The Recalibration of Public Social Spending in Spain: Towards a Social Investment State? - Revista ...
←
→
Page content transcription
If your browser does not render page correctly, please read the page content below
doi:10.5477/cis/reis.175.85
The Recalibration of Public Social Spending
in Spain: Towards a Social Investment State?
El recalibrado del gasto social público en España:
¿hacia un Estado orientado a la inversión social?
David Luque Balbona and Ana M. Guillén
Key words Abstract
Spain Social investment has become the dominant paradigm guiding the
• Social Investment reform of European welfare states. Beyond its normative postulates,
• Social Protection social investment is a useful analytical framework for the study of
• Recalibration of ongoing changes in social policy. From this perspective, this article
Social Spending finds evidence of a turn toward social investment in the welfare budget
in Spain that began in the mid-nineties. In addition, it shows that the
development of new policies linked to social investment have not
occurred at the expense of traditional social protection policies. Lastly,
it is found that the impact of austerity differs for the different dimensions
of social policy.
Palabras clave Resumen
España La inversión social se ha consolidado como paradigma dominante
• Inversión social para orientar la reforma de los estados de bienestar europeos. Más
• Protección social allá de sus postulados normativos, la inversión social se presenta
• Recalibrado del como un marco analítico útil para el estudio de las transformaciones en
gasto social marcha en la política social. Desde esta perspectiva, en este trabajo se
detecta un giro inversor del presupuesto de bienestar en España desde
mediados de los noventa. Además, se muestra que el desarrollo de
las nuevas políticas orientadas a la inversión social no se ha hecho a
expensas de las políticas tradicionales de protección social. Finalmente,
se contrasta el distinto impacto que ha tenido la austeridad en las
distintas dimensiones de la política social.
Citation
Luque Balbona, David and Guillén, Ana M. (2021). “The Recalibration of Public Social Spending in
Spain: Towards a Social Investment State?”. Revista Española de Investigaciones Sociológicas,
175: 85-104. (http://dx.doi.org/10.5477/cis/reis.175.85)
David Luque Balbona: Universidad de Oviedo | luquedavid@uniovi.es
Ana M. Guillén: Universidad de Oviedo | aguillen@uniovi.es
Reis. Rev.Esp.Investig.Sociol. ISSN-L: 0210-5233. N.º 175, July - September 2021, pp. 85-10486 The Recalibration of Public Social Spending in Spain: Towards a Social Investment State
Introduction cies. Lastly, we look at whether the Great
Recession has led to a shift in the recalibra-
Social investment has become the domi- tion of the Spanish welfare state.
nant paradigm guiding the reform of Euro- To achieve these aims, this study is
pean welfare states in their adaptation to the structured in the following form. After this
emergence of New Social Risks (NSR) asso- introductory section, the second section
ciated with post-industrialism (Bonoli, 2005; presents the notion of social investment as
Taylor-Gooby, 2004). The starting point of the paradigm guiding social policy reform,
the debate over strategies for modernising develops the analytical framework of the re-
welfare states can be found in the pioneer- search and describes four hypothetical sce-
ing works of Giddens (1998) and Esping-An- narios for recalibrating social spending. In
dersen (1999); however, it is only in the last the third section we analyse the process of
ten years that we find scientific research in recalibrating social spending in Spain over
this area increasing, particularly after the in- the last two decades, examining whether a
stitutionalisation of the term with the launch- shift toward social investment in the social
ing of the Social Investment Package for welfare budget has occurred. The fourth
Growth and Social Cohesion in 2013 on the section looks at the evolution of spending
part of the European Commission. in social policies that most closely follow a
The concept of social investment emerged social investment logic. Following, we dis-
not only with the ambition to modernise the cuss the obstacles to social investment in
welfare state, but also to ensure its sustain- the immediate future. The study ends with
ability (Hemerijck, 2011). Therefore, this per- our conclusions.
spective on social policy may be of particular
importance in overcoming current (and future)
challenges to Spanish social policy. However, Social investment as paradigm
literature on the matter remains very limited in and analytical framework
Spain (Pino, 2014; León and Pavolini, 2014;
Rodríguez Cabrero, 2015, 2018; Rodríguez Although the launching of the Social In-
Cabrero, 2015; León et al., 2019; Rodríguez vestment Package for Growth and Social
Cabrero, 2018; Guillén and Luque Balbona, Cohesion by the European Commission
2019). in 2013 led to the definitive institutiona-
The main objective of this study is to ex- lisation of the term, the idea of social in-
amine the degree to which a social invest- vestment is not that recent (Morel, Palier
ment perspective has been implemented in and Palme, 2012). Its logic already for-
Spain by analysing the evolution of spend- med part of the Lisbon Agenda, launched
ing in different dimensions of social policy. in 2000, which had the aim of converting
In addition, we also look at an issue that is the EU into the most competitive and dy-
often ignored in research: the emergence namic knowledge-based economy and
of NSR does not necessarily imply that Old capable of achieving sustainable growth,
Social Risks (OSR), belonging to the indus- more and better jobs and greater social
trial era, are now less important (Crouch cohesion (Hemerijck, 2015).
and Keune, 2012; Huber and Stephens, In academic debates, the notion of social
2007). Thus, we also consider whether the investment was initially proposed by Gid-
development of new policies oriented to- dens (1998) and Esping-Andersen (1999) in
ward social investment have been at the searching for strategies to counteract the
expense of traditional social protection poli- NSR emerging from post-industrialism, but
Reis. Rev.Esp.Investig.Sociol. ISSN-L: 0210-5233. N.º 175, July - September 2021, pp. 85-104David Luque Balbona and Ana M. Guillén 87
with an important nuance between both ver- life span to achieve high levels of labour
sions. In Giddens’ The Third Way, the (new) market participation. The stock function is
social investment state1 will come to substi- aimed at maintaining and improving hu-
tute the traditional welfare state, while for Es- man capital to foster future productivity.
ping-Andersen it will complement it. There- Lastly, the buffering function has two ends:
fore, there are two ways of conceiving social providing adequate social protection and
investment: with or against social protection; economic stabilisation (Hemerijck, 2015).
although it seems that “fans of this second However, this latter function is often ig-
solution are more and more numerous” (Bar- nored. For the correct development of so-
bier, 2017: 51). cial investment, the three functions must
In brief, the new welfare state logic that be integrated. Thus, adequate protection
supports the social investment paradigm through minimum incomes is a prior critical
is that of “preparing” rather than “repair- condition for an effective social investment
ing”. The main idea underlying this per- strategy (Vandenbroucke, Hemerijck and
spective is that “social policy should no Palier, 2011).
longer focus on ‘passively’ protecting peo- Social investment is not free from
ple from the perils of the market by means criticisms. Regarding the distributive ef-
of cash benefits, but rather prepare or fects of the transformation of the tradi-
‘empower’ people in order to maximally tional welfare state to a social investment
integrate them into the market” (Cantil- state, there are various authors that sug-
lon and Lancker, 2013: 553). Thus, the gest it has limited potential for providing
center of gravity for social policy shifts greater social cohesion and reducing pov-
toward the maximisation of employabil- erty (Cantillon, 2011; Vandenbroucke and
ity and employment (Kersbergen and Her- Vleminckx, 2011; Taylor-Gooby, Gumy
merijck, 2012). In short, this new paradigm and Otto, 2015; Vliet and Wang, 2015).
implies a change “from protective welfare Behind these criticisms we find the hy-
states with emphasis on expost remedies pothesis of “resource competition” be-
to productive welfare states with focus on tween different social programmes (Can-
ex ante prevention” (Kuitto, 2016: 445). tillon, 2011). According to this hypothesis,
From a broad perspective, we can dif- in a period of permanent austerity, the ac-
ferentiate three interdependent and com- cent placed on new social investment pol-
plementary functions of welfare under a icies shifts some of available resources
social investment paradigm: 1) alleviating from (old) protection programmes to (new)
the “flow” of labour market and life-cycle active investment programmes (Cantil-
transitions; 2) elevating the quality of the lon, 2011; Vendenbroucke and Vleminckx,
stock of human capital; and 3) maintaining 2011).
a safety net through minimum incomes as Cantillon and Lancker (2013) high-
social protection and economic stabilisa- light three failures of the social invest-
tion “buffers” (Hemerijck, 2014). The func- ment perspective to achieve inclusive so-
tion of flow is aimed at a more efficient use cial progress. First, the corner stone of
and allocation of labour resources over the social investment, achieving social integra-
tion through employment, generates a ma-
1 In this text we use the term “social investment state”; jor problem in terms of excluding individ-
however, some authors, with the aim of stressing its uals that cannot participate in the labour
complementarity with the traditional model, consider market. Secondly, from a social investment
it better to use the term “active welfare state” as an
“overarching” term for this new paradigm or theoretical perspective, individuals are increasingly re-
approach to social welfare. sponsible for their own welfare. Individuals
Reis. Rev.Esp.Investig.Sociol. ISSN-L: 0210-5233. N.º 175, July - September 2021, pp. 85-10488 The Recalibration of Public Social Spending in Spain: Towards a Social Investment State
are guided toward “appropriate behaviour” lytical framework for studying changes in
by increasing the conditionality of certain social policy, as it can be used to distin-
social programmes, above all in the labour guish forms of social spending that can be
market and in regards to social assistance classified as “investment” from others that
benefits. Lastly, some authors point to the cannot (Nolan, 2013). Thus, we can com-
existence of a “Matthew effect”, which oc- pare the composition of social spending
curs in some of the leading policies of so- between countries, its evolution over time
cial investment: “When policy measures and the effectiveness of different forms of
are grafted on an underlying logic of (pre- spending. In this study we analyse the ev-
vious) employment, then government in- olution of specific items of public spend-
vestment benefits those already better-off” ing in order to evaluate the transforma-
(Cantillon and Lancker, 2013: 561). tions that have taken place in social policy
In addition, Jenson (2009), among other (Deken, 2017).
authors, argues that the investment per- The investment metaphor itself makes
spective gives little attention to gender is- the analysis of spending data a good
sues. Fostering women’s economic activ- choice for identifying the extent to which
ity and the development of reconciliation governments have adopted a social invest-
measures are instrumentalised, first, with ment agenda (Deken, 2014; Nolan, 2017).
deomographic ends, and secondly, as a so- In addition, in an “age of permanent strain”
lution to problems generated by the aging (Pavolinie et al., 2015), a focus on spend-
of the population. Thus, the aim of fostering ing is also useful in identifying potential
equality of opportunity between men and trade-offs between the different dimen-
women is not a priority. sions of social policy. In this way, following
Beyond its function as a paradigm guid- Ronchi (2018), we find different scenarios
ing social policy reforms, the social invest- or pathways in the recalibration of social
ment perspective can be a useful ana- spending (Figure 1).
FIGURE 1. Four scenarios for the recalibration of social spending
Social Investment
+ –
Social Protection
+ (1) Fast track to social investment (3) Reversed resource competition
– (2) Resource competition (4) Social retrenchment
Source: Adapted from Ronchi (2018: 7).
a) In the upper left quadrant (scenario 1), track to social investment”: a kind of
resources for both dimensions of welfare win-win solution that fits well with the
(protection and investment) increase. In perspective defended by Esping-An-
this way, scenario 1 represents a “fast dersen, among others.
Reis. Rev.Esp.Investig.Sociol. ISSN-L: 0210-5233. N.º 175, July - September 2021, pp. 85-104David Luque Balbona and Ana M. Guillén 89
b) The lower left quadrant (scenario 2) cor- ers forms of social spending is more prob-
responds to the assumption defended lematic than might initially be thought. First,
by the dominant current in social in- what is understood by the term investment
vestment. In this scenario resources are must be clarified. In economic theory, an in-
taken from social protection and em- vestment is spending on goods that are not
ployed in the investment dimension. consumed but that are used for future pro-
This is the “resource competition” hy- duction, the most obvious examples being
pothesis previously mentioned (Can- the facilities and machinery that workers use
tillon, 2011; Vandenbroucke and Vlem- to produce goods and services. Therefore,
inckx, 2011). an investment implies postponing consump-
c) The opposite happens in the upper right tion to improve productive capacity.
quadrant (scenario 3), “reversed com- The distinction between investment and
petition for resources” (Streeck and consumption is less clear when it is applied
Mertens, 2011): resources are taken to the productive capacity of workers, as
from the investment dimension and ded- “[it] is very difficult to think of a form of social
icated to the social protection dimen- spending that is purely investment, without a
sion. In this scenario, due to budgetary substantial element of current consumption”.
restrictions and the inertia of traditional This is even true when considering educa-
(passive) programmes, there is no room tion; as the main form of investment in hu-
for manoeuvre to develop social invest- man capital, we cannot negate that “educa-
ment. This scenario is most likely in cri- tion also clearly has consumption benefits to
sis situations: spending on investment the individual, in terms of enjoyment of and
(more discretional) is more strongly im- fulfilment from the educational process it-
pacted than (obligatory) spending on self”. It is also difficult to think of social ex-
protection (Breunig and Busemeyer, penses that are purely consumption.
2012).
More broadly, at least some spending by
d) Lastly, the lower right quadrant (sce- the individual on food, clothing, and so on,
nario 4) refers to “social cuts”: resources counted unambiguously as consumption in
dedicated to both investment and pro- national accounting terms, clearly also has
tection are reduced. This indicates the a potential return in terms of worker pro-
arrival of a (genuine) era of retrenchment ductivity (Nolan, 2013: 464).
of social policy.
To not open this conceptual Pandora’s
This study uses public social expendi- box, it is best to take investment and con-
ture data to consider which of the differ- sumption as points of reference on a con-
ent hypothetical scenarios of recalibration tinuum, in which the underlying logic of a
has occurred in Spain. However, prior to concrete type of policy is closer to one ex-
this we must make a series of conceptual treme (investment) or the other (consump-
and methodological clarifications because tion), and determine their classification in
of the ambiguity of the concept of social in- that manner. In other words, we can clas-
vestment. First, we look at the conceptual sify policies in function of the extent they
difference between “investment” and oth- contribute to the type of return that social
ers forms of social spending so that, sub- investment seeks to generate: increasing
sequently, we can consider its empirical ap- the size of the labour force and its produc-
plication. tivity (Deken, 2014).
Following Nolan (2013, 2017), distin- How do we approach this empirically?
guishing between social investment and oth- Various studies have aggregated social
Reis. Rev.Esp.Investig.Sociol. ISSN-L: 0210-5233. N.º 175, July - September 2021, pp. 85-10490 The Recalibration of Public Social Spending in Spain: Towards a Social Investment State
expenditure items in different ways to fit versus “new” welfare state. The “old” wel-
them to an analysis from a social invest- fare state is conceptualised as centred
ment perspective (among others, Häuser- on transfers, aimed at covering risks con-
mann, 2012; Hemerijck, 2013; Kuitto, nected to the loss of income due to ag-
2016; Kvist, 2013; Ronchi, 2018; Vanden- ing, unemployment, illness or disability.
broucke and Vleminckx, 2011). Each ag- The “new” welfare state is conceptualised
gregation presents its own advantages as centred on services aimed at increas-
and limitations; see Deken (2014) for a de- ing individuals’ capacities for obtaining in-
tailed analysis in this respect. However, it come through education, continual training
is possible to extract a minimum common and the requalification and socialisation of
denominator from the different proposed care to facilitate balancing work and fam-
classifications, although using different la- ily life. More recently, Ronchi (2018) also
bels. Thus, based on the underlying logic employed this heuristic dichotomy in con-
of each type of policy and using the ter- sidering cash benefits as “social protec-
minology employed by Kuitto (2016), cer- tion” and in-kind benefits as “social invest-
tain social spending items have generally ment”. This latter option serves us, in what
been considered as “social investment” as follows, to make an initial approximation
they favour inclusion in the labour market of the recalibration of social spending in
(childcare and elderly care policies, active Spain.
employment policies and education) while
others, in contrast, have generally been
categorised as “compensatory spending” Recalibration of public
because they protect persons at risk from spending on social policies
the market (pensions, contributory bene-
fits for unemployment and monetary trans- In this section we analyse the evolution of
fers to families with children). However, public spending on “social protection” and
there is a series of policies whose classi- “social investment” policies since the mid-
fication in one group or the other is more nineties2 to obtain a broad overview of the
contingent (for example, parental leaves level of development of social investment
and health care spending), so that we de- in Spain. The objective is two-fold: first, we
liberately exclude them from our analysis. examine if there was some type of recali-
This is due to the “dual purpose” of such bration of spending between both dimen-
policies (Deken, 2014). Thus, for exam- sions of social policy in the period of eco-
ple, spending on healthcare can have an nomic expansion prior to the crisis and,
ex post compensatory function or an ex secondly, we analyse what happened af-
ante preventative (investive) one. As some- ter the sudden change in the economic cy-
thing new, in this study we incorporate the cle that took place in 2008. Lastly, we also
buffer function in our analysis of social in- place the Spanish case in a European con-
vestment through spending on minimum
insertion incomes.
2 The period of analysis is determined by the availabil-
To resolve these operational problems ity of time series data on public expenditures in the dif-
in a pragmatic manner, other studies have ferent areas of social policy necessary to apply the an-
alytical framework we have described in the previous
chosen more generic conceptualisations. section. However, it is important to emphasise that the
Thus, for example, Huber and Stephens recalibration of social spending in Spain began prior to
(2007) suggest that the debate over the the period under analysis, concretely in the period from
1986 to 1992, during which the welfare state was con-
reform of social policy has been, in great solidated in Spain (see among others, Rodríguez Ca-
part, carried out over terms of an “old” brero, 2011).
Reis. Rev.Esp.Investig.Sociol. ISSN-L: 0210-5233. N.º 175, July - September 2021, pp. 85-104David Luque Balbona and Ana M. Guillén 91
text. However, prior to this, it is necessary (closer to the protective dimension) and in-
to provide a brief characterisation of the kind benefits (closer to an investment orien-
Spanish welfare state to understy its main tation) since the middle of the nineties.
structural determinants. In the Graph 1 we can see that up until
According to Ferrera (1996), who grouped 2009 public spending was growing for both
Europe’s Mediterranean countries together in types of benefits, therefore, we find a “fast
function of a series of cultural traits, policy dy- track” scenario toward social investment.
namics and similar institutional aspects, the In this period, strong economic growth and
Spanish welfare state forms part of a fourth healthy public finances led to a wide mar-
welfare model in Europe. In short, the original gin for manoevre for expanding spending in
conceptual model of types of welfare states social investment without a need for with-
was expanded (Esping-Andersen, 1990). drawing resources from other areas of so-
Following González Begega and Luque cial policy. Thus, in 2009 we find the highest
Balbona, (2016: 263), the countries of south- level of social spending on in-kind benefits
ern Europe are characterised by a hybrid for the series. This “fast track” path toward
type of welfare system, constructed based social investment shows that, for the Span-
on the adaptation of institutional pieces and ish case, for an investment turn to occur it
policy logics from other models. does not necessarily have to be at the ex-
pense of (old) compensatory policies.
An initial corporatist element, on which
the pension system rested [...]. A second so- The international crisis that began in
cial democratic component introduced over 2008 shifted the country out of the fast
the eighties in the healthcare and education track. In Spain, the Great Recession began
systems, although to different degrees of de- in the third quarter of 2008 and, technically,
velopment depending on the country, and a ended in the second quarter of 2013. In the
third, liberal or limited social assistance ap- middle of that period, in 2010, there was a
brief and weak expansion. The recession in
proach.
