Welfarism: A Defence Against Sen's Attack

YK NG

DOI: https://doi.org/10.2307/2232601

1981-01-01

Abstract:Journal Article Welfarism: A Defence Against Sen’s Attack Get access Yew-Kwang Ng Yew-Kwang Ng Monash University Search for other works by this author on: Oxford Academic Google Scholar The Economic Journal, Volume 91, Issue 362, 1 June 1981, Pages 527–530, https://doi.org/10.2307/2232601 Published: 01 June 1981

What problem does this paper attempt to address?

Economy and Morality: The Philosophy Of The Welfare State

Y. Shionoya

2005-08-05

Abstract:In particular, his argument that “a guaranteed minimum income may be achievable only where a functioning market economy has first created an appropriate level of material prosperity” and thus that “this wealth also enables to citizens of free market economies to be guaranteed a subsistence level income to ensure that no one need ever go without the basic essentials of life as a result of a loss of income due to some misfortune or foolishness” (85) is somehow out of tune with the rest of his book. Saying that a minimum income scheme is not “a redistributive measure but should constitute part of the basic institutional framework within which a market economy operates” (85) is clearly a bit too audacious, especially because by doing so we are de facto comparing a general allocation scheme with the basic tenets of the rule of law. On this point, Meadowcroft seems to abandon his brave defense of the market economy in the search of some more intelligent way of structuring the welfare state we are all living in. This is far from being a meaningless quest and, though it does not really feel at home here, it does not diminish the book’s value for the reader.

Philosophy,Economics
Towards libertarian welfarism: protecting agency in the night-watchman state

Marius S. Ostrowski

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/13569317.2013.750182

2013-02-01

Journal of Political Ideologies

Abstract:One of the major debates within libertarian thought concerns the need for a centralized state structure to sustain the norms governing agents' behaviour in society. Minarchists support state monopolies over the means of coercion to ensure that society abides by these norms, whereas free-market anarchists consider such monopolies damaging and unnecessary, with norms maintained by agents' natural motivations. This article finds that the libertarian ‘pre-political’ principles which free-market anarchists adopt lack objectivity and plausible independence, creating a fundamental tension between the endorsement of a libertarian morality and anarchist commitments to pluralism of legal and political structures. It suggests that libertarians place a core, shared value on individual agency, but that this value can only be universalized through political processes of discussion and agreement, and sustained only in the presence of institutional sanction and coercion mechanisms. This article argues that libertarian commitments to agency require such mechanisms to be welfarist and minimally state-like, and proposes various ways in which the appropriate structures and policies could be realized, stressing the continuity of this novel form of libertarian welfarism with the aims and underlying values of both sides of the libertarian debate.

political science
Enterprise and Welfare States: a Comparative Perspective

Jose Harris

DOI: https://doi.org/10.2307/3679167

1990-12-01

Transactions of the Royal Historical Society

Abstract:DO ‘welfare states’ enhance or subvert economic enterprise, civic virtue, private moral character, the integrity of social life? Though these questions have a piquantly contemporary ring in modern British politics, they are nevertheless old quandaries in the history of social policy. Since the seventeenth century, if not earlier, practitioners, theorists and critics of public welfare schemes have argued for and against such schemes in contradictory and adversarial terms; claiming on the one hand that social welfare schemes would supply a humanitarian corrective to the rigours of a market economy; and on the other hand that they would support and streamline market forces by enhancing individual and collective efficiency. Similarly, for several hundred years models of civic morality which emphasize independence and self-sufficiency have jostled with alternative models which emphasize paternalism, altruism and organic solidarity. Few phases of social policy in Britain and elsewhere have not contained elements of more than one approach. Even the New Poor Law, notorious for its subordination to market pressures, nevertheless harboured certain residual anti-market principles and often lapsed into practices that were suspiciously communitarian; whilst Edwardian New Liberalism, famous for its philosophy of organic solidarism, in practice tempered social justice with the quest for ‘national efficiency’. These varying emphases have all been reflected in the fashions and phases of welfare state historiography—fashions and phases that appear to have been at least partly determined by the vagaries of prevailing political climate. Thus, in the aftermath of the Second World War, historians tended to portray the history of social policy as a series of governmental battles against private vested interests—battles in which the mantle of civic virtue was worn by an altruistic administrative elite, while civic vice was embodied in the motley crew of doctors, landlords, employers and insurance companies who viewed social welfare as a commodity in the market.
The Smithian ontology of ‘relative poverty’: revisiting the debate between Amartya Sen and Peter Townsend*

Toru Yamamori

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/1350178X.2018.1561081

2018-12-30

Journal of Economic Methodology

Abstract:ABSTRACT Although ‘relative poverty’ is a phrase of immediate recognition, wide circulation and an ever increasing acceptance in the last half century, the concept itself remains surprisingly undertheorised. This paper wishes to try and remedy this discursive deficiency by proposing an ontological elucidation of the nature of our needs. The author re-visits the dispute between Amartya Sen and Peter Townsend — a duel of crossed wires (if not sabres), which can be seen as representative of the various theoretical takes on the nature of relative poverty. While the dispute itself ended with an unfortunate misunderstanding between the two scholars, whose different disciplinary affiliations have done nothing but replicate the rift, the author nonetheless foregrounds the commonality between the two thinkers – their respective identification with Adam Smith. By exploring points of differences and convergence with Adam Smith’s own ontology of needs, which the author reconstructed elsewhere, the paper hopes to offer insights into the ontology of ‘relative poverty’ as well as to suggest that taking this ontology seriously would lead us inevitably to a re-examination of ‘economic methodology’.

Sociology,Economics,Philosophy
Enterprise and the Welfare State: A Comparative Perspective

Jose Harris

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-349-21603-1_3

1991-01-01

Abstract:Do ‘welfare states’ enhance or subvert economic enterprise, civic virtue, private moral character, the integrity of social life? Though these questions have a piquantly contemporary ring in modern British politics, they are nevertheless old quandaries in the history of social policy. Since the seventeenth century, if not earlier, practitioners, theorists and critics of public welfare schemes have argued for and against such schemes in contradictory and adversarial terms; claiming on the one hand that social welfare schemes would supply a humanitarian corrective to the rigours of market economy; and on the other hand that they would support and streamline market forces by enhancing individual effort and collective efficiency. Similarly, for several hundred years models of civic morality which emphasise independence and self-sufficiency have jostled with alternative models which emphasise paternalism, altruism and organic solidarity.1 Few phases of social policy in Britain and elsewhere have not contained elements of more than one approach. Even the New Poor Law, notorious for its subordination to market pressures, nevertheless harboured certain residual anti-market principles and often lapsed into practices that were suspiciously communitarian;2
On the possibility of an anti-paternalist behavioural welfare economics

Johanna Thoma

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/1350178X.2021.1972128

2021-09-02

Journal of Economic Methodology

Abstract:Behavioural economics has taught us that human agents don't always display consistent, context-independent and stable preferences in their choice behaviour. Can we nevertheless do welfare economics in a way that lives up to the anti-paternalist ideal most economists subscribe to? I here discuss Sugden's powerful critique of most previous attempts at doing so, which he dubs the 'New Consensus', as appealing to problematic notions of latent preference and inner rational agency. I elaborate on a fundamental rethinking of the normative foundations of anti-paternalist welfare measurement that often remains implicit in the behavioural welfare economics literature Sugden discusses, but which is required to make these accounts minimally plausible. I argue that, if we go along with this rethinking, Bernheim and Rangel's [(2007). Toward choice-theoretic foundations for behavioural welfare economics. American Economic Review, Papers and Proceedings , 97 , 464–470. https://doi.org/10.1257/aer.97.2.464; (2009). Beyond revealed preference: Choice-theoretic foundations for behavioural welfare economics. Quarterly Journal of Economics , 124 (1), 51–104. https://doi.org/10.1162/qjec.2009.124.1.51] choice-theoretic framework withstands Sugden's criticism. Sugden's own, more radical proposal is thus under-motivated by his critique of the 'New Consensus'.

economics
WELFARE IMPLICATIONS OF ‘SOCIAL INCOME’ IN A CHANGING ECONOMY

MB MCELROY

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1465-7295.1978.tb00283.x

1978-01-01

Economic Inquiry

Abstract:Samuelson (1961) concluded that in a dynamic setting any scalar concept of current economic activity is inherently myopic with respect to the relevant welfare-space. This conclusion, which virtually undermines any welfare foundations for the concept of income, is shown to be based on an incomplete and inconsistent concept of capital formation. When this is amended, the alleged welfare contradiction in the concept of income vanishes.
How Security Service Responds to the Impact of the Social Security Law (浅谈保安服务业如何应对《社会保险法》实施的冲击)

Ke Meng,Daron Acemoglu,Jorn-Steffen Pischke,Daron Acemoglu,Jorn-Steffen Pischke,Christopher H Achen,Ramgopal Agarwala,Ehtisham Ahmad,Vito Tanzi,Qiang Gao,George A Akerlof,Jens Alber,Guy Standing,Alberto Alesina,Vittorio Grilli,Gian Maria Milesi-Ferretti,Franklin Allen,Jun Qian,Meijun Qian,Paul D Allison,R Alvarez,Geoffrey Garrett Michael,Lange Peter,Alice H Amsden,Perry Anderson,Vincenzo Andrietti,Joshua D Angrist,Alan B Krueger,Masahiko Aoki,Klaus Armingeon,Giuliano Bonoli,Kenneth Arrow,Johanna Avato,Johannes Koettl,Rachel Sabates-Wheeler,Shusong Ba,Earl Babbie,Emanuele Baldacci,Benedict Clements,Sanjeev Gupta,Cui Qiang,Keith Banting,Nicholas Barr,Robert J Barro,John Barron,Mark Berger,Dan Black,John Barron,Mark Berger,Dan Black,John Barron,Dan Black,Mark Loewenstein,Yoram Barzel,William J Baumol,William G Bowen,Nathaniel Beck,Jonathan N Katz,Nathaniel Beck,Jonathan N Katz,Nathaniel Beck,Jonathan N Katz,Nathaniel Beck,Jonathan N Katz,Richard Tucker,Gary S Becker,Pablo Beramendi,Morris L Bian,Vicki Birchfield,Markus Crepaz,Olivier Blanchard,Francesco Giavazzi,Daniel Bland,Ka Man,Marc J Blecher,Vivienne Shue,Howard S Bloom,Hans-Peter Blossfeld,Katrin Golsch,Gotz Rohwer,Mark Blyth,Zhiyue Bo,Giuliano Bonoli,Alison Booth,Mark Bryan,George J Borjas,Gregory Bracken,David Bradley,David H Bradley,John D Stephens,David Brady,Jason Beckfield,Martin Seeleib-Kaiser,Loren Brandt,Thomas Rawski,John Sutton,Loren Brandt,Thomas Rawski,Loren Brandt,Eric Thun,Dan Breznitz,Michael Murphree,Harry G Broadman,Xiaolun Sun,Amable Bruno,James M Buchanan,Gordon Tullock,Moshe Buchinsky,Marius R Busemeyer,Achim Goerres,Simon Weschle,Marius R Busemeyer,Maria Alejandra Cattaneo,Stefan C Wolter,Marius R Busemeyer,Christine Trampusch,Pierre Cahuc,Andre Zylberberg,Fang Cai,John Giles,Philip O'Keefe,Dewen Wang,Fang Cai,Meiyan Wang,Donald T Campbell,Julian Stanley,William L Cary,Bernard Casey,Jerry Ray Cates,Anita Chan,Chun Chang,Yijiang Wang,Olivier Charlot,Bruno Decreuse,Pierre Granier,Aimin Chen,N Edward Coulson,Shengxiang Chen

2019-01-01

Abstract:This chapter shows how China's welfare state is partially responsible for its imbalanced economic growth model, characterised by an overreliance on export-led manufacturing industries and the laggard development of the service economy. It argues that the expansive Chinese pension system facilitates the expansion of the manufacturing sector by subsidising the training of workers with industrial specific skills, as this system is designed to do, but it has an unintended consequence. The political-economic logic has shown that China's pension system is dictated by the need of the Chinese economy. Rebalancing the Chinese economy, the overriding priority in Chinese government's post-crisis macroeconomic policy, therefore requires adjustments to the Chinese pension system. The chapter examines the structure of the Chinese economy through the lens of this study's political-economic framework. China's …
The welfare state and support for environmental action in Europe

