Welfarism and the multidimensionality of welfare state legitimacy: evidence from The Netherlands, 2006

Is it possible that citizens who support a substantial role for government in the provision of welfare are, at the same time, critical about specific aspects of such provision? Based on confirmatory factor analyses, and using a 2006 Dutch survey, this study shows that welfare state legitimacy is indeed multidimensional, i.e. that opinions tend to cluster together in several dimensions referring to various aspects of the welfare state. There is partial evidence for the existence of a single, underlying welfarism dimension which consists basically of views regarding the range of governmental responsibility, as well as of the idea that these governmental provisions do not have unfavourable repercussions in economic or moral spheres. However, the separate dimensions cannot be reduced entirely to this overall welfarism dimension. This is illustrated by the finding that the various attitude dimensions are affected differently by socio-structural position and ideological dispositions

On the cultural analysis of social policy

This paper takes the increased interest in the relation between culture and social policy as a starting point, and discusses how this increasing attention can be understood as the result of economic, social and academic trends. It discusses these matters and at the same time reviews briefly some of the main findings of the cultural analysis of social policy. A second issue regards the character of the cultural perspective in social policy analysis. Thus far, most studies in the field have been guided by a notion of culture as consisting of the values, norms and beliefs of welfare state actors. Recently, this notion has been questioned by advocates of the so-called 'cultural turn', who suggest that a radical change in the cultural analysis of social policy is required. The article concludes with a discussion of their claims

Trends and experience in Dutch flexible work and flexicurity policies

"The flexibilisation of work and of working life have been issues high on the agenda of the Dutch public debate for at least fifteen years. Mostly, they have been regarded as positive developments, specifically from the viewpoint of their potential for enhancing the employment of the Dutch labour force and for promoting the emancipation and economic self-sufficiency of women. Dutch governments haverecognized, however, that for taking full profit of such benefits flexibilisation has tobe regulated. Which means, not in the least, that flexible workers have to have an adequate social protection. In line with this thinking, policies have been guided by the aspiration of combining flexibility and security. Or to achieve adequate flexicurity as the combination of goals has come to be known. In this chapter the editor will present and discuss critically Dutch flexicurity policies ofrecent years, which have mainly been taken in the fields of part-time work, socialsecurity, labour law, and work-care combination. To put matters into perspective he will start with presenting figures about developmentsin the extent and distribution of flexible work and of part-time work. In main lines it will show that in the Netherlands the degree of flexible work is rathermodest, while the degree of part-time work is very high. Thirdly, he will discuss the development in Dutch government’s flexicurity policies, and describe the aims and content of recent measures. Since collective labour agreements between social partnersare an important part of workers' flexicurity he should also discuss developmentsin this field separately, but space restrictions do not allow this. He will finish with a critical evaluation of the most important measures, and draw some conclusions." (text abstract