Spain was among the most severe, along
To this, we can add other important dis- with Greece, Irely and Portugal (Bentolila,
tinctive characteristics regarding what inter- 2015). In addition, the crisis had a much
ests us here: a “preferential orientation of the greater impact on employment than on
social protection system towards pensions, GDP in Spain, an exception when we look
which led to the withdrawal of resources from at the international panorama (Garicano,
other areas such as family policies, the under- 2012). The overall outcome was the loss of
development of public care services”. almost 3.3 million jobs between 2008 and
Regarding the evolution of public so- 2012 (equivalent to 15.5% of the jobs that
cial spending in Spain, as indicated in the had existed at the beginning of the crisis).
previous section, the “old” welfare state Some authors connect this disproportion-
is characterised as more oriented toward ate destruction of employment to the “type
transfers, while the “new” social investment of productive specialisation consolidated in
state is more oriented toward services (Hu- the last expansive phase of the economic
ber and Stephens, 2007). Thus, in a first ap- cycle” (Rocha, 2012: 68). For example, as a
proximation, in Graph 1 we see the evolu- consequence of the bursting of the national
tion of the distribution of public spending real estate bubble, the construction sector
on social protection between cash transfers alone lost 1.4 million jobs.
Reis. Rev.Esp.Investig.Sociol. ISSN-L: 0210-5233. N.º 175, July - September 2021, pp. 85-10492 The Recalibration of Public Social Spending in Spain: Towards a Social Investment State
GRAPH 1. Evolution of public social spending by type of benefit, millions of euros
200,000
180,000
160,000
140,000
120,000
100,000
80,000
60,000
40,000
20,000
0
95
96
97
98
99
00
01
02
03
04
05
06
07
08
09
10
11
12
13
14
15
19
19
19
19
19
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
Cash benefits In-kind benefits
Source: OECD. Stat (retrieved March 6, 2019).
The crisis also had a strong impact on crisis. On the other hand, in-kind spending,
public finances. Starting from a solid fiscal after a slight decrease in the first years of the
position (public debt as 35.8% of GDP and crisis, declined drastically starting with the
a fiscal surplus equivalent to 1.7% of GDP beginning of the hard adjustment policies on
in 2007), during the crisis incomes plum- public spending in 2012, now with Mariano
meted while expenses increased as auto- Rajoy (Partido Popular) in the government.
matic stabilizers went into effect (Laparra As a result, a context of strong austerity re-
and Pérez Eransus, 2012). In the evolution of garding public finances led to a scenario of
public spending we can identify two clearly “reversed competition for public resources”;
differentiated stages: after an initial expan- in-kind spending declined, while spending
sive stage (2007-2008), a stage of fiscal con- levels on direct cash benefits remained sta-
solidation (2010-2014) began that strength- ble as automatic stabilisers came into effect
ened with the intensification of the sovereign (mainly retirement pensions and unemploy-
debt crisis in the summer of 2011 and the ment benefits). Thus, the Great Recession
change in government that took place in De- introduced a new layer of complexity in the
cember 2011 (Conde-Ruiz et al., 2016). recalibration of social policy (Leoni, 2016).
In this context, a dramatic change in the Lastly, with the return to strong economic
prior trend in public spending on social pol- growth in 2014 and the relaxing of auster-
icy occurred. On the one hand, after a one- ity policies, we see an increase in in-kind
off reduction in 2010, linked to the initial spending in 2015, while cash transfers re-
adjustment measures announced by the mained stable. What this seems to indicate
second Zapatero government (PSOE), in is that the country has not entered into a pe-
May spending on cash benefits slowed its riod of permanent austerity, at least, in terms
rate of increase since the beginning of the of social investment spending.
Reis. Rev.Esp.Investig.Sociol. ISSN-L: 0210-5233. N.º 175, July - September 2021, pp. 85-104David Luque Balbona and Ana M. Guillén 93
In short, in this initial approach to the terity measures, while spending on mon-
recalibration of public social spending we etary benefits (more connected to social
find that the impact of the process of the protection) only stopped increasing. The
consolidation of public finances varies in return to economic growth, in a consoli-
function of the type of social spending. In- dated manner since 2014, seems to sug-
kind spending (more connected to social gest a recovery in spending on social in-
investment) was seriously affected by aus- vestment.
GRAPH 2. Evolution of the ratio spending on cash benefits/spending on in-kind benefits
2.75
2.50
2.25
2.00
1.75
1.50
1.25
95
96
97
98
99
00
01
02
03
04
05
06
07
08
09
10
11
12
13
14
15
19
19
19
19
19
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
Source: OECD. Stat (retrieved March 6, 2019).
Graph 2 shows the evolution of the ra- ing on cash benefits remained stable while
tio (coefficient) between spending on cash spending on in-kind benefits declined. In
benefits and in-kind benefits. From this, 2015, the last year for which data is avail-
we can see that during the first ten years of able, the ratio resumed its pre-crisis down-
our period of analysis, the investment side ward trend, spending on in-kind benefits
gained in importance with respect to the grew and cash benefits remained stable.
social protection side: the ratio gradually To close this section, we look at the Span-
declined until 2006 (from 2.53 to 1.71). Dur- ish case in its European context. Graph 3
ing the period from 2007 through 2010 the shows the evolution of the ratio between
process of the recalibration of social spend- spending on cash benefits and in-kind bene-
ing was suspended: the ratio stabilised, fits for the EU15 countries grouped according
which implies that both types of spending to their different welfare regimes as identified
grew in approximately the same proportion. by Esping-Andersen (1990) and subsequently
Thereafter, the ratio grew until it reached a broadened by Ferrera (1996) by defining the
level similar to that found for the year 2001 Mediterranean countries as a differentiated
(2.04). As we can see, in this period, spend- group.
Reis. Rev.Esp.Investig.Sociol. ISSN-L: 0210-5233. N.º 175, July - September 2021, pp. 85-10494 The Recalibration of Public Social Spending in Spain: Towards a Social Investment State
GRAPH 3. E
volution of the ratio spending on cash benefits/spending on in-kind benefits for EU15 countries
grouped by welfare regimes
3.00
2.50
2.00
1.50
1.00
0.50
02
03
95
96
97
98
99
00
01
04
05
06
07
08
09
10
11
12
13
14
15
20
19
19
19
19
19
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
Nordic regime Continental regime Anglo-Saxon regime
Mediterranean regime Spain
Note: Nordic regime: average for Denmark, Finland and Sweden; Continental regime: average for Austria, Germany, Bel-
gium, France, Luxembourg and the Netherlands; Anglo-Saxon regime: average for the United Kingdom; Mediterranean re-
gime: average for Spain, Italy, Greece and Portugal.
Source: OECD. Stat (retrieved March 15, 2019).
