2004
Volume 98, Issue 2
  • ISSN: 0025-9454
  • E-ISSN: 1876-2816

Abstract

Abstract

Globalization has put a new kind of pressure on the welfare state. Due to a rise in flexible contracts, a stable income is no longer a given, which results in an increase in the working poor. This article examined the extent to which the effect between in-work poverty and individual characteristics like gender, educational attainment, age and occupational status depends on the type of welfare state someone lives in. The welfare state classification used in this article is based on an article by Jacques and Noël (2020), who distinguished between the degree of universalism, residualism and targeting within universalism. A multilevel-analysis was conducted using EVS, OECD and Eurostat data (N = 14,405), which showed that gender, age, educational attainment and occupational status, contrary to macro characteristics like Gini coefficient and GDP per capita, have significant direct effects on in-work poverty. The main contribution of this paper, however, is that some of these individual direct effects differ per policy context. These differences do not completely align with the targeting within universalism theory posed by Jacques and Noël, which indicates that critical reflection of their theoretical framework is necessary.

Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.5117/MEM2023.2.005.DOOR
2023-06-01
2024-10-06
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

References

  1. Aassve, A., Iacovou, M., & Mencarini, L. (2006). Youth poverty and transition to adulthood in Europe. Demographic Research, 15, 21–50. https://doi.org/10.4054/demres.2006.15.2
    [Google Scholar]
  2. Airio, I. (2008). Change of Norm? In-work poverty in a comparative perspective. Vammalan Kirjapaino Oy.
    [Google Scholar]
  3. Andreβ, H.J., & Lohmann, H. (2008). The Working Poor in Europe. Edward Elgar Publishing.
    [Google Scholar]
  4. Arts, W., & Gelissen, J. (2001). Welfare states, solidarity and justice principles: Does the type really matter? Acta Sociologica, 44(4), 283-299. https://doi.org/10.1177/0952872002012002114
    [Google Scholar]
  5. Bekker, S., Buerkert, J., Quirijns, Q., & Pop, I. (2021). In-work poverty in times of COVID-19. In E.Aarts., H.Fleuren, M.Sitskoorn, & T.Wilthagen (Reds), The New Common (pp.35-40). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-65355-2_5#DOI
    [Google Scholar]
  6. CBS. (2022, 15februari). Ontwikkelingen zzp. Geraadpleegd op 16februari2022, https://www.cbs.nl/nl-nl/dossier/dossier-zzp/hoofdcategorieen/ontwikkelingen-zzp#:~:text=In%202020%20waren%20er%201,ers%20met%20514%20duizend%20toegenomen.&text=Na%20een%20toename%20in%20de,duizend%20hoger%20dan%20in%202003.
    [Google Scholar]
  7. Esping-Andersen, G. (1990). The Three Worlds of Welfare Capitalism. Polity Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  8. Eurostat. (2017). Social protection statistics – social benefits [Dataset]. Geraadpleegd op 30maart, van: https://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/statisticsexplained/index.php?title=Social_protection_statistics_-_social_benefits#Means-tested_benefits
    [Google Scholar]
  9. EVS. (2020). European Values Study 2017: Integrated Dataset (EVS 2017) [Dataset]. Geraadpleegd op 30maart, van: https://search.gesis.org/research_data/ZA7500
    [Google Scholar]
  10. Filandri, M., & Struffolino, E. (2018). Individual and household in-work poverty in Europe: understanding the role of labor market characteristics. European Societies, 21(1), 130–157. https://doi.org/10.1080/14616696.2018.1536800
    [Google Scholar]
  11. Filandri, M., Pasqua, S., & Struffolino, E. (2019). Being working poor or feeling working poor? The role of work intensity and job stability for subjective poverty. Social Indicators Research, 147(3), 781-803. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11205-019-02174-0
    [Google Scholar]
  12. Golder, M. (2003). Explaining variation in the success of extreme right parties in Western Europe. Comparative Political Studies, 36(4), 432-466.
    [Google Scholar]
  13. Gugushvili, D., & Laenen, T. (2021). Two decades after Korpi and Palme’s “paradox of redistribution”: What have we learned so far and where do we take it from here? Journal of International and Comparative Social Policy, 37(2), 112-127. https://doi.org/10.1017/ics.2020.24
    [Google Scholar]
  14. Jacques, O., & Noël, A. (2018). The case for welfare state universalism, or the lasting relevance of the paradox of redistribution. Journal of European Social Policy, 28(1), 70–85. https://doi.org/10.1177/0958928717700564
    [Google Scholar]