Anne-Marie Parth,Tim Vlandas

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/09589287221115657

2022-09-27

Journal of European Social Policy

Abstract:Journal of European Social Policy, Ahead of Print. How do welfare state policies affect the political support for environmental action of economically vulnerable social groups? Two competing hypotheses can be delineated. On the one hand, a synergy logic would imply that welfare state generosity is associated with higher support for environmental action among economically vulnerable groups due to the insecurity reducing effects of the welfare state. On the other hand, a crowding-out logic would suggest that welfare state generosity is associated with lower support for other policy priorities like environmental action. We test these two hypotheses using 2019 Eurobarometer survey data and country-level indicators of welfare state generosity in 22 European countries. We find that the working class and the elderly are particularly opposed to individual and national environmental action and that the welfare state plays a complex moderating role. Consistent with a synergy logic, welfare state generosity increases pro-environmental behaviour among the working class, but its association with more positive attitudes towards national environmental policies is less strong. Consistent with a crowding-out logic, the elderly appear less likely to behave in environmentally friendly ways if retirement benefits are high. To explore the mechanisms behind this association, we show that the working class who struggle to pay their bills are most opposed to environmental action. Overall, economic insecurities are key obstacles for support of environmental actions and the effects of the welfare state depend both on which social group is concerned and whether individual behaviour versus policy preferences are considered.

public administration,social issues
A note on redistributive fairness and economic reform

Anna Rubinchik,Ruqu Wang

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jdeveco.2007.10.004

IF: 4.277

2008-01-01

Journal of Development Economics

Abstract:To understand reasons for possible failures of ‘good’ economic reforms, we consider an institution which is always successful in making the best public decision from the utilitarian perspective. We show it is bound to introduce inequality if costs of a reform are privately known: the losers can not be always compensated. Thus, if equity is a primary concern, then some reforms with positive aggregate net gain might not be undertaken. If the utilitarian welfare is the only guide for making public decisions, implementing a reform might require the ability to ignore the associated social costs of inequality.
‘It Isn't Charity because We've Paid into it’: Social Citizenship and the Moral Economy of Welfare Recipients in the Wake of 2012 UK Welfare Reform Act

Darren Thiel

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11133-021-09505-z

IF: 2.629

2022-02-10

Qualitative Sociology

Abstract:Abstract Drawing on interviews with welfare claimants living in Essex, UK, this article examines the material and symbolic effects of the UK government’s 2012 Welfare Reform Act, and it highlights the participants’ interpretations of and responses to that. In reaction to their sense of material and symbolic exclusion, participants made moral claims for their inclusion through a notion of social citizenship based on collective reciprocity and care. They claimed to have paid-in to the national purse in various material and moral ways until circumstances outside of their control meant they could no longer do so. They thus asserted a moral-economic right to social inclusion and an ensuing right to receive adequate, non-stigmatised, and non-punitive welfare. These moral-economic claims differ from other, more public, counter-narratives to welfare reform and government austerity, and they assert a clear but subtle opposition to the market-bound logic of the reform .

sociology
Amartya Kumar Sen’s ethical interpretation of poverty

Damian Szymczak

DOI: https://doi.org/10.18778/1899-2226.20.6.12

2017-02-22

Abstract:On the threshold of the 21st century, the problem of poverty remains unresolved. Many still suffer from hunger, and many more have no access to running water, or education. This raises a fundamental question that has bothered economy researchers for centuries: What determines the wealth of some countries, and the poverty of others? One of the contemporary researchers analysing the causes of poverty and development barriers is Indian economist Amartya Kumar Sen. Referring to the socio-economic theory of Sen, the author indicates that modernity implies the need for reflection on the definition of poverty. The author attempts to justify the thesis which focuses on the discord between the evaluation concepts of good and evil with objective economic factors defining poverty. The author suggests that the definition of poverty should be grounded in considerations concerning good and evil in a specific time, as well as cultural and historical context.
Maximin Justice, Sacrifice, and the Reciprocity Argument: A Pragmatic Reassessment of the Rawls/Nozick Debate

Stephen W. Ball

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/s0953820800005744

1993-11-01

Utilitas

Abstract:Theories of economic justice are characteristically based on abstract ethical concerns often unrelated to practical distributive results. Two decades ago, Rawls's theory of justice began as a reaction against the alleged ‘sacrifices’ condoned by utilitarian theory. One variant of this objection is that utilitarianism permits gross inequalities, severe deprivations of individual liberty, or even the enslavement of society's least well-off individuals. There are, however, more subtle forms of the objection. In Rawls, it is often waged without any claim that utilitarianism does in fact imply such gross deprivations in actual realworld circumstances. A second variant hinges, rather, on the milder claim that utilitarianism could condone such deprivations or sacrifices in some possible world—the objection being that utilitarianism improperly makes justice contingent, or uncertain, in this way. A third, still more abstract, variant would be that utilitarianism is flawed—not because of any practical distributive result, actual or hypothetical, but in theory —due to the way it treats individuals' interests, or the ‘concept of persons’ it presupposes.
Pigou’s Welfare Economics Revisited

