Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-wzw2p Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-05-06T09:52:20.541Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

An Asset Theory of Social Policy Preferences

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  30 May 2017

Torben Iversen  and
David Soskice
Torben Iversen
Affiliation:
Harvard University
David Soskice
Affiliation:
Duke University
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

We present a theory of social policy preferences that emphasizes the composition of people's skills. The key to our argument is that individuals who have made risky investments in skills will demand insurance against the possible future loss of income from those investments. Because the transferability of skills is inversely related to their specificity, workers with specific skills face a potentially long spell of unemployment or a significant decline in income in the event of job loss. Workers deriving most of their income from specific skills therefore have strong incentives to support social policies that protect them against such uncertainty. This is not the case for general skills workers, for whom the costs of social protection weigh more prominently. We test the theory on public opinion data for eleven advanced democracies and suggest how differences in educational systems can help explain cross-national differences in the level of social protection.

Type
Research Article
Information
American Political Science Review , Volume 95 , Issue 4 , December 2001 , pp. 875 - 893
Copyright
Copyright © American Political Science Association 2001

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Alesina, Alberto, and Rodrik, Dani. 1994. “Distributive Politics and Economic Growth.” Quarterly Journal of Economics 109 (2): 465-90.Google Scholar
Alt, James E., Carlsen, Fredrik, Heum, Per, Johansen, Kåre. 1999. “Asset Specificity and the Political Behavior of Firms: Lobbying for Subsidies in Norway.” International Organization 53 (1): 99–116.Google Scholar
Alt, James, Frieden, Jeffry, Gilligan, Michael J., Rodrik, Dani and Rogowski, Ronald. 1996. “The Political Economy of International Trade—Enduring Puzzles and an Agenda for Inquiry.” Comparative Political Studies 29 (6): 689–717.Google Scholar
Baldwin, Peter. 1992. The Politics of Social Solidarity: Class Bases of the European Welfare State 1875–1975. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Bates, Robert H., Brock, Philip, and Tiefenthaler, Jill. 1991. “Risk and Trade Regimes—Another Exploration.” International Organization 45 (1): 1–18.Google Scholar
Becker, Gary. 1964. Human Capital: A Theoretical and Empirical Analysis with Special Reference to Education. Chicago: University of Chicago Press and the National Bureau of Economic Research.Google Scholar
Bénabou, Roland. 1996. “Inequality and Growth.” In National Bureau of Economic Research Macro Annual, ed. Bernanke, Ben S. and Rotemberg, Julio J.. Cambridge and London: MIT Press. Pp. 11–74.Google Scholar
Cusack, Thomas. 1991. “The Changing Contours of Government.” WZB Discussion Paper Number 304. Wissenschaftszentrum Berlin fúr Sozialforshung.Google Scholar
Duch, Raymond M., and Taylor, M. A.. 1993. “Postmaterialism and the Economic Condition.”. American Journal of Political Science 37 (3): 747-79.Google Scholar
Esping-Andersen, Gøsta. 1990. The Three Worlds of Welfare Capitalism. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Esping-Andersen, Gøsta. 1999. “Politics without Class; Postindustrial Cleavages in Europe and America.” In Continuity and Change in Contemporary Capitalism, ed. Kitschelt, Herbert, Lange, Peter, Marks, Gary, and Stephens, John. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Pp. 293–316.Google Scholar
Estevez-Abe, Margarita. 1999. “Comparative Political Economy of Female Labor Force Participation.” Paper presented at the 95th American Political Science Association Meeting, Atlanta.Google Scholar
Estevez-Abe, Margarita, Iversen, Torben, and Soskice, David. 2001. “Social Protection and the Formation of Skills: A Reinterpretation of the Welfare State.” In Varieties of Capitalism: The Challenges Facing Contemporary Political Economies, ed. Hall, Peter and Soskice, David. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Franzese, Robert J. 1998. “Political Participation, Income Distribution, and Public Transfers in Developed Democracies.” Ann Arbor: University of Michigan. Typescript.Google Scholar
Frieden, Jeffry. 1991. “Invested Interests: The Politics of National Economic Policies in a World of Global Finance.” International Organization 45 (Autumn): 425-51.Google Scholar