  15. Jacques, O., & Noël, A. (2020). Targeting within universalism. Journal of European Social Policy, 31(1), 15–29. https://doi.org/10.1177/0958928720918973
    [Google Scholar]
  16. Joumard, I., Pisu, M., & Bloch, D. (2012). Tackling income inequality: The role of taxes and transfers. OECD Journal: Economic Studies, 2012(1), 37-70.
    [Google Scholar]
  17. Korpi, W., & Palme, J. (1998). The paradox of redistribution and strategies of equality: Welfare state institutions, inequality, and poverty in the Western Countries. American Sociological Review, 63(5), 661-687. https://doi.org/10.2307/2657333
    [Google Scholar]
  18. Lohmann, H. (2008). The working poor in European welfare states: empirical evidence from a multilevel perspective. In H.J.Andreβ, & H.Lohmann (Eds.), The Working Poor in Europe (pp. 47-74). Edward Elgar publishing
    [Google Scholar]
  19. Lohmann, H., & Marx, I. (2008). The different faces of in-work poverty across welfare state regimes. In H.J.Andreβ, & H.Lohmann (Eds.), The Working Poor in Europe (pp. 47-74). Edward Elgar publishing
    [Google Scholar]
  20. Lucifora, C., McKnight, A., & Salverda, W. (2005). Low-wage employment in Europe: a review of the evidence. Socio-Economic Review, 3(2), 259-292. https://doi.org/10.1093/ser/mwi011
    [Google Scholar]
  21. Marchal, S., & Van Lancker, W. (2018). The measurement of targeting design in complex welfare states: A proposal and empirical applications. Social Indicators Research, 143(2), 693–726. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11205-018-1995-z
    [Google Scholar]
  22. McLanahan, S.S., & Kelly, E.L. (1999). The feminization of poverty. In J.Saltzman (Ed.), Handbook of the Sociology of Gender. Handbooks of Sociology and Social Research (pp. 127-145). Springer.
    [Google Scholar]
  23. Mize, T.D. (2019). Best practices for estimating, interpreting, and presenting nonlinear interaction effects. Sociological Science, 6, 81-117. https://doi.org/10.15195/v6.a4
    [Google Scholar]
  24. Mood, C., & Jonsson, J.O. (2015). The social consequences of poverty: An empirical test on longitudinal data. Social Indicators Research, 127(2016), 663-652. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11205-015-0983-9
    [Google Scholar]
  25. OECD. (2017). Gross domestic product (GDP) [Dataset]. Geraadpleegd op 30maart2022, van: https://data.oecd.org/gdp/gross-domestic-product-gdp.htm
    [Google Scholar]
  26. OECD. (2017). Income and Wealth Distribution Database [Dataset]. Geraadpleegd op 30maart2022, van: https://stats.oecd.org/Index.aspx?DataSetCode=IDD
    [Google Scholar]
  27. OECD. (2018). Pensions at a glance [Dataset]. Geraadpleegd op 30maart2022 van: https://stats.oecd.org/Index.aspx?DataSetCode=PAG#
    [Google Scholar]
  28. OECD. (2017). Social Expenditure (SOCX) [Dataset]. Geraadpleegd op 30maart2022 van: https://stats.oecd.org/Index.aspx?DataSetCode=SOCX_AGG
    [Google Scholar]
  29. Olszewski-Kubilius, P., & Corwith, S. (2017). Poverty, academic achievement, and giftedness: A literature review. Gifted Child Quarterly, 62(1), 37-55. https://doi.org/10.1177/0016986217738015
    [Google Scholar]
  30. Peña-Casas, R., Ghailani, D., Spasova, S., & Vanhercke, B. (2019). In-work poverty in Europe: A study of national policies. Europese Commissie. Geraadpleegd op 29januari2023, van https://ec.europa.eu/social/main.jsp?langId=en&catId=89&newsId=9378&furtherNews=yes
    [Google Scholar]
  31. Raphael, D. (2011). Poverty in childhood and adverse health outcomes in adulthood. Maturitas, 69(1), 22-26. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.maturitas.2011.02.011
    [Google Scholar]
  32. Raudenbush, S.W., & Bryk, A.S. (2001). Hierarchical Linear Models: Applications and Data Analysis Methods. Sage Publications, Inc.
    [Google Scholar]
  33. Rice, D. (2012). Beyond welfare regimes: From empirical typology to conceptual ideal types. Social Policy & Administration, 47(1), 93-110. https://doi.org/10.1111/spol.12001
    [Google Scholar]
  34. Struffolino, E., & Van Winkle, Z. (2021). Gender and race differences in pathways out of in work poverty in the US. Social Science Research, 99, 1–21. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ssresearch.2021.102585
    [Google Scholar]
  35. Weale, A. (1990). Equality, social solidarity, and the welfare state. Ethics, 100(3), 473-488.
    [Google Scholar]
/content/journals/10.5117/MEM2023.2.005.DOOR
Loading
/content/journals/10.5117/MEM2023.2.005.DOOR
Loading

Data & Media loading...

This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was a Success
Invalid data
An Error Occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error