‘Beyond Left and Right’: The New Partisan Politics of Welfare
Identifieur interne : 001724 ( Istex/Corpus ); précédent : 001723; suivant : 001725‘Beyond Left and Right’: The New Partisan Politics of Welfare
Auteurs : Fiona RossSource :
- Governance [ 0952-1895 ] ; 2000-04.
English descriptors
- KwdEn :
- Access points, Agenda, Agenda formation, American case, American journal, Annual meeting, Apls, Beverly hills, Blair, British labour party, Brookings institution, Budget plan, Bush presidency, Business confidence, Cabinet government, Cambridge university press, Castle, Centralized institutions, Chatham, Chatham house, Chicago press, Choice reversal, Class voting, Clinton, Coalition government, Coalition governments, Collective action, Comparative analysis, Congressional voting, Considerable support, Constitutional reform, Constraint, Contextual, Contextual cues, Contextual reasons, Continental europe, Cue, Democratic president, Different types, Diffuse responsibility, Dominant interests, Economic issues, Election briefing, Electoral change, Electoral pressures, Electoral reasons, Englewood cliffs, European journal, Federal government, Federalism, Fiona, Fiona ross, Food stamps, Gerritsen, Governance, Government growth, Great experiment, Greater chance, Harvard university press, Health care coverage, Historical institutionalism, Historical legacies, Ideological drive, Industrial democracies, Industrial societies, Institutional, Institutional change, Institutional conditions, Institutional position, Institutional settings, Interest groups, Issue positions, Labour, Labour governance, Labour triumphs, Laver, Leftist, Leftist parties, Liberal welfare regimes, Little effect, Major parties, Majoritarian, Majoritarian institutions, Majoritarian structures, Many members, Many respects, Michigan press, Minority veto, National standards, Other hand, Parliamentary opposition, Parties matter, Partisan differences, Partisan politics, Party competition, Party policy, Pension reform, Personal responsibility, Pierson, Policy challenge, Policy goals, Policy initiation, Policy process, Policy solutions, Policy structures, Policy success, Political agency, Political behavior, Political economy, Political leadership, Political right, Political science, Political tolerance, Politics literature, Poor position, Popular politics, Potential gains, Preference maximizers, Princeton university press, Principal source, Product differentiation, Proportional representation, Prwora, Public opinion, Public policy, Public services, Public support, Restructuring, Retrenchment, Retrenchment efforts, Retrenchment initiatives, Saliency theory, Science association, Service provision, Social partners, Social policy, Southern europe, Spatial theory, Subnational governments, Subnational units, Successful framing, Tony blair, Trade unions, Unpopular, Unpopular policies, Unpopular politics, Unwelcome measures, Veto players, Veto points, Voter, Voter flight, Vowles, Welfare cuts, Welfare programs, Welfare provision, Welfare recipients, Welfare reform, Welfare retrenchment, Welfare services, Welfare state, Welfare state retrenchment, Western democracies, White house, Work opportunity reconciliation, Xvii world congress, Zealand.
- Teeft :
- Access points, Agenda, Agenda formation, American case, American journal, Annual meeting, Apls, Beverly hills, Blair, British labour party, Brookings institution, Budget plan, Bush presidency, Business confidence, Cabinet government, Cambridge university press, Castle, Centralized institutions, Chatham, Chatham house, Chicago press, Choice reversal, Class voting, Clinton, Coalition government, Coalition governments, Collective action, Comparative analysis, Congressional voting, Considerable support, Constitutional reform, Constraint, Contextual, Contextual cues, Contextual reasons, Continental europe, Cue, Democratic president, Different types, Diffuse responsibility, Dominant interests, Economic issues, Election briefing, Electoral change, Electoral pressures, Electoral reasons, Englewood cliffs, European journal, Federal government, Federalism, Fiona, Fiona ross, Food stamps, Gerritsen, Governance, Government growth, Great experiment, Greater chance, Harvard university press, Health care coverage, Historical institutionalism, Historical legacies, Ideological drive, Industrial democracies, Industrial societies, Institutional, Institutional change, Institutional conditions, Institutional position, Institutional settings, Interest groups, Issue positions, Labour, Labour governance, Labour triumphs, Laver, Leftist, Leftist parties, Liberal welfare regimes, Little effect, Major parties, Majoritarian, Majoritarian institutions, Majoritarian structures, Many members, Many respects, Michigan press, Minority veto, National standards, Other hand, Parliamentary opposition, Parties matter, Partisan differences, Partisan politics, Party competition, Party policy, Pension reform, Personal responsibility, Pierson, Policy challenge, Policy goals, Policy initiation, Policy process, Policy solutions, Policy structures, Policy success, Political agency, Political behavior, Political economy, Political leadership, Political right, Political science, Political tolerance, Politics literature, Poor position, Popular politics, Potential gains, Preference maximizers, Princeton university press, Principal source, Product differentiation, Proportional representation, Prwora, Public opinion, Public policy, Public services, Public support, Restructuring, Retrenchment, Retrenchment efforts, Retrenchment initiatives, Saliency theory, Science association, Service provision, Social partners, Social policy, Southern europe, Spatial theory, Subnational governments, Subnational units, Successful framing, Tony blair, Trade unions, Unpopular, Unpopular policies, Unpopular politics, Unwelcome measures, Veto players, Veto points, Voter, Voter flight, Vowles, Welfare cuts, Welfare programs, Welfare provision, Welfare recipients, Welfare reform, Welfare retrenchment, Welfare services, Welfare state, Welfare state retrenchment, Western democracies, White house, Work opportunity reconciliation, Xvii world congress, Zealand.
Abstract
The ‘new politics of the welfare state,’ the term coined by Pierson (1996) to differentiate between the popular politics of welfare expansion and the unpopular politics of retrenchment, emphasizes a number of factors that distinguish countries' capacities to pursue contentious measures and avoid electoral blame. Policy structures, vested interests, and institutions play a prominent role in accounting for cross‐national differences in leaders' abilities to diffuse responsibility for divisive initiatives. One important omission from the ‘new politics’ literature, however, is a discussion of partisan politics. ‘Old’ conceptualizations of the political right and left are implicitly taken as constants despite radical changes in the governing agenda of many leftist parties over the last decade. Responding to this oversight, Castles (1998) has recently probed the role of parties with respect to aggregate government expenditures, only to concludethat parties do not matter under ‘conditions of constraint.’ This article contends that parties are relevant to the ‘new politics’ and that, under specified institutional conditions, their impact is counterintuitive. In some notable cases the left has had more effect inbruising the welfare state than the right. One explanation for these cross‐cutting tendencies is that parties not only provide a principal source of political agency, they also serve as strategies, thereby conditioning opportunities for political leadership. By extension, they need to be situatedwithin the ‘new politics’ constellation of blame‐avoidance instruments.
