Canada is the only non-European Union country included in this original collection about welfare regimes and nation building, sub-central states and supranational influences on solidarity. Individual chapters are also dedicated to the United Kingdom, Germany, France, Spain, Italy, Belgium and the Nordic region. Included are two chapters on European influences on national practices.
In a thorough and well-constructed Introduction, the editors argue that “territoriality and welfare have too often lived separated lives” (1) and this collection seeks to overcome the divide. Using a “regime approach,” they connect nation building and welfare state development patterns, in light of the challenges from neo-liberalism. These challenges are specified as globalization/continentalization, territorial minorities (sub-state claims) and marketization. While the Introduction celebrates the value of comparative research, most of the remaining chapters are organized around single states and their sub-units.
The chapter on the United Kingdom (by N. McEwen and R. Parry) focuses on devolution's implications for the welfare state. Devolution “on demand” since 1999 has meant varying legislative structures and powers in Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland. These three regions have been seen as more supportive of distributive welfare state policies than England, which leans more toward means-testing, disciplined civil servants and market-driven reforms. Analyzing the particular conjuncture that encouraged devolution and its welfare implications, especially in terms of health, education, housing and services, they acknowledge the constraints of block funding and limited divergence of practices.
The chapter on Germany (by Jörg Mathias) addresses the federal system of Länder and the 1990 unification of East and West. The key tension is between “co-operative” federalism and national social solidarity, especially as tested by unification. The contemporary contestation over funding and control have the country in political turmoil as various proposals unfold, introducing unprecedented territorial and jurisdictional struggles.
France, according to Alistair Cole, is an interesting case because of the strengthening in terms of staff, budgets and powers taking place at the three subnational layers: regions, departments and communes. This de-centreing occurs in a system traditionally dominated by the central government and professional interests within the welfare state. The “layering” which has emerged in the past two decades continues to be dominated by central responsibility for “social inclusion,” a wide policy area. Constitutional reforms in 2003 seem to introduce greater space for decentralization through the ambiguous notion of “experimentation” in the context of national standards.
The chapter on Spain (by R. Gallego, R. Gomà and J. Subirats), more than most others, addresses comparative issues in terms of its location in broader welfare state classification schemes. They address competing interpretations of the “Latin Mediterranean” welfare states. The past two decades have involved political and administrative decentralized competencies to 17 autonomous governments but have been animated by oscillations in social-democratic and liberal central governments, resulting in greater asymmetry and fragmentation of welfare outcomes with a mix of practices. In education this has meant a commitment to access and greater spending but split between public and private schooling. There is high variation between the 17 autonomous governments and enrolments in public schools and subsidized private schools. In health care, a universal system managed by regional governments has been introduced but there remains regional unevenness and the continuation of corporatist-style arrangements for civil servants (7.5 per cent of the population). The authors chart variations in internal regimes by policy domains: education, health care, employment, social services, housing and income support along the poles of state/market and community/family.
In Italy, according to Valeria Fargion, the “Southern Question” has dominated all aspects of politics with limited regional powers or local control. There has been a dual welfare state dominated by pensions, most of the expenditures going to this area and mainly to the industrialized northern area. Much of the delivery of welfare state activities has been by religious and “third sector” partners. In areas dominated by the right there has been a distribution of funding between private institutions, municipalities and other public agencies, while for the left, funds are directed to local governments. The complex Italian system is now dominated by the territorial politics of the “Northern Question,” which splits left and right: the left supporting universalism and local democracy; the right nationalism. This leaves the Italian system as convoluted as ever.
R. Dandoy and P. Baudewyns have chosen to deal with Belgian territorial and ethno-linguistic fragmentation, which is legendary, impacting the incremental decentralization process in place since 1970. There are three recognized communities (French, Flemish and German-speaking) and three regions (Wallonia, Flanders and Brussels-Capital—dominated by French-speaking citizens). Competencies are divided between these entities and the national level. The struggles are over scarce resources, especially so since 1975. There are competing visions over the most appropriate level to deliver welfare state services while maintaining national solidarity.
The Nordic countries are covered collectively by Kaisa Lähteenmäki-Smith without neglecting the differences among the countries. Collectively, the tendency has been to shift responsibilities toward regional and local governments. All these countries are subject to transformations introduced by European liberalization to Nordic social democratic practices, which have traditionally been embedded in the link between social insurance and labour markets. In comparative terms, there remains a similarity across the Nordic regions sufficient to treat them as a “type.”
The inclusion of a chapter on Canada and Quebec (by D. Béland and A. Lecours) is a welcome addition to this collection, and captures the fundamental link between social policy and nation building. Béland and Lecours map the division of powers between the federal and provincial levels, including unemployment insurance, public pensions and equalization transfers, as well as federal support for provincial jurisdictions in health care, social assistance and (strangely missing) education. The key point, however, is the connection of health care to a national unity strategy on the federal side and Quebec nationalists linking their empowerment to both language and the social conditions reflected in a developed welfare state. Quebec has used its day-care, income support and drug insurance plans to demonstrate its commitment to the well-being of Québécois.
Finally, there are two general papers, one on legitimacy (Steffen Mau) and another on social rights (Maurizio Ferrera). Both concentrate their gaze on the European Union level. Mau uses public opinion data to ask whether populations are “ready” to accept European-level social policy solutions. Ferrera speculates that European integration marks a new “spatial architecture of social citizenship.”
In conclusion, this collection provides a series of interesting and well-argued case studies about territory and welfare states but not much in the way of comparative analysis. The least satisfying parts of the collection are the final two chapters. One can also regret the absence of a final chapter on par with the Introduction, drawing together the case studies and their implications for the way we understand welfare states and territory across countries.
