Studies, 47(4), 601–630.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fleckenstein, T., & Lee, S. C. (2017a). The politics of investing in families: comparing family policy expansion in Japan and South Korea. Social Politics, 24(1), 1–28.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fleckenstein, T., & Lee, S. C. (2017b). The politics of labor reform in coordinated welfare capitalism: Comparing Sweden, Germany, and South Korea. World Politics, 69(1), 144–183.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fleckenstein, T., Saunders, A. M., & Seeleib-Kaiser, M. (2011). The dual transformation of social protection and human capital: Comparing Britain and Germany. Comparative Political Studies, 44(12), 1622–1650.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fleckenstein, T., & Seeleib-Kaiser, M. (2011). Business, skills and the welfare state: The political economy of employment-oriented family policy in Britain and Germany. Journal of European Social Policy, 21(2), 136–149.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Giddens, A. (1998). The third way: The renewal of social democracy. Cambridge: Polity.
   Google Scholar
• Hemerijck, A. (2015). The quiet paradigm revolution of social investment. Social Politics, 22(2), 242–256.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hemerijck, A. (2017). The uses of social investment. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Holliday, I. (2000). Productivist welfare capitalism: Social policy in East Asia. Political Studies, 48(4), 706–723.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Huber, E., & Stephens, J. D. (2001). Development and crisis of the welfare state: Parties and policies in global markets. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
   Google Scholar
• Hyman, R. (2001). Understanding European trade unionism: Between market, class and society. London: Sage.
   Google Scholar
• Japanese Cabinet Office. (2017). New year’s reflection by prime minister Shinzo Abe. Tokyo: Author.
   Google Scholar
• Jessoula, M., Graziano, P. R., & Madama, I. (2010). ‘Selective flexicurity’ in segmented labour markets: The case of Italian ‘Mid-Siders’. Journal of Social Policy, 39(4), 561–583.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Johnston, A., Kornelakis, A., & d’Acri, C. R. (2011). Social partners and the welfare state: Recalibration, privatization or collectivization of social risks? European Journal of Industrial Relations, 17(4), 349–364.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jones, C. (1993). The Pacific challenge: Confucian welfare states. In C. Jones (Ed.), New perspectives on the welfare state in Europe (pp. 198–217). London: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Kinderman, D. (2017). Challenging varieties of capitalism’s account of business interests: Neoliberal think-tanks, discourse as a power resource and employers’ quest for liberalization in Germany and Sweden. Socio-Economic Review, 15(3), 587–613.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Korpi, W. (1983). The democratic class struggle. London: Routledge and Kegan Paul.
   Google Scholar
• Korpi, W. (2000). Faces of inequality: Gender, class, and patterns of inequalities in different types of welfare states. Social Politics, 7(2), 127–191.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lee, S. C. (2018). Democratization, political parties and Korean welfare politics: Korean family policy reforms in comparative perspective. Government and Opposition, 53(3), 518–541.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lee, S.-H., & Mohun Himmelweit, S. (Forthcoming). Work-family policy expansion and the idea of social investment: The cases of England, Germany, Japan and Korea. In Y. J. Choi, T. Fleckenstein, & S. C. Lee (Eds.), Welfare reform and social investment policy in Europe and East Asia: International lessons and policy implications. Bristol: Policy Press.
   Google Scholar
• Leitner, S., Ostner, I., & Schmitt, C. (2008). Family policies in Germany. In I. Ostner & C. Schmitt (Eds.), Family policies in the context of family change: The Nordic countries in comparative perspective (pp. 175–202). Wiesbaden: VS Verlag.
   Google Scholar
• Lindvall, J. (2010). Mass unemployment and the state. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Mahon, R. (1997). Child care in Canada and Sweden: Policy and politics. Social Politics, 4(3), 382–418.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mahoney, J. (2000). Path dependence in historical sociology. Theory and Society, 29(4), 507–548.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Manow, P., & Seils, E. (2000). Adjusting badly: The German welfare state. In F. W. Scharpf & V. A. Schmidt (Eds.), Welfare and work in the open economy, Volume 2 (pp. 264–307). Oxford/New York: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Morel, N., Palier, B., & Palme, J. (2012). Towards a social investment welfare state? Bristol: The Policy Press.
   Google Scholar
• Morgan, K. J. (2013). Path shifting of the welfare state: Electoral competition and the expansion of work-family policies in Western Europe. World Politics, 65(1), 73–115.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ostner, I., & Lewis, J. (1995). Gender and the evolution of European social policies. In S. Leibfried & P. Pierson (Eds.), European social policy: Between fragmentation and integration (pp. 159–193). Washington: Brookings.
   Google Scholar
• Ostner, I. (1998). The politics of care policies in Germany. In J. Lewis (Ed.), Gender, social care and welfare state restructuring in Europe (pp. 111–137). Aldershot: Ashgate.
   Google Scholar
• Pierson, P. (2000). Increasing returns, path dependence, and the study of politics. American Political Science Review, 94(2), 251–267.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Regini, M., & Gøsta, E.-A. (1980). Trade union strategies and social policy in Italy and Sweden. West European Politics, 3(1), 107–123.
   Google Scholar
• Ringen, S., Kwon, H.-J., Yi, I., Kim, T., & Lee, J. (2011). The Korean state: How South Korea lifted itself from poverty and dictatorship to affluence and democracy. New York: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Rosenbluth, F., & Thies, M. F. (2010). Japan transformed: Political change and economic restructuring. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Rueda, D. (2005). Insider-outsider politics in industrialized democracies: The challenge to social democratic parties. American Political Science Review, 99(1), 61–74.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ryner, J. M. (2004). Neo-liberalization of social democracy: The Swedish Case. Comparative European Politics, 2(1), 97–119.
   Google Scholar
• Schoppa, L. J. (2006). Race for the exits: The unraveling of Japan’s system of social protection. Ithaca: Cornell University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Sjöberg, O. (2011). Sweden: Ambivalent adjustment. In J. Clasen & D. Clegg (Eds.), Regulating the risks of unemployment: National adaptations to post-industrial labour markets in Europe (pp. 208–231). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Stephens, J. D. (1979). The transition from capitalism to socialism. London: Macmillan.
   Google Scholar
• Strøm, K. (1990). A behavioral theory of competitive political parties. American Journal of Political Science, 34(2), 565–598.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sung, S. and Pascall, G. 2014. Introduction: Gender and Welfare States in East Asia. In S. Sung, & G. Pascall (Eds.), Gender and Welfare States in East Asia: Confucianism or Gender Equality? (pp. 1-28). Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.
   Google Scholar
• Swenson, P. A. (2002). Capitalists against markets: The making of labor markets and welfare states in the United States and Sweden. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Taylor-Gooby, P. (2004). New risks, new welfare: The Transformation of the European welfare state. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Thelen, K. (2000). Why German employers cannot bring themselves to dismantle the German model. In T. Iversen, J. Pontusson, & D. Soskice (Eds.), Unions, employers, and central banks: Wage bargaining and macro-economic regimes in an integrating Europe (pp. 138–172). New York: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar