The Crisis Imperative: Crisis Rhetoric and Welfare State Reform in Belgium and the Netherlands in the Early 1990s (Amsterdam University Press - Changing Welfare States Series)

233 Pages·2006·2.98 MB·English

by  Sanneke Kuipers

Cover Sanneke Kuipers 21-10-2005 11:41 Pagina 1
Sanneke Kuipers
The Crisis
s
e
t
a
t
S
s
a
n e Imperative
n r
e a
k f
e l
e
K w
u
Why do some welfare state crises trigger comprehensive i g
p n
Crisis Rhetoric and Welfare
reforms, while others subside without having exhibited e i
r g
s n State Reform in Belgium and the
much effect? This book argues that crises are deliberately a
h Netherlands in the Early 1990
constructed as an imperative for change. Under certain con- c s
ditions, crises can be a powerful weapon in the hands of
change-oriented policymakers.
T
In the early 1990s, Belgium and the Netherlands were both h
e
characterized by a ‘welfare without work’ pathology, not

C
unlike that found in many other continental welfare states at
r
the time. When crisis rhetoric was applied in both countries,
i
s
the results of the subsequent welfare state reforms were quite
i
s
different in both their scope and breadth.
I
The Crisis Imperative: Crisis Rhetoric and Welfare State m
Reform in Belgium and the Netherlands in the Early 1990s p
e
probes the rhetorical strategies and institutional structures of
r
the two cases, and provides deeper insights into the factors a
t
that condition the success of a crisis imperative. i
v
e
Sanneke Kuipers is a postdoctoral research fellow at the
Department of Public Administration of Leiden University
in the Netherlands.
ISBN 90 5356 808 5
www.aup.nl
Amsterdam University Press
A m s t e r d a m U n i v e r s i t y P r e s s
The Crisis Imperative 21-10-2005 15:04 Pagina 1
the crisis imperative
The Crisis Imperative 21-10-2005 15:04 Pagina 2
CHANGING WELFARE STATES
Processes of socio-economic change – individualising society and globalising eco-
nomics and politics – cause large problems for modern welfare states. Welfare
states, organised on the level of nation-states and built on one or the other form of
national solidarity, are increasingly confronted with – for instance – fiscal prob-
lems, difficulties to control costs, and the unintended use of welfare programs.
Such problems – generally speaking – raise the issue of sustainability because they
tend to undermine the legitimacy of the programs of the welfare state and in the
end induce the necessity of change, be it the complete abolishment of programs, re-
trenchment of programs, or attempts to preserve programs by modernising them.
This series of studies on welfare states focuses on the changing institutions and
programs of modern welfare states. These changes are the product of external
pressures on welfare states, for example because of the economic and political con-
sequences of globalisation or individualisation, or result from the internal, politi-
cal or institutional dynamics of welfare arrangements.
By studying the development of welfare state arrangements in different coun-
tries, in different institutional contexts, or by comparing developments between
countries or different types of welfare states, this series hopes to enlarge the body
of knowledge on the functioning and development of welfare states and their pro-
grams.
editors of the series
Gøsta Esping-Andersen, University of Pompeu Fabra, Barcelona, Spain
Anton Hemerijck, the Netherlands Scientific Council for Government Policy
(Wetenschappelijke Raad voor het Regeringsbeleid – wrr)
Kees van Kersbergen, Free University Amsterdam, the Netherlands
Jelle Visser, University of Amsterdam, the Netherlands
Romke van der Veen, Erasmus University, Rotterdam, the Netherlands
previously published
Jelle Visser and Anton Hemerijck, A Dutch Miracle. Job Growth, Welfare Reform
and Corporatism in the Netherlands, 1997(isbn9053562710)
Christoffer Green-Pedersen, The Politics of Justification. Party Competition and
Welfare-State Retrenchment in Denmark and the Netherlands from 1982 to
1998, 2002(isbn9053565906)
Jan Høgelund, In Search of Effective Disability Policy. Comparing the Develop-
ments and Outcomes of the Dutch and Danish Disability Policies, 2003(isbn
9053566449)
MaurizioFerreraandElisabettaGualmini,RescuedbyEurope?SocialandLabour
Market Reforms from Maastricht to Berlusconi, 2004(isbn9053566511)
Uwe Becker and Herman Schwartz (eds.), Employment ‘Miracles’. A Critical
Comparison of the Dutch, Scandinavian, Swiss, Australian and Irish Cases ver-
sus Germany and the US, 2005(isbn 9053567550)
Martin Schludi, The Reform of Bismarckian Pension Systems. A Comparison of
Pension Politics in Austria, France, Germany, Italy and Sweden, 2005 (isbn
9053567402)
The Crisis Imperative 21-10-2005 15:04 Pagina 3
The Crisis Imperative
Crisis Rhetoric and Welfare State Reform in Belgium
and the Netherlands in the Early 1990s
Sanneke Kuipers
amsterdam university press
The Crisis Imperative 21-10-2005 15:04 Pagina 4
The publication of this book is made possible with a grant from the
gakFoundation (Stichting Instituut gak, Hilversum).
