Many people feel a general unease in relation to globalization and have experienced a deterioration of the welfare system. On the other hand, much research on the welfare state, as we know it in the Nordic countries, points to it being able to resist pressure upon it and defend its position.
The research results can, however, be questioned, in the view of Daniel Ankarloo (picture), who is more pessimistic about the welfare sector’s future.
”When talking about globalization in relation to the welfare state, the general view is that something happened at the end of the 1970s and early 1980s”, Ankarloo says. ”Most people share the view that some kind of change in the system occurred at this time, even if they disagree on other matters.”
On the one hand, the finance markets were internationalized, and financial capital’s movement increased in both speed and volume. On the other hand, the welfare state is a distinctively national project: in Sweden the ”people’s home” (Folkhemmet) concept – the idea of a people for whom society has a responsibility to build a home – is still current.
The balance of power has shifted to the advantage of capital
Before globalization increased its pace, there was a kind of power balance between the public sector, the trade unions and organizations representing the business world. The public sector was responsible for general welfare, while unions and commercial-industrial organizations negotiated on matters of wages and working conditions.
”According to this viewpoint, globalization has led to the power balance shifting to the advantage of capital”, says Daniel Ankarloo. ” Political demands for greater social security and higher wages can be met by threats that companies will move to countries with lower costs.”
Several factors lead – at least theoretically – to a weakening of the public, collecive welfare system: de-industrialization in the West and the eastward movement of industry; an ageing population, and a general social trend towards individualization, which opinion-wise turns away from collective solutions.
Together with de-regulation, tax reductions and privatisatioin of sections of the public sector, space for welfare investments according to the Nordic model should be lessening.
Research shows no dramatic weakening of the welfare system
The research presented up to now accords relatively badly with the hypothesis that the welfare systems are being undermined and, additionally, are becoming increasingly similar between countries.
”Studies show surprising results”, says Daniel Ankarloo. ”They do not indicate that the systems have become more similar, but rather the opposite: more different. As an example, the differences in care of the elderly in Denmark and Sweden have increased since the 1990s.”
One can find smaller changes: lower social insurance and welfare payments have been carried through and hit smaller, often marginalized groups. A general deconstruction of the large welfare systems is not evident, however. It is, rather, more a question of stagnation at a high level subsequent to a matchless increase of the welfare sector between the 1950s and 1980s. There are several different explanations.
There is a path-following aspect to the system. Even if globalization is a trend, with lowered taxes and larger income differences as a consequence, many interests are still dependent on the welfare state. Politicians and officials go hand-in-hand with a public opinion that is against cutbacks in more general systems. This is why cutbacks are limited to the margins.
Redistribution within the system
There is consequently a difference between many people’s experience of genuine worry and cutbacks, on the one hand, and the notification from research, on the other hand, that globalization is not noticeably affecting welfare.
Daniel Ankarloo questions the conclusions of this research.
”I think in fact that what globalization theory says will happen is indeed happening in Sweden”, he says. Here the welfare sector is being cut back.
He points to figures that employees within health and social services decreased by 90,000 between 1990 and 2000. At the same time there occurred a strong expansion of higher education, with the establishment of a number of locally-anchored colleges.
”Up to now, researchers have looked at the total, collective economy of the social sector”, Ankarloo says. There the cutbacks are less visible. He believes a redistribution within the social sector has occurred, with a decrease within health and social services, at the same time that an ageing population actually has more needs than previously. Daniel Ankarloo agrees with those who say that the Nordic welfare system will survive even in the long term.
”But the question is, will it function in a good way?” , he says. ”I think one can in fact draw a parallel between the subjectively experienced worry and research results.”
Expectations have lessened
The concern and worry, according to Ankarloo, is based on the welfare system not functioning to achieve the goals that were initially envisaged. Most people agree that, for example, income differences have increased, as has segregation within housing areas. Another aspect is that expectations have changed. The welfare state was earlier seen as a democratic project aiming to increase socio-economic equality and security; to strengthen democracy, protect health, guarantee a social safety-net, and contribute to the process of integration. Nowadays the expectations are distinctly lower, Daniel Ankarloo thinks.
”Those who now claim that the welfare systems function do not do so from the belief that we now have attained social integration and equality. The argument at most seems to be rather that things would have been much worse for us without the welfare system.”
Daniel Ankarloo will lecture on NVC:s seminar "Nordic Day 2009 Prague" - more information about this seminar please click hereText:
Nino Simic, Information Officer, NVC