일시 : 2012.10.10 (수) 10:00 ~ 12:00 장소 : 한국보건사회연구원 …repository.kihasa.re.kr/bitstream/201002/12588/1/52 제4... · 2017-12-22 · global crisis started

- 국제세미나: 경제위기와 사회안전망의 정치학

제1주제 : The Current European Financial Crisis and its

Impact on Social Safety Nets in the Region Gyoergy Szell(독일 University of Osnabrueck 명예교수)

제2주제 : Normative Grounds of Universal Welfare :

Universal Provision or Protection?권혁주(서울대학교 행정대학원 정치학과 교수)

◎ 일시 : 2012.10.10 (수) 10:00 ~ 12:00

◎ 장소 : 한국보건사회연구원 신관제1회의실

THE CURRENT EUROPEAN FINANCIAL CRISIS AND ITS IMPACT ON SOCIAL SAFETY NETS IN THE REGION

LECTURE AT KIHASA, SEOUL, 10 OCTOBER 2012

GYÖRGY SZÉLL, PROF. EM. DR.SCHOOL OF SOCIAL SCIENCES, UNIVERSITY OF OSNABRÜCK/GERMANY

György Széll: Generation Praktikum? 2

Los Indignados, Madrid, May 2011

TABLE OF CONTENTS1. Introduction2. Some theses3. The crisis4. Some statistics5. The welfare state and social safety nets6. Future Perspectives7. References

Széll - KIHASA 2012 3

PROTESTS IN GREECE


INTRODUCTIONThe current global financial crisis started with the US subprime crisis in 2007 and culminated with the bankruptcy of Lehman Brothers on 15 September 2008. It spread quickly to all continents, due to the intertwining of the financial sector after its deregulation since the 1980s (Reagonomics, Thatcherism; Friedman 2002). Although the global crisis started with the US-subprime collapse, it quickly developed to a general financial crisis, which at the end also affected the real economy.There is no European Social Model – yet. In so far the social safety nets in the region are quite diversified. Not only between the EU 27, but also within the EURO-member states. Some EU-countries and their citizens accepted more or less quietly to pay for their past errors (Ireland, Portugal, the Baltic republics, Cyprus), however, especially in Greece, Spain and Italy radical opposition was formed, where strong anarchist traditions survived.



SOME THESES• The current European crisis is part of a worldwide reconfiguration

of capital.• The labour movement, which has fought for more than a hundred

years for social justice and freedom, has realized the welfare state and its regime in a number of countries, mainly in Europe.

• Global competition brought an organized attack on the welfare state in the name of shareholder value.

• The main tool was deregulation (Reaganomics, Thatcherism).• Even social-democratic governments followed this path. • The trend for individualisation weakened the labour movement

and the labour parties. Solidarity has become obsolete.• In the 1980s already the short dream of ‘everlasting prosperity’

ended.• The crisis strengthened already on-going trends (ageing society)

to reduce the welfare state.


• During the Cold War the neo-liberal attack (Friedman 1963) against the welfare state was delayed.

• The debate on the welfare state and social safety nets is a central part of the conflict between two fundamentally different concepts of society.

• The Anglo-Saxon model contrasts in this regard with the continental European model (de Tocqueville 1835). However, even in the United States this conflict is going on. And not to forget, Great Britain had one of the most developed welfare regimes in the world in the decades after World War II.

• For the ROK as a divided nation and still a transition economy the debate about the welfare state is central for its identity and future.

• Capitalism is the dominant form of production relations, it provoked the crisis, and is not really harmed by it, may be even strengthened.

• Social movements of resistance (Occupy Wall Street!, Los Indignados, the World Social Forum, attac) although using the new social media are not yet successful in overcoming the crisis in the perspective of more social justice and sustainability.


MORE ITALIAN ANTI-AUSTERITY PROTESTS IN ROMEhttp://www.euronews.com/2011/10/08/more-italian-anti-austerity-protests-in-rome/


THE CRISISThe crisis today within Europe is manifold. We have to differentiate between different crises, although quite interlinked:• The financial crisis, which is first a crisis of the banking system with its

toxic papers and bad loans,• The crisis in the real economy,• The debt crisis – private and public,• The currency/Euro-crisis.Then we have to distinguish between different countries:• EU-countries (27)• Euro-countries (17)• Non-Euro countries (U.K., Baltic republics, Hungary, Romania,

Bulgaria)• EU-candidates• Associated countries (Switzerland, Norway, Iceland, Liechtenstein)• Candidate countries (Croatia, Serbia, Montenegro, Albania, Turkey,

Iceland)


Again there are great differences between:

• Nordic/Central European,

• West European,

• Mediterranean and

• Former socialist countries.

The crisis is so severe due to the lack of:

• A political union (different policies and governments),

• An economic union,

• A financial union

• A banking union and

• A social union.

In addition the weakness of the European Commission and the European Parliament makes solutions much more difficult.


• The crisis is a global crisis – as already mentioned earlier, however, has its different varieties, due to history and culture.

• The so-called Euro-crisis is first of all a bank and debt crisis, although part of global competition.

• The rating agencies, the leading ones are all US-American, play a doubtful role in this context.

