Whose Idea? Family Policy in Germany and Norway and the Role of International Organizations
Total Page：16
File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb
View metadata, citation and similar papers at core.ac.uk brought to you by CORE provided by NORA - Norwegian Open Research Archives Whose idea? Family policy in Germany and Norway and the role of international organizations Tord Skogedal Lindén Dissertation for the degree philosophiae doctor (PhD) at the University of Bergen 2.1.2009 2 Acknowledgements Since October 2005 I have had the good fortune of being part of the project “Policy Discourses, International Actors and National Welfare Policy”, funded by the Norwegian Research Council and led by Nanna Kildal. Stein Kuhnle, Rune Ervik, Even Nilssen, and Aksel Hatland have also worked on the project. This project group has been outstanding in supporting me. Stein and Nanna have been my formal supervisors, but Even, Rune and Aksel have been so helpful that I have felt that I have had no less than five supervisors. The doctoral seminars organized by the Department of Comparative Politics and the Rokkan Centre, and the seminars given by their research groups on Welfare and Democracy and Democracy, Politics and Welfare, have also been important. I have gained a lot from the PhD-courses, seminars and conferences I have taken part in. Participation in these activities was possible due to generous funding from the University of Bergen’s Meltzerfond and E.ON-Ruhrgas. The former scholarship gave me the possibility to collect data in Germany and Norway, with research stays both at the Hertie School of Governance in Berlin and NOVA in Oslo. The scholarship from E.ON-Ruhrgas enabled me to visit the Sociology Department in Göttingen, Germany, for two months in 2006. The research stays, prepared with the help of Stein Kuhnle, Aksel Hatland and Ilona Ostner, were important for the development of my dissertation. During these stays many persons have given valuable comments on my project. Henning Finseraas and Anne Skevik Grødem in Oslo deserve to be mentioned in particular. The same goes for Christof Schiller in Berlin and Sigrid Leitner, Tim Spier, Felix Roth, Uschi Brand and Torsten Niechoj in Göttingen. In Bergen, the Rokkan Centre and its staff have provided a great working environment and funding for parts of my work. Colleagues here and at the department of Comparative politics, especially Nina Berven and Kristin Strømsnes, have been of much help. Oliver Klose, a master student in sociology, has been an interesting discussant on Germany and its social security system. He has also been of invaluable help in transcribing and translating German texts. Remi Maier-Rigaud, whose friendship I gained during my visit to Cologne and his to Bergen, has contributed a lot as well. I would also like to thank my interviewees and other persons who have agreed to spend time discussing my project. Writing a dissertation cannot always be done within “normal office hours”. Without the support of Guri and our daughter, Lisa, I could not have finished this project. 3 Abstract A growing dissatisfaction with established explanatory frameworks of welfare state developments such as functional explanations (internal and external problem pressure), institutionalist accounts (path dependency) and political factors (parties) has made scholars apply ideational perspectives to understand recent reforms. Although family policy reforms have been investigated through idea-based explanations, scholars have neglected the role of international organizations in the ´idea game` of collecting and disseminating family policy advice. This thesis seeks to fill this void throughout its three main parts which are: a theoretical investigation of ideational factors in policy-making as well as how this can be studied; an empirical investigation of the family policy ideas of the two international organizations EU and OECD; and an empirical investigation of the influence of these ideas on German and Norwegian family policy reforms. The thesis, whose disciplinary home is the comparative welfare state literature, thus contributes to the literature on the role of ideas, social policy in international organizations and national family policy reforms. Each part does this by informing theoretical, methodological and/or empirical parts of this body of literature: How, why, when and with what impact do family policy ideas cross borders? First, the thesis argues that ideational frameworks provide valuable insights into policy-making on welfare. It contributes by documenting how policy failure and international comparisons and rankings are conducive to the impact of policy ideas. Moreover, a particular set of ideas, referred to as malleable ideas or family policy as a productive factor, meaning ideas that are capable of solving many problems at the