The Italian welfare reform trajectory in turbulent times

Absolutely exceptional under many respects, the XVIII parliamentary term has represented a peculiar terrain for welfare reform. On the one side, over the past five years, three highly heterogeneous governments have alternated in power, supported by different coalitions, each resulting from demanding negotiations and alliances between parties, within a moving political landscape. On the other side, the legislature has been heavily affected by the unprecedented challenges posed by the Covid-19 health emergency and its harsh social and economic consequences. Despite the complexity of the overall scenario and the internal frictions experienced by the three short-lived cabinets, since 2018, important reforms were enacted in key welfare sectors, marking in some cases a break with the previous institutional legacy. The paper aims at critically examining the trajectory of welfare reforms during the last parliamentary term, shedding light on how they have been shaped through time by a combination of external turbulences and political constraints. Adopting an historical institutionalist approach, the analysis focuses on the transformations occurred in key social policy areas - anti-poverty policy and income support, family policy and pensions - in order to examine the major innovations and shifts occurred under the three cabinets, featuring such diverse electoral bases and ideological stances

The Italian welfare reform trajectory in turbulent times

Absolutely exceptional under many respects, the XVIII parliamentary term has represented a peculiar terrain for welfare reform. On the one side, over the past five years, three highly heterogeneous governments have alternated in power, supported by different coalitions, each resulting from demanding negotiations and alliances between parties, within a moving political landscape. On the other side, the legislature has been heavily affected by the unprecedented challenges posed by the Covid-19 health emergency and its harsh social and economic consequences. Despite the complexity of the overall scenario and the internal frictions experienced by the three short-lived cabinets, since 2018, important reforms were enacted in key welfare sectors, marking in some cases a break with the previous institutional legacy. The paper aims at critically examining the trajectory of welfare reforms during the last parliamentary term, shedding light on how they have been shaped through time by a combination of external turbulences and political constraints. Adopting an historical institutionalist approach, the analysis focuses on the transformations occurred in key social policy areas - anti-poverty policy and income support, family policy and pensions - in order to examine the major innovations and shifts occurred under the three cabinets, featuring such diverse electoral bases and ideological stances

The Italian welfare reform trajectory in turbulent times

Absolutely exceptional under many respects, the XVIII parliamentary term has represented a peculiar terrain for welfare reform. On the one side, over the past five years, three highly heterogeneous governments have alternated in power, supported by different coalitions, each resulting from demanding negotiations and alliances between parties, within a moving political landscape. On the other side, the legislature has been heavily affected by the unprecedented challenges posed by the Covid-19 health emergency and its harsh social and economic consequences. Despite the complexity of the overall scenario and the internal frictions experienced by the three short-lived cabinets, since 2018, important reforms were enacted in key welfare sectors, marking in some cases a break with the previous institutional legacy. The paper aims at critically examining the trajectory of welfare reforms during the last parliamentary term, shedding light on how they have been shaped through time by a combination of external turbulences and political constraints. Adopting an historical institutionalist approach, the analysis focuses on the transformations occurred in key social policy areas - anti-poverty policy and income support, family policy and pensions - in order to examine the major innovations and shifts occurred under the three cabinets, featuring such diverse electoral bases and ideological stances

A federalist's dilemma: Trade-offs between social legitimacy and budget responsibility in multi-tiered welfare states

In multi-tiered states, subnational policymakers face a dilemma: on one hand, they must ensure the social legitimacy of their subnational unit by owning relevant policies including their potentially negative consequences; on the other, they have to manage their budget responsibly, which limits the scope of policy development. We study this dilemma in relation to social policies, by examining how the constituent units and municipalities in Germany, Italy, Spain and Switzerland deal with it, taking social assistance as an empirical example. Our analysis suggests that the combination of the federation’s history and a multinational political context affects the incentives and the choices made by the policymakers regarding ownership and disownership of policy competencies in the field of social assistance. By analysing mechanisms that are likely to play out in multi-tiered welfare states, our article contributes to both the social policy and the political science literatures

Buffering national welfare states in hard times: the politics of EU capacity‐building in the social policy domain