• Euro-bashing is part of this – largely unfair – competition.• National interests – even within the EU – still dominate.• And not to forget speculation, mainly by hedge and pension funds:

Globally 55 trillion US $ are at any moment looking for investment on the guidelines of shareholder-value, i.e. minimum 15 % profit-rate, in the banking sector 25 %, and in the IT-sector 40 %.

• The real estate bubble is also hitting Europe – and soon in China.• In so far the dominating form capitalism is again the so-called ‘casino

capitalism’.• Consequently Rio+ 20 failed.


• The crisis increased precariousness, i.e. part-time work, limited contracts, low pay, lack of social security, early retirement,

• Young people are still or again living at home.• Social inequality and poverty have increased over the last couple of

decades through the weakness of trade unions. A two-tier society developed.

• The share of wages within the respective GDP has decreased over the last 30 years by at least 10 per cent points everywhere.

• Deindustrialisation took place in all so-called industrialized countries since the 1970s. The part of industry within GDP is now between

• Machines do not pay taxes nor social insurance. Due that fact the financing of the social safety nets got into deep trouble since the 1980s. Since then there is a debate about a machine tax.

• The US-American authors Piore and Sabel published in 1984 their book ‘The Second Industrial Divide. Possibilities for prosperity’, there they argue that the European craftsmanship against the US-American

• Demographic change sharpened the distribution between the active and non-active populations, therefore the debate about prolongating working life.


THE EUROPEAN SOCIAL SAFETY NETS • There is no European Welfare state yet, due to historic and cultural

differences.

• The Danish author Esping-Andersen distinguishes between three worlds of welfare-capitalism: the social-democratic Scandinavian, the conservative Continental European, and the liberal Anglo-Saxon ones (1990).

• Every country believes that its own social safety net is the best, although benchmarking and best practice have been introduced since the 1990s.

• Although the acceptance of the so-called ‘Acquis sociaux’ of the European Union are a precondition for the entry into the EU.

• The TU strategy for many decades was to reduce working time for a more equal distribution of the work volume, more gender justice and to improve the quality of life and working life as well as democratic participation.


SOCIAL SECURITYIt includes mainly:

• Health care, Old age Care, Unemployment benefits, Child care, Retirement benefits, Work or professional inability benefits.

• The European Welfare State meant, as it was largely realised in Sweden: Security from the cradle to the bier. The social democracy and a historic compromise between capital and labour are its base.

• Against it stands the Anglo-Saxon model of a strong civil society vs. a strong state, where private protection based on private insurance and savings is the formula. Although interestingly these countries have the lowest private savings.

• Especially in developing countries self-help organisations try to replace the lack of a welfare state.

• The success of the Welfare State is built on economic growth. The crisis weakens automatically the social safety nets, guaranteed by the Welfare State.


• Kind of social safety nets, mainly via subsidies, are given to whole sectors in the name of national interest or social cohesion. These are by the way also largely practiced in the Anglo-Saxon countries, first of all the USA.

• The main advantaged are farmers, miners, liberal professions (doctors, pharmacists, lawyers etc.)

• Lobbies are playing a prominent role in promoting specific interests also in this field.

• A high degree of political and financial corruption covers these sectors.

• Fordism was the development strategy of modern capitalism of the 20th century, which allowed workers through wage increase to buy their own products, i.e. cars; combining it with Taylorism and rationalisation of the production process and the products (Aglietta & Fernbach 2001)

• The German sociologist Burkart Lutz published already in 1984 a pertinent analysis of the last 200 years under the title ‘The short dream of ever-lasting prosperity’.


SOME INDICATORS OF WELFARE

• Quality of life and working life, the European Foundation for the Improvement of Living and Working Conditions,

• The European Quality of Life Survey (EQLS),

• The UNDP Human Development Report (HDI),

• The Gini co-efficient.


EUROPEAN QUALITY OF LIFE SURVEY 2007Europeans are generally satisfied and happy with life: on a scale from one to ten, the EU27 average is 7 for life satisfaction and 7.5 for happiness;

Disparities in household incomes across Europe are stark: in the EU27, Bulgaria and Romania have incomes almost as low as that of the candidate country, FYR Macedonia; to cope with inadequate income, around half of all households in the NMS12 and CC3 (with the exception of Cyprus and Malta) grow some of their own food;

The family is highly involved in child- and eldercare and remains the first port of call for personal support in emergencies; Europeans report high levels of satisfaction with their family life; women still spend more time than men in caring activities and domestic duties;

A good work-life balance is tricky to achieve and problems with it appear to be most common in south-eastern Europe: in Croatia and Greece, a little over 70% of working citizens say that they are too tired to do household jobs at least several times a month because of work;


81% of EU residents said that good health was ‘very important’ for their quality of life: however, on average, only 21% of people rate their health as ‘very good’;

When asked to rate the quality of society, people in the eastern European NMS12 – and in Italy and Portugal – trust their political institutions the least. Citizens in the Nordic countries, and in Turkey, have the most trust in their institutions; people in the Nordic countries and the Netherlands also express the highest levels of trust in other people.


SOME STATISTICSThe social situation has dramatically deteriorated since 2008 in regard to:

• Unemployment rates,

• Especially Youth unemployment rates,

• Private debt,• Retirement age,

• Pensions,

• health care,

• Child care, and

• Old age care.

The main sources are Eurostat and the European System of Social PROtection Statistics (ESSPROS).


ESSPROSthe integrated system of social protection statistics, provides a coherent comparison between European countries of social benefits to households and their financing. Social benefits are transfers to households, in cash or in kind intended to relieve them from the financial burden of a number of risks or needs.

The risks or needs of social protection refer to the ESSPROSS functions that are comprehensive, but do not include education unless it is a support to indigent families with children. The functions are disability, sickness/health care, old age, survivors, family/children, unemployment, housing and social exclusion.

Social benefits are made through collectively organised schemes by government and/or collective agreements. The schemes do not necessarily refer to institutions, although they are in many cases. These schemes can be defined solely for ESSPROS as a classification of schemes exists, where schemes are grouped by criteria. All schemes that are solely based on individual arrangements or where simultaneous reciprocal agreements exist are not regarded as social protection.


SOCIAL PROTECTION SYSTEMS - MISSOCThe EU's Mutual Information System on Social Protection (MISSOC) provides detailed, comparable and regularly updated information about national social protection systems in English, French and German.MISSOC publishes the Comparative tables on social protection covering:31 countries: the 27 EU Member States plus Iceland, Liechtenstein, Norway and Switzerland;12 main areas of social protection: financing, healthcare, sickness, maternity, invalidity, old-age, survivors, employment injuries and occupational diseases, family, unemployment, guaranteed minimum resources and long-term care;more than 300 detailed categories.In addition, the Cross-cutting introductions to the comparative tables provide a trans-national approach to the main concepts and principles of each social protection branch. As from 2011, MISSOC is also in charge of updating a series of guides to national social security systems, more specifically designed to inform citizens moving within Europe and available in 24 languages.MISSOC also produces the MISSOC Analysis, an annual information bulletin and other specialised publications. Archive material concerning MISSOC's activities is available via the MISSOC Secretariat.


• Household saving rate nearly stable at 13.3% in the euro area and 11.6% in the EU27. Household real disposable income increased by 0.2% in the euro area <http://epp.eurostat.ec.europa.eu/cache/ITY_PUBLIC/2-01082012-AP/EN/2-01082012-AP-EN.PDF>. (July 2012)‚

• Euro area unemployment rate at 11.2%; EU27 at 10.4%. The euro area (EA17) seasonally-adjusted unemployment rate was 11.2% in June 2012, stable compared with May. It was 10.0% in June 2011. The EU271 unemployment rate was 10.4% in June 2012, also stable compared with May. It was 9.5% in June 2011. Eurostat estimates that 25.112 million men and women in the EU27, of whom 17.801 million were in the euro area, were unemployed in June 2012. Compared with May 2012, the number of persons unemployed increased by 127 000 in the EU27 and by 123 000 in the euro area. Compared with June 2011, unemployment rose by 2.165 million in the EU27 and by 2.024 million in the euro area. Eurostat estimates that 25.112 million men and women in the EU27, of whom 17.801 million were in the euro area, were unemployed in June 2012. Compared with May 2012, the number of persons unemployed increased by 127 000 in the EU27 and by 123 000 in the euro area. Compared with June 2011, unemployment rose by 2.165 million in the EU27 and by 2.024 million in the euro area <http://epp.eurostat.ec.europa.eu/cache/ITY_PUBLIC/3-31072012-BP/EN/3-31072012-BP-EN.PDF>. (June 2012)



��

��

FIGURE 2: UNEMPLOYMENT RATES EU-27, EA-17, US AND JAPAN, SEASONALLY ADJUSTED, JANUARY 2000 - MAY 2012


FIGURE 3: YOUTH UNEMPLOYMENT RATES, EU-27 AND EA-17, SEASONALLY ADJUSTED, JANUARY 2000 - MAY 2012


FIGURE 4: CHANGE IN THE NUMBER OF UNEMPLOYED PERSONS (COMPARED TO PREVIOUS MONTH, IN THOUSANDS), SEASONALLY ADJUSTED, JANUARY 2006 -MAY 2012


FIGURE 5: GINI INDEX - INCOME DISPARITY SINCE WORLD WAR II


TABLE 1: HUMAN DEVELOPMENT INDEX (HDI) 20091. Norway2. Australia3. Netherlands4. United States5. New Zealand6. Canada7. Ireland8. Liechtenstein9. Germany10. Sweden11. Switzerland12. Japan13. Hong Kong, China

(SAR)14. Iceland15. Korea (Republic

of)Széll - KIHASA 2012 29

1. Denmark2. Israel3. Belgium4. Austria5. France6. Slovenia7. Finland8. Spain9. Italy10.Luxembourg11.Singapore12.Czech Republic13.United Kingdom14.Greece15.United Arab Emirates16.Cyprus17.Andorra18.Brunei Darussalam19.Estonia20.Slovakia21.Malta

FIGURE 6: MAASTRICHT DEBT AS A PERCENTAGE OF GDP 2010-2011.PNG



http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Long-term_interest_rates_(eurozone).png

Figure 7:


Figure 8:

GENERAL GOVERNMENT REVENUE AND EXPENDITURE, 2011

From 2008 onwards, the economic and financial crisis had generated a decrease in government revenue and an increase in government expenditure in terms of GDP. This had resulted in substantially deteriorated government deficits. In 2010 in the EU-27, revenue and expenditure tended to stabilise in terms of GDP, with a deficit of -6.4% of GDP.

