Conflito social e welfare state: Estado e desenvolvimento social no Brasil

Este artigo argumenta que no Brasil a luta de classes não alcançou dimensões profundas que pudesse engendrar a constituição do welfare state. Ao contrário, o Estado, sobretudo sua forma mais moderna, capitalista, que emergiu a partir da década de 1930, sempre se antecipou aos movimentos sociais que representassem ameaças de rupturas. De forma repressiva, o Estado brasileiro desde o Império dissipou os conflitos com o objetivo de manter uma certa harmonia em favor do processo de expansão e reprodução capitalista e a integração dos espaços regionais. O artigo, portanto, é uma tentativa, prematura, de entender o processo de constituição dos sistemas de seguridade social, analisando as experiências de alguns países e suas respectivas características, com isso confrontando alguns estudos e realizando comparações com a dinâmica da luta de classes no Brasil e a função do Estado nesse processo.

Reinventar o Welfare State ou construir o pós-managerialismo?

Comunicação apresentada no 7.º Congresso Nacional de Administração Pública "Estado e Administração na resposta à crise", no Centro de Congressos de Lisboa, de

Do welfare state ao conceiro de governance: que futuro para as administrações públicas no início do século XXI?

Comunicação apresentada no 2º Congresso Nacional de Administração Pública "Projectos de mudança", em Lisboa, de 3 a 4 de Novembro de 2004.

Federalism and Welfare to Work in Switzerland: The Development of Active Social Policies in a Fragmented Welfare State

This article is concerned with the impact that federal structures have on the development of welfare to work or activation policies. More precisely, it argues that the incentives and the risks associated with a division of responsibilities among different jurisdictions may constitute an obstacle to broad reforms that promote labor market participation of nonworking benefit recipients. This argument is illustrated with a case study discussing policy responses to a massive rise in caseloads among social assistance recipients in Switzerland. We conclude that the lack of a fundamental reform was the consequence of the incentives provided by the federal structure of the program. These incentives have both encouraged cost shifting among jurisdictions and discouraged involvement of federal level policy makers in a bigger reform.

Children in the welfare state. A social investment approach

Children occupy centre-stage in any new welfare equilibrium. Failure to support families may produce either of two undesirable scenarios. We shall see a society without children if motherhood remains incompatible with work. A new family policy needs to recognize that children are a collective asset and that the cost of having children is rising. The double challenge is to eliminate the constraints on having children in the first place, and to ensure that the children we have are ensured optimal opportunities. The simple reason why a new social contract is called for is that fertility and child quality combine both private utility and societal gains. And like no other epoch in the past, the societal gains are mounting all-the-while that families’ ability to produce these social gains is weakening.In the following 1 analyze the twin challenges of fertility and child development. I then examine which kind of policy mix will ensure both the socially desired level of fertility and investment in our children? The task is to identify a Paretian optimum that will maximize efficiency gains and social equity simultaneously.

The macroeconomic effects of German unification: Real adjustments and the welfare state

We study the effects of German unification in a model with capital accumulation, skill differences and a welfare state. We argue that this event is similar to a mass migration of low-skilled agents holding no capital into a foreign country. Absent a welfare state, we observe an investment boom, depressed output and employment conditions. Capital owners and high-skilled agents are willing to give up to 4% of per-capita consumption to favor unification. When a welfare state exists the investment boom disappears and the recession is prolonged. Now, with unification, capital owners and high-skilled agents lose 4% of per-capita consumption.