Varieties of federalism, institutional legacies, and social policy: Comparing old‐age and unemployment insurance reform in Canada
Abstract
Béland D, Myles J. Varieties of federalism, institutional legacies, and social policy: Comparing old‐age and unemployment insurance reform in Canada With reference to Canada, this article explores the politics of reform affecting two social insurance programs: Employment Insurance (EI) and the Canada Pension Plan (CPP). Comparing these two large, yet institutionally distinct, social insurance schemes underscores how institutional differences in policy legacies and governance among social programs create distinct obstacles and opportunities for reform in federal countries. Drawing on historical institutionalism and emphasizing the types of federalism and decision making specific to EI and CPP, the article explains key political differences between these two programs. Focusing on reforms enacted in the 1990s, the article explores the institutional obstacles and opportunities for policy change in EI and CPP, which offers insight into how these programs could change in the future. We show that different forms of federal governance pointing to the “varieties of federalism” and, more generally, the institutional and territorial logics embedded in these two programs create different obstacles and opportunities for reform.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Cites
Increasing Returns, Path Dependence, and the Study of Politics
Pierson, P. (2000) · American Political Science Review · doi:10.2307/2586011 · Cited by 8,094 · see citing works
HACKER, J. S. (2004) · American Political Science Review · doi:10.1017/s0003055404001121 · Cited by 1,543 · see citing works
Strategies of Causal Assessment in Comparative Historical Analysis
Mahoney, J. (2003) · Comparative Historical Analysis in the Social Sciences · doi:10.1017/cbo9780511803963.011 · Cited by 260 · see citing works
Flagged first, then by citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Béland, D., Marchildon, G. P., Medrano, A., & Rocco, P. (2024) · Politics & Policy · doi:10.1111/polp.12575 · Cited by 7 · see citing works
Self-citation
- Authors
- Béland, D., & Myles, J.
- Affiliations
- University of Saskatchewan (CA)
- University of Toronto (CA)
- Corresponding author
- Béland, Daniel
- ORCID
- Béland, Daniel
- Venue
- International Journal of Social Welfare
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2012-02-28
- Volume
- 21
- Issue
- s1
- ISSN
- 0907-2055 (ISSN-L)
- 1369-6866
- 1468-2397
- OpenAlex
- W1488248301
- Cited by
- 35
- References
- 3
- Citations by year
- 2026: 1 · 2025: 4 · 2024: 1 · 2023: 3 · 2022: 1 · 2021: 2 · 2020: 3 · 2019: 4 · 2018: 4 · 2017: 3 · 2016: 2 · 2015: 1 · 2014: 5
- FWCI
- 12.14
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- International Journal of Social Welfare (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Political Science and International Relations › Social Policy and Reform Studies
- Social Sciences › Political Science and International Relations › Political Systems and Governance
- Social Sciences › Public Administration › Public Policy and Administration Research
- Keywords
- institutional legacy, social insurance reform, old-age insurance, unemployment insurance, employment insurance, Canada Pension Plan, federal governance, historical institutionalism, policy change, Canada
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