In 2011 EU-27 general government total revenue stood at 44.6 % of GDP, while total expenditure amounted to 49.1 % of GDP, producing a deficit of -4.5 % of GDP. In the euro area (EA-17), total revenue was 45.3 % of GDP and total expenditure 49.4 % of GDP, with a deficit of -4.1% of GDP. Both areas show a clear trend towards budget consolidation in 2011. It should be kept in mind that these averages mask disparate developments in the situation of individual Member States.


FIGURE 9: EXPENDITURE ON SOCIAL PROTECTION PER INHABITANT

http://epp.eurostat.ec.europa.eu/tgm/web/_svg/Eurostat_Map_tps00100_05222919551_download_tmp_embed.png 34

TABLE 2: EXPENDITURE FOR SOCIAL PROTECTION BENEFITS IN THE EU, ICELAND, NORWAY AND SWITZERLAND IN RELATION TO (%) GDP 2005-2009

Country2005 2006 2007 2002 2009Belgium 27.3 27.1 26.8 28.1 30.4Denmark 30.2 29.2 28.8 29.6 33.4Germany 30.0 28.9 27.8 28.0 31.4Greece 24.9 24.7 24.8 26.3 28.0Spain 20.6 20.5 20.7 22.1 p 25.France 31.5 30.9 30.6 31.0 33.1Ireland 17.9 18.2 18.8 22.0 27.9Italy 26.4 26.6 26.7 27.8 p 29.8Luxembourg 21.7 20.4 19.3 20.2 23.1The Netherlands 27.9 28.8 28.3 28.5 31.6

Austria 28.7 28.2 27.8 28.4 30.8Portugal 24.6 24.6 23.9 24.3 26.9

Finland 26.7 26.4 25.4 26.2 30.3Sweden 31.1 30.4 29.2 29.5 32.0United Kingdom 26.3 26.0 23.3 p 26.3 29.2


Country 2005 2006 2007 2002 2009

Total for the EU15 27.6 27.2 26.4 p 27.5 30.3Czech Republic 18.4 18.0 18.0 18.0 20.4Estonia 12.6 12.1 12.1 14.9 19.2Cyprus 18.4 18.5 18.2 18.5 20.9Latvia 12.8 12.7 11.3 12.7 16.8Lithuania13.2 13.4 14.4 16.1 21.3Hungary 21.9 22.5 22.7 22.9 23.4Malta 18.4 18.3 18.0 18.5 20.0Poland 19.7 19.4 18.1 18.6 19.7Slovenia 23.0 22.7 21.3 21.4 24.3Slovakia 16.5 16.3 16.0 16.0 18.8Total for the EU25 27.2 26.8 25.9 p 26.9 29.7Romania13.4 12.8 13.6 14.3 17.1Bulgaria 15.1 14.2 14.1 15.5 17.2Total for the EU27 27.1 26.6 25.7 p 26.7 p 29.5Iceland 21.7 21.2 21.4 22.0 25.4Norway 23.8 22.6 22.9 22.5 26.4Switzerland 29.3 28.0 27.3 26.4 p


GENERAL EU-STRATEGIES • The EU has since its very beginning, even with the European Community of Coal

and Steel since 1951, developed strategies to accompany and overcome structural changes. The main tools are:- the European Regional Funds (ERF) - the European Social Funds (ESF)- the Common Agricultural Policy (CAP), which covers one third of the EU-budget.

• The Maastricht criteria – agreed in 1997:

1. an annual budget deficit no higher than 3% of GDP (this includes the sum of all public budgets, including municipalities, regions, etc.)

2. a national debt lower than 60% of GDP or approaching that value,

3. no inflation higher than 3 %.

• The Lisbon Agenda from 2000 had as target to make Europe the leading knowledge economy by 2015, combining environmental and social sustainability.

• Converging the wage systems.• Introducing a Basic Income Guarantee (BIG). • However, not yet minimum labour standards, although some directives into this

direction have been passed.


SPECIFIC EU-STRATEGIES• The EU is acting as a troika, combining the competencies of the

Commission, the ECB and the IMF, to put more pressure on the respective governments.

• Austerity – reducing state und public spending,

• Debt brakes,

• Euro-/Stability bonds,

• The European Stability Mechanism (ESM),

• The European Financial Stabilisation Facility (EFSF),

• The European Financial Stabilisation Mechanism (EFSM),

• The Stability and Growth Pact (SGP),

• The European Central Bank (ECB),

• The European Economic and Social Council (EESC).