Cover illustration: Joseph M. Turner, The Burning of the Houses of Parliament,
1834
Cover design: Jaak Crasborn bno, Valkenburg a/d Geul
Layout: Adriaan de Jonge, Amsterdam
isbn9053568085
nur754
© Amsterdam University Press, Amsterdam 2006
All rights reserved. Without limiting the rights under copyright reserved above, no
part of this book may be reproduced, stored in or introduced into a retrieval sys-
tem, or transmitted, in any form or by any means (electronic, mechanical, photo-
copying, recording or otherwise) without the written permission of both the copy-
right owner and the author of the book.
The Crisis Imperative 21-10-2005 15:04 Pagina 5
Contents
Acknowledgments 7
1 The Crisis Imperative 9
1.1 Welfare State Crisis in the Lowlands 9
1.2 The Puzzle and Its Pieces 10
1.3 The Theoretical Argument 12
1.4 Analysis of Reform 13
1.5 Purpose, Relevance and Limitations 15
1.6 Book Plan 17
2 Crisis and Change 19
2.1 Introduction 19
2.2 Welfare State Change in Belgium and the Netherlands: A Tough
Nut to Crack 20
2.3 An Alternative Explanation: Crises and Institutional Dynamics 27
2.4 Conclusion 35
3 Comparing Social Security Crises:Design and Method 37
3.1 Introduction 37
3.2 Similar Institutional Structures 38
3.3 Differences 43
3.4 Similar Predicaments 45
3.5 Different Outcomes 47
4 “Nothing as Permanentas a Temporary Arrangement”:
Belgian Policy Making on UnemploymentBenefits 53
4.1 Introduction 53
4.2 The Challenges of Post-Industrialism in Belgium 55
4.3 Belgian Politics 57
4.4 Power in Practice: Social Partners 61
4.5 The Evolution of Social Security Policy 68
5
The Crisis Imperative 21-10-2005 15:04 Pagina 6
4.6 Policy Reactions to Adversity 72
4.7 Effects of Adjustments: Ever Deeper Trouble? 76
4.8 Conclusion 89
5 Global Pacts and Crisis Plans 91
5.1 Introduction 91
5.2 Contradictions and Crisis 93
5.3 Actors’ Resources and Venues 100
5.4 Institutional Obstacles to Change 106
5.5 Conclusion 114
6 The Sticky State and the Dutch Disease 119
6.1 Introduction 119
6.2 Post-Industrial Challenges to the Dutch Economy and Its Society
121
6.3 Politics in the Netherlands 122
6.4 The ‘Polder Model’: Industrial Relations and Socio-Economic
Policy Making 126
6.5 The Runaway Social Security System 131
6.6 The Dutch Disease and Policy Remedies 135
6.7 Reforms Enforced, Contradictions Reinforced 137
6.8 Conclusion 145
7 Crisis Narratives and Sweeping Reforms 147
7.1 Introduction 147
7.2 From Incubation to Open Crisis 148
7.3 Access to Resources and Venues 163
7.4 Triggers and Change Agents 169
7.5 Conclusion 175
8 The Politics of Crisis Construction 179
8.1 Small Steps or Giant Leaps? 179
8.2 The Crisis Stratagem 180
8.3 Reform in Retrospect: Much Ado About Nothing? 186
8.4 On Balance 189
Notes 193
Listof Abbreviations 207
Listof Interview Respondents 211
Bibliography 215
Index 229
6
The Crisis Imperative 21-10-2005 15:04 Pagina 7
Acknowledgments
This book began as a dissertation at Leiden University’s Department of
Public Administration. Many people contributed to its completion as a dis-
sertation, and further along the way to the significantly revised version here
before you. Thank you! I owe special thanks to my supervisors and mentors
in Leiden, Paul ’t Hart and Kees Goudswaard, who have provided me with
invaluable support and inspiration. Arjen Boin was there from the start. In
fact, he lured me into academia and has never let me down since, and I owe
him for it. Romke van der Veen has been a constructive consultant and stim-
ulating advisor. Jos Berghman provided encouragement and guidance in
Belgium and generously introduced me to his wide network of contacts in
Belgian politics and industrial relations. The Belgian case study would not
have been possible without the help and hospitality of the colleagues at Leu-
ven University, where Marleen Brans and Geert Bouckaert allowed me to
spend four months. The interviewees, both in the Netherlands and Belgium,
offered me their precious time to share their experiences and expertise on
the cases researched. Their openness to my questions and prompt, positive
responses to my requests for interviews and authorization of their citations
have made this research an inspiring and rewarding adventure.