Satoshi Yamazaki

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108882507.005

2021-04-13

Abstract:This innovative history of welfare economics challenges the view that welfare economics can be discussed without taking ethical values into account. Whatever their theoretical commitments, when economists have considered practical problems relating to public policy, they have adopted a wider range of ethical values, whether equality, justice, freedom, or democracy. Even canonical authors in the history of welfare economics are shown to have adopted ethical positions different from those with which they are commonly associated. Welfare Theory, Public Action, and Ethical Values explores the reasons and implications of this, drawing on concepts of welfarism and non-welfarism developed in modern welfare economics. The authors exemplify how economic theory, public affairs and political philosophy interact, challenging the status quo in order to push economists and historians to reconsider the nature and meaning of welfare economics.
Berge equilibrium, altruism and social welfare

Hans Haller,Haller, Hans

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00355-024-01514-5

2024-03-29

Social Choice and Welfare

Abstract:Welfare and other properties of Berge equilibria are investigated. In particular, we address the questions to what extent Berge equilibrium can select from multiple Nash equilibria; can serve as a substitute for Nash equilibria; can Pareto improve upon Nash equilibrium. Furthermore, some of the recent results on the relation between Berge equilibria and Kantian equilibria are summarized.

economics,social sciences, mathematical methods
Preferences for social insurance: the role of job security and risk propensity

Mauricio Bugarin,Yasushi Hazama

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10101-024-00313-z

2024-06-05

Economics of Governance

Abstract:In a 2003 article, Karl Moene (University of Oslo) and Michael Wallerstein (Yale University) demonstrated that wealthier citizens tend to support higher spending in social policies directed at the unemployed, while preferring lower spending in policies aimed at the employed. This paper reveals that these findings hinge on two key assumptions: that citizens have a coefficient of relative risk aversion (CRRA) greater than one, and that all citizens face an equal probability of job loss—a presumption which is not necessarily realistic. By incorporating the observation that job security tends to correlate positively with income, we demonstrate that affluent individuals may still advocate for reduced spending in unemployment policies, even when their CRRA exceeds one. Moreover, a significant shift in the distribution of job security—such as during an abrupt economic crisis—might engender greater societal support for these policies, contrary to their previous research. Finally, empirical data from recent Brazilian history provide analytical support for the theoretical assertions presented herein.

economics
Uncommon complication of anaphylactoid purpura.

J. Fitzsimmons

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.4.5628.431

1968-11-16

British Medical Journal

Abstract:20 to 30 minutes and two to three hours after its administration. Immediately after dipyridamole a pronounced reduction (Fig. 3) in the cumulative number of emboli was found (21.5 % of control; P<<0.001). However, the effect was transient, and injuries inflicted 20 to 30 minutes after dipyridamole showed platelet activity comparable to that seen in the control tests (91 % of control; 0.3>P>0.2). Neither of the two animals given prostaglandin E1 (25 and 125 Iug./kg. body weight) intravenously and tested before, immediately after, and 45, 75, and 120 minutes after its administration showed an inhibitory effect on platelet activity.
New Labour, Old Functionalism: The Underlying Contradictions of Welfare Reform in the US and the UK

Simon Prideaux

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-9515.00221

2001-03-01

Social Policy and Administration

Abstract:Through references to Hansard, official papers, Fabian pamphlets and pertinent texts from the fields of politics, sociology and social policy, this piece illustrates the similarities of thought behind the deliberations of New Labour and those of the early American functionalists and their modern‐day counterparts. Examination of the rhetoric used by both parties shows that there are three main focal points of comparison. On one level there is a shared belief in the cohesive impetus of realistic ‘aspiration’ in a stratified society. On another, there is a mutual desire to balance individual ‘rights’ with communal ‘responsibilities’. Finally, there is a common concern over the apperceived problem of the ‘underclass’ and how to deal with it. On the basis that these interrelated topics influenced social policy through the intensity of debate around them, the piece moves on to set the resultant American and British models of ‘workfare’ alongside the proposed ‘New Deals’ of New Labour. This has a threefold purpose. First, by detailing these examples the influence of the likes of Charles Murray and Lawrence Mead in future Labour policy may be observed. Second, the American association is particularly important in that the theoretical basis and practical experience of US social policy in the 1980s can act as an actual, realized example of the problems facing the proposed welfare policies of New Labour. Third, this comparison allows the piece to move on and discuss the failings of such authoritarian welfare programmes in the light of modern capitalism and modern society. In this way a conclusion on the effectiveness of New Labour and its unrealized ‘New Deal’ for Britain is broached.

development studies,public administration,social work,social issues
The Japanese ‘Welfare Society’: Social Rights in Action and the Seeds of the Precariat?

