Cross-national differences in support for welfare and redistribution: an evaluation of competing theories

摘要: Unlike the other chapters in this book, which focus on attitude differences or similarities over time within one country, this chapter examines variations in attitudes across different national contexts. Many of the same problems and benefits as befall the other chapters apply to this approach also. In addition, however, there are certain extra pitfalls and bonuses which are specific to comparative analysis and which will be elaborated as we pursue the substantive goals of the chapter. These goals are, firstly, to assess where Britain stands in comparison with fellow members of the European Union and a range of other societies, including the Anglo-American democracies and the post-communist states of eastern Europe, on issues relating to egalitarian policies and strategies involving redistribution by the government. Second, to consider evidence on the robustness of national differences and similarities on key redistributive issues. And finally, to test empirically two important and ambitious theories which have tried to explain why nations differ in their level of commitment to redistribution and why in some societies the last two decades have seen something of a public ‘backlash'against redistributive welfare policies.The role of government intervention in reducing inequality has long been a focus of political conflicts in advanced industrial societies. Some of the policies designed to achieve this aim-that is, state pensions and health care provision-have attracted widespread support, but those which have involved explicit redistribution of income across social classes have been more controversial (Smith 1989; Taylor-Gooby 1993).'This chapter focuses