EUROPEAN ECONOMIC AND SOCIAL COUNCIL OPINION: THE ECONOMIC CRISIS, EDUCATION AND THE LABOURMARKET

“Key points:• �� !��"��##$�%�&��'��$� ��

• �� !��'��(�� '��!�� )

• "�� '��!�� %�� !�� '�� %�� "��!��)

• ��!�� "��*�� $+#&��'(��,��%��%�� -)

• ��!�� %�� .�� "�� '�� .��)

• �� !��"�� )


• '��""��!�� "��#�� / ��"�� 0 ��.� ��!��"�1 �� / ��"�� $��)

• �� "�� !�� .��.��%�� )

• ��*�� 2 ��"��. �� %��!��"��2 ��"�� "�� )

• ��!��%�! �� "�� "��.�� 2��""�� ,'��"�� "�� -� ��"��*��.��!��)

• ��#�� 0��%�� #�� $�� 0��%�� )

• �� !�� '�� '��(�'�)� ��

• �� "��%��"�� !�� *��.�� 3


NATIONAL STRATEGIES

• Increasing the VAT, which concerns first of all the poorer parts of the population,

• decreasing pensions,• decreasing minimum wages,• making redundant employees of the public sector and public

companies,• Privatisation of public companies,• Nationalisation of banks, insurances, companies,• Outsourcing of public activities,• Structural changes (re-industrialisation),• Reforming the tax system,• Reforming public administration, and• Bail-out of banks.


STABILITY BONDS“The European Economic and Social Council believes that in order to resolve the crisis and avoid a prolonged recession, more Europe is needed, not less.This requires a strong determination on the part of the European Commission to reaffirm and implement the Community method. From this point of view, the Green Paper is welcome.Europe must combine solidarity, responsibility and shared confidence. This will foster fiscal responsibility and integration, pooling of risks stemming from sovereign debt, restoration of long-term creditworthiness, and ultimately could facilitate the implementation of structural reforms and attract investments.The EESC shares the Commission's view that Stability Bonds must have a high credit quality to be accepted by investors and the Member States of the euro area and to avoid the risk of moral hazard.As regards the various "options for issuance of Stability Bonds", the Committee believes that the European Commission's "median" approach which involves "partial substitution of Stability Bond issuance for national issuance, with joint and several guarantees" is the most practicable and overall the most acceptable option.”


FUTURE PERSPECTIVES• The Hungarian-Canadian economist Karl Polanyi wrote in 1944 ‘The

Great Transformation’, one of the most pertinent analysis of the modern world.

• Karl Marx forecasted: Socialism or Barbarism.• The Polish-German economist and socialist Rosa Luxemburg published

99 years ago her book on the accumulation of capital. Already then she forecasted that the financial sector will become the dominating one.

• In the 1980s the whole world spoke of a triad competition between the USA, Europe and Japan.

• Since then Japan, which is still the third biggest national economy in the world, has disappeared from this race – partly due its own incompetence, corruption, and natural disasters.

• Instead China has entered the front stage, becoming soon number one. Definitely it is far away for a welfare state for decades, although still classified as a socialist state.

• The Japano-American political scientist Francis Fukuyama declared the ‘End of history’ in 1992.

• The belief in progress, which meant technological, economic and social progress, has been shattered during the terrible 20th century.


• The US-American political scientist Norman Birnbaum published ‘After Progress. The future of socialism’ in 2005, a more optimistic vision.

• However, the peace dividend, of which many people dreamt after the breakdown of the Soviet system, has never been realized. On the contrary more money is spent for military instead of social benefits than ever before in human history.

• Austerity is certainly in the perspective of the responsibility for future generations and for sustainability a reasonable and necessary strategy. However, the experiences of the 1930s demonstrate that this policy has to applied with much care. Otherwise the risk of radicalisation and social unrest will surface again.

• So which conclusion for the future of European social safety nets? • It is a battle around Enlightenment. Today, during the crisis – like 80

years ago – national-chauvinist, even neo-fascist movements on the one hand, and anarchists on the other hand spread around.

• It is the role of science to contribute to a better understanding of the reasons of the crisis, and alternatives to radical, fundamentalist ‘solutions’. There institutions like KIHASA may play a prominent role.



REFERENCESAglitter, Michel & David Fern Bach (2001), A theory of capitalist regulation: The US experience.London, Verso (new ed.).

Birnbaum, Norman (2001), After Progress. The future of socialism. New York, Oxford University Press.

Busch, Klaus; Széll, György et al. (eds.) (2000), Ways to Social Peace in Europe. Osnabrück, Secolo.

Bespring-Andersen, Gusto (1990), The Three Worlds of Welfare Capitalism. Cambridge, Polity Press & Princeton: Princeton University Press.

Friedman, Milton (2002), Capitalism and Freedom. Chicago & London, The University of Chicago Press (1963).

Fukuyama, Francis (1992), The End of History. New York, The Free Press.

Garibaldi, Francesco & Telljohann, Volker (eds.) (2004), Globalisation, Company Strategies and Quality of Working Life in Europe. Frankfurt/M. et al., Peter Lang.

Harrison, Denis; György Széll & Reynaldo Bourque (Eds.) (2009), Social Innovation, the Social Economy and World Economic Development. Democracy and Labour Rights in an Era of Globalization. Peter Lang, Frankfurt a.M. et al.

Hennicke, Peter (2009), ‘Increasing Resource Productivity: A possible win-win strategy to protect resources, climate and jobs’, in Széll, György & Ute Széll (eds.), Quality of Life & Working Life in Comparison. Frankfurt a.M. et al., Peter Lang: 39-54.

