Heikki Hiilamo

Volume 55 - Article 21 | Pages 665–678

Globalisation, ageing and structural changes challenge social security systems in high-income countries. We explore welfare accounts as a social policy innovation, addressing a gap in the literature by summarising how welfare accounts function across countries. We contribute to the theoretical discussion on social security reforms by asking: could welfare accounts help address the growing fiscal strain and the carrying-capacity challenges posed by ageing populations? The comparative literature and structured expert interviews suggest that welfare accounts offer a socially just solution, as they do not impact those receiving social assistance or last-resort benefits. The strength of welfare accounts lies in flexibility: while comprehensive adoption of welfare accounts is not necessarily sensible, selective implementation could potentially help to address the challenges of ageing welfare states.

This study examines the relationship between the export of raw tobacco and the national implementation of measures aimed at reducing tobacco demand. This w

Throughout the 21st century, many welfare states have expanded family policies. However, the COVID-19 pandemic spurred significant, though varied, adjustments in family benefits across countries. This study conducts a qualitative comparative policy analysis of ten high-income countries, selected on the basis welfare regime theory, to examine how family policy changed during the COVID-19 crisis and whether these changes marked the beginning of new policy paths. The analysis shows that most institutional responses for families with children were incremental and temporary in nature, serving to reinforce rather than overhaul existing welfare systems. These results align with historical institutionalist theory and its emphasis on path dependence. Despite some convergence in emergency measures, long-standing differences in areas such as childcare availability and benefit generosity persist across the studies welfare state regimes. While the pandemic acted as a catalyst for certain policy innovations, it did not fundamentally disrupt the institutional logic underpinning family policy.

The article "Are Tobacco Companies in Nigeria Complying With Health Warning Label Regulations on Cigarettes and Other Tobacco Products?" by Afolabi Oyapero et al. examines compliance with health warning label (HWL) regulations in Nigeria. While this...

Purpose: This case study focuses on an alternative minimum-security model, the Safety Income (SI) Model, representing a nuanced departure from both established policies and UBI. StI is a welfare system that supplements households earning below the standard median income with 50% of the difference between the standard median and their current earnings. The quantitative case study presents the set-up of SI and assesses the cost of its implementation in South Korea. By employing a computable general equilibrium model method, the study compares the impacts of SI, UBI and the existing scheme in South Korea on income disparities, labor market outcomes and Gross Domestic Product.Design/methodology/approach: In the past decade, the Universal Basic Income (UBI) concept has gained international significant traction as a potential remedy for poverty and inequality. However, the practical implications of UBI implementation remain under extensive debate. It is unclear if UBI is an effective model for poverty alleviation.Findings: The analyses show that SI outperforms the other two welfare systems across all studied economic indicators. SI demonstrates more substantial reductions in income inequality compared with UBI and the existing scheme, minimal impact on unemployment rates compared with other schemes and a relatively modest decrease in GDP, making it a more favorable choice for South Korea when developing the minimum-security system within the specified budget constraint.Originality/value: This research contributes to the discourse surrounding basic income, economic security, poverty alleviation and inclusive social policies.