Reforming State Pension Provision in ‘Liberal’ Anglo-Saxon Countries: Re-Commodification, Cost-Containment or Recalibration?

There are good theoretical reasons for expecting pension reform in Anglo-Saxon countries to follow similar paths. Esping-Andersen (1990) famously identified these countries as belonging to the same ‘Liberal’ model of welfare, under which benefits, including pensions, are said to be residual and weak...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Social policy and society : a journal of the Social Policy Association 2013-01, Vol.12 (1), p.77-90
Hauptverfasser: Lain, David, Vickerstaff, Sarah, Loretto, Wendy
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
container_end_page 90
container_issue 1
container_start_page 77
container_title Social policy and society : a journal of the Social Policy Association
container_volume 12
creator Lain, David
Vickerstaff, Sarah
Loretto, Wendy
description There are good theoretical reasons for expecting pension reform in Anglo-Saxon countries to follow similar paths. Esping-Andersen (1990) famously identified these countries as belonging to the same ‘Liberal’ model of welfare, under which benefits, including pensions, are said to be residual and weakly ‘de-commodifying’, reducing individuals’ reliance on the market to a much lesser degree than elsewhere. Pierson (2001) has furthermore argued that because of path dependency welfare states are likely to follow established paths when dealing with ‘permanent austerity’. Following this logic, Aysan and Beaujot (2009) argue that pension reform in liberal countries has resulted in increasing re-commodification. In this paper, we review pension reforms in the UK, USA, Canada and New Zealand in the 2000s. We argue that because, in reality, the pension systems differed significantly at the point of reform, the paths followed varied considerably in terms of whether they focused on ‘re-commodification’, ‘cost-containment’ or ‘recalibration’.
doi_str_mv 10.1017/S1474746412000450
format Article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_1622299903</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><cupid>10_1017_S1474746412000450</cupid><sourcerecordid>2832550581</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c492t-9135fadbd1e76483c8653985983750e92a884904c5d43eb277193edd7b4617ab3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNqFkc1KxDAUhYsoOI4-gLuCGxdWkyZpGjcig38woMzouqTt7ZChTTTJiO7mMfT15knM_CxEEbmLe7nnOweSG0WHGJ1ihPnZGFMeKqM4RQhRhraiXlixhCBOtlczTZb6brTn3BShlDLCetF8BI2xndKTeOylh_gBtFNGxw_WvKrVpHS8mH8MVQlWtov5Z3ypJ61JxvItiAMz094qcOfxCJKB6TpTq0ZV0gfrSZCdD1vtpdIdaB8bG7hKtqq0K-RiP9ppZOvgYNP70dP11ePgNhne39wNLodJRUXqE4EJa2Rd1hh4RnNS5RkjImciJ5whEKnMcyoQrVhNCZQp51gQqGte0gxzWZJ-dLzOfbbmZQbOF51yFbSt1GBmrsBZmqZCCET-RxkTCIWvzgN69AOdmpnV4SEFDnmBEmJJ4TVVWeOchaZ4tqqT9r3AqFier_h1vuAhG4_sSqvqCXyL_tP1BRKLnSg</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>1222006998</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Reforming State Pension Provision in ‘Liberal’ Anglo-Saxon Countries: Re-Commodification, Cost-Containment or Recalibration?</title><source>Cambridge Journals</source><source>Sociological Abstracts</source><source>Applied Social Sciences Index &amp; Abstracts (ASSIA)</source><creator>Lain, David ; Vickerstaff, Sarah ; Loretto, Wendy</creator><creatorcontrib>Lain, David ; Vickerstaff, Sarah ; Loretto, Wendy</creatorcontrib><description>There are good theoretical reasons for expecting pension reform in Anglo-Saxon countries to follow similar paths. Esping-Andersen (1990) famously identified these countries as belonging to the same ‘Liberal’ model of welfare, under which benefits, including pensions, are said to be residual and weakly ‘de-commodifying’, reducing individuals’ reliance on the market to a much lesser degree than elsewhere. Pierson (2001) has furthermore argued that because of path dependency welfare states are likely to follow established paths when dealing with ‘permanent austerity’. Following this logic, Aysan and Beaujot (2009) argue that pension reform in liberal countries has resulted in increasing re-commodification. In this paper, we review pension reforms in the UK, USA, Canada and New Zealand in the 2000s. We argue that because, in reality, the pension systems differed significantly at the point of reform, the paths followed varied considerably in terms of whether they focused on ‘re-commodification’, ‘cost-containment’ or ‘recalibration’.</description><identifier>ISSN: 1474-7464</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1475-3073</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1017/S1474746412000450</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press</publisher><subject>Benefits ; Canada ; Liberalism ; Market ; Markets ; New Zealand ; Old age benefits ; Pensions ; Reform ; Reforms ; Retirement ; Social policy ; Themed Section on Rethinking Retirement Incomes: Inequality and Policy Change in the UK and Anglo Saxon Countries ; U.S.A ; United Kingdom ; Wealth ; Welfare ; Welfare State</subject><ispartof>Social policy and society : a journal of the Social Policy Association, 2013-01, Vol.12 (1), p.77-90</ispartof><rights>Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2012</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c492t-9135fadbd1e76483c8653985983750e92a884904c5d43eb277193edd7b4617ab3</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c492t-9135fadbd1e76483c8653985983750e92a884904c5d43eb277193edd7b4617ab3</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://www.cambridge.org/core/product/identifier/S1474746412000450/type/journal_article$$EHTML$$P50$$Gcambridge$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>164,314,780,784,12845,27343,27923,27924,30998,33773,33774,55627</link.rule.ids></links><search><creatorcontrib>Lain, David</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Vickerstaff, Sarah</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Loretto, Wendy</creatorcontrib><title>Reforming State Pension Provision in ‘Liberal’ Anglo-Saxon Countries: Re-Commodification, Cost-Containment or Recalibration?</title><title>Social policy and society : a journal of the Social Policy Association</title><addtitle>Social Policy &amp; Society</addtitle><description>There are good theoretical reasons for expecting pension reform in Anglo-Saxon countries to follow similar paths. Esping-Andersen (1990) famously identified these countries as belonging to the same ‘Liberal’ model of welfare, under which benefits, including pensions, are said to be residual and weakly ‘de-commodifying’, reducing individuals’ reliance on the market to a much lesser degree than elsewhere. Pierson (2001) has furthermore argued that because of path dependency welfare states are likely to follow established paths when dealing with ‘permanent austerity’. Following this logic, Aysan and Beaujot (2009) argue that pension reform in liberal countries has resulted in increasing re-commodification. In this paper, we review pension reforms in the UK, USA, Canada and New Zealand in the 2000s. We argue that because, in reality, the pension systems differed significantly at the point of reform, the paths followed varied considerably in terms of whether they focused on ‘re-commodification’, ‘cost-containment’ or ‘recalibration’.</description><subject>Benefits</subject><subject>Canada</subject><subject>Liberalism</subject><subject>Market</subject><subject>Markets</subject><subject>New Zealand</subject><subject>Old age benefits</subject><subject>Pensions</subject><subject>Reform</subject><subject>Reforms</subject><subject>Retirement</subject><subject>Social policy</subject><subject>Themed Section on Rethinking Retirement Incomes: Inequality and Policy Change in the UK and Anglo Saxon Countries</subject><subject>U.S.A</subject><subject>United Kingdom</subject><subject>Wealth</subject><subject>Welfare</subject><subject>Welfare State</subject><issn>1474-7464</issn><issn>1475-3073</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2013</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>7QJ</sourceid><sourceid>ABUWG</sourceid><sourceid>AFKRA</sourceid><sourceid>AZQEC</sourceid><sourceid>BENPR</sourceid><sourceid>BHHNA</sourceid><sourceid>CCPQU</sourceid><sourceid>DWQXO</sourceid><sourceid>GNUQQ</sourceid><recordid>eNqFkc1KxDAUhYsoOI4-gLuCGxdWkyZpGjcig38woMzouqTt7ZChTTTJiO7mMfT15knM_CxEEbmLe7nnOweSG0WHGJ1ihPnZGFMeKqM4RQhRhraiXlixhCBOtlczTZb6brTn3BShlDLCetF8BI2xndKTeOylh_gBtFNGxw_WvKrVpHS8mH8MVQlWtov5Z3ypJ61JxvItiAMz094qcOfxCJKB6TpTq0ZV0gfrSZCdD1vtpdIdaB8bG7hKtqq0K-RiP9ppZOvgYNP70dP11ePgNhne39wNLodJRUXqE4EJa2Rd1hh4RnNS5RkjImciJ5whEKnMcyoQrVhNCZQp51gQqGte0gxzWZJ-dLzOfbbmZQbOF51yFbSt1GBmrsBZmqZCCET-RxkTCIWvzgN69AOdmpnV4SEFDnmBEmJJ4TVVWeOchaZ4tqqT9r3AqFier_h1vuAhG4_sSqvqCXyL_tP1BRKLnSg</recordid><startdate>20130101</startdate><enddate>20130101</enddate><creator>Lain, David</creator><creator>Vickerstaff, Sarah</creator><creator>Loretto, Wendy</creator><general>Cambridge University Press</general><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>0-V</scope><scope>3V.</scope><scope>7QJ</scope><scope>7U4</scope><scope>7XB</scope><scope>88J</scope><scope>8BJ</scope><scope>8FK</scope><scope>ABUWG</scope><scope>AFKRA</scope><scope>ALSLI</scope><scope>AZQEC</scope><scope>BENPR</scope><scope>BHHNA</scope><scope>CCPQU</scope><scope>DWI</scope><scope>DWQXO</scope><scope>FQK</scope><scope>GNUQQ</scope><scope>HEHIP</scope><scope>JBE</scope><scope>M2R</scope><scope>M2S</scope><scope>PQEST</scope><scope>PQQKQ</scope><scope>PQUKI</scope><scope>PRINS</scope><scope>Q9U</scope><scope>WZK</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20130101</creationdate><title>Reforming State Pension Provision in ‘Liberal’ Anglo-Saxon Countries: Re-Commodification, Cost-Containment or Recalibration?</title><author>Lain, David ; Vickerstaff, Sarah ; Loretto, Wendy</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c492t-9135fadbd1e76483c8653985983750e92a884904c5d43eb277193edd7b4617ab3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2013</creationdate><topic>Benefits</topic><topic>Canada</topic><topic>Liberalism</topic><topic>Market</topic><topic>Markets</topic><topic>New Zealand</topic><topic>Old age benefits</topic><topic>Pensions</topic><topic>Reform</topic><topic>Reforms</topic><topic>Retirement</topic><topic>Social policy</topic><topic>Themed Section on Rethinking Retirement Incomes: Inequality and Policy Change in the UK and Anglo Saxon Countries</topic><topic>U.S.A</topic><topic>United Kingdom</topic><topic>Wealth</topic><topic>Welfare</topic><topic>Welfare