Social Investment Policies in Canada, Australia, Japan, and South Korea
Tóm tắt
This paper compares the social investment policy reforms that have been introduced by the two Anglo-Saxon liberal welfare regimes of Canada and Australia and the two East Asian welfare regimes of Japan and South Korea since the 1990s. The paper examines the causes of these social policy changes, and asks why these seemingly different contexts produce such similar policy idea. While all four countries share similar broad ideational template and language of social investment, they differ in terms of their target groups and policy instruments. Whereas Canada and Australia have focused their social investment policies on children through ECEC (what I call an “invest in the future” model); Japan and South Korea have approached social investment from a more general human capital and economic activation perspective (what I call a “human capital activation” model). As a result, social investment policies in these countries have targeted more broadly on children, women, and the elderly. I argue that these differences in social investment approaches stem from the differences in their social, political and economic contexts, and the political economic legacies.
Tài liệu tham khảo
Abe, A. (2010). The changing shape of the care diamond: The case of child and elderly care in Japan. Retrieved April 4, 2011, from UNRISD: http://www.unrisd.org/
Borland, J. (1999). Earnings inequality in Australia: Changes, causes, and consequences. The Economic Record, 75 (229) 177–202.
Brennan, D. (2002). Australia: Child care and state-centered feminism in a liberal welfare regime. In S. Michel & R. Mahon (Eds.), Child care policy at the crossroads: Gender and welfare state restructuring (pp. 95–112). New York, NY: Routledge.
Brennan, D. (2007). The ABC of child care politics. Australian Journal of Social Issues, 42 (2) 213–225.
Department of Education, Employment and Workplace Relations [DEEWR]. Australia. (2010, April). State of childcare in Australia. Canberra: Commonwealth of Australia.
Giddens, A. (1998). The third way: The renewal of social democracy. Cambridge: Polity Press.
Haas, E. (1992). Introduction: Epistemic communities and international policy co-ordination. International Organization, 46 (1) 1–35.
Heisz, A., Jackson, A., & Picot, G. (2004). Winners and losers in the labour market of the dy1990s (Statistics Canada Report No. 184). Ottawa: Statistics Canada.
Holliday, I. (2000). Productivist welfare capitalism: Social policy in East Asia. Political Studies, 48, 706–723.
Hulme, R. (2006). The role of policy transfer in assessing the impact of American ideas on British social policy. Global Social Policy, 6 (2) 173–195.
Jenson, J. (2010). Diffusing ideas for after Neoliberalism: The social investment perspective in Europe and Latin America. Global Social Policy, 10 (1) 59–84.
Jenson, J., & Saint-Martin, D. (2003). New routes to scial cohesion? Citizenship and the social investment state. The Canadian Journal of Sociology, 28 (1) 77–99.
Korea Institute of Child Care and Education [KICCE]. 2009. Annual numbers of childcare centres (1990-2008). Retrieved May 25, 2011, from KICCE: http://www.kicce.re.kr/eng/bbs/bbs_V.jsp?menu_id=030101&DB=archives02&no_=275&sch_type=&keyword=&page_num=1#
Korea Institute of Child Care and Education [KICCE]. 2008. Annual numbers of children enrolled in childcare centres (1990–2007). Retrieved May 25, 2011, from KICCE: http://www.kicce.re.kr/eng/bbs/bbs_V.jsp?menu_id=030101&DB=archives02&no_=167&sch_type=&keyword=&page_num=3#
Korea Office of the President. (2000). DJ Welfarism: A new paradigm for productive welfare in Korea. Seoul: Tae Sul Dang.
Lefebvre, P. (2004, March). Quebec’s innovative early childhood education and care policy and its weaknesses. Policy Options/Options Politique, 52–57.
Mahon, R., & McBride, S. (2008). Introduction. In R. Mahon & S. McBride (Eds.), The OECD and transnational governance (pp.3-22). Vancouver, Canada: UBC Press.
Midgley, J. (1995). Social development: The developmental perspective in social welfare. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
Midgley, J. (1999). Growth, redistribution and welfare: Toward social investment. Social Service Review, 73 (1) 3–21.
Midgley, J., & Tang, K-L. (2001). Introduction: Social policy, economic growth and developmental welfare. International Journal of Social Welfare, 10 (4) 244–252.
Ministry of Gender Equality and Family[MOGEF]-Korea. (2007). 보육사업안내 [Childcare Project: Guidelines]. Seoul, Korea: Author.
Ministry of Health, Labor and Welfare[MOHLW]-Japan. (1997). White paper on health and welfare — 1997. Tokyo, Japan: Gyosei.
Ministry of Health, Welfare and Family Affairs [MOHWFA]-Korea. (2009). Necessity of the long term care insurance(LTCl). Retrived April 27, 2011, from http://english.mw.go.kr/front_eng/jc/sjc0105mn.jsp?PAR_MENU_ID=1003&MENU_ID=10030502
Morisset, R., John M., & Picot, G. (1994). Earnings inequality and the distribution of working time in Canada. Canadian Business Economics, 2 (3) 3–16.
Na, J., & Moon, M. (2003). Integrating policies and systems for early childhood education and care: The case of the Republic of Korea, Early Childhood and Family Policy Series No. 7. Paris, France: UNESCO.
National Institute for Population and Social Security Research[NIPSSR]-Japan. (2008). The cost of social security in Japan FY2008. Retrieved February 14, 2011, from http://www.ipss.go.jp/ss-cost/e/cost08/cost08.asp
OECD. (2011). OECD Family Database. Retrieved May 10, 2011, from http://www.oecd.org/document/4/0,3746,en_2649_34819_37836996_1_1_1_1,00.html
Peng, I. (2002). Social care in crisis: Gender, demography and welfare state restructuring in Japan. Social Politics, 9 (3) 411–443.
Peng, I. (2010). The expansion of social care and reforms: Implications for care workers in Republic of Korea. International Labour Review, 249 (4) 461–476.
Peng, I. (in press, a). The good, the bad, and the confused: Social and political economy of care in South Korea. Manuscript submitted for publication.
Peng, I. (in press, b). Social and political economy of care: South Korea. In R. Mahon & F. Robinson (Eds.), The global political economy of care: Integrating ethics and social politics. Vancouver, Canada: UBC Press.
Peng, I., & Wong, J. (2008). Institutions and institutional purpose: Continuity and change in East Asian social policy. Politics and Society, 36 (1) 61–88.
Perkins, D., Nelms, L., & Smyth, P. (2004). Beyond neoliberalism: The social investment state? (Social Policy Working Paper No. 3). Melbourne, Australia: Brotherhood of St-Laurence and the Centre for Public Policy.
Press, F., & Hayes, A. (2000). OECD Thematic Review of Early Childhood Education and Care Policy: Australian Background Report. Sydney, Australia: Institute of Early Childhood.
Rainwater, L., & Smeeding, T. M. (2003). Doing poorly: U.S. child poverty in cross-national context. Children, Youth and Environments, 23 (2) 48–76.
Sabatier, P., & Jenkins-Smith, H. (Eds.). (1993). Policy change and learning: An advocacy coalition approach. Boulder, CO: Westview Press.
Wong, Y.-L. I., Garfinkel, I., & McLanahan, S. (1993). Single-mother families in eight countries: Economic status and social policy. Social Service Review, 67 (2) 177–197.
World Bank. (1993). The East Asian miracle: Economic growth and public policy. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.