The Rise, Fall and Revival of the Swedish Welfare State: What are the Policy Lessons from Sweden? (original) (raw)
Related papers
What are the policy lessons from Sweden? On the rise, fall and revival of a capitalist welfare state
New Political Economy, 2013
This paper discusses a number of questions with regard to Sweden's economic and political development: • How did Sweden become rich? • What explains Sweden's high level of income equality? • What were the causes of Sweden's problems from 1970 to 1995? • How is it possible that Sweden, since the crisis of the early 1990s, is growing faster than most EU countries despite its high taxes and generous welfare state? These questions are analyzed using recent insights from institutional economics, as well as studies of inequality and economic growth. The main conclusion is that there is little, if any, Swedish exceptionalism: Sweden became rich because of well-functioning capitalist institutions, and inequality was low before the expansion of the welfare state. The recent favorable growth record of Sweden, including the period of financial stress (2008-2010), is a likely outcome of a number of far-reaching structural reforms implemented in the 1980s and 90s.
The Rise, Fall and Revival of a Capitalist Welfare State: What are the Policy Lessons from Sweden
2011
This paper discusses a number of questions with regard to Sweden's economic and political development: How did Sweden become rich? What explains Sweden's high level of income equality? What were the causes of Sweden's problems from 1970 to 1995? How is it possible that Sweden, since the crisis of the early 1990s, is growing faster than most EU countries despite its high taxes and generous welfare state?
Economic growth and welfare state: a case study of Sweden
2014
"In this article we analyse the relation between the dynamics of economic growth and the welfare state using the Swedish experience as a case study. We defend three theses concerning the Swedish experience: that the deep economic crisis of 1990–93 constituted the definite breaking point for the accumulation pattern in force since the 1950s (and in crisis since the mid-1970s); that the new accumulation pattern eroded the long-standing symbiotic relationships between economic growth and the welfare state; and that the welfare state has suffered retrenchments and qualitative changes of great importance, which can be fundamentally explained by the transformations in the accumulation pattern. We conclude that the changes introduced in Sweden have continued to subordinate the welfare state’s main goals, giving priority to the new accumulation pattern. doi: 10.1093/cje/bet049
The Trend to Widening Wealth and Income Inequality in Sweden and its Causes
World Review of Political Economy
Sweden is a model of social democracy in which the Social Democratic Party has long been in power, and in which distribution under the conditions of monopoly capitalism has been the object of one-sided praise. Wealth and income inequality in Sweden was in the past relatively low, but in recent years has shown a tendency to undergo a structural increase, and some indicator values are already at comparatively high levels. Investigating the causes, we find that the ownership structure of the means of production, dominated by monopoly capitalist private ownership, has played a decisive role in the creation and evolution of wealth and income inequality within Sweden. The Swedish welfare system, whose core elements are social security provisions and the tax system, has played an important role in alleviating wealth and income inequality and in promoting social equity, but the degree of adjustment it achieves is relatively limited, and it now faces challenges in ensuring its sustainability...
Expansion and retrenchment of the Swedish welfare state: a long-term approach
International Journal of Health Services, vol. 45, núm. 2 , 2015
In this paper we will make a long-term analysis of the evolution of the Swedish welfare state. We will look for an explanation of that evolution using a systemic approach. That is to say, our approach will consider the interrelations between economic growth (EG), the socio-political institutional framework (IF) and the welfare state (WS) − understood as a set of institutions embracing the labour market and its regulation, the tax system and the so-called social wage − in order to find the main variables that explain its evolution. We will show that expansive phase of the Swedish welfare state can be explained by the symbiotic relationships developed in the interaction of WS-EG-IF; whereas the period of welfare state retrenchment is a result of the changes operated in the socio-political (IF) and economic (EG) bases on which it was based.
The Swedish Welfare State Model : A Brief Overview
Social Science Spectrum, 2016
The Swedish welfare state model has its roots in home turf as well as in the soil of othernations, mainly Germany and Britain. It took on its characteristic shape as the People’s Home in the 1930s, when national models to the left and right of the political spectrum in many countries were built around “the people”. At the time it was also labelled “the middle way” between capitalism and socialism. During the 1960s “record years” the Swedish welfare state grew rapidly. It stood at its zenith around 1970, hailed internationally as the Swedish model. However, the welfare state and the economy,closely intertwined, soon entered into a protracted structural crisis. In the early 1990s,Sweden experienced a deep and to a large extent home-made financial crisis and the Swedish model became a warning example in some quarters. Out of the crisis arose a revised model in which welfare services were still provided more or less “for free” (i.e.funded by tax money) while at the same time there were ...
2011
We acknowledge the helpful comments of Birgitta Swedenborg, the other members of the Center for Business and Policy Studies/ National Bureau of Economic Research group, and conference participants-especially Nils Gottfries (our discussant) and Bertil Holmlund. We also thank Albin Kainelainen, Kjell Salvanes, Per Skedinger, and Roope Uusitalo for help with the data. We are responsible for the errors. Some of the work on this chapter was done while Fredriksson was at the Institute for International Economic Studies, Stockholm University. 1. Even at its peak during the 1950s, union coverage in the United States never exceeded 35 percent. Private-sector unionism has been in steady decline since. Union coverage has increased only in the public sector, where roughly 36 percent of workers now belong to unions. Government intervention in labor markets has increased over time, mainly as a result of workplace regulations and the erosion of the employment at will doctrine that has historically characterized much of U.S. employment relations. Public employment as a fraction of total employment remains low by international standards.