Broadly speaking, the evolution of the sembles the continental welfare regime.
ratio (protection/investment) in the differ- The distancing of Spain from its traditional
ent regimes confirms previous results from (Mediterranean) grouping confirms what
both other researches based on spending has been found in other studies (Guillén
data (Kuitto, 2016; Ronchi, 2018) and stud- and León, 2011; Pavolini et al., 2015; Gui-
ies of a more qualitative nature (Bouget llén, González Begega and Luque Balbona,
et al., 2015). The Nordic and Anglo-Saxon 2016). Lastly, the Great Recession only
regimes present a more balanced division had a drastic impact on the slow process
between the protective and investment of the recalibration of social spending in
dimensions in their welfare budgets. The the Mediterranean regime; with austerity
continental regime is in a middle ground
generating a scenario of “reversed com-
between the former and the Mediterranean
petition for resources”, the progress made
countries, although it is closer to the latter,
during the previous decade disappeared.
at least until the beginning of the Great Re-
cession. The Mediterranean regime leans In the following section we analyse
more toward the protective dimension; spending in Spain on items most closely re-
however, Spain continues to follow a path lated to the logic of social investment and
toward recalibration that separates it from evaluate the degree of development of its
this group, as it more and more closely re- different functions.
Reis. Rev.Esp.Investig.Sociol. ISSN-L: 0210-5233. N.º 175, July - September 2021, pp. 85-104David Luque Balbona and Ana M. Guillén 95
Evolution of public spending From a social investment perspective,
education is a prerequisite for achieving
in regard to different social
success in the labour market and a foun-
investment functions
dation for well-being as well (Leoni, 2016).
Education can be considered a “pure” form
In this section we analyse the evolution of
of investment (in human capital) given that
public spending on policies most directly
it generates returns in the medium and long
connected to social investment. The diffe-
term in the form of higher rates of employ-
rent spending items are grouped around
ment and better wages.
the three social investment functions (stock,
flow and buffers) introduced in the second In Graph 4 we see an important increase
section of this article. in public spending on education up to 2009,
with an average annual increase of 7.4%
since 2000. In 2014 we find spending of 53.9
The stock function: the development of billion euros, 90.0% more than in 2000 in cur-
human capital rent terms. However, with the change in the
economic cycle, there was a drastic reduc-
The stock function is connected to future pro- tion in public spending on education, prima-
ductivity and is aimed at improving, updating rily concentrated in the 2012-2013 biennium,
and maintaining human capital (Hemerijck, reaching a low of 44.8 billion euros in 2014
2015). Education and active labour market (an accumulated decline of –16.9%). Finally,
policies (ALMP) are most closely connected in 2015 with the relaxing of austerity policies,
to this social investment function (Graph 4). spending on education increased slightly.
GRAPH 4. Evolution of public spending on the stock function, millions of euros
60,000
50,000
40,000
30,000
20,000
10,000
0
95
96
97
98
99
00
01
02
03
04
05
06
07
08
09
10
11
12
13
14
15
19
19
19
19
19
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
ALMP Education
Note: Spending on all educational levels ISCED 2011 excluding early childhood education (0 to 3 years of age).
Source: Education, Statistics on Public Spending on Education, Ministry of Education (various years). ALMP, OECD. Stat
(retrieved March 15, 2019).
Reis. Rev.Esp.Investig.Sociol. ISSN-L: 0210-5233. N.º 175, July - September 2021, pp. 85-10496 The Recalibration of Public Social Spending in Spain: Towards a Social Investment State
For their part, ALMP are also a clear suffered from an evident “competition over
component of social investment strategies. resources”, as those required for passive
Instead of providing a replacement income policies increased dramatically with the
to individuals who lose their employment, application of austerity measures. With the
active policies are based on making the pe- consolidation of economic growth in 2014,
riod of unemployment as short as possible, resources aimed at ALMP resumed their
proactively helping those who are unem- upward growth.
ployed reincorporate into the labour mar-
ket. In addition, ALMP try to avoid the scar-
ring effect of unemployment and they also The flow function: care related policies
generate overall returns to society, reduc-
ing spending on benefits and subsidies by The flow function is aimed at making the
fostering reinsertion in the labour market most efficient use of available employment
(Bonoli, 2012). resources and achieving high levels of labour
As can be seen in Graph 4 spending market participation, mainly through facilita-
on ALMP grew significantly from the mid- ting the transition from economic inactivity
nineties until the beginning of the crisis, (Hemerijck, 2015). Thus, the evolution of pu-
following the activation principles intro- blic spending on early childhood education
duced by the European Employment Strat- and care and in-kind benefits for the elderly
egy (Moreno and Serrano, 2011). With the are the policies that most closely indicate
eruption of the crisis, spending on ALMP social investment in this function.
GRAPH 5. Evolution of public spending on the flow function, millions of euros
8,000
7,000
6,000
5,000
4,000
3,000
2,000
1,000
0
95
96
97
98
99
00
01
02
03
04
05
06
07
08
09
10
11
12
13
14
15
19
19
19
19
19
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
In-kind benefits for the elderly Early childhood education and care
Source: OECD. Stat (retrieved March 15, 2019).
Reis. Rev.Esp.Investig.Sociol. ISSN-L: 0210-5233. N.º 175, July - September 2021, pp. 85-104David Luque Balbona and Ana M. Guillén 97
As can be seen in Graph 5, Spain had or mechanism of coordination”. In addition,
been “fertile ground” in the development of they have a supplementary and complemen-
care policies (León and Pavolini, 2014) until tary dimension, reducing the gaps in protec-
the arrival of the Great Recession. Spend- tion left uncovered by the central state sys-
ing on early childhood education and care tem (Sanzo, 2018: 43). In Graph 6 we see the
were at minimal levels at the beginning of evolution in spending on RMIs.
the nineties but grew significantly and con- In Graph 6 we can see how, with the cri-
stantly during the years of rapid economic
sis, RMIs were no longer the residual sys-
growth and the massive incorporation of
tems they had been (Sanzo, 2018). The
women into the labour market (from the
growth in spending was continuous and
mid-nineties until the Great Recession).
particularly intense after the crisis began, in-
However, with the initiation of a harsh ad-
creasing from slightly more than 200 million
justment to social spending in 2012, the
euros in 2002 to almost 1,400 million euros
budgetary commitments in these areas de-
in 2015. As a result, the crisis led to the un-
clined, although not as abruptly as in other
expected institutionalisation of the minimum
areas of social policy.
income system in Spain (Natili, 2016). Thus,
Spending on elderly care followed a sim-
the buffer function is the only social invest-
ilar trajectory, starting from low levels in the
ment function that was strengthened during
mid-nineties, spending grew progressively
the Great Recession. However, due to the
until 2007. In fact, a brief golden age in
low level of actual protection it provides,
long-term care began (2007-2011) with the
the system of guaranteed income is more
passage of the so-called Dependency Law
aimed at avoiding severe poverty than aid-
at the end of 2006, with an accumulated in-
ing individuals to train for and find employ-
crease in spending of 75.5% with respect
ment (Rodríguez Cabrero, 2018).
to 2006. During the most intense period of
austerity (the 2012-2013 biennial), spending To summarise our findings in this sec-
declined by 14.0% from its maximum level tion, until the Great Recession, Spain was
in 2011. Since then spending in this area fertile territory for social investment. The
has remained relatively stable. three functions (stock, flow and buffer) had
all undergone significant development. With
the arrival of the crisis, budgetary restric-
The buffer function: minimum income tions led to a tradeoff between the invest-
systems ment and protective dimensions of social
policy. As a result, only the buffer function
In Spain, Regional Minimum Incomes pro- was consolidated during the crisis, while
grammes (RMIs) are the policies that most the stock and flow functions suffered from
closely exercise a buffer function (maintai- competition for resources.
ning strong universal minimum income safety
nets). The RMI system is configured as the
only protection mechanism for the potentia-
lly active population with no previous contri-
Discussion: brakes on social
butory link and as a safety net for those who investment
have exhausted all other benefits (Arriba,
2014). RMIs are structured as a decentrali- After analysing the evolution of public social
sed system that “operates in different ways spending, we look at a series of factors that
depending on the region, leading to very dis- can act as a brake on a hypothetical new
tinct systems, not subject to any process expansion of social investment in Spain.