Hollingsworth, Joel Rogers & Robert Boyer (eds.) (1997), Contemporary Capitalism. The Embeddedness of Institutions. Cambridge, Cambridge University Press.

Széll: The EU-Labour Movement & the Crisis 46

Lutz, Burkhard (1984), Der kurze Traum immerwährender Prosperität. Eine Neuinterpretation der industriell-kapitalistischen Entwicklung im Europa des 20. Jahrhunderts. Frankfurt a.M. & New York, Campus.

Luxemburg, Rosa (2006), Reform or Revolution and Other Writings. Dover Publications.

Marx, Karl (1989), Capital. Harmondsworth, Penguin, 3 vols.

Mainz, Renate (ed.) (2012), Crisis and Control. Institutional Change in Financial Market Regulation. Frankfurt a.M., Campus.

Nicolaou-Smokoviti, Litsa & György Széll (eds.) (1994), Participation, Organisational Effectiveness and Quality of Working-Life in the Year 2000. Frankfurt/M. al., Peter M. Lang.

Piore, Michael J. & Charles F. Sabel (1984), The Second Industrial Divide. Possibilities for prosperity. New York, Basic Books.

Polanyi, Karl (1957), The great transformation: [the political and economic origins of our time]. Boston, Beacon Press [c1944].

Soros, George (1998), The crisis of global capitalism. The open society endangered. New York, Public Affairs Publisher.

Széll, György (1988), Participation, Workers’ Control and Self-Management. Trend report and bibliography. London, Sage, Current Sociology, vol. 36, # 3.

Széll, György (ed.) (2001), European Labour Relations. Aldershot, Gower, 2 vol.

Széll, György (2004), ‘Sociology and Industrial Democracy’, in Nikolai Genov (ed.), Advances in Sociological Knowledge – over half a century, Wiesbaden, VS-Verlag: 396-418.


Széll, György (ed.) (2006), Corporate Social Responsibility in the EU & Japan. Frankfurt/M. et al., Peter Lang.

Széll, György (2007), ‘La participation des travailleurs dans les entreprises allemandes en crise’, Personnel & Gestion, N°7/Août, pp. 5-9.

Széll, György (2010), ‘Changing Labour Relations in China’, Indian Journal of Industrial Relations, April 2010: 554-565.

Széll, György; Bösling, Carl-Heinrich & Johannes Hartkemeyer (eds.) (2005), Labour, Globalisation and the New Economy. Frankfurt/M. et al., Peter Lang.

Széll, György; Bösling, Carl-Heinrich & Ute Széll (eds.) (2008), Education, Labour & Science –Perspectives for the 21st Century. Frankfurt/M. et al., Peter Lang.

Széll, György & Gian-Primo Cella (eds.) (2002), The Injustice at Work: An International View on the World of Labour and Society. Frankfurt/M. et al., Peter M. Lang.

Széll, György; Chetty, Dasarath & Alain Chouraqui (eds.) (2002), Participation, Globalisation & Culture – International and South African Perspectives. Frankfurt/M. et al., Peter M. Lang.

Széll, György; Cornforth, Chris & Paul Blyton (eds.) (1989), The State, Trade Unions and Self-Management. Issues of Competence and Control. Berlin & New York, de Gruyter.

Széll, György; Werner Kamppeter & Woosik Moon (eds.) (2009), European Social Integration – A Model for East Asia? Frankfurt/M. et al., Peter Lang.

Széll, György & Ute Széll (eds.) (2009), Quality of Life & Working Life in Comparison. Frankfurt/M. et al., Peter Lang.

Tocqueville, Alexis de (1965), Democracy in America. London et al., Oxford Univ. Press (1835).


HuckHuck‐‐ju Kwonju Kwon[Seoul [Seoul National University]National University][Seoul [Seoul National University]National University]

ContentsContents

IntroductionIntroductionIntroductionIntroduction

Citizenship and Universal WelfareCitizenship and Universal Welfare

Universal Welfare and Insurance Against RiskUniversal Welfare and Insurance Against Risk

Targeting and Universal ProtectionTargeting and Universal Protection

‘Free Welfare’ and Universal Protection‘Free Welfare’ and Universal Protection

l di kl di kConcluding RemarksConcluding Remarks

22

1. Introduction (1)1. Introduction (1)

∙ Global economic crisis∙ Global economic crisis

∙ Europe∙ Europe

∙ ∙ Introduced a large number Introduced a large number of social policies and of social policies and programmesprogrammes

pp: strong cuts in social spending: strong cuts in social spending

∙ Developing countries∙ Developing countries: introduce new social policy: introduce new social policy

∙ Have expanded its coverage∙ Have expanded its coverage

∙ But, lack of long∙ But, lack of long‐‐term directionterm directionp yp y

and strengthen existing oneand strengthen existing one

i di d f i l lff i l lf

Need to Need to justify justify the extension of social policythe extension of social policy

ConstructConstruct normative grounds normative grounds for universal welfarefor universal welfare

