Danish University Colleges
Denmark : which Type of Welfare Regime? and Recent Political Changes in Denmark lecture notes
Madsen, Aase Mygind
Publication date:
2006
Link to publication
Citation for pulished version (APA):
Madsen, A. M. (2006). Denmark : which Type of Welfare Regime? and Recent Political Changes in Denmark:
lecture notes. (2 ed.) Socialrådgiveruddannelsen i Aarhus, VIA University College. Social Skriftserie No. 5 http://www2.viauc.dk/socialraadgiver/aarhus/skolen/publikationer/socialskriftserie/Sider/typeofwelfareregime.asp x
General rights
Copyright and moral rights for the publications made accessible in the public portal are retained by the authors and/or other copyright owners and it is a condition of accessing publications that users recognise and abide by the legal requirements associated with these rights.
• Users may download and print one copy of any publication from the public portal for the purpose of private study or research.
• You may not further distribute the material or use it for any profit-making activity or commercial gain • You may freely distribute the URL identifying the publication in the public portal
Download policy
If you believe that this document breaches copyright please contact us providing details, and we will remove access to the work immediately and investigate your claim.
Denmark – which Type of Welfare Regime?
and
Recent Political Changes in Denmark
Lecture notes
Aase Mygind Madsen
Associate Professor, Ph.D. political science
2006
Aase Mygind Madsen
Denmark – which Type of Welfare Regime?
Recent Political Changes in Denmark
Copyright: Aase Mygind Madsen and Aarhus School of Social Work.
Edited by Pernille Halling-Overgaard, Head of Research and Development.
Social skriftserie, Aarhus School of Social Work, No. 5, 2006.
ISBN: 87-85200-50-6
Cover illustration, excerpt from “Hippolytos en skæbnefortælling”, made by Evan Rasmussen.
Published and printed by:
Aarhus School of Social Work Jens Chr. Skous Vej 2
DK- 8000 Aarhus C www.dsh-aa.dk
This publication can be ordered by tel: ++45 8627 6622 or by email: dsh- aa@dsh-aa.dk. It can also be downloaded from The Aarhus School of Social Work’s homepage or from www.euromodule.com
Price: DKK 30 + postage.
Contents
Preface
41. Denmark - which Type of Welfare
Regime?
61.1 Emergence in the 1970ies and subsequent
Developments 7
1.2 The Institutional Aspects 10
1.3 The Universal Aspects 15
1.4 The Political Aspects 16
1.5 Conclusion 20
1.6 List of Literature 22
2. Recent Political Changes in Denmark
24 2.1 Increased Civil Society Orientation 262.1.1 Decentralisation and deinstitutionalisation of social welfare institutions 27 2.1.2 More space for voluntary work 28 2.1.3 Users’ free choice of service providers 30 2.1.4 Citizenship-based rights 31 2.2 Increased Market Orientation 32 2.2.1 Users’ payment – incl. old age pension 32 2.2.2 Public – private partnership 33
2.2.3 Privatisation 34
2.3 The Activation Line 34
2.4 Other Changes – and Non Changes 37 2.5 New Rhetoric – New Explanations 38 2.6 Are the Basic Features of the Institutional and
Universal Welfare State Changing? 40
2.7 List of Literature 42
Preface
The two papers or lecture notes in this issue of “Den Sociale Højskoles skriftserie” were originally written in the spring of 2004 for The European Module Network. They appear on the website of this network together with other papers on
comparative social work and social policy in Europe (see www.dsh-aa.dk or www.euromodule.com).
They give a good overview of the main principles of the Danish welfare model and its development over the last 30 years. As such they can be recommended as an introduction to the system for Danish as well as foreign students.
The lecture notes appear in the social science curriculum for international social work students at The Aarhus School of Social Work and the comparative social policy curriculum for social work students at University of Central Lanchashire, Preston, U.K. They have further been used as background papers for lectures held by the author at The Aarhus School of Social Work’s partnerschools in Finland, U.K., Iceland, Germany and Poland.
Only a few changes have been made in the manuscript from 2004. Although the welfare Commission (mentioned on page 37 in the second lecture note) submitted its report in 2005 and the government subsequently has made its own welfare proposals on April 4th 2006, there has not yet been legal changes following up upon these proposals. As for the Structural Reform Commission all its recommendations has been passed through Parliament, however, these
comprehensive administrative changes will not be implemented until January 2007.
The Lecture Notes gives a good overview of the main principles of the Danish Welfare Model and how it has developed over the last 30 years. As such it can be
recommended for Danish as well as foreign students interested in the world famous (?) Danish Welfare Model.
1. Denmark – which Type of Welfare Regime?
Images of the Danish welfare regime are usually imbedded in images of the Scandinavian welfare model. As such it has attracted theoretical attention in writings by internationally well known scholars such as R.H.Titmuss, T.H. Marshall and Goesta Esping Andersen (Titmuss, R.H.,1987; Marshall, T.H., 1963; Esping Andersen, G., 1990). Whether the label
‘institutional welfare model’ (Titmuss and Marshall) or
‘Scandinavian welfare model’ (Esping Andersen) is preferred, the common concern of the three is with the model’s 1) redistributive character 2) citizenship based universalism implying 3) a high degree of equality and a relatively high level of material wellbeing. Both Titmuss, Marshall and Esping Andersen argue that the 3 points have been most successfully achieved in the Scandinavian countries due to the influence of strong Social Democratic parties.
The three points have gradually emerged as characteristic features of the Danish welfare regime. They, however, can only be argued to have fully characterised it in a period of approximately 40 years from the late 1960ies till perhaps the time of writing1.