I had no idea before I started that social security policy was such a com-
plex, technical field. Nevertheless, Leo Aarts and Philip de Jong adopted me
as their assistant on the so-called Donner Committee, which was advising
the Dutch government on disability insurance reform at the time. Leo and
Philip’s expertise, patience, thought-provoking discussions, and sense of
humor provided a great and enjoyable learning experience.
I chose to continue working at the Department of Public Administration
at Leiden University as a post-doctoral research fellow, and I did so with
good reason. Of all my colleagues at the department, some people in partic-
ular come to mind: Anne-Greet, Celesta, Fleur, Gerard, Jörg, Jos, Liesbet,
Martijn G., Martijn van de M., Mette, Sander, Sandra, Torsten and
Willeke, helped resolve my own little crises along the way and were always
around for a good coffee break, a discussion, and some gossip. The Leiden
7
The Crisis Imperative 21-10-2005 15:04 Pagina 8
Ph.D. seminar was a stimulating forum for peer reviews. Why leave such a
place?
I also received helpful comments and suggestions during several confer-
ences and workshops, as well as spontaneously from colleagues nearby.
Duco Bannink, Arjen Boin, Diederik van Coppenolle, Christoffer Green-
Pedersen, Markus Haverland, Anton Hemerijck, Liesbet Heyse, Koen
Hermans, Kees van Kersbergen, Ellen Immergut, Brian Jacobs, Patrick
Kenis, Mark Rhinard, Geesje Saeijs, Petra Schreurs, Angelique Steen, Eric
Stern, Theo Toonen, Jouke de Vries, Christa van Wijnbergen, and Frank de
Zwart are all gratefully acknowledged for their time and constructive criti-
cism. Ann and Maureen Weller edited the entire manuscript of my disserta-
tion skillfully and creatively. Wieteke Zwijnenberg proved a competent stu-
dent assistant, providing stoicism and good humor as the deadline ap-
proached. The Netherlands Institute of Government, the Netherlands Orga-
nization for Scientific Research and the Leiden University Fund financially
supported my conference visits and research abroad. The Stichting Instituut
GAKis gratefully acknowledged for their financial support of this book pro-
ject. Vanessa Nijweide and Jaap Wagenaar at Amsterdam University Press
were encouraging and supportive in getting this book in print.
The completion of this book would not have been possible without the
love and support of friends and family. I especially thank my parents and my
sisters for their continuing encouragement and confidence. I dedicate this
book to Maurice, who completes my life in a wonderful way.
Sanneke Kuipers
November 2005
8 the crisis imperative
The Crisis Imperative 21-10-2005 15:04 Pagina 9
1 The Crisis Imperative
1.1 Welfare State Crisis in the Lowlands
In the struggle by European welfare states to overcome recession during the
1980s, two countries in particular lingered behind. The Netherlands and
Belgium exemplified the pathology of ‘welfare without work’ that charac-
terized continental welfare states.1 In their enduring attempts to improve
their macro-economic and financial situations, both states were largely un-
able to tackle their most pressing social policy problems. In Belgium, the to-
tal unemployment benefits covered income transfers for approximately one
million people – roughly one-tenth of their population. Likewise, in the
Netherlands roughly one million of the country’s 16million people received
disability benefits. These respective programs were responsible, in large
part, for the countries’ high inactivity rates.2They represented the Achilles’
heels of their social security systems.
The institutional settings in both states are very comparable, as will be
discussed further in chapter 3. In both countries, social partners have a
structural impact on social policy in agenda setting, decision-making, and
implementation phases.3 While employers’ and employees’ income contri-
butions finance the programs, the social partners are responsible for admin-
istration and allocation of funds to the beneficiaries (Deleeck 2001).4Also,
powers and responsibilities are diffused in complex configurations of inter-
dependent policymakers. The political systems are home to a wide variety
of political parties, governing together in multiparty coalitions. Therefore,
possibilities to inhibit change are abundant.5
Yet, the 1990s showed a surprising divergence in scope and extent of the
policy changes in both welfare states. In Belgium, the government an-
nounced major reforms but took only incremental steps to improve the fi-
nancial sustainability of the system and to activate the unemployed with
subsidized work programs. Belgium’s previous social security arrange-
ments proved remarkably resilient. In the Netherlands, policymakers
announced fundamental reforms to both the contents of the disability
9