LIST OF PANELS

This panel seeks to understand the panoply of instruments for providing social welfare in a comparative and historical perspective.  Many years ago, Esping-Anderson (1990) asserted that modern welfare states “are now predominantly occupied with the production and distribution of social well-being” (p. 1).  Though much research remains to understand the policy process, social policymaking is obviously the most common instrument of social-welfare provision.   Yet, other instruments are being recognized, such as social entrepreneurship, public-private partnerships, and social movements.  Prior research has also examined the intersection of public administration and nongovernmental organizations and the shared responsibilities of modern welfare states and “third parties” (Salamon, 1995; Savas, 2000 ), this panel seeks to analyze both intra-governmental (i.e., occurring within government) and extra-governmental (i.e., occurring outside government) instruments of social-welfare provision. 

State capacity is a germane issue in that a government’s capacity to provide social welfare determine at least in part the policy instruments available to it.  The social innovations behind social-welfare provision and the effective conduct of social policy presume a certain level of institutional development and state capacity that varies greatly from state to state.  To provide welfare for its citizens through intra-governmental instruments such as public policymaking, a state needs policy capacity enabled through the development of its governance institutions.  Indeed, the modern state with robust policy capacity has been the primary source of social innovation in developed societies for most of the twentieth century through today.  Yet, when a society has feeble governance institutions and limited policy capacity, more extreme and unpredictable forms of social innovation such as social movements or even revolution can arise.  One of the more striking developments of the late twentieth century has been the rise of social entrepreneurship.  If a government’s policy capacity is limited but it has a functionally viable institutional foundation, even if inchoate, social entrepreneurship can serve as a source of extra-governmental social innovation (Shockley & Frank, 2011).  

This panel seeks research into understanding the panoply of instruments for providing social welfare in a comparative and historical perspective.  Many years ago, Esping-Anderson (1990) asserted that modern welfare states “are now predominantly occupied with the production and distribution of social well-being” (p. 1).  Though much research remains to understand the policy process, social policymaking is obviously the most common instrument of social-welfare provision.   Yet, other instruments are being recognized, such as social entrepreneurship, public-private partnerships, and social movements.  Prior research has also examined the intersection of public administration and nongovernmental organizations and the shared responsibilities of modern welfare states and “third parties” (Salamon, 1995; Savas, 2000 ), this panel seeks to analyze both intra-governmental (i.e., occurring within government) and extra-governmental (i.e., occurring outside government) instruments of social-welfare provision.