In the first section of this article, I will take a more detailed look at what characterises the Danish welfare model. Focus will be on the 1970ies, when it was most unfolded, but emperical data until recent times will be used as focus is more
1 As the lecture note ‘Recent political changes in Denmark’ will reveal, its days as a redistributive, institutional and universal welfare state, securing its citizens a relatively high standard of living, might be counted with the initiatives of the contemporary liberal conservative government.
on characterising the model in an ideal type manner than on supplying statistical evidence of its actual existence at a specific period of time. In the second section I will discuss the welfare regime from an institutional perspective, concentrating on how it has been organised within the public system. In the third section I will turn to a universal perspective by discussing the citizens’ access to different types and quantities of transfers and services. Finally, in the last section, I will discuss the political perspective, in the sense that I will look at the constellation of societal forces that have shaped the system.
Contrary to Titmuss and Marshall, but in line with Esping Andersen in his later writings, I will argue that the system as an ideal type model owes its origin as much to the enlightment of the middle section of farmers in the 19th century and perhaps an even older modest mentality of the people – as to the sole influence of the working class movement.
It will be argued that it makes good sense to analyse the Danish welfare model from an institutional as well as from a universal and a political perspective and that the latter perspective moreover tends not only to characterize the model, but also to explain what comprises both the institutional and universal aspects. It will be argued that this particular public system both operates in a democratic manner and in comparison with the other Nordic welfare systems, leave considerable scope to voluntary initiative.
1.1 Emergence in the 1970ies and subsequent Developments
It is generally acknowledged that the uniqueness of the Danish welfare system was most profoundly expressed in the 1970ies.
The combination of features that made it world famous was never more unfolded than during the last part of that decade.
The social welfare reform, which the Danish parliament passed between 1970-1976, laid the legal foundation and a stable growth economy with low unemployment rate made it financially possible to implement it at that specific time. A basic principle was that the public system should provide assistance to any citizen according to his or her need.
To social democrats, especially this part, in a linear development thinking, represented the ultimate stage of human politics. As the grand old man in Danish social policy, Bent Rold Andersen2, phrased it in 1996 ”There is no return ticket from the welfare state”.
Below I have summarized 11 features which I find in combination illuminate the institutional as well as the universal and political aspects of the Danish welfare system:
1) it was universal in the sense that it covered all citizens
2) when a social event occurred, it was the duty of the system to maintain economically and re- establish a person into a state of normality3
2 As advisor to the chairman of the Social Welfare Commission and leading researcher on the research projects initiated by the social reform commission, Bent Rold Andersen was the main architect behind the 1976 Reform. He was also during part of 1982 social democratic Minister of Social Affairs
3 In most Social Policy literature from the seventies, this was referred to as the solidarity principle
3) social services and cash transfers were financed by taxes
4) services and transfers were provided directly from the public system to the citizen
5) the provision and the funding of services and transfers were separated from each other
6) the system operated in a widely decentralised system, with a three tier system of political representation and was comparatively open towards activities of voluntary organisations
7) the system was constructed as a municipality based one string system based on an integrated perspective on the client
8) services and income transfers were delivered according to need. What had caused the need was not relevant
9) coverage was like a fine meshed net
10) the system to a considerable extent resulted in redistribution of wealth and income.
11) the system was female biased
Point 1 emphasises the universal aspect, 2-5 the institutional/public aspect as it is usually discussed, whereas points 6-7 emphasise the commitment to local democracy and the effort to construct an administrative system matching the gradually developed integrated perspective on the client and his/her social problem (see the next section). Point 8-9 were measures meant to combat social exclusion and alleviate poverty without stigmatizing anybody. Point 10 is different to
the other points in the sense that it featured the overall result of the combined working of the other features, in other words: the outcome of the system4. Finally, point 11 refers to the fact that since the public system takes care of children, the sick, disabled and the elderly, women have been able to become self-reliant and thereby less dependent on men and marriage.
Simultaneously, as in the Swedish and Norwegian welfare system, they have achieved a higher representation in political bodies and administrative entities than in any other parts of the world.5
1.2 The Institutional Aspects
The institutional aspect of the Danish welfare system is best understood as a combination of three usually distinct topics: 1) its profound rooting in a three-tier public system (central government, county, municipality) 2) the composition of the social expenditures and 3) the organisation of the public system, which leaves space to a high degree of decentralisation and room for manoeuvring of voluntary organisations.
As regards the first part, the best indicator of the weight of the public sector is the huge public expenditures amounting to around 60% of the GNP throughout the 1980ies and the
4 This was a key point to T.H. Marshall, who argued that the institutional welfare model corresponds well with principles of social equality
5 Some feminist writers, however, have argued that women’s dependency of men thereby have been substituted with a dependency on the public system, which in turn makes them especially vulnerable towards possible cuts in public expenditures (Borchorst, Anette, 1994)
1990ies (Finansministeriet, 2003: figure 2.1.b: 31). Still in 2001, approximately half the yearly public expenditures are spent on social purposes, excluding education and health, but including labour market expenditures. Even more remarkably, 2/3 of the social expenditures, in 2001 amounting to 214 billion DKK comprises of cash transfers paid directly to Danish citizens – and financed by taxes (ibid: 13). According to the latest statistics and contrary to popular beliefs, Denmark has, thus, more social benefits paid by income tax than any other country, even exceeding Sweden in this respect (ibid: 133-134).
As regards the composition of the social expenditures, the relationship between cash transfer and social service over the last 30-40 years has changed in favour of cash benefits, so that cash benefit expenditures since the 1990ies have been twice as big as expenditures to social services (Ploug, Niels &
Jon Kvist (eds.), 1994: table 2.2:30).
Over the last 10 years there has been a deliberate effort to change some of the cash transfers from so-called passive to
‘active’ transfers, following a clear change in social political rhetoric, starting with a speech by the then Social Democratic Minister of Social Affairs, Ritt Bjerregård, in 1980 and subsequently gaining support from the following ministers of Social Affairs covering a political spectre from Social Democrats to the Conservative Party.
During all these years pensions, i.e. old age pension, civil servant pensions, early retirement pension and social security pension have outnumbered expenditures to other types of social benefit. In 1998 the 4 together comprised more than
52% of all the cash transfers. The same year unemployment benefits amounted to 9% of the total cash benefit expenditures and, perhaps surprisingly, expenditures to social assistance to 7% only. 5% of the cash benefit expenditures was spent on the much debated ‘børnecheck’, child allowances that all families are entitled to irrespective of income - perhaps a reflection of both the universalism of the system and its gender sensitivity.
The effort to pool tax money into active maintenance rather than into passive transfers had from 1992-2001 resulted in a 26% reduction of the passive income compensating benefits, in particular unemployment benefits. Correspondingly, expenditures to active income compensating transfers rose with 33%. Still, however, more than half the recipients of cash transfers in the 2003 budget comprised persons above 60 years (Finansministeriet, 2003: 17), explaining that the single welfare issue most debated at the time of writing is the old age and early retirement pension, which by some experts and politicians have been discussed in terms of ‘the pension bomb’ or ‘the elder burden’.
Finally, as regards the organisation of the public system, it is sometimes overlooked that compared with other countries with a relatively large public sector, the Danish public system operates through widespread decentralisation. (in Danish ‘den kommunale forankring’ (communal anchoring)), building on a century long commitment to local democracy.
In 1996 Bent Rold Andersen described the phenomena in this way:
“who sends the visiting nurse when a new Dane is born?
Where do we go to have our children in day care institutions?
Where do we go to have our children recorded in school?
From where do we get our sick benefits? Who sends the home nurse? Where do we go for social benefits? From where will the disabled get aid for their daily functions, help to furnish their dwellings and their rehabilitation? Where can old people go for domestic help, day centres and activities and who pays out his old age pension? The Nordic countries are the only ones in the world, where the answer to all these questions are the municipalities (kommunen) - a municipality which has its own political body and attached bureaucrats “ …” Nowhere else in the world” Bent Rold Andersen concludes in his essay
“is so much of the countries power left to local decision making and power left with people in the receiving end”
(Andersen, Bent Rold, 1996:134-35).
There was/is still a strictly regulated division of labour and flow of tax money between the three tiers of the public social system. Broadly speaking the municipalities pay people their old age pension, early retirement pension, maternity leave, aid to single mothers and expenditures to refugees the first 1½ year, but have these expenses 100 % reimbursed from the state. A good deal of the remaining cash benefit expenditures are also paid by the municipalities, but expenses reimbursed on different scales, mostly on a fifty-fifty basis. Heaviest on the municipalities’ budgets figure social assistance expenses, rehabilitation, early retirement pension, sick benefit after the second week and expenses on refugees after 1½ year. Apart from the cash payments, municipalities have full responsibility for delivery of service to the elderly and for the running of day-care institutions.
A main division of labour between the municipality and the county is that the municipality is responsible for most of the social services, whereas the county is responsible for health services. Within the social field the prime tasks of the counties are running of social institutions that demand a bigger population basis than the individual municipality.
Most institutions run by the counties are rehabilitation institutions, re-establishment centres and institutions for drug addicts, disabled and criminal youngsters.
Apart from the central reimbursement of the statutory cash benefits, sources of income for the municipalities are the municipal tax (a certain percentage of the total income tax), internal harmonising of municipal income, general subsidies from the state and – on a very small scale - users’ payment.
As this well-developed public system with elected bodies at all administrative levels takes care of almost everything in peoples’ lives, one could imagine that the system leaves very little space for private and voluntary work.
This, however, is not the case. Although the percentage of people working in voluntary organisations with social service is lower in Denmark than in countries like the UK and the Netherlands (Koch-Nielsen and Elisabeth Toft Rasmussen, 1995:88-89), there is a very high percentage of people working voluntarily within the fields of sport, leisure and culture. Perhaps more remarkably, a substantial part of social work with homeless, prostitutes etc. is taken care of by voluntary organisations on request from the state or the municipalities and their costs heavily subsidised by the public system - with little interference with how the work is done.
1.3 The Universal Aspects
What exactly does universalism mean? In an often quoted article on social policy, Goul Andersen argues that there are different meanings of the concept universalism. His point is that if citizenship and autonomy are seen as core aspects of the welfare state, one must choose a definition of universalism as: rights- and citizenship based general arrangements, securing comprehensive, adequate transfers and services.
(Goul Andersen, 1999, p. 51). Hence, in a universal model, all citizens are secured adequate services and transfers. These, however, can be both flat rate (everybody gets the same), need based (mainly for the weakest) and graduated after performance (most to those who have contributed most).
The Danish welfare system is universal in the sense that access to most transfers and services are tied to Danish citizenship, only - not to previous contributions as in social insurance systems.
Over a period of a little more than a hundred years the Danish welfare system as such has undergone a transition from a predominantly residual over a social insurance based model to a highly advanced universal model, which as mentioned became most unfolded as an ideal type model in the Social Welfare Reform in 1976.
Whereas most service delivery in Denmark are flat rate based, there is a wide range of arrangements when it comes to cash transfers. The flagship of Danish universalism is/was the old age pension. The 1891 Act on Old Age Relief introduced universalism in social policy and thus definitively put the
Danish model on a track, different to Bismarck’s contemporary social insurance based model. The universalism imbedded in the Danish Old Age Act inspired amongst others British decision makers at the turn of the 19th century in their preparatory work to the British Old Age Act of 1908. The Danish act was universal in the sense that it introduced flat rate relief on the basis of citizenship. It remained as such until 1994, when the basic amount of the state old age pension, hitherto received by anyone over 70, became tested in relation to earned income (Stephens, John D.,1997: 55 and Kautto, Mikko et al (1999:.91and 97). Its importance as a signifier of universalism in the Danish Welfare System has further been reduced with the increased importance of collectively based labour market pensions.
In contemporary social policy, ‘børnechecken’ (flat rate child allowances) is the most well-known case of a universal flat rate transfer – and its legitimacy seen from the perspective of both right and left of the political spectre is constantly debated.