Url:
DOI: 10.1111/0952-1895.00127
Links to Exploration step
ISTEX:2F758192BBCDEC1673B57B29117189B298695395Le document en format XML
<record><TEI wicri:istexFullTextTei="biblStruct"><teiHeader><fileDesc><titleStmt><title xml:lang="en">‘Beyond Left and Right’: The New Partisan Politics of Welfare</title>
<author><name sortKey="Ross, Fiona" sort="Ross, Fiona" uniqKey="Ross F" first="Fiona" last="Ross">Fiona Ross</name>
<affiliation><mods:affiliation>University of Bristol</mods:affiliation>
</affiliation>
</author>
</titleStmt>
<publicationStmt><idno type="wicri:source">ISTEX</idno>
<idno type="RBID">ISTEX:2F758192BBCDEC1673B57B29117189B298695395</idno>
<date when="2000" year="2000">2000</date>
<idno type="doi">10.1111/0952-1895.00127</idno>
<idno type="url">https://api.istex.fr/document/2F758192BBCDEC1673B57B29117189B298695395/fulltext/pdf</idno>
<idno type="wicri:Area/Istex/Corpus">001724</idno>
<idno type="wicri:explorRef" wicri:stream="Istex" wicri:step="Corpus" wicri:corpus="ISTEX">001724</idno>
</publicationStmt>
<sourceDesc><biblStruct><analytic><title level="a" type="main">‘Beyond Left and Right’: The New Partisan Politics of Welfare</title>
<author><name sortKey="Ross, Fiona" sort="Ross, Fiona" uniqKey="Ross F" first="Fiona" last="Ross">Fiona Ross</name>
<affiliation><mods:affiliation>University of Bristol</mods:affiliation>
</affiliation>
</author>
</analytic>
<monogr></monogr>
<series><title level="j" type="main">Governance</title>
<title level="j" type="alt">GOVERNANCE</title>
<idno type="ISSN">0952-1895</idno>
<idno type="eISSN">1468-0491</idno>
<imprint><biblScope unit="vol">13</biblScope>
<biblScope unit="issue">2</biblScope>
<biblScope unit="page" from="155">155</biblScope>
<biblScope unit="page" to="183">183</biblScope>
<biblScope unit="page-count">29</biblScope>
<publisher>Blackwell Publishers Inc.</publisher>
<pubPlace>Boston, USA and Oxford, UK</pubPlace>
<date type="published" when="2000-04">2000-04</date>
</imprint>
<idno type="ISSN">0952-1895</idno>
</series>
</biblStruct>
</sourceDesc>
<seriesStmt><idno type="ISSN">0952-1895</idno>
</seriesStmt>
</fileDesc>
<profileDesc><textClass><keywords scheme="KwdEn" xml:lang="en"><term>Access points</term>
<term>Agenda</term>
<term>Agenda formation</term>
<term>American case</term>
<term>American journal</term>
<term>Annual meeting</term>
<term>Apls</term>
<term>Beverly hills</term>
<term>Blair</term>
<term>British labour party</term>
<term>Brookings institution</term>
<term>Budget plan</term>
<term>Bush presidency</term>
<term>Business confidence</term>
<term>Cabinet government</term>
<term>Cambridge university press</term>
<term>Castle</term>
<term>Centralized institutions</term>
<term>Chatham</term>
<term>Chatham house</term>
<term>Chicago press</term>
<term>Choice reversal</term>
<term>Class voting</term>
<term>Clinton</term>
<term>Coalition government</term>
<term>Coalition governments</term>
<term>Collective action</term>
<term>Comparative analysis</term>
<term>Congressional voting</term>
<term>Considerable support</term>
<term>Constitutional reform</term>
<term>Constraint</term>
<term>Contextual</term>
<term>Contextual cues</term>
<term>Contextual reasons</term>
<term>Continental europe</term>
<term>Cue</term>
<term>Democratic president</term>
<term>Different types</term>
<term>Diffuse responsibility</term>
<term>Dominant interests</term>
<term>Economic issues</term>
<term>Election briefing</term>
<term>Electoral change</term>
<term>Electoral pressures</term>
<term>Electoral reasons</term>
<term>Englewood cliffs</term>
<term>European journal</term>
<term>Federal government</term>
<term>Federalism</term>
<term>Fiona</term>
<term>Fiona ross</term>
<term>Food stamps</term>
<term>Gerritsen</term>
<term>Governance</term>
<term>Government growth</term>
<term>Great experiment</term>
<term>Greater chance</term>
<term>Harvard university press</term>
<term>Health care coverage</term>
<term>Historical institutionalism</term>
<term>Historical legacies</term>
<term>Ideological drive</term>
<term>Industrial democracies</term>
<term>Industrial societies</term>
<term>Institutional</term>
<term>Institutional change</term>
<term>Institutional conditions</term>
<term>Institutional position</term>
<term>Institutional settings</term>
<term>Interest groups</term>
<term>Issue positions</term>
<term>Labour</term>
<term>Labour governance</term>
<term>Labour triumphs</term>
<term>Laver</term>
<term>Leftist</term>
<term>Leftist parties</term>
<term>Liberal welfare regimes</term>
<term>Little effect</term>
<term>Major parties</term>
<term>Majoritarian</term>
<term>Majoritarian institutions</term>
<term>Majoritarian structures</term>
<term>Many members</term>
<term>Many respects</term>
<term>Michigan press</term>
<term>Minority veto</term>
<term>National standards</term>
<term>Other hand</term>
<term>Parliamentary opposition</term>
<term>Parties matter</term>
<term>Partisan differences</term>
<term>Partisan politics</term>
<term>Party competition</term>
<term>Party policy</term>
<term>Pension reform</term>
<term>Personal responsibility</term>
<term>Pierson</term>
<term>Policy challenge</term>
<term>Policy goals</term>
<term>Policy initiation</term>
<term>Policy process</term>
<term>Policy solutions</term>
<term>Policy structures</term>
<term>Policy success</term>
<term>Political agency</term>
<term>Political behavior</term>
<term>Political economy</term>
<term>Political leadership</term>
<term>Political right</term>
<term>Political science</term>
<term>Political tolerance</term>
<term>Politics literature</term>
<term>Poor position</term>
<term>Popular politics</term>
<term>Potential gains</term>
<term>Preference maximizers</term>
<term>Princeton university press</term>
<term>Principal source</term>
<term>Product differentiation</term>
<term>Proportional representation</term>
<term>Prwora</term>
<term>Public opinion</term>
<term>Public policy</term>
<term>Public services</term>
<term>Public support</term>
<term>Restructuring</term>
<term>Retrenchment</term>
<term>Retrenchment efforts</term>
<term>Retrenchment initiatives</term>
<term>Saliency theory</term>
<term>Science association</term>
<term>Service provision</term>
<term>Social partners</term>
<term>Social policy</term>
<term>Southern europe</term>
<term>Spatial theory</term>
<term>Subnational governments</term>
<term>Subnational units</term>
<term>Successful framing</term>
<term>Tony blair</term>
<term>Trade unions</term>
<term>Unpopular</term>
<term>Unpopular policies</term>
<term>Unpopular politics</term>
<term>Unwelcome measures</term>
<term>Veto players</term>
<term>Veto points</term>
<term>Voter</term>
<term>Voter flight</term>
<term>Vowles</term>