Reis. Rev.Esp.Investig.Sociol. ISSN-L: 0210-5233. N.º 175, July - September 2021, pp. 85-10498 The Recalibration of Public Social Spending in Spain: Towards a Social Investment State
GRAPH 6. Evolution of public spending on the buffer function, millions of euros
1,600
1,400
1,200
1,000
800
600
400
200
0
2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015
Source: Report on minimum insertion income (various years). Spanish Ministry of Health, Social Services and Equality.
First, public finances in Spain are still ity of the system, independent of other
in a delicate situation despite the current considerations. The entry of new pen-
favourable economic context. Spain be- sioners into the system with higher aver-
gan 2018 as the only EU country with a age benefits will require more resources
public deficit above 3% and, therefore, each year, which are not covered by cur-
remained under the yoke of the exces- rent social security contributions, making
sive deficit procedure launched in 2009. it necessary to take resources away from
The meagre public resources available se- other areas and/or increase indebtedness.
verely limit the expansion of social invest- This situation may result in a “permanent
ment policies, even more so if we take reversed competition for resources”, in
into account the critical state in which which increased spending on economic
we find the pension system, with a defi- benefits (closer to the logic of protec-
cit, according to Eurostat, of more than tion) will not leave space for the expan-
17,000 million euros in 2017. Debate over sion of benefits in services (closer to an
the future of retirement pensions, part of investment logic). Debate over the sus-
the paradigm of (old) policies oriented to- tainability of the pension system shows
ward protection, occupies a growing por- that the OSR, far from losing relevancy,
tion of public and media attention and so- continue to be central due to the dramatic
cial policy focus. The de facto repeal3 of process of the aging of the population. In
the annual revaluation index introduced in this sense, Buesmeyer and Garritzmann
a 2013 reform has, in the short term, in- (2017: 871) point out that social invest-
tensified the problem of the sustainabil- ment policies “are generally very popu-
lar, but as soon as realistic budget con-
3 The annual update of pension amounts in 2018 and straints are added, public support drops
2019 has not been applied. considerably”. Thus, Neimanns, Buse-
Reis. Rev.Esp.Investig.Sociol. ISSN-L: 0210-5233. N.º 175, July - September 2021, pp. 85-104David Luque Balbona and Ana M. Guillén 99
meyer and Garritzmann (2018) find, in a among OECD countries (OECD, 2007).
sample of eight European countries (in- This structural disconnection between the
cluding Spain), that only 17% of those education system and the labour market
surveyed were in agreement with increas- “exposes human capital investments to
ing spending on social investment at the the risk of over-education and poor eco-
expense of social protection. nomic returns” (Kazepov and Ranci, 2017:
Secondly, beyond the resurgence in 101). Secondly, and also regarding the
OSR, the underlying problem in financing labour market, there is an incapacity for
these new social policies linked to a so- new jobs to provide sufficient conditions
cial investment perspective, is the Span- for social integration. Precarious employ-
ish state’s low capacity for raising rev- ment is not a result of the crisis, as it was
enue. Public revenue as a percentage of already well-rooted in Spain prior to the
GDP in Spain is well below the average crisis. Structural reforms of the labour
for its neighbouring countries. Thus, in market and of the collective bargaining
2017, public revenue in Spain was 37.9% system, approved at the height of the cri-
of GDP, while the average for the EU15 sis, have strengthened the trend toward
was 45.4% (44.9% in the EU28). As a re- greater precarisation of employment for a
sult, with spending on social protection part of the occupied population, as a re-
amounting to 17.1% of GDP in 2015, the sult of choosing internal devaluation as
latest year with definitive data, the Span- the economic policy for exiting the crisis.
ish welfare state can be described as low In short, social investment policies are not
cost. In addition, Beblavý and Hájkova capable of generating good quality jobs
(2016) show that countries with low lev- nor of reducing labour market precari-
els of public revenue, among them Spain, ousness without the existence of specific
have a relative preference for “compen- contextual conditions connected to the
sating social spending”. Social invest- productive fabric and the institutional reg-
ment policies require large and continu- ulation of the labour market.
ing investments that are very difficult for
states with low levels of public revenue
to undertake. Therefore, one requisite for Conclusions
a (new) expansion of social investment is
an increase in the state’s revenue collect- Returning to the objectives discussed in
ing capacity. the introduction, from our analysis of pu-
Lastly, in addition to the issues of the blic spending data —the skeleton of social
availability of resources and spending investment, according to Deken (2004)—
preferences between protection and in- we find that there has been a social inves-
vestment, the question arises, as noted tment turn in the welfare budget in Spain
by Kazepov and Ranci (2017) for the Ital- over the last two decades. Spending on
ian case, whether the preconditions exist policies closer to the postulates of social
in Spain for an effective social investment investment has increased in importance
strategy. First, one of the weak contextual over this period. Another important con-
factors in the Spanish case is the poor clusion is that the increase in spending in
connection between the education system the investment dimension of social policy
(supply of human capital) and the labour has not been at the expense of the pro-
market (demy for human capital). Thus, tective dimension. Until the Great Reces-
even before the crisis, Spain had the sion, Spain, with strong economic growth
highest level of over-qualification (25%) and sound public finances, was on a “fast
Reis. Rev.Esp.Investig.Sociol. ISSN-L: 0210-5233. N.º 175, July - September 2021, pp. 85-104100 The Recalibration of Public Social Spending in Spain: Towards a Social Investment State
track” toward social investment. Resour- cies from a social investment perspective
ces aimed at both the (new) investment (ALMP, childcare and elderly care poli-
side as well as the (traditional) protective cies and RMIs), we could examine the po-
side increased, although the former more tential existence of regional variations in
so in relative terms. the establishment of a social investment
In comparative terms, the recalibra- logic. In addition, we could look at citi-
tion of social spending toward social in- zen preferences regarding the traditional
vestment has been more intense in Spain approach to social policy (repair) versus
than in the other countries of the Mediter- the social investment approach (prepare)
ranean welfare model. From a social in- to get an idea of the extent of public sup-
vestment perspective, Spain has deviated port for this strategy for modernising so-
from the pre-established path, increas- cial policies.
ing the internal heterogeneity within this
group.