33

1. Introduction (2) 1. Introduction (2)

∙∙ SocioeconomicSocioeconomictransitiontransition

∙∙MoreMore flexibilityflexibilityofof labo rlabo r marketmarket

∙∙ EconomicEconomic shiftshift: : from from labourlabour‐‐transitiontransition

∙∙ DemographicDemographictransitiontransition

ofof labourlabour marketmarket

∙∙ HighHigh unemployunemploy‐‐mentment

: : from from labourlabourintensive intensive to knowledgeto knowledge‐‐intensiveintensive

:: ageingageing population,population,lowlow fertilityfertility

:: middlemiddle classclass andandthethe youngyoung

∙ Need more ∙ Need more trainingtrainingand educationand education

Need to Need to extend extend social protection and policiessocial protection and policiesNeed to Need to extend extend social protection and policiessocial protection and policiesandand strengthen strengthen its coverage against social riskits coverage against social risk

44

2. Citizenship and Universal Welfare2. Citizenship and Universal Welfare

∙∙ Social movement with the notion of worker’s rightSocial movement with the notion of worker’s right

∙ ∙ CClass coalition thru the perspectives of risk categorieslass coalition thru the perspectives of risk categories

∙ ∙ But, But, not clear not clear ti j tifi titi j tifi ti

∙∙Marshall, concept of ‘Citizenship’ Marshall, concept of ‘Citizenship’

‐‐ Civil rights, Political rights and Social rightsCivil rights, Political rights and Social rights

‐‐ Social rights Social rights ▶▶ Universal rights to welfareUniversal rights to welfare

normative justificationnormative justificationfor universal social rightsfor universal social rights

∙ Why ∙ Why social rights social rights shouldshouldgg gg yy ggbe consideredbe considered as right ofas right ofcitizens and universal?citizens and universal?

∙∙ ‘Objective and Minimum Standard of Social Security(1950)’‘Objective and Minimum Standard of Social Security(1950)’

∙ The Welfare State should strive to∙ The Welfare State should strive to

A. include entire population (universal principle)A. include entire population (universal principle)

B cover a wide range of contingencies B cover a wide range of contingencies B. cover a wide range of contingencies B. cover a wide range of contingencies

and provide nearly adequate benefits (comprehensive)and provide nearly adequate benefits (comprehensive)

C. unify the finance and administration (a national administrative system)C. unify the finance and administration (a national administrative system)

D. loose the tie btw benefits and contribution (social rights)D. loose the tie btw benefits and contribution (social rights)

55

3. Universal Welfare and Insurance3. Universal Welfare and InsuranceAgainst Risk (1)Against Risk (1)g ( )g ( )

Each person has an equal right to the most extensive scheme of equal basic liberties Each person has an equal right to the most extensive scheme of equal basic liberties compatible with a similar scheme of liberties for all. compatible with a similar scheme of liberties for all.

Social and economic inequalities are to satisfy 2 conditions: they must beSocial and economic inequalities are to satisfy 2 conditions: they must be

(a) to the greatest benefit of the least advantaged members of society: and(a) to the greatest benefit of the least advantaged members of society: and(a) to the greatest benefit of the least advantaged members of society: and(a) to the greatest benefit of the least advantaged members of society: and

(b) attached to offices and positions open to all under conditions of fair equality (b) attached to offices and positions open to all under conditions of fair equality

of opportunityof opportunity

(a) the basic liberties: for example freedom of thought and liberty of conscience(a) the basic liberties: for example freedom of thought and liberty of conscience

(b) freedom of movement and choices of occupation (b) freedom of movement and choices of occupation (b) freedom of movement and choices of occupation (b) freedom of movement and choices of occupation

(c) power and prerogatives of offices and positions of responsibility(c) power and prerogatives of offices and positions of responsibility

(d) income and wealth(d) income and wealth

(f) the social bases of self(f) the social bases of self‐‐respectrespect

66

( )( )

3. Universal Welfare and Insurance3. Universal Welfare and InsuranceAgainst Risk (2)Against Risk (2)g ( )g ( )

(1) If one is not in the least advantaged(1) If one is not in the least advantagedposition, is there any claim that oneposition, is there any claim that onerightly put forward?rightly put forward?

∙ Set up an imaginary community∙ Set up an imaginary communityof isolated islandof isolated island

∙ The idea of auction∙ The idea of auctionrightly put forward?rightly put forward?

(2) The extent of ‘fair share’ of primary(2) The extent of ‘fair share’ of primarygood Rawls argue for is not clear.good Rawls argue for is not clear.

∙∙ Need to be prepared against Need to be prepared against the brute and option luckthe brute and option luck

▶▶ B ins rance against catastropheB ins rance against catastropheg gg g

▶▶ Buy insurance against catastropheBuy insurance against catastrophe

Universal Protection against RiskUniversal Protection against Risk

Social rights to welfare is universal Social rights to welfare is universal∙ Social rights to welfare is universal∙ Social rights to welfare is universal

∙ Everyone should be protected against risk∙ Everyone should be protected against risk

77

4. Targeting and 4. Targeting and Universal Protection (1) Universal Protection (1) ( )( )

Targeting (selectivity)Targeting (selectivity) Problem of targetingProblem of targetingg g ( y)g g ( y)in welfare provisionin welfare provision

g gg g

(1) Ideological shift (1) Ideological shift toward toward neoneo‐‐liberal tendencyliberal tendency