<term>Welfare cuts</term>
<term>Welfare programs</term>
<term>Welfare provision</term>
<term>Welfare recipients</term>
<term>Welfare reform</term>
<term>Welfare retrenchment</term>
<term>Welfare services</term>
<term>Welfare state</term>
<term>Welfare state retrenchment</term>
<term>Western democracies</term>
<term>White house</term>
<term>Work opportunity reconciliation</term>
<term>Xvii world congress</term>
<term>Zealand</term>
</keywords>
<keywords scheme="Teeft" xml:lang="en"><term>Access points</term>
<term>Agenda</term>
<term>Agenda formation</term>
<term>American case</term>
<term>American journal</term>
<term>Annual meeting</term>
<term>Apls</term>
<term>Beverly hills</term>
<term>Blair</term>
<term>British labour party</term>
<term>Brookings institution</term>
<term>Budget plan</term>
<term>Bush presidency</term>
<term>Business confidence</term>
<term>Cabinet government</term>
<term>Cambridge university press</term>
<term>Castle</term>
<term>Centralized institutions</term>
<term>Chatham</term>
<term>Chatham house</term>
<term>Chicago press</term>
<term>Choice reversal</term>
<term>Class voting</term>
<term>Clinton</term>
<term>Coalition government</term>
<term>Coalition governments</term>
<term>Collective action</term>
<term>Comparative analysis</term>
<term>Congressional voting</term>
<term>Considerable support</term>
<term>Constitutional reform</term>
<term>Constraint</term>
<term>Contextual</term>
<term>Contextual cues</term>
<term>Contextual reasons</term>
<term>Continental europe</term>
<term>Cue</term>
<term>Democratic president</term>
<term>Different types</term>
<term>Diffuse responsibility</term>
<term>Dominant interests</term>
<term>Economic issues</term>
<term>Election briefing</term>
<term>Electoral change</term>
<term>Electoral pressures</term>
<term>Electoral reasons</term>
<term>Englewood cliffs</term>
<term>European journal</term>
<term>Federal government</term>
<term>Federalism</term>
<term>Fiona</term>
<term>Fiona ross</term>
<term>Food stamps</term>
<term>Gerritsen</term>
<term>Governance</term>
<term>Government growth</term>
<term>Great experiment</term>
<term>Greater chance</term>
<term>Harvard university press</term>
<term>Health care coverage</term>
<term>Historical institutionalism</term>
<term>Historical legacies</term>
<term>Ideological drive</term>
<term>Industrial democracies</term>
<term>Industrial societies</term>
<term>Institutional</term>
<term>Institutional change</term>
<term>Institutional conditions</term>
<term>Institutional position</term>
<term>Institutional settings</term>
<term>Interest groups</term>
<term>Issue positions</term>
<term>Labour</term>
<term>Labour governance</term>
<term>Labour triumphs</term>
<term>Laver</term>
<term>Leftist</term>
<term>Leftist parties</term>
<term>Liberal welfare regimes</term>
<term>Little effect</term>
<term>Major parties</term>
<term>Majoritarian</term>
<term>Majoritarian institutions</term>
<term>Majoritarian structures</term>
<term>Many members</term>
<term>Many respects</term>
<term>Michigan press</term>
<term>Minority veto</term>
<term>National standards</term>
<term>Other hand</term>
<term>Parliamentary opposition</term>
<term>Parties matter</term>
<term>Partisan differences</term>
<term>Partisan politics</term>
<term>Party competition</term>
<term>Party policy</term>
<term>Pension reform</term>
<term>Personal responsibility</term>
<term>Pierson</term>
<term>Policy challenge</term>
<term>Policy goals</term>
<term>Policy initiation</term>
<term>Policy process</term>
<term>Policy solutions</term>
<term>Policy structures</term>
<term>Policy success</term>
<term>Political agency</term>
<term>Political behavior</term>
<term>Political economy</term>
<term>Political leadership</term>
<term>Political right</term>
<term>Political science</term>
<term>Political tolerance</term>
<term>Politics literature</term>
<term>Poor position</term>
<term>Popular politics</term>
<term>Potential gains</term>
<term>Preference maximizers</term>
<term>Princeton university press</term>
<term>Principal source</term>
<term>Product differentiation</term>
<term>Proportional representation</term>
<term>Prwora</term>
<term>Public opinion</term>
<term>Public policy</term>
<term>Public services</term>
<term>Public support</term>
<term>Restructuring</term>
<term>Retrenchment</term>
<term>Retrenchment efforts</term>
<term>Retrenchment initiatives</term>
<term>Saliency theory</term>
<term>Science association</term>
<term>Service provision</term>
<term>Social partners</term>
<term>Social policy</term>
<term>Southern europe</term>
<term>Spatial theory</term>
<term>Subnational governments</term>
<term>Subnational units</term>
<term>Successful framing</term>
<term>Tony blair</term>
<term>Trade unions</term>
<term>Unpopular</term>
<term>Unpopular policies</term>
<term>Unpopular politics</term>
<term>Unwelcome measures</term>
<term>Veto players</term>
<term>Veto points</term>
<term>Voter</term>
<term>Voter flight</term>
<term>Vowles</term>
<term>Welfare cuts</term>
<term>Welfare programs</term>
<term>Welfare provision</term>
<term>Welfare recipients</term>
<term>Welfare reform</term>
<term>Welfare retrenchment</term>
<term>Welfare services</term>
<term>Welfare state</term>
<term>Welfare state retrenchment</term>
<term>Western democracies</term>
<term>White house</term>
<term>Work opportunity reconciliation</term>
<term>Xvii world congress</term>
<term>Zealand</term>
</keywords>
</textClass>
</profileDesc>
</teiHeader>
<front><div type="abstract" xml:lang="en">The ‘new politics of the welfare state,’ the term coined by Pierson (1996) to differentiate between the popular politics of welfare expansion and the unpopular politics of retrenchment, emphasizes a number of factors that distinguish countries' capacities to pursue contentious measures and avoid electoral blame. Policy structures, vested interests, and institutions play a prominent role in accounting for cross‐national differences in leaders' abilities to diffuse responsibility for divisive initiatives. One important omission from the ‘new politics’ literature, however, is a discussion of partisan politics. ‘Old’ conceptualizations of the political right and left are implicitly taken as constants despite radical changes in the governing agenda of many leftist parties over the last decade. Responding to this oversight, Castles (1998) has recently probed the role of parties with respect to aggregate government expenditures, only to concludethat parties do not matter under ‘conditions of constraint.’ This article contends that parties are relevant to the ‘new politics’ and that, under specified institutional conditions, their impact is counterintuitive. In some notable cases the left has had more effect inbruising the welfare state than the right. One explanation for these cross‐cutting tendencies is that parties not only provide a principal source of political agency, they also serve as strategies, thereby conditioning opportunities for political leadership. By extension, they need to be situatedwithin the ‘new politics’ constellation of blame‐avoidance instruments.</div>
