Global welfare regimes: a cluster analysis

Miriam Abu Sharkh, Ian Gough

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

  • 34 Citations

Abstract

This article tests the claim that a small number of distinct ‘welfare regimes’, combining institutional patterns and social welfare outcomes, can be identified across the developing world. It develops a methodology for clustering a large number of developing countries, identifying and ranking their welfare regimes, assessing their stability over the decade 1990—2000, and relating these to important structural variables. It confirms the distinction between three meta-welfare regimes: proto-welfare state regimes, informal security regimes and insecurity regimes. However, it discriminates between relatively successful and failing informal security regimes. Regime membership is ‘sticky’ over time, but has been modified by two global trends: the HIV-AIDS pandemic in Africa and the growing role of remittances in some countries.
LanguageEnglish
Pages27-58
Number of pages32
JournalGlobal Social Policy
Volume10
Issue number1
DOIs
StatusPublished - 2010

Fingerprint

cluster analysis
welfare
developing world
remittance
acquired immune deficiency syndrome
human immunodeficiency virus
regime
ranking
social welfare
welfare state
methodology
AIDS
developing country
trend
test
Africa

Cite this

Global welfare regimes : a cluster analysis. / Abu Sharkh, Miriam; Gough, Ian.

In: Global Social Policy, Vol. 10, No. 1, 2010, p. 27-58.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Abu Sharkh, Miriam ; Gough, Ian. / Global welfare regimes : a cluster analysis. In: Global Social Policy. 2010 ; Vol. 10, No. 1. pp. 27-58.
@article{5399fec904d449fa9cc89698221a0d33,
title = "Global welfare regimes: a cluster analysis",
abstract = "This article tests the claim that a small number of distinct ‘welfare regimes’, combining institutional patterns and social welfare outcomes, can be identified across the developing world. It develops a methodology for clustering a large number of developing countries, identifying and ranking their welfare regimes, assessing their stability over the decade 1990—2000, and relating these to important structural variables. It confirms the distinction between three meta-welfare regimes: proto-welfare state regimes, informal security regimes and insecurity regimes. However, it discriminates between relatively successful and failing informal security regimes. Regime membership is ‘sticky’ over time, but has been modified by two global trends: the HIV-AIDS pandemic in Africa and the growing role of remittances in some countries.",
author = "{Abu Sharkh}, Miriam and Ian Gough",
year = "2010",
doi = "10.1177/1468018109355035",
language = "English",
volume = "10",
pages = "27--58",
journal = "Global Social Policy",
issn = "1468-0181",
publisher = "Sage Publications",
number = "1",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Global welfare regimes

T2 - Global Social Policy

AU - Abu Sharkh, Miriam

AU - Gough, Ian

PY - 2010

Y1 - 2010

N2 - This article tests the claim that a small number of distinct ‘welfare regimes’, combining institutional patterns and social welfare outcomes, can be identified across the developing world. It develops a methodology for clustering a large number of developing countries, identifying and ranking their welfare regimes, assessing their stability over the decade 1990—2000, and relating these to important structural variables. It confirms the distinction between three meta-welfare regimes: proto-welfare state regimes, informal security regimes and insecurity regimes. However, it discriminates between relatively successful and failing informal security regimes. Regime membership is ‘sticky’ over time, but has been modified by two global trends: the HIV-AIDS pandemic in Africa and the growing role of remittances in some countries.

AB - This article tests the claim that a small number of distinct ‘welfare regimes’, combining institutional patterns and social welfare outcomes, can be identified across the developing world. It develops a methodology for clustering a large number of developing countries, identifying and ranking their welfare regimes, assessing their stability over the decade 1990—2000, and relating these to important structural variables. It confirms the distinction between three meta-welfare regimes: proto-welfare state regimes, informal security regimes and insecurity regimes. However, it discriminates between relatively successful and failing informal security regimes. Regime membership is ‘sticky’ over time, but has been modified by two global trends: the HIV-AIDS pandemic in Africa and the growing role of remittances in some countries.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=77949589274&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1468018109355035

U2 - 10.1177/1468018109355035

DO - 10.1177/1468018109355035

M3 - Article

VL - 10

SP - 27

EP - 58

JO - Global Social Policy

JF - Global Social Policy

SN - 1468-0181

IS - 1

ER -