복지레짐의 국제비교분석: 평등과 효율성의 양립가능성을 중심으로

초록

In the 1970s, debate on Marshall's theory of social citizenship, the welfare state of the Beveridge Report, Keynesian economic policy and other theories forming the theoretical underpinning of Fordism and the welfare state after World War II gave way to discourse on new thinking, such as Okun’s Big Tradeoff, the trickle-down effect and the crisis of the welfare state. However, the global financial crisis of 2008 set in motion a shift in perspective on income inequality, which had previously seen such inequality as a natural outcome of economic growth. Contrary to the assumptions of the trickle-down theory, we find that the rising tide of growth does not float all boats and that economic growth does not naturally address the problem of income inequality. Rather, deepening income inequality threatens the stability of the system. The Nordic countries, which remain loyal to the welfare state tradition, have achieved economic performance comparable to Anglo-American countries and have done so without worsening income inequality. This contrasts with economic development in Anglo-American countries that have tolerated inequality to promote competitiveness and growth. Our conclusions demonstrate that the relationship between equality and efficiency need not be a tradeoff; it can also be complementary. Comparative studies by Esping-Andersen and Amable show that welfare systems can be compatible with other institutional systems in ways that ensure welfare, growth and income equality. In this paper, we classify developed economies into four models based on interaction between the welfare system, labor market, and education and training systems within each economy, and we formalize under what conditions equality and growth may coexist. This comparative analysis of growth regimes finds that achieving equal distribution requires social efforts through social compromise and dialogue, as well as through supporting institutional design, and that such efforts can simultaneously promote growth and economic equality.

키워드