</front>
</TEI>
<istex><corpusName>wiley</corpusName>
<keywords><teeft><json:string>retrenchment</json:string>
<json:string>fiona</json:string>
<json:string>welfare state</json:string>
<json:string>contextual</json:string>
<json:string>fiona ross</json:string>
<json:string>unpopular policies</json:string>
<json:string>majoritarian</json:string>
<json:string>veto players</json:string>
<json:string>governance</json:string>
<json:string>restructuring</json:string>
<json:string>gerritsen</json:string>
<json:string>vowles</json:string>
<json:string>laver</json:string>
<json:string>contextual cues</json:string>
<json:string>cue</json:string>
<json:string>apls</json:string>
<json:string>cambridge university press</json:string>
<json:string>prwora</json:string>
<json:string>american journal</json:string>
<json:string>welfare reform</json:string>
<json:string>veto points</json:string>
<json:string>blair</json:string>
<json:string>policy structures</json:string>
<json:string>chatham house</json:string>
<json:string>partisan politics</json:string>
<json:string>welfare cuts</json:string>
<json:string>public policy</json:string>
<json:string>tony blair</json:string>
<json:string>retrenchment initiatives</json:string>
<json:string>leftist</json:string>
<json:string>voter</json:string>
<json:string>pierson</json:string>
<json:string>white house</json:string>
<json:string>party competition</json:string>
<json:string>comparative analysis</json:string>
<json:string>federal government</json:string>
<json:string>science association</json:string>
<json:string>spatial theory</json:string>
<json:string>political behavior</json:string>
<json:string>industrial democracies</json:string>
<json:string>leftist parties</json:string>
<json:string>great experiment</json:string>
<json:string>parties matter</json:string>
<json:string>retrenchment efforts</json:string>
<json:string>labour</json:string>
<json:string>public services</json:string>
<json:string>access points</json:string>
<json:string>institutional conditions</json:string>
<json:string>unwelcome measures</json:string>
<json:string>many respects</json:string>
<json:string>political leadership</json:string>
<json:string>policy process</json:string>
<json:string>contextual reasons</json:string>
<json:string>social policy</json:string>
<json:string>public opinion</json:string>
<json:string>democratic president</json:string>
<json:string>saliency theory</json:string>
<json:string>historical institutionalism</json:string>
<json:string>agenda formation</json:string>
<json:string>western democracies</json:string>
<json:string>european journal</json:string>
<json:string>trade unions</json:string>
<json:string>party policy</json:string>
<json:string>choice reversal</json:string>
<json:string>institutional settings</json:string>
<json:string>british labour party</json:string>
<json:string>agenda</json:string>
<json:string>popular politics</json:string>
<json:string>continental europe</json:string>
<json:string>policy goals</json:string>
<json:string>welfare retrenchment</json:string>
<json:string>considerable support</json:string>
<json:string>labour governance</json:string>
<json:string>liberal welfare regimes</json:string>
<json:string>welfare state retrenchment</json:string>
<json:string>public support</json:string>
<json:string>issue positions</json:string>
<json:string>politics literature</json:string>
<json:string>historical legacies</json:string>
<json:string>other hand</json:string>
<json:string>partisan differences</json:string>
<json:string>welfare provision</json:string>
<json:string>successful framing</json:string>
<json:string>pension reform</json:string>
<json:string>policy initiation</json:string>
<json:string>interest groups</json:string>
<json:string>social partners</json:string>
<json:string>southern europe</json:string>
<json:string>service provision</json:string>
<json:string>majoritarian structures</json:string>
<json:string>preference maximizers</json:string>
<json:string>policy solutions</json:string>
<json:string>minority veto</json:string>
<json:string>parliamentary opposition</json:string>
<json:string>beverly hills</json:string>
<json:string>diffuse responsibility</json:string>
<json:string>majoritarian institutions</json:string>
<json:string>political right</json:string>
<json:string>ideological drive</json:string>
<json:string>centralized institutions</json:string>
<json:string>institutional change</json:string>
<json:string>voter flight</json:string>
<json:string>brookings institution</json:string>
<json:string>personal responsibility</json:string>
<json:string>work opportunity reconciliation</json:string>
<json:string>potential gains</json:string>
<json:string>welfare recipients</json:string>
<json:string>national standards</json:string>
<json:string>collective action</json:string>
<json:string>coalition governments</json:string>
<json:string>policy success</json:string>
<json:string>coalition government</json:string>
<json:string>michigan press</json:string>
<json:string>business confidence</json:string>
<json:string>dominant interests</json:string>
<json:string>different types</json:string>
<json:string>labour triumphs</json:string>
<json:string>american case</json:string>
<json:string>welfare services</json:string>
<json:string>congressional voting</json:string>
<json:string>electoral reasons</json:string>
<json:string>institutional position</json:string>
<json:string>budget plan</json:string>
<json:string>health care coverage</json:string>
<json:string>industrial societies</json:string>
<json:string>little effect</json:string>
<json:string>economic issues</json:string>
<json:string>product differentiation</json:string>
<json:string>constitutional reform</json:string>
<json:string>election briefing</json:string>
<json:string>proportional representation</json:string>
<json:string>policy challenge</json:string>
<json:string>greater chance</json:string>
<json:string>subnational units</json:string>
<json:string>subnational governments</json:string>
<json:string>poor position</json:string>
<json:string>food stamps</json:string>
<json:string>welfare programs</json:string>
<json:string>political science</json:string>
<json:string>englewood cliffs</json:string>
