1. @spswspsw.york Department of Social Policy and Social Work Exploring Culture and Welfare Regimes Can the examination of cross-national differences in societal values help us to understand differences in welfare state activity? John Hudson University of York, UK Nam K. Jo SungKongHoe University, South Korea Antonia Keung University of York, UK Award ES/J00460X/1

2. @spswspsw.york Department of Social Policy and Social Work 1. Background  Explore ‘culture matters’ for welfare thesis  Often cited as important, typically in a loose manner  ‘Macro’ perspective  Broad conception, dominant beliefs, often post hoc explanations  ‘Micro’ perspective  Public opinion, specific issues, unstable  Much debate; advances in data, concepts and method

3. @spswspsw.york Department of Social Policy and Social Work  Jo (2011) culture as stable societal values  More concrete than macro  More enduring than micro  Cultural context of social policy making  Avoid cultural determinism  Interplay of politics, economics, institutions and culture  Not a decisive influence, but a significant one 1. Background

4. @spswspsw.york Department of Social Policy and Social Work 2. Societal Values  Extract examples of societal values:  Data from successive waves EVS/WVS data 1981-2009  173 societal cases 59 countries x max 4 time points 243,975 responses  Factor analysis of pooled data manual inspection and reanalysis  End goal: identify stable and distinct examples of societal values  Built on work of Hofstede, Jo, Schwartz, van de Vijver et al

5. @spswspsw.york Department of Social Policy and Social Work 2. Societal Values Societal ValueExample Survey Item RelgiosityGod is important in my life Conservative Social NormsIs divorce permissible? Permissive Values on Adherence to LawsJustifiable to cheat on taxes? Optimistic ValuesSatisfied with your life? Traditional Family ValuesIs marriage an out-dated institution? Interpersonal toleranceWould you not like heavy drinkers as your neigbours? Political ActivenessDo you participate in lawful demonstrations? Political OrientednessDo you regularly discuss politics with friends?

6. @spswspsw.york Department of Social Policy and Social Work  Independent variables  Societal values  Economic context (GDP per capita, growth, unemployment)  Political context (cabinet composition)  Historical Institutional context (welfare regime)  Dependent Variables:  unemployment spending  family policy spending  maternity leave policy structures  Medium term averages 3. Regression Analysis

7. @spswspsw.york Department of Social Policy and Social Work 3. Regression Analysis Unemp Exp (% PE) Unemp Exp (% GDP) Fam Pol Exp (% PE) Fam Pol Exp (% GDP) Maternity Leave (FTE) Culture Matters? ✔✔ Any Key Values? - Perm Laws + Toler - Perm Laws + Toler Other Factors?Regime (SE) Economy Regime (SE) Economy

8. @spswspsw.york Department of Social Policy and Social Work 3. Regression Analysis Unemp Exp (% PE) Unemp Exp (% GDP) Fam Pol Exp (% PE) Fam Pol Exp (% GDP) Maternity Leave (FTE) Culture Matters? ✔✔ ✔✔ Any Key Values? - Perm Laws + Toler - Perm Laws + Toler - Religiosity + Con Norms - Religiosity + Con Norms + Toler + Perm Laws + Opt Val Other Factors?Regime (SE) Economy Regime (SE) Economy RegimeRegime (SD) Regime Left Cabinet

9. @spswspsw.york Department of Social Policy and Social Work  Good degree of support for culture matters thesis  Some interesting findings  Interpersonal tolerance, religiosity  Some important limits  Data driven, intepretation, gaps in data  Only examples of societal values  Puzzle around family policy spending  Impact of culture less clear in models  Could be a DV issue?  Influence of traditional family values absent? 3. Regression Analysis

10. @spswspsw.york Department of Social Policy and Social Work  Small but growing body of fsQCA rooted work  Key features:  Case based analysis  Membership of conceptually rooted, researcher determined, (fuzzy) sets  Not linear  Key principles include:  Conjunctural causation  Equifinality 4. fsQCA Analysis

11. @spswspsw.york Department of Social Policy and Social Work ‘[QCA views] causal conditions not as adversaries in the struggle to explain variation in dependent variables, but as potential collaborators in the production of outcomes. The key issue is not which variable is the strongest (i.e., has the biggest net effect), but how different conditions combine and whether there is only one or several different combinations of conditions (causal “recipes”) capable of generating the same outcome.’ Ragin, 2008 4. fsQCA Analysis

