中间的位置很重要吗?支持再分配福利改革的收入群体联盟

IF 1.4 3区 社会学 Q3 SOCIAL WORK
Tijs Laenen, Femke Roosma, Peter Achterberg
{"title":"中间的位置很重要吗?支持再分配福利改革的收入群体联盟","authors":"Tijs Laenen,&nbsp;Femke Roosma,&nbsp;Peter Achterberg","doi":"10.1111/ijsw.70007","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>Many well-established theories argue that welfare state policies create, and are created by, support coalitions between different income groups. Empirically, however, relatively little attention has been paid to the coalitions forged by the group that matters most according to these theories: middle-income earners. To address that gap, this article investigates the income differences underlying popular support for two radically opposing redistributive reforms, going in the direction of either a fully means-tested welfare state targeting the poor only or a universal basic income. Using data from the European Social Survey, we confirm the long-standing hypothesis that middle-income earners align with high-income earners against means-tested welfare. Regarding universal basic income, income differences prove considerably smaller. Furthermore, contrary to much prior research, our findings provide little evidence for the prediction from policy feedback theory that the support coalitions underlying these reforms are shaped by the progressivity of countries' tax-and-transfer systems.</p>","PeriodicalId":47567,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Social Welfare","volume":"34 2","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.4000,"publicationDate":"2025-03-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/ijsw.70007","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"It's the middle that matters? Income group coalitions in support of redistributive welfare reform\",\"authors\":\"Tijs Laenen,&nbsp;Femke Roosma,&nbsp;Peter Achterberg\",\"doi\":\"10.1111/ijsw.70007\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p>Many well-established theories argue that welfare state policies create, and are created by, support coalitions between different income groups. Empirically, however, relatively little attention has been paid to the coalitions forged by the group that matters most according to these theories: middle-income earners. To address that gap, this article investigates the income differences underlying popular support for two radically opposing redistributive reforms, going in the direction of either a fully means-tested welfare state targeting the poor only or a universal basic income. Using data from the European Social Survey, we confirm the long-standing hypothesis that middle-income earners align with high-income earners against means-tested welfare. Regarding universal basic income, income differences prove considerably smaller. Furthermore, contrary to much prior research, our findings provide little evidence for the prediction from policy feedback theory that the support coalitions underlying these reforms are shaped by the progressivity of countries' tax-and-transfer systems.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":47567,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"International Journal of Social Welfare\",\"volume\":\"34 2\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-03-20\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/ijsw.70007\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"International Journal of Social Welfare\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"90\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/ijsw.70007\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"社会学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"SOCIAL WORK\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal of Social Welfare","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/ijsw.70007","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"SOCIAL WORK","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

许多成熟的理论认为,福利国家政策创造了不同收入群体之间的支持联盟,并被这些联盟所创造。然而,从经验上看,人们很少关注由这些理论认为最重要的群体——中等收入者——组成的联盟。为了解决这一差距,本文调查了两种截然相反的再分配改革背后的收入差异,这两种改革的方向要么是建立一个完全针对穷人的经济状况调查的福利国家,要么是建立一个普遍的基本收入。利用欧洲社会调查(European Social Survey)的数据,我们证实了一个长期存在的假设,即中等收入者与高收入者一致,反对经经济状况调查的福利。就全民基本收入而言,收入差距被证明要小得多。此外,与之前的许多研究相反,我们的研究结果几乎没有为政策反馈理论的预测提供证据,即这些改革背后的支持联盟是由国家税收和转移支付系统的累进性形成的。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

It's the middle that matters? Income group coalitions in support of redistributive welfare reform

It's the middle that matters? Income group coalitions in support of redistributive welfare reform

Many well-established theories argue that welfare state policies create, and are created by, support coalitions between different income groups. Empirically, however, relatively little attention has been paid to the coalitions forged by the group that matters most according to these theories: middle-income earners. To address that gap, this article investigates the income differences underlying popular support for two radically opposing redistributive reforms, going in the direction of either a fully means-tested welfare state targeting the poor only or a universal basic income. Using data from the European Social Survey, we confirm the long-standing hypothesis that middle-income earners align with high-income earners against means-tested welfare. Regarding universal basic income, income differences prove considerably smaller. Furthermore, contrary to much prior research, our findings provide little evidence for the prediction from policy feedback theory that the support coalitions underlying these reforms are shaped by the progressivity of countries' tax-and-transfer systems.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
3.80
自引率
10.50%
发文量
45
期刊介绍: The International Journal of Social Welfare publishes original articles in English on social welfare and social work. Its interdisciplinary approach and comparative perspective promote examination of the most pressing social welfare issues of the day by researchers from the various branches of the applied social sciences. The journal seeks to disseminate knowledge and to encourage debate about these issues and their regional and global implications.
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信