<json:string>unpopular politics</json:string>
<json:string>electoral pressures</json:string>
<json:string>political economy</json:string>
<json:string>class voting</json:string>
<json:string>xvii world congress</json:string>
<json:string>cabinet government</json:string>
<json:string>electoral change</json:string>
<json:string>princeton university press</json:string>
<json:string>annual meeting</json:string>
<json:string>political tolerance</json:string>
<json:string>principal source</json:string>
<json:string>political agency</json:string>
<json:string>government growth</json:string>
<json:string>many members</json:string>
<json:string>harvard university press</json:string>
<json:string>bush presidency</json:string>
<json:string>chicago press</json:string>
<json:string>major parties</json:string>
<json:string>clinton</json:string>
<json:string>federalism</json:string>
<json:string>constraint</json:string>
<json:string>chatham</json:string>
<json:string>zealand</json:string>
<json:string>unpopular</json:string>
<json:string>institutional</json:string>
<json:string>castle</json:string>
</teeft>
</keywords>
<author><json:item><name>Fiona Ross</name>
<affiliations><json:string>University of Bristol</json:string>
</affiliations>
</json:item>
</author>
<articleId><json:string>GOVE127</json:string>
</articleId>
<arkIstex>ark:/67375/WNG-CPB15JVZ-0</arkIstex>
<language><json:string>eng</json:string>
</language>
<originalGenre><json:string>article</json:string>
</originalGenre>
<abstract>The ‘new politics of the welfare state,’ the term coined by Pierson (1996) to differentiate between the popular politics of welfare expansion and the unpopular politics of retrenchment, emphasizes a number of factors that distinguish countries' capacities to pursue contentious measures and avoid electoral blame. Policy structures, vested interests, and institutions play a prominent role in accounting for cross‐national differences in leaders' abilities to diffuse responsibility for divisive initiatives. One important omission from the ‘new politics’ literature, however, is a discussion of partisan politics. ‘Old’ conceptualizations of the political right and left are implicitly taken as constants despite radical changes in the governing agenda of many leftist parties over the last decade. Responding to this oversight, Castles (1998) has recently probed the role of parties with respect to aggregate government expenditures, only to concludethat parties do not matter under ‘conditions of constraint.’ This article contends that parties are relevant to the ‘new politics’ and that, under specified institutional conditions, their impact is counterintuitive. In some notable cases the left has had more effect inbruising the welfare state than the right. One explanation for these cross‐cutting tendencies is that parties not only provide a principal source of political agency, they also serve as strategies, thereby conditioning opportunities for political leadership. By extension, they need to be situatedwithin the ‘new politics’ constellation of blame‐avoidance instruments.</abstract>
<qualityIndicators><refBibsNative>false</refBibsNative>
<abstractWordCount>223</abstractWordCount>
<abstractCharCount>1590</abstractCharCount>
<keywordCount>0</keywordCount>
<score>9.676</score>
<pdfWordCount>12616</pdfWordCount>
<pdfCharCount>80269</pdfCharCount>
<pdfVersion>1.3</pdfVersion>
<pdfPageCount>29</pdfPageCount>
<pdfPageSize>403.92 x 648 pts</pdfPageSize>
</qualityIndicators>
<title>‘Beyond Left and Right’: The New Partisan Politics of Welfare</title>
<genre><json:string>article</json:string>
</genre>
<host><title>Governance</title>
<language><json:string>unknown</json:string>
</language>
<doi><json:string>10.1111/(ISSN)1468-0491</json:string>
</doi>
<issn><json:string>0952-1895</json:string>
</issn>
<eissn><json:string>1468-0491</json:string>
</eissn>
<publisherId><json:string>GOVE</json:string>
</publisherId>
<volume>13</volume>
<issue>2</issue>
<pages><first>155</first>
<last>183</last>
<total>29</total>
</pages>
<genre><json:string>journal</json:string>
</genre>
</host>
<namedEntities><unitex><date><json:string>2000</json:string>
<json:string>1992</json:string>
<json:string>1979</json:string>
<json:string>1968</json:string>
<json:string>1997</json:string>
<json:string>1990s</json:string>
<json:string>1998</json:string>
<json:string>1994</json:string>
<json:string>1983</json:string>
<json:string>1972</json:string>
<json:string>1970s</json:string>
<json:string>1995</json:string>
<json:string>1984</json:string>
<json:string>1978</json:string>
<json:string>1980s</json:string>
<json:string>1996</json:string>
</date>
<geogName></geogName>
<orgName><json:string>TO CHINA Parties The</json:string>
<json:string>An International Journal</json:string>
<json:string>Republican Congress</json:string>
<json:string>United States and Britain</json:string>
<json:string>Canada, Germany, and Australia</json:string>
<json:string>While party</json:string>
<json:string>China There</json:string>
<json:string>European Commission</json:string>
<json:string>Australia and New Zealand</json:string>
<json:string>Institute of Economic</json:string>
<json:string>Marie Curie Foundation</json:string>
<json:string>New Zealand and Australia, Castles, Gerritsen, and Vowles</json:string>
<json:string>Republican party</json:string>
<json:string>Democratic Congress</json:string>
<json:string>European University</json:string>
<json:string>Communist party</json:string>
<json:string>Labour party</json:string>
<json:string>Congress</json:string>
</orgName>
<orgName_funder></orgName_funder>
<orgName_provider></orgName_provider>
<persName><json:string>Nixon Goes</json:string>
<json:string>Morris S. Ogul</json:string>
<json:string>Researchers Program</json:string>
<json:string>George Bush</json:string>
<json:string>Bert A. Rockman</json:string>
<json:string>C. Jones</json:string>
<json:string>Roger Douglas</json:string>
<json:string>Blair</json:string>
<json:string>Bryan Jones</json:string>
<json:string>Olive Tree</json:string>
<json:string>Anthony King</json:string>
<json:string>Gingrich</json:string>
<json:string>Guy Peters</json:string>
<json:string>Affairs</json:string>
<json:string>Maurizio Ferrera</json:string>
<json:string>John Smith</json:string>
<json:string>Tony Blair</json:string>
</persName>
<placeName><json:string>United States</json:string>
<json:string>Australia</json:string>
<json:string>Canada</json:string>
<json:string>China</json:string>
<json:string>Europe</json:string>
<json:string>America</json:string>
<json:string>Neustadt</json:string>
<json:string>New Zealand</json:string>
<json:string>Britain</json:string>
