Abstract
Through a trajectory of theories, methods and situations, the book under review provides a treasure of information linking the history of two time periods: 1945–1980 and 1980–2005 to the present and looking forward to future possibilities of welfare policy reforms in 22 developing and former communist countries of Latin America, East Asia and Eastern Europe, nay in the globalized world of the neoliberal era. Such a nine chaptered piece requires extensive treatment on theoretical, methodological and thematic lines, but for limitations of space I will have to be brief in this review.
At a theoretical level, this historical comparative analysis of the development in three regions is drawn from Anderson’s model of ‘The Three Worlds of Welfare Capitalism’, though written in the context of the developing world and the theory of the ‘Social Contract’. As against the conventional theoretical explanation, the authors argue that democratic systems do not always promote better redistribution and inclusiveness or social policy-making due to mediation by economic constraints, fiscal circumstances and pressures of politicization. Their own theory is that the welfare reforms are ‘path dependent’.
The authors have used a well-triangulated methodology with a huge number of cross-national quantitative data and qualitative analysis of case data and processes of historical evolution of welfare state in the said three regions. The comparisons are made between and within the regions as well. The rationale for the study is well justified through an excellent synthesis of literature covering 48 pages of updated references in the book.
Substantively, amidst apparent convergences, the authors contend that the three regions of their study represent comparable divergent models of social welfare, policy reform and development strategies. Export-oriented East Asian governments and firms were reluctant to increase labour costs by promoting social insurance schemes though interested in investment in public education. East European authoritarian regimes expanded occupational insurance unexpected in non-democracies. In the Latin American system urban middle-class and blue-collar workers were more protected than the rural peasants or informal sector workers.
Well within the robust character of a comparative framework, certain inadequacies are felt about the authors’ explanations of complementarities between welfare state formation and development strategies, intra-regional comparisons and the situations prevalent during the early decades of 20th century. On the whole this is a highly important contribution to the literature. The book is not only a needed resource for readers on the political economy of development but also has set the best agenda for further research on the theme.