same time, is shown to be particularly influential. Another finding with theoretical implications is that while ideational literature has identified conditions favourable for ideas to gain ground (i.e. become imported), the reasons why actors try to export ideas have hardly been investigated. Wishes to “shine” in international comparisons combined with a hope of gaining general influence are two such reasons the thesis identifies through the analysis of German and Norwegian family policy reforms. Second, the thesis presents family policy ideas of the EU and OECD. It shows that these add up to a rather comprehensive set of policy recommendations with the potential of influencing national reforms. The recommendations are employment-imprinted, but more than neo-liberal advice as they for instance ask for strong public funding for childcare. Another finding that is just as important in the discussion of international family policy, and this applies especially to the OECD, regards the way policy advice is developed. The thesis documents how such advice to a large extent may be up loading of national policy to the international arena and that countries to a large extent decides themselves whether they are evaluated or not. This ensures countries substantial possibilities of strategic use of international actors to avoid unpleasant critique or lend authority and legitimacy to reforms. Third, the thesis analyzes German and Norwegian family policy reforms and concludes that the advice from EU and OECD is well known among policy actors, but has not been crucial for the changes that took place. However, it finds that international comparisons have been important in Germany and that foreign policy ideas have influenced both Norway and Germany, implying that ideational factors have played a role. The policy ideas dominating national debate and reform preparations are similar to the ideas promoted by the EU and OECD, but bilateral learning is still more important than international organizations in this field of social policy. Overall, this dissertation shows how paying attention to family policy ideas of international actors improves our understanding of welfare developments in Norway and Germany. The findings are substantiated by comprehensive data in the form of policy documents, parliamentary debates and expert interviews. 4 Sammendrag Ideer som teoretisk innfallsvinkel anvendes i økende grad i studier av velferdspolitiske reformer. En årsak er at teorier som vektlegger funksjonelle (eksempelvis indre og ytre reformpress), institusjonelle (eksempelvis stiavhengighet) og politiske (eksempelvis partier) forklaringsvariabler ikke gir tilstrekkelig svar på når, hvorfor og hvordan velferdsordninger endres. Familiepolitiske ordninger har tidligere blitt analysert med utgangspunkt i et slikt ideperspektiv, men forskere har ikke sett på rollen internasjonale organisasjoner kan spille i det såkalte ide spillet; spredning av familiepolitiske anbefalinger. I denne avhandlingen studeres dette gjennom tre hoveddeler; a) en teoretisk diskusjon av betydningen av ideer for politikkutvikling samt hvordan slike prosesser kan studeres, b) en empirisk presentasjon av hvilken type familiepolitikk organisasjoner som EU og OECD fremmer, og c) hvorvidt slike ideer øver innflytelse på norsk og tysk familiepolitikk. Avhandlingen utgår fra disiplinen komparative studier av sosialpolitikk og bidrar til litteraturen om betydningen av ideer, sosialpolitikk i internasjonale organisasjoner og nasjonale familiepolitiske reformer. I avhandlingen drøftes hvordan, hvorfor, når og med hvilken innflytelse familiepolitiske ideer krysser grenser, spørsmål som til nå er viet liten oppmerksomhet. Det argumenteres først for at ideperspektivet øker vår forståelse av velferdspolitikk. Avhandlingen dokumenterer hvordan faktorer som feilslått politikk og internasjonale sammenligninger og rangeringer øker sannsynligheten for at internasjonale ideer vinner frem. Tilpasningsdyktige ideer av typen familiepolitikk som produktivfaktor, det vil si ideer som kan løse flere problemer samtidig og er åpne for ulike begrunnelser, har størst gjennomslag. Et annet funn med teoretisk betydning er at mens litteratur om ideer har fokusert på faktorer som øker ideers kraft og dermed sannsynlighet for å importeres og implementeres av stater, har litteraturen oversett hvorfor ideer eksporteres. Ønsket om å fremstå som eksempel til etterfølgelse kombinert med et håp om å vinne generell innflytelse er blant årsakene som avdekkes i avhandlingen gjennom analysen av tyske og norske reformer. I del to presenteres familiepolitiske ideer i EU og OECD. Det vises at slike ideer utgjør en relativ omfattende samling av anbefalinger med potensial for å påvirke nasjonale reformer. Anbefalingene er i stor grad økonomisk og sysselsettingsorienterte, men likevel mer enn neoliberale råd