<json:string>Portugal</json:string>
<json:string>France</json:string>
<json:string>Italy</json:string>
</placeName>
<ref_url></ref_url>
<ref_bibl><json:string>Prothro and Grigg 1960</json:string>
<json:string>McClosky and Brill 1983</json:string>
<json:string>Weaver and Rockman 1993</json:string>
<json:string>Peterson, Rabe, and Wong 1986</json:string>
<json:string>Klingemann, Hofferbert, and Budge 1994</json:string>
<json:string>Esping-Andersen 1990</json:string>
<json:string>Inglehart 1990</json:string>
<json:string>Grofman, Griffin, and Glazer 1990</json:string>
<json:string>Crawford and Ostrom 1995</json:string>
<json:string>Papadakis and Rainbow 1996</json:string>
<json:string>Wildavsky 1986</json:string>
<json:string>Immergut 1992</json:string>
<json:string>Lewis-Beck 1983</json:string>
<json:string>Hibbs 1992</json:string>
<json:string>Rose and McAllister 1986</json:string>
<json:string>Kim (1997)</json:string>
<json:string>Sullivan, Piereson, and Marcus 1982</json:string>
<json:string>Lau 1982, 1985</json:string>
<json:string>Poole and Rosenthal 1991</json:string>
<json:string>Olson 1965</json:string>
<json:string>Sundquist 1992</json:string>
<json:string>Burns 1963, 1990</json:string>
<json:string>Pierson 1995</json:string>
<json:string>Gregory 1998</json:string>
<json:string>Laver and Shepsle 1991</json:string>
<json:string>Powell 1989</json:string>
<json:string>Vowles and McAllister 1996</json:string>
<json:string>Rose 1988</json:string>
<json:string>March and Olsen 1989</json:string>
<json:string>Dalton 1988</json:string>
<json:string>Schmidt 1996</json:string>
<json:string>Scharpf 1988</json:string>
<json:string>Saarlvik and Crewe 1983</json:string>
<json:string>Hall 1992</json:string>
<json:string>March 1997</json:string>
<json:string>Castles and McKinley 1979</json:string>
<json:string>Ferrera 1997</json:string>
<json:string>Dalton, Flanagan, and Beck 1984</json:string>
<json:string>Lowi 1979</json:string>
<json:string>Wallis and Dollery 1997</json:string>
<json:string>Pierson 1994</json:string>
<json:string>Weatherford and McDonnell 1996</json:string>
<json:string>Lijphart 1984</json:string>
<json:string>Laver and Shepsle 1990</json:string>
<json:string>Easton and Gerritsen 1996</json:string>
<json:string>Lijphart 1984, 1989</json:string>
<json:string>Feldman 1982</json:string>
<json:string>Crewe 1986</json:string>
<json:string>Thelen and Steinmo 1992</json:string>
<json:string>Elazar 1984</json:string>
<json:string>Sullivan et al. 1984</json:string>
<json:string>Pierson 1993</json:string>
<json:string>Kitschelt 1994</json:string>
<json:string>Kinder and Kiewiet 1979</json:string>
<json:string>Douglas 1993</json:string>
<json:string>Laver and Hunt 1992</json:string>
<json:string>Le Grand 1990</json:string>
<json:string>Alt and Lowry 1994</json:string>
<json:string>Giddens 1994</json:string>
<json:string>Lowi 1972</json:string>
<json:string>Druckman (1998)</json:string>
<json:string>Castles and Mitchell 1992</json:string>
<json:string>Grodzins 1960</json:string>
<json:string>Hinich and Ordeshook 1970</json:string>
<json:string>Ferguson and Rogers 1986</json:string>
<json:string>Stewart 1984</json:string>
<json:string>Huber and Inglehart 1995</json:string>
<json:string>Riker 1993</json:string>
<json:string>Palfrey 1984</json:string>
<json:string>Weaver 1986</json:string>
<json:string>1994, 1996</json:string>
<json:string>Coleman and Skogstad 1995</json:string>
<json:string>Lewis-Beck and Rice 1985</json:string>
<json:string>January 1992</json:string>
<json:string>Downs 1957</json:string>
<json:string>Laver and Shepsle (1993)</json:string>
<json:string>James 1992</json:string>
<json:string>Kiser and Ostrom 1982</json:string>
<json:string>Morton 1993</json:string>
<json:string>Esping-Andersen 1996</json:string>
<json:string>Kitschelt 1993, 1994</json:string>
<json:string>Klingemann et al.</json:string>
<json:string>Franklin 1985, 1992</json:string>
<json:string>Alvarez and Nagler 1995</json:string>
<json:string>Castles 1993</json:string>
</ref_bibl>
<bibl></bibl>
</unitex>
</namedEntities>
<ark><json:string>ark:/67375/WNG-CPB15JVZ-0</json:string>
</ark>
<categories><wos><json:string>1 - social science</json:string>
<json:string>2 - public administration</json:string>
<json:string>2 - political science</json:string>
</wos>
<scienceMetrix><json:string>1 - economic & social sciences</json:string>
<json:string>2 - social sciences</json:string>
<json:string>3 - political science & public administration</json:string>
</scienceMetrix>
<scopus><json:string>1 - Social Sciences</json:string>
<json:string>2 - Business, Management and Accounting</json:string>
<json:string>3 - Marketing</json:string>
<json:string>1 - Social Sciences</json:string>
<json:string>2 - Social Sciences</json:string>
<json:string>3 - Public Administration</json:string>
<json:string>1 - Social Sciences</json:string>
<json:string>2 - Social Sciences</json:string>
<json:string>3 - Sociology and Political Science</json:string>
</scopus>
<inist><json:string>1 - sciences humaines et sociales</json:string>
</inist>
</categories>
<publicationDate>2000</publicationDate>
<copyrightDate>2000</copyrightDate>
<doi><json:string>10.1111/0952-1895.00127</json:string>
</doi>
<id>2F758192BBCDEC1673B57B29117189B298695395</id>
<score>1</score>
<fulltext><json:item><extension>pdf</extension>
<original>true</original>
<mimetype>application/pdf</mimetype>
<uri>https://api.istex.fr/document/2F758192BBCDEC1673B57B29117189B298695395/fulltext/pdf</uri>
</json:item>
<json:item><extension>zip</extension>
<original>false</original>
<mimetype>application/zip</mimetype>
<uri>https://api.istex.fr/document/2F758192BBCDEC1673B57B29117189B298695395/fulltext/zip</uri>
</json:item>
<istex:fulltextTEI uri="https://api.istex.fr/document/2F758192BBCDEC1673B57B29117189B298695395/fulltext/tei"><teiHeader><fileDesc><titleStmt><title level="a" type="main">‘Beyond Left and Right’: The New Partisan Politics of Welfare</title>
<respStmt><resp>Références bibliographiques récupérées via GROBID</resp>
<name resp="ISTEX-API">ISTEX-API (INIST-CNRS)</name>
</respStmt>
</titleStmt>
<publicationStmt><authority>ISTEX</authority>
<publisher>Blackwell Publishers Inc.</publisher>
<pubPlace>Boston, USA and Oxford, UK</pubPlace>
<availability><licence>2000 Blackwell Publishers, Inc.</licence>
</availability>
<date type="published" when="2000-04"></date>
</publicationStmt>
<notesStmt><note type="content-type" subtype="article" source="article" scheme="https://content-type.data.istex.fr/ark:/67375/XTP-6N5SZHKN-D">article</note>
<note type="publication-type" subtype="journal" scheme="https://publication-type.data.istex.fr/ark:/67375/JMC-0GLKJH51-B">journal</note>
