IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/pra/mprapa/33516.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

The efficiency and effectiveness of social spending in the EU-27 and the OECD – a 2011 reanalysis

Author

Listed:
  • Tausch, Arno

Abstract

In this contribution, we look again at the trajectory and the efficiency of the ‘European social model’ (EMS). We re-apply an econometric methodology, which was already used in the study Herrmann, Heshmati et al., 2008, 2009. In that study, the authors said that apart from Finland and the Netherlands, some new EU-27 member countries, especially the Czech Republic and Slovenia, provided some answers to the question about the efficiency of state expenditures in reducing poverty rates, while countries like the Federal Republic of Germany achieved only a mediocre ranking. Considering the fact that social expenditures often amount to ¼ or even 1/3 of the GDP in advanced Western democracies, this question has acquired new and additional importance during the current international debt crisis, affecting several European countries such as Greece. Put in simple terms: aren’t the Germans, French … also throwing a lot of money out of the window, while the world is now fixed on the Greeks? The most influential social science journal article on the subject, mentioning the ESM in the title, was written by Scharpf, 2002 and maintains that efforts to adopt European social policies are politically impeded by the diversity of national welfare states, differing not only in levels of economic development and hence in their ability to pay for social transfers and services but, even more significantly, in their normative aspirations and institutional structures. Hyman, 2005, even says that there is simply no agreement what 'social Europe' means in the first place, let alone how it should be defended against the challenges inherent in the neoliberal approach to economic integration. Jepsen and Pascual, 2005 were equally sceptical about the subject. They even maintain that the very use of the concept under scrutiny here – the EMS - in the academic and political debate is simply a rhetorical resource intended to legitimize the politically constructed and identity-building project of the EU institutions. In our re-analysis of the underlying issues, we first come to the conclusion that the USA not only had lower unemployment and higher economic growth rates than the EU-15. Globalization inflows were smaller than in the EU-15, and – most importantly – the tendency towards sectoral inequality as a proxy for overall inequality was less pronounced than in the EU-15. The average, unweighted performance of the other Western democracies rather resembles the European performance. So the dire fact number one, established in this essay, is that during globalization, the ‘European social model’ is not better avoiding the ills of inequality than the USA or other Western democracies. Following the methodology, developed in Herrmann et al., 2008, 2009, and based on the latest Eurostat data, we then come to the conclusion that currently European social policy only lifts 6.80% of the total European population, i.e. 29.44% of the poor population, out of poverty. A very huge amount of money is required for this. Social transfers amount to ¼ of the European GDP in 2006. To lift just 1% of the population out of poverty, a staggering 3.66% of the GDP is now needed on the level of the EU-27. We also show that Sweden, Luxembourg, Finland, Spain, Denmark, Estonia, the Netherlands, Germany, the UK and France currently spend 5% or more of their GDP to lift just 1% of the population out of poverty. In most EU-27 member countries, only 1/3 or less of the poor population are lifted out of poverty by social transfers. I.e. 2/3 or more of the population are practically not reached by this gigantic machinery EMS, which consumes ¼ of European GDP. In accordance with Herrmann et al. 2008, 2009, we also analyze the OECD figures on how much it costs to lift 1% of the population out of poverty. Our analysis reveals that there are only many different single experiences and models of social policy, and these experiences do not confirm stereotypes, typologies or other generalized approaches. Our conclusions from the data for 2003 suggest that very efficient models, like the Slovak Republic and the Czech Republic, but also Luxembourg, Hungary and Poland, have to be contrasted by the laggards and high-cost models, like Spain and Mexico, but also Finland, Switzerland, New Zealand, and South Korea. The comparison of the aggregate efficiency parameters would even suggest that there was a convergence of efficiency trends from the mid-1980s onwards across the Atlantic. Again applying the politometric methods, developed in the study Hermann et. al. 2008, 2009, we document the fact that the PIIGS – i.e. Portugal, Ireland, Italy, Greece and Spain, which currently are at the centre of the financial storm, affecting Europe (Baglioni and Cherubini, 2010; Andrade and Chhaochharia, 2010; and Zemanek, 2010), do not perform well on our refined social protection expenditure effectiveness indicator. The five leading countries according to our analysis with the latest Eurostat 2008 data are Hungary; Slovakia; Bulgaria; Czech Republic; and Poland, which are all new member states of the Union. The least efficient social sectors are to be found in Latvia, Estonia, the UK and Greece. We also present data from a re-analysis of the UNICEF report (2007) on child poverty in advanced countries. Based on a standard SPSS XVIII principal component analysis of the UNICEF variables, and weighting the five resulting factors according to their contribution in explaining the total variance of the model we arrive at the conclusion that there is no evidence which would suggest that there is a single European social model, to be distinguished from the rest of other Western countries. Not surprisingly, the Scandinavians and North-west Europeans lead the way: Finland; Sweden; Netherlands; Switzerland and Denmark. The most lamentable situation of young people was to be encountered in the Baltic Republics, the USA and Japan. Confronted with the dire fact that neither the European political class, nor the academic community have come up with convincing evidence on the European social model (EMS), we arrive at the final conclusion that the ESM hardly exists.

