327.4
Incorporating the Social Investment Element into East-Asian Productivist Welfare System: Path Dependence or Path Breaking?

Monday, July 14, 2014: 11:15 AM
Room: F203
Oral Presentation
Peter Jen-Der JEN-DER LUE , National Chung-Cheng University, Taiwan
The critical difference between East Asian productivist welfare state and European social investment welfare state is the logic of social policy formation. East Asian productivist welfare state was designed according to the principle of ‘economic developmentalism’ to achieve economic catch-up. However, European social investment welfare state is emerging as a new policy paradigm to adapt new knowledge-based economy and deal with new social risks. 

Recommodification and decommodification are both prominent in the social investment welfare state. However, the logic of economic developmentalism in East Asia (and probably, in Southeast Asia) led East Asian governments to push labours into labour market (the process of commodification) by devoting most of resources to human capital formation policies, such as universal education system. Family policy is very prominent in European social investment welfare state, but not in East Asian productivist welfare state. Third, one of the critical features of the social investment welfare state is the focus being placed more on the life course and on the future than on equality of outcomes in the present . Last but not least, the concept of citizenship in East Asian productivist welfare state and European social investment welfare state is different.

 Given the differences of the East Asian productivist welfare regime with the social investment strategy in Europe, some ‘active’ components and mode of welfare delivery have changed recently in East-Asian countries, particularly Japan, Korea and Taiwan. This article aims to highlight the contend of discourse and rationale for this change. The political position of different actors (political parties, unions and employer organizations) toward this change will be examined. Moreover, a new social/political cleavage and possible building of effective coalition for pushing this social investment in East Asian context will be examined.