LIST OF PANELS

Over the past two decades or so, many countries in the Global South have radically transformed their social protection systems. In some cases, this transformation entailed a massive expansion of new policy instruments, such as conditional cash transfers, and a simultaneous retrenchment of older instruments that we now label ‘social policy by other means’ or the ‘hidden welfare state’. Furthermore, in key social policy areas, such as pensions and health, countries introduced far-reaching reforms that helped them make headways towards achieving the goal of universal social protection coverage enshrined in the Sustainable Development Goals. At the same time, however, these reforms often also meant a severe retrenchment of social rights for citizens who had traditionally been protected by the social security system.

This janus-faced transformation of social protection systems in many areas of the Global South has led to a new scholarly interest in social policies beyond the ‘three worlds of welfare capitalism’. The ‘geography of comparative welfare state research’ (Hort, 2005) has clearly shifted from the ‘eighteen to twenty rich capitalist countries’ in the OECD area (Esping-Andersen, 1994: 713) to a more diverse set of countries including parts of Latin America, East Asia and Africa (Huber and Niedzwiecki 2015). As a result, accounts of the emergence, expansion and reform of social policies in the Global South have proliferated. Scholars have produced authoritative accounts in particular of developments in Latin America and East Asia. Today, we know far more about social policy beyond the three worlds.

Yet, we believe that the study of Southern social policy has more to offer than just provide insights into Southern social policy. We believe that existing scholarship on the ‘three worlds’ has the potential to transplant classic methodologies, concepts and theories used in comparative social policy to the study of these new areas. The classics grew out of the study of the ‘three worlds’, which were at that time seen as the most advanced social protection systems in the world. The methodologies and measurements used to study these worlds have been devised with the goal of understanding Northern welfare states. The concepts they used grew out of an attempt at making sense of dynamics in classic welfare states. For example, the Swedish case, viewed widely as the ideal-typical welfare state, has had an outsize influence in shaping the research agenda. It remains an open question whether and to what extent these measurements, concepts and theories that have been developed for the study of the classic welfare states really allow us to understand the new cases and thus help us make valid comparisons between old and new ‘worlds’.

The past decades have witnessed a janus-faced transformation of social protection systems in many areas of the Global South. Many countries made headways toward universalizing basic social protection. While developing new social protection instruments, they also retrenched old instruments of social protection. We invite submissions that study these developments of social policy beyond the ‘three worlds of welfare capitalism’. We invite both single case studies as well as comparative papers. Comparisons of Northern and Southern countries within a single framework are welcome. Papers should be theoretically informed and empirically grounded. Contributions could – but need not – tackle some of the following issues:

First, papers could deal with the emergence, development and reform of social policy beyond the classic welfare states. For instance, papers could deal with policy change or institutional change in new and old instruments of social protection. With regard to policy change, studies could trace shifts in the intensity and density of policies. With regard to institutional change, studies could trace how institutional change takes place in settings quite different from the classic welfare states. Moreover, how do established theories regarding the drivers behind social policy change fare beyond the classic ‘three worlds’? For instance, is it meaningful to study developments from a power resources or partisan politics perspective? Papers that focus on unconventional instruments of social protection found in the Global South are particularly welcome. For instance, studies on severance pay, food subsidies or access to informal housing would be most welcome.

Second, papers could deal with issues that arise when applying well-established concepts to the new ‘worlds’. Most concepts in comparative social policy and welfare state research have been developed to explore classic welfare states. Can these concepts be meaningfully applied to new cases without taking concept stretching too far? For instance, does it make sense to study Latin American or East Asian countries, which at least partly have highly elaborate social protection systems, as ‘welfare states’? Similarly, is it meaningful to study countries in the Global South under the concept of ‘welfare regimes’? If so, should we develop new dimensions to account for particular unaccounted features of these new cases? Moreover, how should we study ‘social policy by other means’ that these countries typically pursue? Are these policies part of their welfare states or welfare regimes? Papers that deal with such conceptual issues in the study of Southern social policy are welcome.

Third, papers could deal with the methodological challenges that arise when studying Southern social protection systems. Most measurement tools of the research areas (e.g. SPIN, CWED, SOCX) have been developed to capture and compare classic welfare states. Does it make sense to measure the new cases with the same measurement tools we use for the old cases? What can we gain by measuring cases beyond the classic welfare states with established measurement tools? Are there any pitfalls of these measurement tools alongside the evident promises? What unconventional instruments of social protection might be overlooked? Would scores based on state-of-the-art measurement tools still be valid?