Skip to main content
Go to the home page of the European Commission (opens in new window)
English English
CORDIS - EU research results
CORDIS
Content archived on 2024-06-11

The Politics of Unpopular Policies: Enacting the Anti-Welfare State Agenda

Objective



Research objectives and content

By offering an anti-state solution to the governing crisis of the late 1970s and early 1980s. Political leaders constructed an agenda o hose success ultimate depended upon the implementation of unwelcome measures. The eulogy of less government boiled down to the penance of specific cuts placed upon specific constituencies. Yet we know relatively little out the incentives and disincentives leaders possess to impose pain. By extension, we know remarkably little about what factors differentiate governments in terms of their success in the area of welfare retrenchment. What is increasingly clear is that the commitment to pursue unpopular policies is not a sufficient condition for loss imposition. The limited penetration of the anti-state agenda is severely under-explained in terms of the tactical options used is rightist governments. Indeed, there is a distinct theoretical void concerning the incentives and disincentives leaders possess to impose pain in politically salient areas. Virtually all our theorising is predicated on leaders doing more not less. It is increasingly clear, however, that the two processes are far from identical. This research project seeks to investigate the factors that constrain and facilitate leaders across advanced industrial democracies in their welfare retrenchment efforts.

Aside from the use of low profile policy methods. There appear to be two overarching mechanisms affecting leadership options in this respect: institutions and partisan issue associations. Pre-existing policy-structures and institutions affect leaders capacity to hide the condition whether low-risk strategies are available to leaders.

Partisan issue-associations condition both their capacity to hide and their need to do so. The thesis guiding this project is that the political aspects of retrenchment have been both marginalized and, to a large extent, oversimplified.

Training content (objective, benefit and expected impact)

Links with industry / industrial relevance (22)

Fields of science (EuroSciVoc)

CORDIS classifies projects with EuroSciVoc, a multilingual taxonomy of fields of science, through a semi-automatic process based on NLP techniques. See: The European Science Vocabulary.

You need to log in or register to use this function

Programme(s)

Multi-annual funding programmes that define the EU’s priorities for research and innovation.

Topic(s)

Calls for proposals are divided into topics. A topic defines a specific subject or area for which applicants can submit proposals. The description of a topic comprises its specific scope and the expected impact of the funded project.

Call for proposal

Procedure for inviting applicants to submit project proposals, with the aim of receiving EU funding.

Data not available

Funding Scheme

Funding scheme (or “Type of Action”) inside a programme with common features. It specifies: the scope of what is funded; the reimbursement rate; specific evaluation criteria to qualify for funding; and the use of simplified forms of costs like lump sums.

RGI - Research grants (individual fellowships)

Coordinator

Istituto Universitario Europeo
EU contribution
No data
Address
Via dei Roccettini 5
50016 Fiesole Firenze
Italy

See on map

Total cost

The total costs incurred by this organisation to participate in the project, including direct and indirect costs. This amount is a subset of the overall project budget.

No data
My booklet 0 0