PDF Hosted at the Radboud Repository of the Radboud University Nijmegen
Total Page：16
File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb
PDF hosted at the Radboud Repository of the Radboud University Nijmegen The following full text is a publisher's version. For additional information about this publication click this link. http://hdl.handle.net/2066/30233 Please be advised that this information was generated on 2021-10-03 and may be subject to change. Innovative Agents versus Immovable Objects © Sabina Stiller, 2007 Cover design and printing: Ponsen & Looijen BV, Wageningen ISBN 978-90-90220-94-9 The image on the cover page was made available with friendly permission of the photographer: © Seth White, 2002 (source: http://www.sethwhite.org ) All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted, in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording or otherwise, without the prior written permission from the author. Innovative Agents versus Immovable Objects The Role of Ideational Leadership in German Welfare State Reforms een wetenschappelijke proeve op het gebied van de Managementwetenschappen Proefschrift ter verkrijging van de graad van doctor aan de Radboud Universiteit Nijmegen op gezag van de rector magnificus prof. mr. S.C.J.J. Kortmann volgens besluit van het College van Decanen in het openbaar te verdedigen op donderdag 4 oktober 2007 om 15.30 uur precies door Sabina Johanna Stiller geboren op 2 juni 1972 te Buchloe, Duitsland Promotores: prof. dr. R.H. Lieshout prof. dr. M.S. de Vries prof. dr. C.J. van Kersbergen (Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam) Leden van de manuscriptcommissie: dr. K.M. Anderson prof. dr. A. Hemerijck (Erasmus Universiteit Rotterdam) prof. dr. M.H. Leyenaar (voorzitter) prof. dr. H. Obinger (Universität Bremen) prof. dr. V.A. Schmidt (University of Boston) In memory of my grandparents “Not ideas, but material and ideal interests directly govern men’s conduct. Yet very frequently the ‘world images’ that have been created by ‘ideas’ have, like switchmen, determined the track along which action has been pushed by the dynamic of interest.” Max Weber, The social psychology of world religions, From Max Weber: Essays in Sociology , 1958 [1915], 280) Preface I am convinced that every PhD thesis is preceded by a long, eventful journey and this one has not been an exception. Now that it is completed I can tell that it was challenging and exciting at times but also, ultimately, very rewarding. When I moved into my new office at the Centrum voor Duitsland-Studies on the top floor of cosy Huize Heyendael (“het Kasteeltje”) in January 2002, I frankly did not know what awaited me. Starting out with a vague idea of the controversy about the “German Model”, I ultimately delved into the intricacies of welfare state change. As an “exiled” German, I enjoyed the opportunity to study the changes I had noticed in the social policy sphere of my country from the certain distance of a neighbouring country. Early on, I got intrigued by the ideational literature but, importantly, also found it wanting. This led me to look more closely at the role of key politicians and their contribution to the adoption of particular reforms, a line of thought that came to be central in the thesis. Five years on and with the benefit of hindsight, I would still do it over (while, inevitably, doing some things in different ways...). During all this time, I could count on the support of a large number of people and I would like to take the opportunity to express my thanks to at least some of them. To begin with, my triad of supervisors and, at the same time, promotores. Bob, thank you for your ongoing confidence, support, and meticulous comments on my draft chapters (not to forget for housing me in Anna’s former office which has once more proven to be a superb place to finish a dissertation). Michiel, I owe you thanks for your critical, to-the-point and pragmatic feedback over the years and many animated discussions about the nature of (ideational) leadership. Kees, I am grateful to you for making me enthusiastic about welfare state research in the first place, for inspiring discussions about the imperfections of any research and continuous encouragement along the way. I would also like to thank the members of the manuscript commission for agreeing to review the dissertation and for their timely and positive comments. As a PhD researcher you do not get far without a supportive working environment and again I can consider myself fortunate in this respect: In the first two years I enjoyed the good working atmosphere with my former colleagues (including the German visiting scholars such as Eric, Martin and Birte) at the Centrum voor Duitsland-Studies. After moving on to the Faculty of Management Sciences, I got used quickly to my current colleagues at the Department of Political Science, which is a great place to work. Without naming you all one by one, let me thank you for unequaled