Partisan Politics in the Long Shadow of the Golden Age

Frank Bandau
{"title":"Partisan Politics in the Long Shadow of the Golden Age","authors":"Frank Bandau","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.2668112","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The question if political parties matter in social policy making is traditionally answered by an analysis of social spending or replacement rates. Following this approach, parties obviously mattered in the ‘golden age’, whereas their influence dwindled or even disappeared afterwards. Starting from the insights and blind spots of the conventional approach, I will outline an innovative, more historical approach that emphasizes the mutual interaction of political parties and welfare institutions over time. On the one hand, partisan conflict patterns are shaped by existing welfare institutions. This means that different institutional designs lead to different partisan conflicts and, ultimately, to contextualized partisan effects, i.e. if and especially how parties matter differs considerably across welfare states. On the other hand, welfare institutions are themselves the product of previous partisan conflicts and the resulting policies. Thus, by shaping the institutional design of welfare programs in their favor, parties can, due to policy feedback, deliberately constrain their political opponents’ policy options. Although one has to account for unintended consequences, this mechanism points to the existence of institutionalized partisan effects. The analytical framework is applied to pension politics in Sweden and the United Kingdom since the late 1950s.","PeriodicalId":127004,"journal":{"name":"SIRN: Retirement Income (Topic)","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2015-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"SIRN: Retirement Income (Topic)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2668112","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

The question if political parties matter in social policy making is traditionally answered by an analysis of social spending or replacement rates. Following this approach, parties obviously mattered in the ‘golden age’, whereas their influence dwindled or even disappeared afterwards. Starting from the insights and blind spots of the conventional approach, I will outline an innovative, more historical approach that emphasizes the mutual interaction of political parties and welfare institutions over time. On the one hand, partisan conflict patterns are shaped by existing welfare institutions. This means that different institutional designs lead to different partisan conflicts and, ultimately, to contextualized partisan effects, i.e. if and especially how parties matter differs considerably across welfare states. On the other hand, welfare institutions are themselves the product of previous partisan conflicts and the resulting policies. Thus, by shaping the institutional design of welfare programs in their favor, parties can, due to policy feedback, deliberately constrain their political opponents’ policy options. Although one has to account for unintended consequences, this mechanism points to the existence of institutionalized partisan effects. The analytical framework is applied to pension politics in Sweden and the United Kingdom since the late 1950s.
黄金时代长期阴影下的党派政治
政党在社会政策制定中是否重要的问题,传统上是通过分析社会支出或替代率来回答的。按照这种方法,政党在“黄金时代”显然很重要,但之后它们的影响力逐渐减弱,甚至消失了。从传统方法的见解和盲点出发,我将概述一种创新的、更具历史意义的方法,它强调政党和福利机构随着时间的推移相互作用。一方面,党派冲突模式是由现有的福利制度塑造的。这意味着不同的制度设计会导致不同的党派冲突,并最终产生情境化的党派效应,即政党在福利国家中的重要性,尤其是在多大程度上存在巨大差异。另一方面,福利制度本身是以前的党派冲突和由此产生的政策的产物。因此,通过塑造有利于他们的福利计划的制度设计,由于政策反馈,政党可以故意限制其政治对手的政策选择。尽管人们必须考虑到意想不到的后果,但这一机制指出了制度化的党派效应的存在。该分析框架适用于1950年代末以来瑞典和英国的养老金政治。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信