1.4 The Political Aspects
It has been widely debated whether the Scandinavian Welfare systems owe their special features to the influence of strong working class movements of the 20th century, especially the Social Democratic parties, or to a certain red-green political alliance of workers and small to middle sized farmers (Esping Andersen).
As mentioned in the introduction, it is widely believed that the welfare state primarily is a result of Social Democratic politics. To illuminate that Social Democrats were held responsible, not only for what was achieved through central legislation, but also for local achievements, Søren Kolstrup in his dissertation quotes an American professor who in 1955 commented on the role of town municipalities in the construction of the Danish welfare state:
“In the municipalities the strong material orientation of the Danish working class movement has its strongest representation. Hospitals, schools, rest homes, homes for the elderly and other public institutions in modern Danish towns are all mainly due to social democratic initiative and calls for the highest admiration” (Kolstrup, Søren, 1996: 65 my translation).
I shall argue in this part that whereas the ideology and initial fights of the Danish Social Democratic party bore strong resemblance to those of its brother parties in Sweden and Norway, the development of the peasant movement in the last part of the late 19th century came out differently in Denmark than in the other Scandinavian countries. The argument is that this influenced developments both in the Social Democratic party and in the welfare system as it emerged throughout the 20th century.
What was so special about the peasant movement of the late 19th century and what was its impact on the advance of the 11 features of the welfare system, mentioned in the first section?
Most particular was the manner in which the movement happened to organise the social rising of the middle peasants
through practical training in democracy from below, as mass education and through establishment of different types of self- help organisations. All of it at a later stage imitated by the workers’ movement. N.F.S. Grundtvig (priest, social reformer, educator) was the ideological founder of the movement and his ideas strongly influenced farmers and religious circles between 1880-1900. Amongst other things people-oriented educational schemes and folk high schools were established in the name of Grundtvigianism and soon the country flourished with production and lending cooperatives in a way that still inspire bottom up solutions to social problems in many parts of The Third World.
The peasant movement had a twofold influence on subsequent developments in Danish social policy:
Firstly, the many associations and cooperatives that were organised on a one man-one vote basis contributed to the solving of social problems at a societal level so that the transition from feudal village communities to more individualised ways of living, took place at less social cost than in many other places. In the rural sector, people organised village halls, cooperative dairies, cooperative slaughterhouses, stores, saving and credit institutions and sick benefit institutions locally – and in urban areas the labour movement imitated this way of problem solving by organising unions, strike funds, cooperative housing estates, unemployment funds and cultural associations – all of it democratic arrangements organised locally in order to solve peoples immediate needs.
As time passed most of these associations and cooperatives became institutionalised and bureaucratised in the public sphere. There was still democratic control, but gradually
political bodies took over from direct elections and local control. The point to emphasise is that the process of institutionalising social security and social delivery in the public sphere had developed organically from people’s own initiatives. Hence it attracted support from a majority of the population, also because it secured an all-embracing comprehensive security to everybody (the universal aspect).
Secondly, both the 19th century peasant movement and the labour movement as especially emphasized in several writings by Bent Rold Andersen built on and enforced an anti-elitarian sentiment in the population that according to some observers had been there since the end of the Viking period, when the sons of Knud the Great were forced out of England. The argument is that this initiated 600 years’ lack of imperial ambitions, while the country grew smaller and smaller. Years before the French revolution, the national poet Ludvig Holberg had ridiculed the material and spiritual elite and praised the sound logic of the common man. Several national songs praise the simple, ordinary man. So in this perspective, the idea of equality has a history of many more years than the welfare state and a grounding in the minds of a substantial part of the Danish population. What Grundtvig added was the well-known phrase, that “Denmark is a country where few have too much and fewer too little”. The anti elitarian attitude has also been characterised in a negative way, as the ‘jantelov’ (Danes exercise internal control by suppressing any initiative to rise above others). Whether assessed negatively or positively, it appears plausible that the broad support to both egalitarian policies and the tendency to favour the middle layer in the Danish society is underpinned by this national character
(Andersen, Bent Rold, 1996 and Klaudi Klausen, Kurt and Per Selle (eds.), 1995).
In conclusion the institutional side of the welfare system has clear social democratic fingerprints, not least the points securing a fine meshed net and need orientation. The influence from peasant organisations can be seen in the universal aspect that everybody gains from the system, the Old Age Pension Act being a clear example of this influence. Universalism, however, is also important in social democratic images of inclusion, departing from communitarian/conservative concepts of inclusion by building on a high degree of equality, i.e. it is the underprivileged that shall be included in mainstream society.
1.5 Conclusion
All modern welfare states can be seen as the result of limiting the free market forces by political means (Korpi, amongst others, 2002:9). They differ, however, with regard to the manner in which, by whom and the extent to which this limitation of market forces is undertaken. The point I have tried to make in this paper is that, at least for a period of forty years, the Danish welfare model has been exceptional in the sense that it managed through publicly organised power, not least in situations of crises, to secure individuals and families a minimum income, irrespective of the market value of their work or property. Moreover, it has ensured that all citizens without status or class distinction have been offered a wide range of social services. As the level of income compensation and the standard of the services available to all citizens have
been both adequate and comprehensive, it has lived up to Goul Andersen’s definition of a universal welfare state and as the frame for its implementation is/were almost exclusively the public system, it definitely also has lived up to images of an institutional welfare state. The two aspects are of course interrelated, as the comprehensiveness (that everybody is covered at a reasonably high level) of the universal model is best secured in an institutional (public) organisation.
1.6 List of Literature
Andersen, Bent Rold, 1996 “Det danske velfærdssamfund” I Dalgård, Ingerslev et al (red.), 1996, Velfærdsstatens fremtid. Handelshøjskolens Forlag.
Borchorst, Anette, 1994 ” Welfare State Regimes” in Diane Sainsbury (ed.) Gendering Welfare States. London. Sage Publications.
Borchorst, Anette and Peter Abrahamson (1996) EU og socialpolitik. Rådet for Europæisk Politiks Skrift nr. 13.
