Just Institutions Matter: The Moral and Political Logic of the Universal Welfare State
Abstract
In this book Bo Rothstein seeks to defend the universal welfare state against a number of important criticisms which it has faced in recent years. He combines genuine philosophical analysis of normative issues concerning what the state ought to do with empirical political scientific research in public policy examining what the state can do. Issues discussed include the relationship between welfare state and civil society, the privatization of social services, and changing values within society. His analysis centres around the importance of political institutions as both normative and empirical entities, and Rothstein argues that the choice of such institutions at certain formative moments in a country's history is what determines the political support for different types of social policy. He thus explains the great variation among contemporary welfare states in terms of differing moral and political logics which have been set in motion by the deliberate choices of political institutions. The book is an important contribution to both philosophical and political debates about the future of the welfare state.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
Universal programs tend to be more popular than means-tested ones.
“This extends to individual programs in that universal programs tend to be more popular than means-tested ones (Rothstein, 1998).”
From Universalism in Welfare Policy: The Swedish Case beyond 1990 (2020) · cites this paper as Rothstein, 1998
Cited by
Sorted by citations
HISTORICAL INSTITUTIONALISM IN COMPARATIVE POLITICS
Thelen, K. (1999) · Annual Review of Political Science · doi:10.1146/annurev.polisci.2.1.369 · Cited by 3,409 · see citing works
Polycentric systems for coping with collective action and global environmental change
Ostrom, E. (2010) · Global Environmental Change · doi:10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2010.07.004 · Cited by 2,460 · see citing works
All for All: Equality, Corruption, and Social Trust
Rothstein, B., & Uslaner, E. M. (2005) · World Politics · doi:10.1353/wp.2006.0022 · Cited by 1,529 · see citing works
Self-citationMaking carbon pricing work for citizens
Klenert, D., Mattauch, L., Combet, E., Edenhofer, O., Hepburn, C., Rafaty, R., & Stern, N. (2018) · Nature Climate Change · doi:10.1038/s41558-018-0201-2 · Cited by 793 · see citing works
Van Der Waal, J., De Koster, W., & Van Oorschot, W. (2013) · Journal of Comparative Policy Analysis: Research and Practice · doi:10.1080/13876988.2013.785147 · Cited by 213 · see citing works
Rothstein, B. (2015) · Governance · doi:10.1111/gove.12128 · Cited by 132 · see citing works
Self-citationThe case for welfare state universalism, or the lasting relevance of the paradox of redistribution
Jacques, O., & Noël, A. (2018) · Journal of European Social Policy · doi:10.1177/0958928717700564 · Cited by 108 · see citing works
Social capital and public libraries: The need for research
Vårheim, A. (2007) · Library & Information Science Research · doi:10.1016/j.lisr.2007.04.009 · Cited by 94 · see citing works
Universalism in Welfare Policy: The Swedish Case beyond 1990
Blomqvist, P., & Palme, J. (2020) · Social Inclusion · doi:10.17645/si.v8i1.2511 · Cited by 67 · see citing works
“This extends to individual programs in that universal programs tend to be more popular than means-tested ones (Rothstein, 1998).”
BackgroundJacques, O., & Noël, A. (2021) · Journal of European Social Policy · doi:10.1177/0958928720918973 · Cited by 57 · see citing works
Research on digital discretion—The subjectification of street‐level work in public administration
Johansson, J. (2025) · Review of Policy Research · doi:10.1111/ropr.12637 · Cited by 19 · see citing works
Food Insecurity and Social Policy: A Comparative Analysis of Welfare State Regimes in 19 Countries
Berkowitz, S. A., Drake, C., & Byhoff, E. (2024) · International Journal of Social Determinants of Health and Health Services · doi:10.1177/27551938231219200 · Cited by 14 · see citing works
Stepping-stone solidarity: The normative foundation of the social investment welfare state
Bagadirov, A., Hemerijck, A., & Puertas Roig, P. (2025) · Acta Sociologica · doi:10.1177/00016993251319682 · Cited by 10 · see citing works
- Authors
- Rothstein, B.
- Affiliations
- University of Gothenburg (SE)
- Corresponding author
- Rothstein, Bo
- Venue
- Cambridge University Press eBooks
- Publisher
- Cambridge University Press
- Published
- 1998-02-13
- OpenAlex
- W1968649049
- Cited by
- 1,403
- References
- 0
- Citations by year
- 2026: 57 · 2025: 29 · 2024: 33 · 2023: 42 · 2022: 42 · 2021: 73 · 2020: 52 · 2019: 57 · 2018: 75 · 2017: 56 · 2016: 56 · 2015: 54 · 2014: 57 · 2013: 60 · 2012: 51
- FWCI
- 66.94
- Type
- book
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Cambridge University Press eBooks (publishedVersion)
- DigitalGeorgetown (Georgetown University Library) (submittedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Political Science and International Relations › Social Policy and Reform Studies
- Social Sciences › Political Science and International Relations › Political Philosophy and Ethics
- Social Sciences › Political Science and International Relations › Globalization and political ideologies
- Keywords
- welfare state, political institutions, civil society, privatization of social services, social policy, institutional choice, future of the welfare state, normative political theory
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