</notesStmt>
<sourceDesc><biblStruct type="article"><analytic><title level="a" type="main">‘Beyond Left and Right’: The New Partisan Politics of Welfare</title>
<author xml:id="author-0000"><persName><forename type="first">Fiona</forename>
<surname>Ross</surname>
</persName>
<affiliation>University of Bristol</affiliation>
</author>
<idno type="istex">2F758192BBCDEC1673B57B29117189B298695395</idno>
<idno type="ark">ark:/67375/WNG-CPB15JVZ-0</idno>
<idno type="DOI">10.1111/0952-1895.00127</idno>
<idno type="unit">GOVE127</idno>
<idno type="toTypesetVersion">file:GOVE.GOVE127.pdf</idno>
</analytic>
<monogr><title level="j" type="main">Governance</title>
<title level="j" type="alt">GOVERNANCE</title>
<idno type="pISSN">0952-1895</idno>
<idno type="eISSN">1468-0491</idno>
<idno type="book-DOI">10.1111/(ISSN)1468-0491</idno>
<idno type="book-part-DOI">10.1111/gove.2000.13.issue-2</idno>
<idno type="product">GOVE</idno>
<idno type="publisherDivision">ST</idno>
<imprint><biblScope unit="vol">13</biblScope>
<biblScope unit="issue">2</biblScope>
<biblScope unit="page" from="155">155</biblScope>
<biblScope unit="page" to="183">183</biblScope>
<biblScope unit="page-count">29</biblScope>
<publisher>Blackwell Publishers Inc.</publisher>
<pubPlace>Boston, USA and Oxford, UK</pubPlace>
<date type="published" when="2000-04"></date>
</imprint>
</monogr>
</biblStruct>
</sourceDesc>
</fileDesc>
<profileDesc><abstract xml:lang="en" style="main"><p>The ‘new politics of the welfare state,’ the term coined by Pierson (1996) to differentiate between the popular politics of welfare expansion and the unpopular politics of retrenchment, emphasizes a number of factors that distinguish countries' capacities to pursue contentious measures and avoid electoral blame. Policy structures, vested interests, and institutions play a prominent role in accounting for cross‐national differences in leaders' abilities to diffuse responsibility for divisive initiatives. One important omission from the ‘new politics’ literature, however, is a discussion of partisan politics. ‘Old’ conceptualizations of the political right and left are implicitly taken as constants despite radical changes in the governing agenda of many leftist parties over the last decade. Responding to this oversight, Castles (1998) has recently probed the role of parties with respect to aggregate government expenditures, only to concludethat parties do not matter under ‘conditions of constraint.’ This article contends that parties are relevant to the ‘new politics’ and that, under specified institutional conditions, their impact is counterintuitive. In some notable cases the left has had more effect inbruising the welfare state than the right. One explanation for these cross‐cutting tendencies is that parties not only provide a principal source of political agency, they also serve as strategies, thereby conditioning opportunities for political leadership. By extension, they need to be situatedwithin the ‘new politics’ constellation of blame‐avoidance instruments.</p>
</abstract>
<textClass><keywords rend="tocHeading1"><term>Original Articles</term>
</keywords>
</textClass>
<langUsage><language ident="en"></language>
</langUsage>
</profileDesc>
<revisionDesc><change>undefined</change>
<change>[object Object]</change>
</revisionDesc>
</teiHeader>
</istex:fulltextTEI>
<json:item><extension>txt</extension>
<original>false</original>
<mimetype>text/plain</mimetype>
<uri>https://api.istex.fr/document/2F758192BBCDEC1673B57B29117189B298695395/fulltext/txt</uri>
</json:item>
</fulltext>
<metadata><istex:metadataXml wicri:clean="Wiley component found"><istex:xmlDeclaration>version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8" standalone="yes"</istex:xmlDeclaration>
<istex:document><component version="2.0" type="serialArticle" xml:lang="en"><header><publicationMeta level="product"><publisherInfo><publisherName>Blackwell Publishers Inc.</publisherName>
<publisherLoc>Boston, USA and Oxford, UK</publisherLoc>
</publisherInfo>
<doi origin="wiley" registered="yes">10.1111/(ISSN)1468-0491</doi>
<issn type="print">0952-1895</issn>
<issn type="electronic">1468-0491</issn>
<idGroup><id type="product" value="GOVE"></id>
<id type="publisherDivision" value="ST"></id>
</idGroup>
<titleGroup><title type="main" sort="GOVERNANCE">Governance</title>
</titleGroup>
</publicationMeta>
<publicationMeta level="part" position="04002"><doi origin="wiley">10.1111/gove.2000.13.issue-2</doi>
<numberingGroup><numbering type="journalVolume" number="13">13</numbering>
<numbering type="journalIssue" number="2">2</numbering>
</numberingGroup>
<coverDate startDate="2000-04">April 2000</coverDate>
</publicationMeta>
<publicationMeta level="unit" type="article" position="0015500" status="forIssue"><doi origin="wiley">10.1111/0952-1895.00127</doi>
<idGroup><id type="unit" value="GOVE127"></id>
</idGroup>
<countGroup><count type="pageTotal" number="29"></count>
</countGroup>
<titleGroup><title type="tocHeading1">Original Articles</title>
</titleGroup>
<copyright>2000 Blackwell Publishers, Inc.</copyright>
<eventGroup><event type="firstOnline" date="2002-12-17"></event>
<event type="publishedOnlineFinalForm" date="2002-12-17"></event>
<event type="xmlConverted" agent="Converter:BPG_TO_WML3G version:2.3.2 mode:FullText source:Header result:Header" date="2010-03-06"></event>
<event type="xmlConverted" agent="Converter:WILEY_ML3G_TO_WILEY_ML3GV2 version:3.8.8" date="2014-01-26"></event>
<event type="xmlConverted" agent="Converter:WML3G_To_WML3G version:4.1.7 mode:FullText,remove_FC" date="2014-10-24"></event>
</eventGroup>
<numberingGroup><numbering type="pageFirst" number="155">155</numbering>
<numbering type="pageLast" number="183">183</numbering>
</numberingGroup>
<linkGroup><link type="toTypesetVersion" href="file:GOVE.GOVE127.pdf"></link>
</linkGroup>
</publicationMeta>
<contentMeta><countGroup><count type="linksPubMed" number="0"></count>
<count type="linksCrossRef" number="0"></count>
</countGroup>
<titleGroup><title type="main">‘Beyond Left and Right’: The New Partisan Politics of Welfare</title>
</titleGroup>
<creators><creator creatorRole="author" xml:id="cr1" affiliationRef="#a1"><personName><givenNames>Fiona</givenNames>
<familyName>Ross</familyName>
</personName>
</creator>
</creators>
<affiliationGroup><affiliation xml:id="a1"><unparsedAffiliation>University of Bristol</unparsedAffiliation>
</affiliation>
</affiliationGroup>