Bernard Thomann

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/9781009008686.009

2022-01-06

Abstract:This pioneering volume explores the long-neglected history of social rights, from the Middle Ages to the present. It debunks the myth that social rights are 'second-generation rights' – rights that appeared after World War II as additions to a rights corpus stretching back to the Enlightenment. Not only do social rights stretch back that far; they arguably pre-date the Enlightenment. In tracing their long history across various global contexts, this volume reveals how debates over social rights have often turned on deeper struggles over social obligation – over determining who owes what to whom, morally and legally. In the modern period, these struggles have been intertwined with questions of freedom, democracy, equality and dignity. Many factors have shaped the history of social rights, from class, gender and race to religion, empire and capitalism. With incomparable chronological depth, geographical breadth and conceptual nuance, Social Rights and the Politics of Obligation in History sets an agenda for future histories of human rights.
The Welfare State as Universal Social Security: A Global Analysis

Kerem Gabriel Öktem

DOI: https://doi.org/10.17645/si.v8i1.2509

2020-03-18

Social Inclusion

Abstract:Over the past decades, the geography of comparative welfare state research has transformed. Whereas scholars used to focus on a limited number of advanced industrialised democracies, they now increasingly study developments in Europe’s periphery, East Asia, and Latin America. So, does this mean that the welfare state has spread around the world? To answer this question, we analyse different ways to measure welfare states and map their results. With the help of International Labour Organization and International Monetary Fund data, we explore measurements based on social expenditures, social rights, and social security legislations and show that each of them faces serious limitations in a global analysis of welfare states. For some measurements, we simply lack global data. For others, we risk misclassifying the extent and quality of some social protection systems. Finally, we present a measurement that is grounded in the idea that the welfare state is essentially about universalism. Relying on a conceptualisation of the welfare state as collective responsibility for the wellbeing of the entire population, we use universal social security as a yardstick. We measure this conceptualization through health and pension coverage and show that a growing number of countries have become welfare states by this definition. Yet, it is possible that at least some of these cases offer only basic levels of protection, we caution.

social sciences, interdisciplinary

Welfarism: A Defence Against Sen's Attack

Economy and Morality: The Philosophy Of The Welfare State

Towards libertarian welfarism: protecting agency in the night-watchman state

Enterprise and Welfare States: a Comparative Perspective

The Smithian ontology of ‘relative poverty’: revisiting the debate between Amartya Sen and Peter Townsend*

Enterprise and the Welfare State: A Comparative Perspective

On the possibility of an anti-paternalist behavioural welfare economics

WELFARE IMPLICATIONS OF ‘SOCIAL INCOME’ IN A CHANGING ECONOMY

How Security Service Responds to the Impact of the Social Security Law (浅谈保安服务业如何应对《 社会保险法》 实施的冲击)

The welfare state and support for environmental action in Europe

A note on redistributive fairness and economic reform

‘It Isn't Charity because We've Paid into it’: Social Citizenship and the Moral Economy of Welfare Recipients in the Wake of 2012 UK Welfare Reform Act

Amartya Kumar Sen’s ethical interpretation of poverty

Maximin Justice, Sacrifice, and the Reciprocity Argument: A Pragmatic Reassessment of the Rawls/Nozick Debate

Pigou’s Welfare Economics Revisited

Berge equilibrium, altruism and social welfare

Preferences for social insurance: the role of job security and risk propensity

Uncommon complication of anaphylactoid purpura.

New Labour, Old Functionalism: The Underlying Contradictions of Welfare Reform in the US and the UK

The Japanese ‘Welfare Society’: Social Rights in Action and the Seeds of the Precariat?

The Welfare State as Universal Social Security: A Global Analysis

How Security Service Responds to the Impact of the Social Security Law (浅谈保安服务业如何应对《社会保险法》实施的冲击)