(1) 2 kinds of errors (1) 2 kinds of errors in process of targetingin process of targeting‐‐ Inclusion errorInclusion error

(2) Fiscal constraint (2) Fiscal constraint and quest for and quest for efficiencyefficiency

(3) International agencies (3) International agencies relied on relied on targeted transfertargeted transfer

Inclusion errorInclusion error(leakage, non(leakage, non‐‐poor covered)poor covered)‐‐ Exclusion errorExclusion error(under(under‐‐coverage, poor not covered)coverage, poor not covered)

relied on relied on targeted transfertargeted transfer(4) The (4) The crisiscrisis of universalismof universalism

: gap btw universal proclamations : gap btw universal proclamations and and the actual reach of its policiesthe actual reach of its policies

(2) (2) StigmatizationStigmatization of recipientsof recipients

(3) (3) Perverse incentivePerverse incentive: encourage to remain poor: encourage to remain poor

88

4. Targeting and 4. Targeting and Universal Protection (2) Universal Protection (2) Universal Protection (2) Universal Protection (2)

‐‐Welfare benefits with individual inability and laziness in CambodiaWelfare benefits with individual inability and laziness in CambodiaWelfare benefits with individual inability and laziness in CambodiaWelfare benefits with individual inability and laziness in Cambodia‐‐ Establish that welfare benefit as a part of social rightsEstablish that welfare benefit as a part of social rights

‐‐ The middle class: important to expand state responsibility for social welfareThe middle class: important to expand state responsibility for social welfare‐‐ How to include the marginal class: Raise the level of benefits with social assistanceHow to include the marginal class: Raise the level of benefits with social assistance

Collecting income data and other data related to wellCollecting income data and other data related to well being of citizensbeing of citizens‐‐ Collecting income data and other data related to wellCollecting income data and other data related to well‐‐being of citizensbeing of citizensand identifying the poor peopleand identifying the poor people

‐‐ As important part of development (ex. Indonesia)As important part of development (ex. Indonesia)

99

5. ‘Free Welfare’ and 5. ‘Free Welfare’ and Universal Protection (1) Universal Protection (1) ( )( )

1010


Public polices for Universal Protection Public polices for Universal Protection

∙ ∙ Policies for protection against social risk in KoreaPolicies for protection against social risk in Korea

‐‐ Social insuranceSocial insurance

: National Pension : National Pension ProgrammeProgramme Unemployment Insurance and so on Unemployment Insurance and so on: National Pension : National Pension ProgrammeProgramme, Unemployment Insurance and so on, Unemployment Insurance and so on

‐‐ Social AssistanceSocial Assistance

: The Minimum Living Standard Guarantee: The Minimum Living Standard Guarantee

Universal standards of Universal standards of ppublic policiesublic policies

DesignDesign ImplementationImplementation PolicyPolicy

CoverageCoverageof policyof policy

accessible to everyone accessible to everyone without any criteria without any criteria

Social insuranceSocial insuranceSocial assistanceSocial assistancep yp y yy

SufficiencySufficiencyof protectionof protection

provideprovide adequate leveladequate levelfor basic living standardfor basic living standard

Social assistanceSocial assistance

1111


Dead zone of policies for social protection Dead zone of policies for social protection

A t l B fi i D d ZPolicies

Actual Beneficiary Dead Zone

Category Ratio(%) Category Ratio(%)

Defaulter Exceptional

PublicInsurance(2010)

The National ∙ Civil Service∙ Military Personnel Pension

contributor

42.5

Defaulter, Exceptionalpeople for contribution,Excluded people from

public pension, Not economically active

57.5

contributor Not economically active population

Unemployment Insurance

Regular employee,Part of non‐regular 41.2

Part of non‐regular employee, f

58.8Insurance(2009)

Part of non regular employee

41.2Unpaid family worker,Individual proprietor

58.8

The Minimum living Standard

R i i t 6Poor but excluded b d i i t ti 6

g Sta da dGuarantee

(2010)

Recipients 46.4 by administrative criteria

53.6

Need to focus on Need to focus on by social insurance and assistanceby social insurance and assistance

1212

yy

6. Concluding Remarks6. Concluding Remarks

Welfare state Welfare state with political with political sustainablitysustainablity

∙ Economic shift:∙ Economic shift:from from labourlabour‐‐intensiveintensive

∙ ∙ Demographic transition: Demographic transition: ageing ageing population, population,

∙ ∙ Protect the middle class Protect the middle class as well as the poor and vulnerableas well as the poor and vulnerable

to knowledgeto knowledge‐‐intensiveintensiveg gg glow fertilitylow fertility

as e as t e poo a d u e ab eas e as t e poo a d u e ab e

∙ Need to answer ∙ Need to answer ‘ Who should pay ‘ Who should pay for social for social benefit?’benefit?’‘ ‘ Why should they pay for it?’ Why should they pay for it?’

· · Universal protectionUniversal protectionagainst social riskagainst social risk

Why should they pay for it? Why should they pay for it?

1313

Documents

일시 : 2012.10.10 (수) 10:00 ~ 12:00 장소 : 한국보건사회연구원 …repository.kihasa.re.kr/bitstream/201002/12588/1/52 제4... · 2017-12-22 · global crisis started