Choosing the Path of Austerity: How Policy Coalitions Shape Welfare-policy Choices in Periods of Fiscal Consolidation

In general, fiscal adjustments are associated with significant reductions in social spending. Hence, the welfare state is not spared from austerity. Because the welfare state is still central to party competition, this is electorally risky. The paper addresses the following questions: Do left parties differ from their centrist and rightist competitors in the design of austerity measures? And does government type has an impact on the extent to which austerity policies rely on social spending cuts? By comparing 17 OECD countries between 1982 and 2009 we show that if governments embark on a path to austerity, their ideology does not have a significant effect on the magnitude of welfare state retrenchment. However, if major opposition parties and interest groups rally against social spending cuts, a broad pro-reform coalition is a crucial precondition for large fiscal consolidation programs to rely on substantial cuts to social security.

Integrating Islamic Positions into European Public Discourse: The Paradigmatic Example of Tariq Ramadan

As the continuing relevance of religion to secular European societies garners increasing recognition, the question remains of which religious positions may assume a public role, with Islam at the center of many debates. This article complements the ongoing theoretical debate with a detailed case study analyzing the major works of Islamic scholar and public intellectual Tariq Ramadan. I show that in the last two decades Ramadan significantly modified his views on Islam and European societies. I argue that these adjustments were interdependent, and as such paradigmatically illustrate that the integration of Islamic positions into public discourse depends on shifts in the understanding of both concepts.

Cleverer than we thought: the change in discourse of the Georgian Orthodox Church

This paper will focus on three episodes of contemporary church-state relations in Georgia, in particular, the conflicting interaction between law and religion in the public space. The first episode will be an open confrontation between the church and the state over the law on Registration of Religious Minority organizations (2011) which allowed the religious minorities to freely register; second: the Law on Self-governance (2013) which Georgian Orthodox Church considered “a threat to territorial integrity of Georgia”; and lastly: the Law on Anti-discrimination (2014) which was deemed “legitimization of Sodomic sin”. By reflecting on the three examples where for the first time after the collapse of Soviet Union, the Georgian state openly confronted the church and made a decision notwithstanding its position, I will attempt to argue that the role of the Orthodox Church in influencing the law making process is in gradual decline. However, on the other hand, by presenting the results of an ethnographic study conducted in 23 eparchies and perishes in 7 regions of Georgia in 2014, I will also show that church has adapted to its declining role over policy making, and to regain its political influence it gradually started to employ a civic rather than ethno nationalist discourse on matters of religious freedom while engaging with government. The paper will suggest that both unilateral decision-making of the state and civic shift in the discourse of the church constitute an important change in understanding church-state dynamics in the post-communist Orthodox Christianity dominated society.

The impact of welfare benefits on natives' and immigrants' attitudes towards immigration

We investigate whether the dependence of immigrants on welfare benefits leads to opposition to further immigration by natives and immigrants in a pooled cross-section of 21 European countries for the 2004-2010 period. Explicitly controlling for the dependence of immigrants and natives on benefits we find that higher benefit take-up rates among immigrants than among natives lead to less favourable attitudes of natives towards immigration. Interestingly, we do not find similar stylised facts for immigrants' attitudes towards immigration.

The impact of welfare benefits on natives' and immigrants' attitudes towards immigration

We investigate whether the dependence of immigrants on welfare benefits leads to opposition to further immigration by natives and immigrants in a pooled cross-section of 21 European countries for the 2004-2010 period. Explicitly controlling for the dependence of immigrants and natives on benefits we find that higher benefit take-up rates among immigrants than among natives lead to less favourable attitudes of natives towards immigration. Interestingly, we do not find similar stylised facts for immigrants' attitudes towards immigration.