Esping Andersen, Gøsta, 1990, The three Worlds of Welfare Capitalism. Cambridge, Polity Press.
Esping Andersen, Gøsta, 2000, “Velfærdsstatem i det 21.
århundrede” Socialpolitisk Redegørelse 2000:kap. 12 /www.sm.dk/netpublikationer/redg.2000/kap12.htm).
Finansministeriet, 2003, Budgetredegørelse.
Goul Andersen, Jørgen, 1999, “Den universelle velfærdsstat under pres – men hvad er universalisme?”Grus nr. 56/57.
Jonasen, Viggo ”History of the Danish Welfare State”
European Modules. Social policy, category 1: Denmark.
Jonasen, Viggo “The Non Profit Organisation in the Danish Welfare System” European Modules.
Kautto, Mikko, Matti Heikkilæ, Bjørn Hvinden, Staffan Marklund and Niels Ploug (eds), 1999, Nordic Social Policy.
Changing Welfare States. London and New York, Routledge.
Klaudi Klausen, Kurt og Per Selle (red.), 1995, Frivillig organisering i Norden. Tano.
Koch-Nielsen, Inger og Elisabeth Toft Rasmussen(1995) ”Den frivillige sektor og velfærdsstaten” i Social Forskning.
August 1995.
Kolstrup, Søren, 1996, Velfærdsstatens rødder. Fra kommunesocialisme til folkepension. Viborg. SFAH Skriftserie nr. 38.
Korpi, Walter, 2002, Velfærdsstat og socialt medborgerskab. Danmark i et komparativt perspektiv, 1930-1995. Århus. Magtudredningen.
Marshall, T.H., 1963 Class, Citizenship and Social Development. New York. Doubleday & Co. Plovsing, Jan, 1998, Socialpolitik. Kbh. Handelshøjskolens Forlag.
Stephens, John D.,1997 ”The Scandinavian Welfare States:
Achievements, Crisis and Prospects” in Gøsta Esping Andersen (red), 1997, Welfare States in Transition. National Adaptions in Global Economies. London. Sage Publications.
Titmuss, R (1987) The Philosophy of Welfare. Selected Writings. London. Allen & Unwin.
2. Recent Political Changes in Denmark
Danish social and labour market policies have departed from the ideal type institutional and universal welfare model that the country was famous for, especially in the 1970ies. Some of the alterations have come from the current liberal-conservative government - in power since 2001- but according to most observers the initiatives of this government can be seen as a continuation of a line of progress, which according to most observers dates as long back as to a speech held in 1980 by the then Social Democratic Minister of Social Affairs, Ritt Bjerregaard (Plovsing, 2000: 59).
The aim of this article is to discuss these changes. If one categorises social systems according to a welfare triangle model, it appears that many changes can be categorized as movements from a predominantly public orientation to both a more private and a more civil society orientation.
Figure 1:
THE WELFARE TRIANGLE
MARKET STATE
CIVIL SOCIETY
Accordingly, I will discuss changes that can be branded as increased civil society orientation in the first section of the article. Changes that can be branded as increased market orientation in section 2 and aspects of the activation line in section 3.6 In the fourth section trends that cannot be categorised as movements on the welfare triangle will be dealt with. The fifth section will comprise a discussion of new types of rhetoric and new types of explanations of social policy
6 Both structure and content of this lecture note are largely inspired by
changes. Finally, the last section will discuss whether the policy changes are categorically changing the institutional and universal Danish welfare model as it emerged in the 1970ies.
(see lecture note 1).
2.1 Increased Civil Society Orientation
The effort to change the heavy reliance of the Danish social system on public institutions into a system more responsive towards civil society, including activities of voluntary organisations for obvious reasons gained broader political support than the effort to change the system in a market direction. Under the headline of increased civil society orientation, I will discuss:
2.1.1 The decentralisation wave of the 1980ies and 1990ies 2.1.2 Deliberate public effort to invite and support
voluntary work and influence in the social sector 2.1.3 The free users’ choice concept
2.1.4 Citizenship rights vis-à-vis the public system.
It is debatable whether the tendency to increase user’s payment shall be categorised as a step in the direction of increased civil society orientation/responsibility or as a step in the direction of increased market orientation. In this article I have chosen to deal with it under the headline of increased market orientation.
2.1.1 Decentralisation and deinstitutionalisation of social welfare institutions
Throughout the 1980ies, when another conservative-liberal coalition than the one that comprises the current government alliance was in power, considerable effort was invested in modernising the public sector. As part of a global trend, the public sector was at that time seen as too bureaucratic, too expensive, too inefficient and not sufficiently service minded towards the citizens. Initiatives in most of the western world were inspired by the New Public Management philosophy and a main ingredient was a budget- and appropriation reform. The ideology behind the budgetary changes was to render responsibility in terms of both decision making power and financial responsibility to the last link in the chain. Hence, decentralisation and deinstitutionalisation became key issues in the renewal of the service delivery system. Decentralisation meant that municipal institutions became free to establish a priority of tasks to be done within a municipally given budget.
It can be seen as an initiative making the people closest to social activities more visible, without moving the activities away from the public realm. By changing the focus from the impersonal central institutions and bureaucratic offices to the executive staff at the frontline – and to boards of parents, relatives and/or users, the effort can be interpreted as an attempt to give the administration a human face.
The main target of deinstitutionalisation was to do away with the big public institutions. It has primarily concerned large institutions for mentally retarded and the psychiatric hospitals. In the case of physically and mentally handicapped, small community based dwelling entities have gradually substituted
“hospital-like” institutions and health control takes place
locally, close to the client. The same closeness philosophy is displayed with regard to childcare, care of the elderly and placement of criminal youngsters. Up until the 1980ies it was a public responsibility in the elderly sector to have enough homes for the elderly constructed. Now the aim is to have old people staying as long as possible “in their own homes”. To compensate for the capacity reduction at homes for elderly, home help service, personal care and activation centres have been expanded and developed. Finally, as regards full time placement of criminal youngsters, more professional family placement has substituted institution placement.