The EU has traditionally influenced the social and employment policies of Member States through regulation, leaving redistribution to national welfare states. The latter have, however, been gradually weakened by global socioeconomic change and by the expansion of EU market integration. A series of crises over the last 15 years made a bad situation worse: the longue durée erosion of the capacity of European welfare states has morphed into acute social aftershocks, especially in peripheral countries. After the austerity reflex in the early 2010s, the EU introduced new policy instruments with market-correcting rationales that go beyond the regulatory approach. This article revisits the creation and functioning of four of these instruments that represent EU-level capacity-building in the social policy domain: the European Globalisation Adjustment Fund, the Youth Guarantee, the Just Transition Fund and SURE (the temporary Support to mitigate Unemployment Risks in an Emergency). We argue that the EU increasingly provides ‘buffer mechanisms’ to support stressed national welfare states in tasks they would otherwise be unable to accomplish, and we identify the political factors that drive the expansion of this ‘buffering’ logic in EU social policy.This research was supported by the research project ‘Policy Crisis and Crisis Politics: Sovereignty, Solidarity and Identity in the EU Post-2008’, funded by an Advanced Grant of the European Research Council (Grant no. 810356 ERC-2018-SyG)

Nuova destra, vecchio Welfare?

La forza dei partiti cosiddetti neopopulisti, in specie sovranisti e di de stra, \ue8 vieppi\uf9 evidente nelle recenti tornate elettorali, oltre che nel di battito pubblico, tanto nei Paesi europei quanto negli Stati Uniti. Sono pochi gli Stati in cui i partiti populisti di destra\u2013su cui si concentra questo contributo\u2013non sono divenuti rilevanti sullo scacchiere po litico, alterando significativamente le dimensioni della competizione elettorale nonch\ue9 l\u2019agenda dei governi. Una serie di ricerche in scienza politica e sociologia ha iniziato a investigare le ragioni del successo elettorale, le caratteristiche organiz zative e, pi\uf9 recentemente, le posizioni ei programmi di questi (pi\uf9 o meno) nuovi partiti nei diversi settori di politica pubblica. Nel campo delle politiche sociali la letteratura ha tradizionalmente riservato un ruolo di second\u2019ordine allo studio dei rapporti tra partiti di destra e trasformazione dei sistemi di Welfare

The right(s) and minimum income in hard times: Southern and Eastern Europe compared

The paper addresses a topic still largely under-researched in comparative welfare state literature: the role of right parties in the reform of last resort safety nets. More precisely, the study investigates minimum income schemes’ reforms promoted during the Great Recession (2008–2013) by centre-right governments in three countries belonging to the European periphery: Italy, Portugal and Latvia. Despite common political orientation and increased problem pressure, these countries have gone through distinct reform trajectories in their social safety nets that may be labelled expansion (Latvia), retrenchment (Portugal), and continuity (Italy). Against this backdrop, the paper suggests that right parties display substantially different positions and pursue different reform strategies in anti-poverty policies. These differences can be explained by the diverse types of right parties and varying competition and coalition dynamics in the three countries

sj-docx-1-pas-10.1177_00323292241226806 - Supplemental material for Back from the Cold? Progressive Politics and Social Policy Paradigms in Southern Europe after the Great Recession

Supplemental material, sj-docx-1-pas-10.1177_00323292241226806 for Back from the Cold? Progressive Politics and Social Policy Paradigms in Southern Europe after the Great Recession by Rui Branco, Joan Miró and Marcello Natili in Politics & Society</p

Active Inclusion as an Organisational challenge: integrated anti-poverty policies in three European countries :

Active inclusion aims at the reduction of poverty by strengthening the agency of excluded persons by the provision of a minimum income, activation and social services. The contribution to poverty alleviation is determined by expenditure levels and the organisation of these three policy fields. This can be shown by three examples: The comprehensive Swedish regime is characterised by high expenditures; the redistributive German regime is characterised by lower service levels and in Italy, all three dimensions are least developed. In addition, the organisation of services differs: Decentralised and discretionary system for the provision of services in Sweden, “creaming and parking” effects in Germany and fragmented providers in Italy. As a result of different expenditure levels and organisational patterns, the selectivity of active inclusion strategies is low in Sweden, medium in Germany and high in Italy. Both the financial and organisational dimensions of active inclusion therefore are decisive for poverty alleviation