12. @spswspsw.york Department of Social Policy and Social Work  Debate in QCA literature around time  cf. Institutionalist debates (e.g. Pierson, 2004 – time matters)  Schneider and Waggeman – two-step approach  Remote and proximate factors  Adapted here into a three-step approach  Remote, proximate and intermediate factors  Visualises influence of societal values in different ‘pathways’  Reflect on cases 4. fsQCA Analysis

13. @spswspsw.york Department of Social Policy and Social Work  Build directly on regression models  Family policy spending (% GDP)  Least clear explanation  Puzzling role of traditional family values  Take significant elements from regression + TFV  Set memberships mainly determined arithmetically  Somewhat tentative and experimental 4. fsQCA Analysis

14. @spswspsw.york Department of Social Policy and Social Work Intermediate Factors Proximate Factors Remote Factors No clear impacts conservative social norms AND religiosity Consistency with HIGH SPENDING of 1.000 and coverage of 0.776 SOCIAL DEMOCRATIC Consistency with HIGH SPENDING of 0.886 Note: differences on traditional family values

15. @spswspsw.york Department of Social Policy and Social Work Intermediate Factors Proximate Factors No theoretically important impacts Remote Factors CONSERVATIVE SOCIAL NORMS AND RELIGIOSITY Consistency with LOW SPENDING of 1.000 and coverage of 0.814 SOUTHERN EUROPEAN Consistency with LOW SPENDING of 0.966 Note: differences on traditional family values

16. @spswspsw.york Department of Social Policy and Social Work Proximate Factors Remote Factors Two routes with combined coverage of 0.773 and consistency with LOW SPENDING of 0.901 growth Consistency with LOW SPENDING of 0.946 and raw coverage of 0.328 left government AND growth Consistency with LOW SPENDING of 0.957 and raw coverage of 0.670 LEFT GOVERNMENT Consistency with HIGH SPENDING of 0.813 and raw coverage of 0.265 EXIT ROUTE Intermediate Factors LIBERAL Consistency with LOW SPENDING of 0.753 Consistency with LOW SPENDING of 0.942 and raw coverage of 0.613 TRADITIONAL FAMILY VALUES AND RELIGIOSITY LEFT GOVERNMENT Consistency with HIGH SPENDING of 0.901 and raw coverage of 0.315 EXIT ROUTE TRADITIONAL FAMILY VALUES AND conservative social norms Consistency with LOW SPENDING of 0.913 and raw coverage of 0.503

17. @spswspsw.york Department of Social Policy and Social Work No clear impacts Counterfactual? GROWTH + LEFT Intermediate Factors Proximate Factors Remote Factors CONSERVATIVE/CORPORATIST Consistency with NEITHER outcome TRADITIONAL FAMILY VALUES Consistency with LOW SPENDING of 0.968 and raw coverage of 0.590

18. @spswspsw.york Department of Social Policy and Social Work  Regime effects strong?  Path dependency usually evident?  Left politics in liberal regime? (EU?)  Conservative/corporatist regime a puzzle  Conflicted response to the new social risks? (esp in EU?) Role of religion?  Some cultural variables operate differently in different regimes  e.g. traditional family values:  no bearing in SD/SE but act against high family spending elsewhere.  In Liberal regime interact with a high degree of religiosity  Culture and regime interact  not a simple linear link, configurations matter? 4. fsQCA Analysis

19. @spswspsw.york Department of Social Policy and Social Work  Shown value of in-between concept of culture?  Facilitates empirical investigation of culture matters thesis  Added support to culture matters thesis?  Suggests regimes and values interact or overlap?  Tentative findings – refinements, more tests to follow  Limits to approach here:  Data driven Examples of societal values Weaknesses in models  Further exploration: key cases, dynamic cases 5. Conclusion

20. @spswspsw.york Department of Social Policy and Social Work --- END ---

21. @spswspsw.york Department of Social Policy and Social Work Summary Of Solution Pathways SOCIAL DEMOCRATIC  conservative norms  religiosity  HIGH FAMILY SPENDING SOUTHERN EUROPEAN  CONSERVATIVE NORMS  RELIGIOSITY  LOW FAMILY SPENDING LIBERAL  FAMLY VALUES  RELIGIOSTY  LOW FAMILY SPENDING LIBERAL  FAMLY VALUES  RELIGIOSTY  growth  LOW FAMILY SPENDING LIBERAL  FAMLY VALUES  conservative norms  growth  left  LOW FAMILY SPENDING LIBERAL  FAMLY VALUES  conservative norms  LEFT  HIGH FAMILY SPENDING LIBERAL  LEFT  HIGH FAMILY SPENDING CONSERVATIVE/CORPORATIST  FAMLY VALUES  LOW FAMILY SPENDING