2.1.2 More space for voluntary work
As I have argued in the lecture note on the Danish welfare regime, the system over its more than 200 years’ existence is considered to have been more responsive to voluntary groups and social movements than the otherwise similar Norwegian and Swedish welfare systems - most probably because various movements played a very active role in constructing the Danish system. The 1970ies saw the emergence both of new types of social movements, like ecological movements and the women’s movements and of grass-root groups, comprising of relatives to patients suffering from specific diseases. In the 1980ies it was the sentiment of many politicians, both to the right and left of the political spectre, that voluntary groups should participate more both in decision-making and as agents of social change. One rationale was that voluntary groups could easier identify with clients and hence contribute more engagement in social work than professionals, especially if people participated in their own development/maintenance through empowerment oriented strategies. To improve this part, it has been a
statutory obligation of municipalities and counties since the passing of the 1998 Social Service Act to assist and cooperate with voluntary social organisations, not only by financing their activities but also by partnership cooperation in actual problem solving.
Another rationale was that the public system had become too institutionalised, not only stuck in paternalistic embracement, but also stuck in an inertia of inflexible bureaucratic procedures that could not adjust to new types of social problems and not come up with new ways of tackling them. In other words, engaging voluntary groups was considered to pool more innovative energy into social trouble shooting.
A third rationale of course was to relieve the financial burden of the welfare state (Simonsen, Palle 1983).
The system reacted to the pressures by establishing The Centre for Voluntary Social Work in 1983 and by setting up a committee (Socialstyrelsens Forsøgsudvalg), which between 1980-87 was mandated to pool public money to social problem solutions suggested by voluntary groups. Later (in 1988) the parliament extended the programme by deciding on a social development scheme with the mandatory purpose to support experiments with social development from below. Key words for new ways of thinking were self government or self determination, untraditional partnerships, strengthening of local communities and cooperation arrangements in particular between the public, private and voluntary sector. Over the subsequent 3 years institutions, municipalities, associations, organisations and individuals received 350 million DKK (10%
of yearly expenditures on income transfers) for social
development projects from SUM (Developmental Pool Funds from the Ministry of Social Affairs).
A similar effort to gain innovative capacity from letting loose forces in the civil society were seen in municipal experiments (Frikommuneforsøg), where specifically selected municipalities were freed from central control and legislation in return for experimenting with new administrative procedures. In the social sector the effort was targeted at finding new ways to assist the weakest clients.
The bottom up strategies meant to flourish through the SUM pools were launched with an euphoria that at times bore resemblance to the rhetoric of the Chinese cultural revolution (see for instance Hegland, Tore Jacob, 1994). However, since the early 1990ies, theme specific pool arrangements with targeted pools for specified socially threatened groups such as homeless, ghetto dwellers, long term unemployed and mentally retarded people have substituted the experimental strategies, which were found not to help these groups sufficiently.
2.1.3 Users’ free choice of service providers
Another trend which has implications both for the turn of the system towards more space to the civil society and towards more space for market influence, are initiatives under the headline “users’ free choice”. The possibility of choosing between different public institutions was imbedded in the NPM inspired modernisation programme for the public sector.
Hence, it was an initiative strongly supported also by the socialist parties, which saw internal public competition as a means to maintain the huge public sector as a specific feature
of the Danish welfare state. As regards competition within the public sector, developments have primarily taken place in the health system. There has long been free users’ choice of personal medical doctors and specialists. Since 1993 this has been extended to free choice of hospitals, also outside one’s home municipality. In the social sector, it is primarily free choice of day-care institutions that has been an option. This, however, has not been used to any great extent, because parents’ mostly prefer the most nearby institution.
There has also been a trend (countering with opposition from some members of the socialist parties) to extend the free user’s choice to a choice between private commercial service providers and the usual public service providers (see section 2).
2.1.4 Citizenship-based rights
Since 1992 there has been an effort to clarify citizens’ rights vis-à-vis service provisions of the welfare state. Civil rights in Denmark have primarily gained momentum as rights towards the public administration. With the implementation of the Retssikkerhedslov (Rule of Law Act) in 1998, it has become statutory to have both individual clients and interest groups participate in the case treatment of both individual and group cases. Following European Union standards, the Persondatalov (law regulating access to personal data) has similarly aimed at protecting individuals against public institutions’ misuse of personal data, for instance tax authorities’ use of data from the social authorities. The right to public child day-care immediately after the end of the mother’s maternity leave has also been phrased as a citizen right as has maximum waiting time for hospital treatment and
the right to care for those among the elderly people, who are in need of it.
A related new development has been a growing tendency to demand service declarations of public services in order that clients or citizens have a real chance of choosing between different offers. Hence, rather than juridical being under an obligation to securing citizens a certain service, it has become an obligation of municipalities and counties to declare what services and income transfers they offer and when.
2.2 Increased Market Orientation
2.2.1 Users’ payment – including old age pension
Users’ payment has gained more momentum in the Danish social system. The main aim has been to reduce the tax financing of social transfers and services. It is primarily in the health sector that users’ payment has gradually gained ground, especially with regard to higher users’ contributions to medicine and dental care. Users’ payment has also increased as regard payment of day care institutions for children, and old people now pay their stay at rest homes from their pension with a free choice of service, incl. catering level and payment accordingly.
The biggest revolution in terms of personal contribution to one’s own maintenance, however, has been the changes regarding old age pension. The flat rate tax paid pension system has over the years been subject to increased income testing. Only a basic amount of the pension is now flat rate,
implying that a substantial part of the individual’s pension is paid by him- or herself. Of greatest importance is the labour market pension, to which the employer at the time of writing pays a little more than 10 % of an employee’s salary, and the employee a little more than 5 %. Apart from the basic public pension and the labour market pension there has also been an increase in pensions drawn at private for profit insurance companies.