<abstractGroup><abstract type="main" xml:lang="en"><p>The ‘new politics of the welfare state,’ the term coined by Pierson (1996) to differentiate between the popular politics of welfare expansion and the unpopular politics of retrenchment, emphasizes a number of factors that distinguish countries' capacities to pursue contentious measures and avoid electoral blame. Policy structures, vested interests, and institutions play a prominent role in accounting for cross‐national differences in leaders' abilities to diffuse responsibility for divisive initiatives. One important omission from the ‘new politics’ literature, however, is a discussion of partisan politics. ‘Old’ conceptualizations of the political right and left are implicitly taken as constants despite radical changes in the governing agenda of many leftist parties over the last decade. Responding to this oversight, Castles (1998) has recently probed the role of parties with respect to aggregate government expenditures, only to concludethat parties do not matter under ‘conditions of constraint.’ This article contends that parties are relevant to the ‘new politics’ and that, under specified institutional conditions, their impact is counterintuitive. In some notable cases the left has had more effect inbruising the welfare state than the right. One explanation for these cross‐cutting tendencies is that parties not only provide a principal source of political agency, they also serve as strategies, thereby conditioning opportunities for political leadership. By extension, they need to be situatedwithin the ‘new politics’ constellation of blame‐avoidance instruments.</p>
</abstract>
</abstractGroup>
</contentMeta>
</header>
</component>
</istex:document>
</istex:metadataXml>
<mods version="3.6"><titleInfo lang="en"><title>‘Beyond Left and Right’: The New Partisan Politics of Welfare</title>
</titleInfo>
<titleInfo type="alternative" contentType="CDATA" lang="en"><title>‘Beyond Left and Right’: The New Partisan Politics of Welfare</title>
</titleInfo>
<name type="personal"><namePart type="given">Fiona</namePart>
<namePart type="family">Ross</namePart>
<affiliation>University of Bristol</affiliation>
<role><roleTerm type="text">author</roleTerm>
</role>
</name>
<typeOfResource>text</typeOfResource>
<genre type="article" displayLabel="article" authority="ISTEX" authorityURI="https://content-type.data.istex.fr" valueURI="https://content-type.data.istex.fr/ark:/67375/XTP-6N5SZHKN-D">article</genre>
<originInfo><publisher>Blackwell Publishers Inc.</publisher>
<place><placeTerm type="text">Boston, USA and Oxford, UK</placeTerm>
</place>
<dateIssued encoding="w3cdtf">2000-04</dateIssued>
<copyrightDate encoding="w3cdtf">2000</copyrightDate>
</originInfo>
<language><languageTerm type="code" authority="rfc3066">en</languageTerm>
<languageTerm type="code" authority="iso639-2b">eng</languageTerm>
</language>
<physicalDescription><extent unit="linksCrossRef">0</extent>
</physicalDescription>
<abstract lang="en">The ‘new politics of the welfare state,’ the term coined by Pierson (1996) to differentiate between the popular politics of welfare expansion and the unpopular politics of retrenchment, emphasizes a number of factors that distinguish countries' capacities to pursue contentious measures and avoid electoral blame. Policy structures, vested interests, and institutions play a prominent role in accounting for cross‐national differences in leaders' abilities to diffuse responsibility for divisive initiatives. One important omission from the ‘new politics’ literature, however, is a discussion of partisan politics. ‘Old’ conceptualizations of the political right and left are implicitly taken as constants despite radical changes in the governing agenda of many leftist parties over the last decade. Responding to this oversight, Castles (1998) has recently probed the role of parties with respect to aggregate government expenditures, only to concludethat parties do not matter under ‘conditions of constraint.’ This article contends that parties are relevant to the ‘new politics’ and that, under specified institutional conditions, their impact is counterintuitive. In some notable cases the left has had more effect inbruising the welfare state than the right. One explanation for these cross‐cutting tendencies is that parties not only provide a principal source of political agency, they also serve as strategies, thereby conditioning opportunities for political leadership. By extension, they need to be situatedwithin the ‘new politics’ constellation of blame‐avoidance instruments.</abstract>
<relatedItem type="host"><titleInfo><title>Governance</title>
</titleInfo>
<genre type="journal" authority="ISTEX" authorityURI="https://publication-type.data.istex.fr" valueURI="https://publication-type.data.istex.fr/ark:/67375/JMC-0GLKJH51-B">journal</genre>
<identifier type="ISSN">0952-1895</identifier>
<identifier type="eISSN">1468-0491</identifier>
<identifier type="DOI">10.1111/(ISSN)1468-0491</identifier>
<identifier type="PublisherID">GOVE</identifier>
<part><date>2000</date>
<detail type="volume"><caption>vol.</caption>
<number>13</number>
</detail>
<detail type="issue"><caption>no.</caption>
<number>2</number>
</detail>
<extent unit="pages"><start>155</start>
<end>183</end>
<total>29</total>
</extent>
</part>
</relatedItem>
<identifier type="istex">2F758192BBCDEC1673B57B29117189B298695395</identifier>
<identifier type="ark">ark:/67375/WNG-CPB15JVZ-0</identifier>
<identifier type="DOI">10.1111/0952-1895.00127</identifier>
<identifier type="ArticleID">GOVE127</identifier>
<accessCondition type="use and reproduction" contentType="copyright">2000 Blackwell Publishers, Inc.</accessCondition>
<recordInfo><recordContentSource authority="ISTEX" authorityURI="https://loaded-corpus.data.istex.fr" valueURI="https://loaded-corpus.data.istex.fr/ark:/67375/XBH-L0C46X92-X">wiley</recordContentSource>
<recordOrigin>Blackwell Publishers Inc.</recordOrigin>
</recordInfo>
</mods>
<json:item><extension>json</extension>
<original>false</original>
<mimetype>application/json</mimetype>
<uri>https://api.istex.fr/document/2F758192BBCDEC1673B57B29117189B298695395/metadata/json</uri>
</json:item>
</metadata>
<serie></serie>
</istex>
</record>
Pour manipuler ce document sous Unix (Dilib)
EXPLOR_STEP=$WICRI_ROOT/Wicri/Santé/explor/EdenteV2/Data/Istex/Corpus
HfdSelect -h $EXPLOR_STEP/biblio.hfd -nk 001724 | SxmlIndent | more
Ou
HfdSelect -h $EXPLOR_AREA/Data/Istex/Corpus/biblio.hfd -nk 001724 | SxmlIndent | more
Pour mettre un lien sur cette page dans le réseau Wicri
{{Explor lien |wiki= Wicri/Santé |area= EdenteV2 |flux= Istex |étape= Corpus |type= RBID |clé= ISTEX:2F758192BBCDEC1673B57B29117189B298695395 |texte= ‘Beyond Left and Right’: The New Partisan Politics of Welfare }}
![]() | This area was generated with Dilib version V0.6.32. | ![]() |