CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 622Populism, Right-Wing MovementsSocial Policy and Reform StudiesGlobalization and political ideologies

Globalization, the welfare state and right-wing populism in Western Europe

Open access
Swank, D.·2003·Socio-Economic Review
DOI 10.1093/soceco/1.2.215
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

We outline and test the argument that globalization contributes to the electoral success of the new far right in Western Europe. We also draw on the theory of embedded liberalism to advance and test the hypothesis that a comprehensive, generous and employment-orientated system of social protection lessens the economic insecurities attendant to internationalization and, in turn, weakens support for far-right parties. In empirical analysis of national elections in 16 European polities from 1981 to 1998, we find that the universal welfare state directly depresses the vote for radical right-wing populist parties and conditions the linkages between capital mobility, trade openness and foreign immigration on the one hand and electoral support for the new far right on the other. In conclusion, we consider our findings' implications for understanding the domestic political effects of globalization and sources of right-wing populism as well as for policy reforms that promote political economic stability in an era of international integration.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1093/soceco/1.2.215

Cites

38 of 38 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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?

  • The pernicious effects of selective welfare on immigrants are diminished in more universalistic welfare states.

    “Various scholars have shown that this dynamic, and its pernicious effects on immigrants, is diminished in more universalistic welfare states (Van der Waal, De Koster & Van Oorschot, 2013; Larsen, 2006; Swank & Betz, 2003; Van Oorschot, 2000; Kumlin & Rothstein 2010; Rothstein 2015).”

    From Solidarity in diverse societies: beyond neoliberal multiculturalism and welfare chauvinism (2015) · cites this paper as Swank & Betz, 2003

    The Robustness of results section finds that substantial immigration is associated with greater increases in support for right-wing populist parties in less universalistic welfare states than in more universalistic ones. The Conclusions likewise says immigration’s electoral effect is weakest in universal welfare states. The paper does not establish that selective welfare directly harms immigrants or measure whether such harms diminish. (LLM, conf=0.84)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

  • Deservingness judgements are primed when the welfare state is organized on a more selective basis using means-tested benefits, which makes recipients more visible and invites debates about their deservingness.

    “We know that deservingness judgements are ' primed ' when the welfare state is organized on a more selective basis, using means-tested benefits, which makes recipients more visible, and invites -indeed almost requires -debates about their deservingness.”

    From Solidarity in diverse societies: beyond neoliberal multiculturalism and welfare chauvinism (2015) · cites this paper as Swank & Betz, 2003

    Section 2.2 identifies means-tested programmes as a feature of liberal welfare states and says their political and moral support is weaker than in universal systems. The passage on public-sector data also describes distrust and conflict between beneficiaries and non-beneficiaries. Neither passage says that means testing makes recipients more visible or primes debates about their deservingness. (LLM, conf=0.84)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 10

  1. Clasen, J. (ed.) Social Insurance in Europe, Bristol, The Policy Press.
  2. Esping-Andersen, G. (1990) Three Worlds of Welfare Capitalism, Princeton, NJ, Princeton University Press.
  3. Greene, W. (2000) Econometric Analysis, 4th edn, Upper Saddle River, NJ, Prentice Hall.
  4. Ignazi, P. (1992) 'The Silent Counter-Revolution: Hypothesis on the Emergence of Extreme Right-Wing Parties in Europe: Introduction' , European Journal of Political Research, 22, 3-35.
  5. Inglehart, R. (1990) Culture Shift, Princeton, NJ, Princeton University Press.
  6. Kriesi, H. (1999) 'Movements of the Left, Movements of the Right: Putting the Mobilization of the Two Types of Social Movements into Context' . In Kitschelt, H., Lange, P., Marks, G. and Stephens, J. (eds) Continuity and Change in Contemporary Capitalism, New York, NY, Cambridge University Press.
  7. Krugman. (1996) Pop Internationalization, Cambridge, MA, MIT Press.
  8. Quinn, D. and Inclan, C. (1997) 'The Origins of International Financial Liberalization' , American Journal of Political Science, 41, 771-813.
  9. Rothstein, B. (1998) Just Institutions Matter: the Moral and Political Logics of the Welfare State, New York, NY, Cambridge University Press.
  10. Wilensky, H. (1976) The New Corporatism, Centralization, and Welfare States, Contempo- rary Sociology Series 06020, Vol. 2, Beverly Hills, CA, Sage.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Authors
Swank, D.
Affiliations
Marquette University (US)
Corresponding author
Swank, D.
Venue
Socio-Economic Review
Publisher
Oxford University Press (OUP)
Published
2003-05-01
Volume
1
Issue
2
Pages
215-245
ISSN
  • 1475-1461 (ISSN-L)
  • 1475-147X
DOI
10.1093/soceco/1.2.215
OpenAlex
W2121920773
Cited by
622
References
38
Citations by year
2026: 13 · 2025: 29 · 2024: 91 · 2023: 58 · 2022: 22 · 2021: 47 · 2020: 28 · 2019: 62 · 2018: 43 · 2017: 25 · 2016: 17 · 2015: 22 · 2014: 13 · 2013: 16 · 2012: 19
FWCI
73.09
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Socio-Economic Review (publishedVersion)
  • SSRN Electronic Journal (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Political Science and International Relations › Populism, Right-Wing Movements
  • Social Sciences › Political Science and International Relations › Social Policy and Reform Studies
  • Social Sciences › Political Science and International Relations › Globalization and political ideologies
Keywords
globalization, welfare state, right-wing populism, far-right parties, embedded liberalism, social protection, economic insecurity, capital mobility, trade openness, immigration, electoral support, Western Europe

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