2.2.2 Public – private partnership
During more than a decade shifting governments have encouraged private enterprises to take more social responsibility. Especially with regard to combating unemployment and with the launching of the so called
“activation line”, job allocation increasingly take place through partnership arrangements between municipal administrators and local enterprises, not only in terms of trying to match the qualifications of the job seeker with the demand for labour in the private sector, but also in terms of financially supporting the employment of persons who mostly, but not necessarily have some reduction in work capacity and other problems than unemployment. Through the so called flex jobs arrangements, 50 or 75% of the employee’s minimum wage is subsidised by the municipalities.7 Through protective job arrangements (skånejobs), the private sector is further encouraged to employ or keep labourers who have been granted early retirement pension. In this way the employer get free labour in return for a labour force which has been assessed as having very little work capacity.
7 At the time of writing (2003) 20.000 persons are employed in fleksjobs of which 53% are in the public sector (Comparatively 250.000 persons are on
2.2.3 Privatisation
Clear-cut privatisation or contracting out of public institutions has also taken place in the Danish social sector. It started with the introduction of the first private hospitals in the 1980ies.
Since then privatisation or contracting out has taken place, primarily in the child and elderly sectors. Since the 1998 Social Service Act elderly people have been entitled to choose to have the cleaning part of the home help service provided by non- public private commercial providers. After some years’ of beginner problems free choice between private and public home help is perhaps the most successful example of private companies’ entry into the up to now exclusively public social service sector. In most cases, though, the quality of the service provisions of private companies is monitored by the public authorities. Without necessarily being contracting out to private enterprises, perhaps the biggest impact of the idea of contracting out is that contracting has flourished, also internally between public institutions and between public institutions and citizens. Åkerstrøm Andersen amongst others has reasoned that this in many ways represents unnecessary bindings, that mostly are already regulated in social legislation (Åkerstrøm Andersen, Niels, 2003).
2.3 The Activation Line
The so-called activation line has since the late 1980ies gradually conquered the labour market and social protection scene in Denmark. From the passing of the Active Labour Market Policy in 1993 and in particular since the passing of the Law on Active Social Policy in 1998, it has been the comprehensive approach to assistance of anyone who can not
maintain him- or herself and his or her family. The point was that they should not “just” be offered social security, unemployment allowances, sick benefit or early retirement pension – but in case of just a tiny capacity to work - a job or alternatively education or another non-passivating offer. The activation line has been accompanied with slogans like “from passive to active maintenance”, “give and take policy”
(noget for noget), “the responsible society”, “contribute before receiving” - implying a major change in social philosophy and rhetoric (see section 5).
With the increased importance given to active maintenance, it has been increasingly important to test the work capacity of people. To accomplish that, the Ministry of Occupation has issued a central directive, comprising a checklist of 14 points, which the local authorities in cooperation with the
“client” have to go through in order to find the appropriate means to maintenance of the individual: a job offer with public subsidy, job training, rehabilitation or if no work capacity is found, early retirement (the last bastion of passive public maintenance).
The activation process as well as the work capacity test is meant to take place in exemplary face – to – face cooperation between the client and the social worker through extensive use of conversation. The aim is through widespread users’
influence to construct a realistic plan of action for the client.
Hence, in order that the client is realistic about his or her future wishes, so-called courses in mental clarification are sometimes used as a social intervention, especially with young people facing relatively severe personal and social problems.
In other words, the increased civil society orientation of the system is (at least ideally) expressed in the activation process, as is definitely the increased market orientation as most of the
“extra” jobs are meant to be found in a broad and comprehensive labour market with socially responsible private enterprises. Enterprises which in return for the possibly reduced competitiveness of a tolerant employment policy receive substantial financial support from the municipalities.
Social and labour market policies are closely related in all welfare models. In Denmark, the two have for a century, followed two different tracks. In social policy, social security and social protection have been given priority and both income transfers and social services have almost exclusively been organised in the public sector, whereas the labour market has been a corporate organisation involving the state, unions and employers’ association. Likewise job mediation has been separated into central administration units for the insured unemployed and municipal administration for the non-insured. However, with the latest initiatives of the current government, the two types of job mediation in the future will be combined in municipal jobcentres for insured as well as non-insured. On the one hand, this can be interpreted as if labour market policies have gained sovereignty over social policy as the job line is in absolute focus. On the other hand, it can be seen as a reduction, especially of union influence, as job mediation in the future will be a municipal business.
2.4 Other Changes – and Non-Changes
Above, social policy changes over the last two decades have been categorised as either changes in the direction of increased civil society or market orientation. As it appears, even the active line can more or less be seen as representing both trends. It is, however, important to emphasize that the social sector in Denmark is still overwhelmingly founded in the public sector. In spite of a few cases of contracting out to private enterprises, almost all service delivery is public. In the elder and child sector the public service has even been extended. In terms of income transfer, everything is still 100%
public – and tax money spent on it huge.
This, however, might change. A Welfare Commission, appointed by the current government, submitted its report in December 2005 and on April 6th, 2006, the government announced its own proposals for the future welfare system.
Regarding immigrants the current government has already introduced restrictions both in terms of limiting the inflow of refugees and spouses and in terms of breaking the universal principle that anyone who can not maintain him- or herself shall be given the same amount of social protection. To immigrants this amount has been lowered.
Finally, on the initiative of the Minister of Internal Affairs, an administrative Reform has passed through parliament. It will be implemented in January 2007 and amongst other things it will definitely do away with the century long three tier democratic system by abolishing the counties. Instead of counties, municipalities will be amalgamated to bigger units
and the single biggest task of the counties, the running of hospitals, will be left to indirectly elected political bodies. To the social sector, it means that institutions and treatment of psychiatric patients, drug addicts and criminal youngsters will be moved to municipalities and subject to political priorities there.
