IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/cup/pscirm/v11y2023i1p34-52_3.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Public opinion on welfare state recalibration in times of austerity: evidence from survey experiments

Author

Listed:
  • Bremer, Björn
  • Bürgisser, Reto

Abstract

Even though social investment is highly popular, welfare state recalibration remains an uphill battle. When resources are scarce in times of austerity, welfare recalibration involves multidimensional trade-offs. Existing research primarily studied preferences toward individual policies or trade-offs in specific policy fields, failing to capture citizens’ overall social policy priorities. Using two novel survey experiments in three European countries, we show that citizens have clear social policy priorities: pensions and education enjoy a high, family policies a medium, and labor market policies a low priority. However, policy constituencies differ in their relative priorities. Our findings suggest that welfare state recalibration is difficult because trade-offs are unpopular, and distributive conflicts in mature welfare states are mainly about distributing resources to specific social groups.

Suggested Citation

  • Bremer, Björn & Bürgisser, Reto, 2023. "Public opinion on welfare state recalibration in times of austerity: evidence from survey experiments," Political Science Research and Methods, Cambridge University Press, vol. 11(1), pages 34-52, January.
    • Handle: RePEc:cup:pscirm:v:11:y:2023:i:1:p:34-52_3
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.cambridge.org/core/product/identifier/S2049847021000789/type/journal_article
    File Function: link to article abstract page
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:cup:pscirm:v:11:y:2023:i:1:p:34-52_3. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Kirk Stebbing (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.cambridge.org/ram .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.