A Comparative Study on Productive Welfare in the Three Worlds of Welfare Capitalism

세 가지 복지자본주의에서의 생산적 복지, 그 성적표 : 복지국가의 경제적 효과와 평등달성의 차이에 관한 체제론적 비교연구

In general, every welfare state is to be productive. If not, the welfare state itself cannot be sustainable because resource for the development of welfare only comes from a sound level of economic development However, how to mix welfare and production differs from country to country. This article tackles this phenomenon as a starting point. Granted, contemporary studies of comparative welfare state often starts from the theory of welfare regime which has been suggested by Esping-Andersen. This article also regards the framework as an analytic tool to elaborate upon the concept of productive welfare and to categorize different types of conception of productive welfare. In liberal regime, the concept is so narrowly interpreted that they emphasize micro-efficiency of specific welfare programs. On the contrary, the other two regime types recognize the concept of productive welfare as relatively wide. Therefore, conservative and social democratic regimes underscore macro-efficiency of the welfare state as a whole. Empirical analyses of this article explores each regime's success and failure in terms of achieving fundamental goals of the welfare state, i.e. economic development and enhancement of equality. A series of evidence show that liberal regime fails in achieving both goals, while the other two regimes seem to be relatively successful. In conclusion, it may be pointed out that current tendency of neo-liberalism and anti-welfarism in Korea should be overcome, which must be the prime task of social welfare academia of this country.