collegiality at all times, intellectual stimulation, and helpful comments and suggestions on draft chapters, especially from the participants in the Working Groups on International Relations and Comparative Politics. And let me not forget to mention many shared indoor and outdoor lunches and refreshing afternoon coffee walks to the DE café. As it would have been difficult to shed light on German welfare state reforms while being in Nijmegen all the time, I travelled to Germany repeatedly: mostly for interviews but also for a two- month stay as visiting researcher at the Zentrum für Sozialpolitik (ZeS) of the University of Bremen. My thanks goes to all who took the time to share with me their memories and inside knowledge about policy areas, reform efforts and key politicians in their offices in Berlin, Hannover, Bochum, Frankfurt, Düsseldorf, Bonn, Bremen, Leipzig and Nürnberg. This is not to forget supporting staff, especially Susan Grzybek en Nicole Schreiter, for their invaluable help in arranging appointments. I am also grateful to those who agreed to participate in the survey for the health care case. At the ZeS, I would like to thank Gisela Hegemann-Mahltig for enabling my stay, and the staff (Eric Seils, Herbert Obinger, Petra Buhr and others) for making me feel welcome at the Barkhof and giving me the opportunity to discuss social policy developments and scholarship in Germany. I am also grateful to a rather diverse group of people who helped me finish this dissertation in one way or another. To Mona and César as well as Amit and his family for their hospitality during my interview trips to Berlin, and to my friends back home in Bavaria and elsewhere for their support over the years “at a distance”. To my fellow PhD colleagues and friends in the Netherlands: Minna, for sharing good and bad times since we met in Fribourg; Gerry, Barbara, and Annelies, for good companionship, collaboration and keeping in touch during our projects; Nishavda, Laura and Geertje for your unfailing ability to listen and support at crucial moments. Simon, thank you for working speedily through this whole manuscript, and Marjet, for helping me to prepare the final draft chapters during your stage in Nijmegen. Next to immersing myself in the details of reform proposals and processes, I also had the opportunity to get involved in other projects, the most enjoyable of which was participating in an enthousiastic group of PhD researchers in the NIG European Research Colloquium, organized by Markus Haverland and Ron Holzhacker: I really enjoyed these meetings and learned a lot from them. I also appreciate the opportunity to spend a few summers working on my methodology skills. Attending Essex and Oslo Summer School courses taught by Charles Ragin, Christoffer Green-Pedersen, Max Bergman, Sean Carey and others, was an enriching experience and helped me to make headway on my dissertation. Finally, I am immensely thankful to my parents for always being there for me and supporting whatever I chose to do in life. This latest undertaking called Doktorarbeit might have seemed virtually endless and abstract to you, but I can assure you it is now really done and has resulted in a tangible product (!) in the form of a book. Martin, my loving companion, I owe you thanks for everything: for neverending patience, for being a source of realistic optimism and for being there for me from the beginning to the end of this journey. Table of Contents List of Abbreviations xii 1. THE PUZZLE OF INSTITUTIONAL STABILITY VERSUS SIGNIFICANT WELFARE STATE REFORMS 1 1.1 Introduction 1 1.2 Historical Institutionalism and Welfare Regime Theory 3 1.3 Structural Welfare State Reforms Do Happen: Definition and Examples 7 1.4 Why Study German Reforms in Particular? 13 1.5 Existing Explanations and Major Reforms in Germany 18 1.6 A Promising Solution to the Puzzle: Political Actors and Ideas 22 1.7 Conclusion 26 2. IDEATIONAL LEADERSHIP: DEFINITION AND ORIGINS OF A CONCEPT BASED ON LEADERSHIP AND THE ROLE OF IDEAS IN POLICY-MAKING 29 2.1 Introduction 29 2.2 The Problems of Two Literatures Trying to Explain Policy Change 30 2.3 A Bird’s Eye View of Leadership: Theories and Concepts 34 2.4 Making Sense of Ideas: A Short Survey of the Ideational Literature 41 2.5 Unwrapping IL: Consequences, Aspects and Limitations 49 2.6 Conclusion 57 3. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODOLOGY 59 3.1 Introduction 59 3.2 Goals and Research Questions 59 ix 3.3 Research Design and Strategy 60 3.4 Operationalizing Ideational Leadership and Structural Reform 69 3.5 Data Sources and Methods of Analysis 76 3.6 Conclusion 80 4. SURVEYING THE GERMAN WELFARE STATE: CHALLENGES, POLICY DEVELOPMENTS AND CAUSES OF RESILIENCE 81 4.1 Introduction 81 4.2 The Continental Welfare State and its German Prototype 82 4.3 Reacting to Pressures? Policy Developments since the Mid-1970’s 88 4.4 Sources of Resilience: Political Institutions and Programme Characteristics 97 4.5 Conclusion 104 5.