Suggested Citation

  • Tausch, Arno, 2011. "The efficiency and effectiveness of social spending in the EU-27 and the OECD – a 2011 reanalysis," MPRA Paper 33516, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    • Handle: RePEc:pra:mprapa:33516
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://mpra.ub.uni-muenchen.de/33516/1/MPRA_paper_33516.pdf
    File Function: original version
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Scharpf, Fritz W., 2002. "The European Social Model: Coping with the challenges of diversity," MPIfG Working Paper 02/8, Max Planck Institute for the Study of Societies.
    2. Holger Zemanek, 2010. "Competitiveness Within The Euro Area: The Problem That Still Needs To Be Solved," Economic Affairs, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 30(3), pages 42-47, October.
    3. Alois Guger & Markus Marterbauer & Ewald Walterskirchen, 2006. "Growth Policy In The Spirit Of Steindl And Kalecki," Metroeconomica, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 57(3), pages 428-442, July.
    4. Rothschild, Kurt W, 2000. "Europe and the USA: Comparing What with What?," Kyklos, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 53(3), pages 249-264.
    5. Peter Herrmann & Almas Heshmati & Arno Tausch & Chemen S.J. Bajalan, 2009. "Efficiency and Effectiveness of Social Spending," Wirtschaft und Gesellschaft - WuG, Kammer für Arbeiter und Angestellte für Wien, Abteilung Wirtschaftswissenschaft und Statistik, vol. 35(1), pages 13-43.
    6. Almas Heshmati & Arno Tausch & Chemen S. J. Bajalan, 2008. "Measurement and Analysis of Child Well-Being in Middle and High Income Countries," European Journal of Comparative Economics, Cattaneo University (LIUC), vol. 5(2), pages 187-249, December.
    7. Kurt W. Rothschild, 2000. "Europe and the USA: Comparing What with What?," Kyklos, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 53(3), pages 249-264, August.
    8. Tausch, Arno & Heshmati, Almas & Bajalan, Chemen S. J., 2007. "On the Multivariate Analysis of the "Lisbon Process"," IZA Discussion Papers 3198, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    9. Arno Tausch, 2010. "The European Union’s failed “Lisbon strategy”," Society and Economy, Akadémiai Kiadó, Hungary, vol. 32(1), pages 103-121, June.
    10. Baglioni, Angelo & Cherubini, Umberto, 2013. "Marking-to-market government guarantees to financial systems – Theory and evidence for Europe," Journal of International Money and Finance, Elsevier, vol. 32(C), pages 990-1007.
    11. Fritz W. Scharpf, 2002. "The European Social Model," Journal of Common Market Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 40(4), pages 645-670, November.
    12. Kurt Rothschild, 2009. "Neoliberalism, EU and the Evaluation of Policies," Review of Political Economy, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 21(2), pages 213-225.
    13. Kurt Rothschild, 1999. "European integration and economic methodology and research: Questions and speculations," Atlantic Economic Journal, Springer;International Atlantic Economic Society, vol. 27(3), pages 243-253, September.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Watson, Dorothy & Maître, Bertrand, 2013. "Social Transfers and Poverty Alleviation in Ireland, 2004-2011," Research Series, Economic and Social Research Institute (ESRI), number BKMNEXT248, June.
    2. Hans Pitlik & Margit Schratzenstaller, 2022. "Kurzexpertise zu Abgabensystem und Ausgabenstrukturen im internationalen Vergleich. Ausgangssituation und Reformbedarf," WIFO Studies, WIFO, number 67988, April.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Eloi Laurent & Jacques Le Cacheux, 2006. "Integrity and Efficiency in the EU: The Case against the European economic constitution," Working Papers hal-00972707, HAL.
    2. Catherine Mathieu & Henri Sterdyniak, 2008. "European social model(s) and social Europe," Sciences Po publications 2008-10, Sciences Po.
    3. Dorte Sindbjerg Martinsen & Gabriel Pons Rotger, 2017. "The fiscal impact of EU immigration on the tax-financed welfare state: Testing the ‘welfare burden’ thesis," European Union Politics, , vol. 18(4), pages 620-639, December.
    4. Van Vliet, Olaf & Kaeding, Michael, 2007. "Globalisation, European Integration and Social Protection – Patterns of Change or Continuity?," MPRA Paper 20808, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    5. Cal Le Gall & Corentin Poyet, 2017. "The effect of supranational economic constraints on MPs issue attention: the case of France," Post-Print hal-01542581, HAL.
    6. Brian Burgoon, 2009. "Social Nation and Social Europe," European Union Politics, , vol. 10(4), pages 427-455, December.