Regarding the impact of fiscal auster-
Bibliography
ity on the process of recalibrating social Arriba González de Durana, Ana (2014). “El pa-
spending, the findings from comparative pel de la garantía de mínimos frente a la cri-
analyses are confirmed. Austerity meas- sis”. VII Informe sobre exclusión and desarro-
ures have more drastically affected (the llo social en España 2014. Madrid: Fundación
more discretional) spending on social in- FOESSA. Available at: http://www.foessa2014.
vestment than (the more consolidated) es/informe, access January 12, 2019.
spending on social protection. In a pe- Barbier, Jean-C. (2017). “Social Investment. With
or Against Social Protection?”. In: Hemerijck, A.
riod of significant budgetary tensions, the
(ed.). The Uses of Social Investment. Oxford: Ox-
trade-off between both dimensions of so- ford University Press.
cial policy becomes more evident. Only the
Beblavý, Miroslav and Hájková, Alžbeta (2016).
social investment buffer function consoli- “Social Investment and State Capacity”. (CEPS
dated during the crisis. Working Document No. 419). Available at: http://
Lastly, the most recent data on public aei.pitt.edu/72908/, access January 10, 2019.
spending on social policies indicates that Bentolila, Samuel (2015). “De recesiones and ex-
the process of a recalibration toward so- pansiones”. Nada es gratis. Available at: https://
nadaesgratis.es, access May 2, 2020.
cial investment has resumed with the re-
turn to economic growth. However, the low Bonoli, Giuliano (2005). “The Politics of the New So-
cial Policies: Providing Coverage against New
revenue collecting capacity of the Spanish
Social Risks in Mature Welfare States”. Policy &
state and the centrality that pensions still Politics, 33(3): 431-449.
occupy in policy debates suggest a re-
Bonoli, Giuliano (2012). “Active Labour Market Pol-
duced margin for manoevre to increase icy and Social Investment: A Changing Rela-
this dimension of social policies in the near tionship”. In: Morel, N.; Palier, B. and Palme,
future. J. (eds.). Towards a Social Investment Welfare
State? Ideas, Policies and Challenges. Bristol:
To conclude, taking the analytical-con-
Policy Press.
ceptual development of social investment
Bouget, Denis; Frazer, Hugh; Marlier, Eric and
and the results presented here as a start-
Sabato, Sebastiano (2015). Social Investment
ing point, several aspects not covered in in Europe: A Study of National Policies. Luxem-
this article can be explored further. For bourg: European Commission–European Social
example, given the highly decentralised Policy Network (ESPN).
character of social policy in Spain, partic- Breunig, Christian and Busemeyer, Marius R. (2012).
ularly in regard to several of the key poli- “Fiscal Austerity and the Trade-Off between
Reis. Rev.Esp.Investig.Sociol. ISSN-L: 0210-5233. N.º 175, July - September 2021, pp. 85-104David Luque Balbona and Ana M. Guillén 101
Public Investment and Social Spending”. Journal Guillén, Ana M. and León, Margarita (eds.) (2011).
of European Public Policy, 19(6): 921-938. The Spanish Welfare State in European Context.
Busemeyer, Marius R. and Garritzmann, Julian L. Farnham: Ashgate.
(2017). “Public Opinion on Policy and Budgetary Guillén, Ana M. and Luque Balbona, David (2019).
Trade-Offs in European Welfare States: Evidence “La inversión social en España”. Documento
from a New Comparative Survey”. Journal of Eu- de Trabajo del VIII Informe FOESSA. Madrid:
ropean Public Policy, 24(6): 871-889. FOESSA.
Cantillon, Bea (2011). “The Paradox of the Social In- Guillén, Ana M.; González Begega, Sergio and
vestment State: Growth, Employment and Pov- Luque Balbona, David (2016). “Austeridad y
erty in the Lisbon Era”. Journal of European So- ajustes sociales en el Sur de Europa. La frag-
cial Policy, 21(5): 432-449. mentación del modelo de bienestar mediterrá-
Cantillon, Bea and Lancker, Wim van (2013). “Three neo”. Revista Española de Sociología, 25(2):
Shortcomings of the Social Investment Perspec- 261-272.
tive”. Social Policy & Society, 12(4): 553-564. Häusermann, Silja (2012). “The Politics of Old and
Conde-Ruiz, José I.; Díaz, Manuel; Marín, Carmen New Social Policies”. In: Bonoli, G. and Natali, D.
and Rubio-Ramírez, Juan (2016). “Evolución del (eds.). The Politics of the New Welfare State. Ox-
gasto público por funciones durante la crisis ford: Oxford University Press.
(2007-2014): España vs UE”. (Working paper, 9, Hemerijck, Anton (2011). “The Social Investment Im-
Fedea). perative beyond the Crisis”. Challenge Europe,
Crouch, Colin and Keune, Maarten (2012). “The 21: 11-19.
Governance of Economic Uncertainty”. In: Hemerijck, Anton (2013). Changing Welfare States.
Bonoli, G. and Natali, D. (eds.). The Politics of Oxford: Oxford University Press.
the New Welfare State. Oxford: Oxford Univer- Hemerijck, Anton (2014). “Social Investment,
sity. ‘stocks’, ‘flows’ and ‘buffers’”. Social Policies,
Deken, Johan de (2014). “Identifying the Skele- 1(1): 9-26.
ton of the Social Investment State: Defining and Hemerijck, Anton (2015). “The Quiet Paradigm Rev-
Measuring Patterns of Social Policy Change on olution of Social Investment”. Social Policy, 22(2):
the Basis of Expenditure Data”. In: Cantillon, B. 242-256.
and Vandenbroucke, F. (eds.). Reconciling Work Huber, Evelyne and Stephens, John D. (2007).
and Poverty Reduction. Oxford: Oxford Univer- “Combating Old and New Social Risks”. In:
sity Press. Armingeon, K. and Bonoli, G. (eds.). The Poli-
Deken, Johan de (2017). “Conceptualizing and tics of Post-Industrial Welfare States. New York:
Measuring Social Investment”. In: Hemerijck, A. Routledge.
(ed.). The Uses of Social Investment. Oxford: Ox- Jenson, Jane (2009). “Lost in Translation: The So-
ford University Press. cial Investment Perspective and Gender Equal-
Esping-Andersen, Gøsta (1990). The Three Worlds ity”. Social Politics, 16(4): 446-483.
of Welfare Capitalism. Princeton, New Jersey: Kazepov, Yuri and Ranci, Costanzo (2017). “Is Every
John Wiley & Sons. Country Fit for Social Investment? Italy as an Ad-
Esping-Andersen, Gøsta (1999). Social Foundations verse Case”. Journal of European Social Policy,
of Postindustrial Economies. Oxford: Oxford Uni- 27(1): 90-104.
versity Press. Kersbergen, Kees van and Hemerijck, Anton (2012).