State</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Lain, David</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Vickerstaff, Sarah</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Loretto, Wendy</creatorcontrib><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>ProQuest Social Sciences Premium Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Corporate)</collection><collection>Applied Social Sciences Index &amp; Abstracts (ASSIA)</collection><collection>Sociological Abstracts (pre-2017)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>Social Science Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>International Bibliography of the Social Sciences (IBSS)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni) (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central UK/Ireland</collection><collection>Social Science Premium Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Essentials</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>Sociological Abstracts</collection><collection>ProQuest One Community College</collection><collection>Sociological Abstracts</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Korea</collection><collection>International Bibliography of the Social Sciences</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Student</collection><collection>Sociology Collection</collection><collection>International Bibliography of the Social Sciences</collection><collection>Social Science Database</collection><collection>Sociology Database</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic Eastern Edition (DO NOT USE)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic UKI Edition</collection><collection>ProQuest Central China</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Basic</collection><collection>Sociological Abstracts (Ovid)</collection><jtitle>Social policy and society : a journal of the Social Policy Association</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Lain, David</au><au>Vickerstaff, Sarah</au><au>Loretto, Wendy</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Reforming State Pension Provision in ‘Liberal’ Anglo-Saxon Countries: Re-Commodification, Cost-Containment or Recalibration?</atitle><jtitle>Social policy and society : a journal of the Social Policy Association</jtitle><addtitle>Social Policy &amp; Society</addtitle><date>2013-01-01</date><risdate>2013</risdate><volume>12</volume><issue>1</issue><spage>77</spage><epage>90</epage><pages>77-90</pages><issn>1474-7464</issn><eissn>1475-3073</eissn><abstract>There are good theoretical reasons for expecting pension reform in Anglo-Saxon countries to follow similar paths. Esping-Andersen (1990) famously identified these countries as belonging to the same ‘Liberal’ model of welfare, under which benefits, including pensions, are said to be residual and weakly ‘de-commodifying’, reducing individuals’ reliance on the market to a much lesser degree than elsewhere. Pierson (2001) has furthermore argued that because of path dependency welfare states are likely to follow established paths when dealing with ‘permanent austerity’. Following this logic, Aysan and Beaujot (2009) argue that pension reform in liberal countries has resulted in increasing re-commodification. In this paper, we review pension reforms in the UK, USA, Canada and New Zealand in the 2000s. We argue that because, in reality, the pension systems differed significantly at the point of reform, the paths followed varied considerably in terms of whether they focused on ‘re-commodification’, ‘cost-containment’ or ‘recalibration’.</abstract><cop>Cambridge, UK</cop><pub>Cambridge University Press</pub><doi>10.1017/S1474746412000450</doi><tpages>14</tpages><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 1474-7464
ispartof Social policy and society : a journal of the Social Policy Association, 2013-01, Vol.12 (1), p.77-90
issn 1474-7464
1475-3073
language eng
recordid cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_1622299903
source Cambridge Journals; Sociological Abstracts; Applied Social Sciences Index & Abstracts (ASSIA)
subjects Benefits
Canada
Liberalism
Market
Markets
New Zealand
Old age benefits
Pensions
Reform
Reforms
Retirement
Social policy
Themed Section on Rethinking Retirement Incomes: Inequality and Policy Change in the UK and Anglo Saxon Countries
U.S.A
United Kingdom
Wealth
Welfare
Welfare State
title Reforming State Pension Provision in ‘Liberal’ Anglo-Saxon Countries: Re-Commodification, Cost-Containment or Recalibration?
url https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-08T20%3A26%3A26IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Reforming%20State%20Pension%20Provision%20in%20%E2%80%98Liberal%E2%80%99%20Anglo-Saxon%20Countries:%20Re-Commodification,%20Cost-Containment%20or%20Recalibration?&rft.jtitle=Social%20policy%20and%20society%20:%20a%20journal%20of%20the%20Social%20Policy%20Association&rft.au=Lain,%20David&rft.date=2013-01-01&rft.volume=12&rft.issue=1&rft.spage=77&rft.epage=90&rft.pages=77-90&rft.issn=1474-7464&rft.eissn=1475-3073&rft_id=info:doi/10.1017/S1474746412000450&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E2832550581%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=1222006998&rft_id=info:pmid/&rft_cupid=10_1017_S1474746412000450&rfr_iscdi=true