    7. Buttler, Friedrich & Schoof, Ulrich & Walwei, Ulrich, 2006. "The European Social Model and eastern enlargement," Zeitschrift für ArbeitsmarktForschung - Journal for Labour Market Research, Institut für Arbeitsmarkt- und Berufsforschung (IAB), Nürnberg [Institute for Employment Research, Nuremberg, Germany], vol. 39(1), pages 97-122.
    8. Koen Caminada & Kees Goudswaard & Olaf Van Vliet, 2010. "Patterns of Welfare State Indicators in the EU: Is there Convergence?," Journal of Common Market Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 48(3), pages 529-556, June.
    9. Anna Horv‡th, 2007. "Committee Governance after the Enlargement of the EU: the Institutionalisation of Cooperation within the Social Protection Committee," European Political Economy Review, European Political Economy Infrastructure Consortium, vol. 6(March), pages 53-73.
    10. Paetzold, Jörg, 2012. "The Convergence of Welfare State Indicators in Europe: Evidence from Panel Data," Working Papers in Economics 2012-4, University of Salzburg.
    11. Milena Büchs, 2008. "How Legitimate is the Open Method of Co-ordination?," Journal of Common Market Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 46, pages 765-786, September.
    12. Theodoros Iosifides & George Korres, 2005. "European Integration and the Future of Social Policy Making," ERSA conference papers ersa05p11, European Regional Science Association.
    13. Rebecca Forman & Elias Mossialos, 2021. "The EU Response to COVID‐19: From Reactive Policies to Strategic Decision‐Making," Journal of Common Market Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 59(S1), pages 56-68, September.
    14. Catherine Mathieu & Henri Sterdyniak, 2008. "Le modèle social européen et l'Europe sociale," Revue de l'OFCE, Presses de Sciences-Po, vol. 0(1), pages 43-103.
    15. Alina Ligia Dumitrescu, 2015. "The Welfare And The Economic Growth: Two Faces Of The Same Coin," Global Economic Observer, "Nicolae Titulescu" University of Bucharest, Faculty of Economic Sciences;Institute for World Economy of the Romanian Academy, vol. 3(2), pages 116-123, November.
    16. Plomien, Ania & Schwartz, Gregory, 2023. "Market-reach into social reproduction and transnational labour mobility in Europe," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 119900, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    17. Cecilia Bruzelius & Constantin Reinprecht & Martin Seeleib-Kaiser, 2017. "Stratified Social Rights Limiting EU Citizenship," Journal of Common Market Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 55(6), pages 1239-1253, November.
    18. Nicole Lindstrom, 2010. "Service Liberalization in the Enlarged EU: A Race to the Bottom or the Emergence of Transnational Political Conflict?," Journal of Common Market Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 48(5), pages 1307-1327, November.
    19. Sarah Marchal & Ive Marx, 2015. "Stemming the tide. What have EU countries done to support low-wage workers in an era of downward wage pressure?," ImPRovE Working Papers 15/18, Herman Deleeck Centre for Social Policy, University of Antwerp.
    20. Gaby Umbach & Igor Tkalec, 2021. "Social Investment Policies in the EU: Actively Concrete or Passively Abstract?," Politics and Governance, Cogitatio Press, vol. 9(2), pages 403-414.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    social spending; European Commission; index numbers and aggregation; cross-sectional models; spatial models; economic integration; regional economic activity; international factor movements; international political economy;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • F15 - International Economics - - Trade - - - Economic Integration
    • C43 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Econometric and Statistical Methods: Special Topics - - - Index Numbers and Aggregation
    • F5 - International Economics - - International Relations, National Security, and International Political Economy
    • F2 - International Economics - - International Factor Movements and International Business
    • C21 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Single Equation Models; Single Variables - - - Cross-Sectional Models; Spatial Models; Treatment Effect Models
    • R11 - Urban, Rural, Regional, Real Estate, and Transportation Economics - - General Regional Economics - - - Regional Economic Activity: Growth, Development, Environmental Issues, and Changes

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:pra:mprapa:33516. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Joachim Winter (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/vfmunde.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.