Ganzeboom, Harry B. G., and Treiman, Donald J.. 1996. “Internationally Comparable Measures of Occupational Status for the 1988 International Standard Classification of Occupations.” Social Science Research 25 (3): 201-39.Google Scholar
Gottschalk, Peter, and Smeeding, T. M.. 2000. “Empirical Evidence on Income Inequality in Industrialized Countries.” In The Handbook of Income Distribution, ed. Atkinson, A. B. and Bourgignon, F.. London: North Holland Press. Pp. 261–307.Google Scholar
Honaker, James, Joseph, Anne, King, Gary, Scheve, Kenneth, and Singh, Naunihal. 1999. AMELIA: A Program for Missing Data. Department of Government, Harvard University.Google Scholar
Huber, Evelyne, and Stephens, John D.. 2001. Development and Crisis of the Welfare State: Parties and Policies in Global Markets. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
ILO. 1999. “International Statistical Comparisons of Occupational and Social Structures: Problems, Possibilities and the Role of ISCO-88.” ILO background paper written by Hoffmann, Eivind.Google Scholar
ISSP. 1993. International Social Survey Program: Role of Government II, 1990 [ICPSR computer file]. Cologne, Germany: Zentralarchiv fuer Empirische Sozialforschung (producer) and Ann Arbor, MI: Inter-university Consortium for Political and Social Research (distributors).Google Scholar
ISSP. 1999. International Social Survey Program: Role of Government III, 1996 [ICPSR computer file]. Cologne, Germany: Zentralarchiv fuer Empirische Sozialforschung (producer) and Ann Arbor, MI: Inter-university Consortium for Political and Social Research (distributors).Google Scholar
ISSP. 2000. International Social Survey Program: Work Orientations II, 1997 [ICPSR computer file]. Cologne, Germany: Zentralarchiv fuer Empirische Sozialforschung (producer) and Ann Arbor, MI: Inter-university Consortium for Political and Social Research (distributors).Google Scholar
Iversen, Torben, and Cusack, Thomas. 2000. “The Causes of Welfare State Expansion: Deindustrialization or Globalization?” World Politics 52 (April): 313-49.Google Scholar
King, Gary, Honaker, James, Joseph, Anne, and Scheve, Kenneth. 2001. “Analyzing Incomplete Political Science Data: An Alternative Algorithm for Multiple Imputation.” American Political Science Review 95 (March): 49–69.Google Scholar
Kitschelt, Herbert. 1991. The Transformation of Social Democracy. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Klingemann, Hans-Dieter. 1979. “The Background of Ideological Conceptualization.” In Political Action: Mass Participation in Five Western Democracies, ed. Barnes, Samuel H. and Kaase, M.. London: Sage. Pp. 215-84.Google Scholar
Korpi, Walter. 1983. The Democratic Class Struggle. London: Routledge and Kegan Paul.Google Scholar
Korpi, Walter. 1989. “Power, Politics, and State Autonomy in the Development of Social Citizenship—Social Rights During Sickness in 18 OECD Countries Since 1930.” American Sociological Review 54 (3): 309-28.Google Scholar
Lijphart, Arend. 1997. “Unequal Participation: Democracy's Unresolved Dilemma.” American Political Science Review 91 (1): 1–14.Google Scholar
Meltzer, Allan H., and Richard, Scott. F.. 1981. “A Rational Theory of the Size of Government.” Journal of Political Economy 89 (5): 914-27.Google Scholar
Moene, Karl Ove, and Wallerstein, Michael. 2001. “Inequality, Social Insurance, and Redistribution.” American Political Science Review 95 (December): 859-74.Google Scholar
OECD. N.d. Electronic Data Base on Wage Dispersion.Google Scholar
OECD. Various years. National Accounts, Part II: Detailed Tables. Paris: OECD.Google Scholar
OECD. 2000. Employment Outlook. Paris: OECD.Google Scholar
Orloff, Ann Shola. 1993. “Gender and the Social Rights of Citizenship: The Comparative Analysis of Gender Relations and Welfare States.” American Sociological Review 58 (3): 303-28.Google Scholar
Perotti, Roberto. 1996. “Growth, Income Distribution and Democracy: What the Data Say.” Journal of Economic Growth 1 (2): 149-87.Google Scholar
Rogowski, Ronald. 1987. “Political Cleavages and Changing Exposure to Trade.” American Political Science Review 81 (December): 1121-37.Google Scholar
Scheve, Kenneth F., and Slaughter, Matthew J.. 1999. “What Determines Individual Trade-Policy Preferences?” Paper presented at the 1998 annual meeting of the Midwest Political Science Association, Chicago.Google Scholar
Sinn, Hans-Werner. 1995. “A Theory of the Welfare State.” Scandinavian Journal of Economics 97 (4): 495–526.Google Scholar
UNESCO. 1999. UNESCO Statistical Yearbook. New York: UNESCO.Google Scholar
Williamson, Oliver E. 1985. The Economic Institutions of Capitalism: Firms, Markets, Relational Contracting. New York: Free Press.Google Scholar