2.5 New Rhetoric – New Explanations
If anything is new in Danish social policy, it is the way – or rather the ways - it is talked about. It started with parties to the left of social democrats (including many feminist writers) and right joining hands in a critique of the paternalistic, all embracing, pacifying welfare state, which secured material wellbeing, but according to its critiques, either did not care enough for the clients (leftist and Christian view) or motivated inactivity and lack of entrepreneurship in the population (rightist view).
In congruence, it was a former leftist journalist who had converted to social democrat and become Minister of the government led by the social democrats of the 1990ies, Karen Jespersen, who most ideologically announced the rhetoric of the new orientation from passive to active maintenance, in terms of arguments that people had lost genuine feelings of care for their neighbour and solidarity to the society, because they expected the public system to take care of every inch of their life. Promoting responsibility for one’s own and others’
wellbeing was the key issue. The assumption was that the public system had gone too far. The system itself had become a social problem. It had created an egoistic “demand more from
the system” culture – was the argument. She turned the Marxist ideal that everybody shall contribute according to capability and receive according to need into a new saying that one shall contribute in order to receive, not least ultimately for one’s own sake (Jespersen, Karen, 1996). Whether this represents a deviation from socialist principles and a turn towards liberalism is widely debated. In any case, the present conservative-liberal government appear to have gone a step further with a policy which it has labelled “give and take policy”– in order to emphasise that in its policy understanding there shall be a payoff if you contribute more than average to society, as a teacher, as a job mediator or as a company that contribute to the integration of ethnic minorities (Regeringen, 2004). A new Ph.D. dissertation on the genealogy of social work in Denmark has attracted attention by arguing that the current policy is neither neo-socialist, nor neo-liberal but rather a revival of late 19th century social philanthropy (Villadsen, Kasper, 2004).
Most remarkable in the current social debate is perhaps not that policies and events are discussed in new ways, but rather that there is a variety of new interpretations and questionings. The many new explanations can be seen as different discourses on Danish social policy and its development.
2.6 Are the Basic Features of the Institutional and Universal Welfare State Changing?
By the turn of the millennium there were some interesting publications on the future perspective of the Scandinavian welfare state. A Nordic research team concluded that the Scandinavian welfare systems perhaps stood on some shaky ground but was capable of surviving (Kautto, Mikko et al, 1999 and Kautto, Mikko et al, 2001). Esping Andersen (2000) and an index presented by the World Economic Forum in 2001 (Kendal, Stine Carsten, 2001) amongst others have concluded that the Nordic welfare models are better prepared for future challenges than any other welfare models. The most negative research analysis was presented by Walter Korpi in an issue of
“Magtudredningen”. He argues that with the reduction of some income transfers, Denmark is moving in the direction of a marginal welfare state.
This gave rise to a fierce attack on Korpi by Jon Kvist, Niels Ploug and Torben Tranæs. Simultaneously, it was in reality a fierce defence of the Danish tax financed welfare system with its comprehensive services and income transfers. Korpi was criticised for looking at transfers, only, and not the service provision, which, as they argue, has seen considerable improvements in recent years. Public day-care institutions have a coverage of almost 100%, which is the highest in the world and the old people sector has also experienced improvements (Kvist, Jon et al., 2002).
If one looks at the 11 features by which I have characterised the Danish model as an institutional and universal welfare model in lecture note 1, it is obvious that several of them have
come under attack. When a certain group, like immigrants, is not entitled to the same level of social assistance as other clients it is an attack on the universal principle. As it became statutory to withdraw unemployment allowances or social security in case of refusal of a job offer, it was an attack on both the principle that service and income transfer is delivered according to need without asking the cause of the need as well as on the feature that the system as a whole represents a fine meshed security net. Obviously, the administrative reform from 2007 and onwards will change the characteristic three tier system with its directly elected political bodies at each level, without necessarily changing the system’s openness towards voluntary initiatives.
However, if looking at the tremendous amounts, more than 1/3 of the GNP which is spent on social welfare in Denmark, I am inclined to support those among the discussant that find that the Danish welfare system is still very resilient towards current challenges – implying that the main changes have been in the social policy rhetoric.
2.6 List of Literature
Esping-Andersen, Gøsta (2000) ”Velfærdsstaten i det 21.
århundrede. Forslag til en investeringsbaseret socialpolitik i Europa” in Socialministeriet (2000) Socialpolitisk redegørelse.
(www.sm.dk/netpublikationer/redg.2000/kap12.htm)
Hegland, Tore Jacob (1994) Fra de tusind Blomster. Til en målrettet udvikling. Forlaget Alfuff.
Jespersen, Karen (1996) “På vej mod ansvarssamfundet” in Politiken 26. August 1996.
Jonasen, Viggo “The Non Profit Organisations in the Danish Welfare System” European Module Paper.
Kautto, Mikko, Matti Heikkilæ, Bjørn Hvinden, Staffan Marklund and Niels Ploug (1999) Nordic Social Policy.
Changing Welfare States. Routledge. London.
Kautto, Mikko, Johan Fritzell, Bjørn Hvinden, Jon Kvist and Hannu Uusitala (2001) Nordic Welfare States. In the European Context. Routledge. London.
Kendal, Stine Carsten (2001) “Skandinavien er mest fremtidsparat” in Information 3. July 2001.
Kvist, Jon, Nies Ploug and Torben Tranæs (2002)
“Velfærdsstatens endeligt?” in Politiken. 27. May 2002.
Mygind Madsen, Aase (2004) Social Policy Paper:
Denmark – which Type of Welfare Regime. European Module Paper.
Plovsing, Jan (2000) Socialpolitik. Handelshøjskolens Forlag.
Regeringen (februar 2004) Noget for noget.
Villadsen, Kasper (2004) Det sociale arbejdes genealogi – kampen for at gøre fattige og udstødte til frie mennesker. Forthcoming. Hans Reitzels Forlag.
Åkerstrøm Andersen (2003) Borgerens kontraktliggørelse.
Hans Reitzels Forlag.
