THE THREE WORLD OF

WELFARE CAPITALISM
• BY- Gosta Esping-Andersen
• PUBLISHED- 1990
• ABOUT AUTHOR – Gosta Esping-Andersen is a Danish sociologist whose primary focus
has been on the welfare state and its place in capitalist economies.
• SUBJECT- Theories of Development and Welfare
• NAME- Sadaf
• Typology of welfare capitalism
In The Three Worlds of Welfare Capitalism, Esping-Andersen outlines a typology of welfare capitalism in an attempt to classify
contemporary Western welfare states as belonging to one of three "worlds of welfare capitalism.
"The three types are characterized by a specific labor market regime and also by a specific post‐industrial employment trajectory.

THREE TYPES OF WELFARE

CAPITALISM

SOCIAL DEMOCRATIC-
LIBERAL REGIMES
CONSERVATIVE REGIMES
REGIMES
• Liberal regimes:
characterized by modest, means tested assistance, and targeted at low-income, usually working-class recipients.
Their strict entitlement rules are often associated with stigma. This type of welfare state encourages market solution to
social problems either passively, by guaranteeing only a minimum, or actively, by directly subsidizing private welfare
schemes. The liberal welfare state is a governing regime that ensures that citizens are taken care of socially and
economically. The liberal belief is to accomplish this with minimal government interference, allowing a free market
economy to create equality. The liberal regime believes that the government monopolizes the market which only
enhances class inequality and creates inefficiencies. Free markets, with little government interference, allows for
competitive exchange which maintains equal opportunity for everyone to contribute to the economy and be successful.
The government only provides the necessary support to alleviate poverty.

• Conservative regimes:
which are typically shaped by traditional family values, and tend to encourage family-based assistance dynamics.
Social insurance in this model typically excludes non-working wives, and family benefits encourage motherhood. State
assistance will typically only step in when the family's capacity to aid its members is exhausted.
• Conservative welfare state:
The conservative welfare state, also known as the Christian welfare state, highlights a government regime with the
least centralized system of governing. The conservative welfare state believes that decision-making should be directed
by local levels rather than a centralized form of governing. The conservative regime is built on the foundation that there
should be an authoritarian control which governs a hierarchy to control the market economy. This hierarchy creates
different classes of people, which the conservative minded people believe creates stability. The conservative regime
believes strong leadership and traditional gender and family roles are what allow a society to function smoothly.
• Social democratic regimes:
universalistic systems that promote an equality of high standards, rather than an equality of minimal needs. This
implies recommodifying welfare services, to reduce the division introduced by market-based access to welfare services, as
well as preemptively socializing the costs of caring for children, the aged, and the helpless, instead of then waiting until the
family's capacity to support them is depleted. This results in a commitment to a heavy social service burden, which
introduces an imperative to minimize social problems, thereby aligning the system's goals with the welfare and
emancipation (typically via full employment policies) of those it supports.
• Social democratic welfare state:
The social democratic welfare state believes that by being a citizen of the nation, it grants access to universal services and
state run benefits. The social democratic welfare state gives people more power in governance. The social democratic
welfare state believes that improving social capital will mobilize power by making them less dependent on the market and
employers. In order to positively create this, social democratic states believe that everyone requires social, health, and
education resources to be efficient in society. By providing this to every citizen, it eliminate
• Social Capital:
These liberal and social democratic regime characteristics are said to be related to bridging social capital. This means that
these societies value equal opportunity and social inclusion. This study helps to show that social capital is seen in all
regimes. With that being said, how people are handled and what society values differs. That is why it is important to note
that social capital has its strengths and weaknesses in all regimes.
• Limitations:
Even though countries are placed into these three welfare state regimes, many are very close in ideologies with one
another. The nations which are identified under each welfare state regime can be classified as ‘prototypes’. This means that
each welfare state regime identified should not be taken as an ideal type. This notion derives from Esping Andersen's
decommodification and social stratification index. The index highlights that each country varies in the strength of how strictly
they follow the welfare state it is categorized under. Due to the fact that many of the social issues which a country faces is
intersectional, they may take on another welfare states ideology to target a certain issue