Ferrera, Maurizio (1996). “The ‘Southern Model’ of “Two Decades of Change in Europe: The Emer-
Welfare in Social Europe”. Journal of European gence of the Social Investment State”. Journal of
Social Policy, 6(1): 17-37. Social Policy, 41(3): 475-492.
Garicano, Luis (2012). “Nuestra Gran Depresión: Kuitto, Kato (2016). “From Social Security to Social
cinco años de destrucción de empleo”. Nada es Investment? Compensating and Social Invest-
Gratis. Available at: https://nadaesgratis.es, ac- ment Welfare Policies in a Life-Course Perspec-
cess May 2, 2020. tive”. Journal of European Social Policy, 26(5):
Giddens, Anthony (1998). The Third Way: The Re- 442-459.
newal of Social Democracy. Cambridge: Univer- Kvist, Jon (2013). “The Post-Crisis European Social
sity Press. Model: Developing or Dismantling Social Invest-
Reis. Rev.Esp.Investig.Sociol. ISSN-L: 0210-5233. N.º 175, July - September 2021, pp. 85-104102 The Recalibration of Public Social Spending in Spain: Towards a Social Investment State
ments?”. Journal of International and Compara- Reform in Italy and Spain”. Comparative Euro-
tive Social Policy, 29(1): 91-107. pean Politics, 13(1): 56-76.
Laparra, Miguel and Pérez Eransus, Begoña (2012) Pino, Eloisa del (2014). “¿Un Estado orientado a la
(coords.). Crisis and fractura social en Europa. inversión social? Avances y retrocesos de los
Causas and efectos en España. Barcelona: Obra Gobiernos europeos en relación con el nuevo
Social “La Caixa”. paradigma del bienestar”. Gaceta Sindical: Re-
León, Margarita and Pavolini, Emmanuele (2014). flexión and Debate, 22: 141-156.
“Social Investment or Back to Familism: The Im- Rocha, Fernando (2012). “La crisis económica y sus
pact of the Economic Crisis on Family and Care efectos sobre el empleo en España”. Gaceta Sin-
Policies in Italy and Spain”. South European So- dical, 19: 67-90.
ciety and Politics, 19(3): 353-369. Rodríguez Cabrero, Gregorio (2011). “The Consoli-
León, Margarita; Ranci, Constanzo; Sabatinelli, Ste- dation of the Spanish Welfare State”. In: Guillén,
fania and Ibáñez, Zyab (2019). “Tensions be- A. M. and León, M. (eds.). The Spanish Welfare
tween Quantity and Quality in Social Investment State in European Context. Farnham: Ashgate.
Agendas: Working Conditions of ECEC Teaching Rodríguez Cabrero, Gregorio (coord.) (2015). ESPN
Staff in Italy and Spain”. Journal of European So- Thematic Report on Social Investment – Spain.
cial Policy, 29(4): 564-576. Brussels: European Commission. Available at:
Leoni, Thomas (2016). “Social Investment: A Guid- http://ec.europa. eu/social/keyDocuments.jsp,
ing Principle for Welfare State Adjustment after access June 1, 2018.
the Crisis?”. Empirica, 43(4): 831-858. Rodríguez Cabrero, Gregorio (2018). “Políticas so-
Morel, Nathalie; Palier, Bruno and Palme, Joakim ciales e inversión social en un horizonte de con-
(eds.). (2012). Towards a Social Investment Wel- solidación fiscal y reestructuración permanente
fare State?: Ideas, Policies and Challenges. Bris- del estado de bienestar”. In: Jaraíz Arroyo, G.
tol: Policy Press. (coord.). Bienestar social y políticas públicas:
Moreno, Luis and Serrano, Amparo (2011). “Euro- retos para pactar el futuro. Madrid: La Cata-
peanization and Spanish Welfare: The Case of rata.
Employment Policy”. In: Guillén, A. M. and León, Ronchi, Stefano (2018). “Which Roads (if any) to So-
M. (eds.). The Spanish Welfare State in European cial Investment? The Recalibration of EU Welfare
Context. Farnham: Ashgate. States at the Crisis Crossroads (2000-2014)”.
Natili, Marcello (2016). “The Unexpected Institution- Journal of Social Policy, 47(3): 459-478.
alization of Minimum Income in Spain”. Labora- Sanzo González, Luis (2018). “La política de garan-
torio di Politica Comparata e Filosofia Pubblica. tía de ingresos en España”. Revista de Servicios
Turin: Centro Einaudi. (Working Paper No. 2). Sociales, 65: 41-51.
Neimanns, Erik; Busemeyer, Marius R. and Garritz- Streeck, Wolfgang and Mertens, Daniel (2011). Fis-
mann, Julian L. (2018). “How Popular Are Social In- cal austerity and public investment: Is the possi-
vestment Policies Really? Evidence from a Survey ble the enemy of the necessary? (MPIfG Discus-
Experiment in Eight Western European Countries”. sion Paper 11/12).
European Sociological Review, 34(3): 238-253.
Taylor-Gooby, Peter (2004). “New Social Risks and
Nolan, Brian (2013). “What use is ‘social invest- Welfare States: New Parading and New Poli-
ment’?”. Journal of European Social Policy, 23(5): tics?”. In: Taylor-Gooby, P. (ed.). New Risks,
459-468. New Welfare. The Transformation of the Euro-
Nolan, Brian (2017). “Social Investment: The Thin pean Welfare State. Oxford: Oxford University
Line between Evidence-Based Research and Press.
Political Advocacy”. In: Hemerijck, A. (ed.). The Taylor-Gooby, Peter; Gumy, Julia M. and Otto, Ade-
Uses of Social Investment. Oxford: Oxford Uni- line (2015). “Can ‘New Welfare’ Address Poverty
versity Press. through More and Better Jobs?”. Journal of So-
OCDE (2007). International Migration Outlook. Paris: cial Policy, 44(1): 83-104.
OCDE. Vandenbroucke, Frank and Vleminckx, Koen (2011).
Pavolini, Emmanuele; León, Margarita; Guillén, “Disappointing Poverty Trends: Is the Social In-
Ana M. and Ascoli, Ugo (2015). “From Austerity vestment State to Blame?”. Journal of European
to Permanent Strain? The EU and Welfare State Social Policy, 21(5): 450-471.
Reis. Rev.Esp.Investig.Sociol. ISSN-L: 0210-5233. N.º 175, July - September 2021, pp. 85-104You can also read
