The reform of Welfare Regimes in Costa Rica, Chile, Argentina, Brazil and Uruguay

The aim of this article is to analyze the social policy in Latin America in a context of emerging welfare states. To understand the changes one takes into consideration the theories about institutional reform and the transformations produced in the XX century and the beginning of the XXI to substitute a social security regime mainly based on segmentation of benefi ts and on programs to fi ght poverty by another with an institutional and redistributive nature. The paper pays attention in particular to the path of the most developed welfare states of Latin America: Costa Rica, Chile, Argentina, Brasil y Uruguay.

Pension structural reforms, re-reforms and their effects on social welfare: The case of Chile

This article fi rst summarizes the structural reforms of pensions (total or partial privatization) in Latin America and Central and Eastern Europe, identifying their advantages and disadvantages, and does the same with the international process of re-reforms of pensions with a greater role of the state. Second, chooses Chile as a case study, as a world pioneer in both types of reforms; describes their characteristics and effects on social welfare of the structural reform of 1981 and the re-reform of 2008. Such effects are evaluated based on ten basic principles of social security from the International Labour Offi ce (ILO): 1) social dialogue to approve the reforms, 2) universal coverage of the population, 3) equal treatment of insured persons, 4) social solidarity, 5) gender equity, 6) suffi ciency of benefi ts, 7) effi ciency and reasonable administrative cost, 8) social participation in the management of the system, 9) role of the state and supervision, and 10) fi nancial sustainability. Third, it summarizes the advantages and disadvantages-challenges of the re-reform and informs on the current debate for further reforms.

Welfare Regimes and “progressive” governments in Latin America: The cases of Venezuela, Ecuador and Bolivia

Several authors have applied the concept of Welfare Regimens for studying social policy in Latin America (Esping-Andersen, 1993 and 2000). Among others, Martínez Franzoni (2007) develops a typology, with fi eld work is at the turn of the millennium, and establishes three categories: State-productivist regime, state-protectionist and family orientated. Most countries in the region are placed in the latter category. The hypothesis of this article argues that with the emergence of governments considered “left” or “progressive” in several countries of the region from the late ‘90s and, more decisively, in 2000’, the map of welfare regimes models could have mutated substantively. The nationally transformative experiences are different (various socio-economic realities and political action in which they are located exists) but they have several contact points that can be summarized in a greater state intervention in different areas previously closed to their operating and recovery of important functions of welfare and care of the population by the government. The paper discusses with an exploratory and descriptive approach the welfare schemes that would shape in three countries that have constitutionalized the change from the neoliberal paradigm: Venezuela, Bolivia and Ecuador.

Welfare Effort and Poverty from the Monetary and Capabilities Approach: A Cross-Country Analysis in Latin American and the Caribbean (1990-2010)

There is abundant empirical evidence on the negative relationship between welfare effort and poverty. However, poverty indicators traditionally used have been representative of the monetary approach, excluding its multidimensional reality from the analysis. Using three regression techniques for the period 1990-2010 and controlling for demographic and cyclical factors, this paper examines the relationship between social spending per capita —as the indicator of welfare effort— and poverty in up to 21 countries of the region. The proportion of the population with an income below its national basic basket of goods and services (PM1) and the proportion of population with an income below 50% of the median income per capita (PM2) were the two poverty indicators considered from the monetarist approach to measure poverty. From the capability approach the proportion of the population with food inadequacy (PC1) and the proportion of the population without access to improved water sources or sanitation facilities (PC2) were used. The fi ndings confi rm that social spending is actually useful to explain changes in poverty (PM1, PC1 and PC2), as there is a high negative and signifi cant correlation between the variables before and after controlling for demographic and cyclical factors. In two regression techniques, social spending per capita did not show a negative relationship with the PM2. Countries with greater welfare effort for the period 1990-2010 were not necessarily those with the lowest level of poverty. Ultimately social spending per capita was more useful to explain changes in poverty from the capability approach.