Palabras clave
Envejecimiento de la población
Estado de bienestar
Manifesto Corpus
Manifesto Project
gasto en políticas de bienestar
recortes sociales.
Resumen
Con la Gran Recesión iniciada en 2007, ha emergido en distintas sociedades europeas la preocupación por el tamaño del gasto social destinado a las personas mayores. En España, este debate se ha relacionado con la irrupción de Podemos y Ciudadanos. Presentamos una propuesta metodológica para definir en perspectiva comparada el perfil social y antisocial de los partidos políticos. Partimos de los programas «anotados» del Manifesto Corpus (Merz et al., 2016) y del modelo de pensamiento reaccionario propuesto por Hirschman (1991), sintetizado en la afirmación de que el Estado de bienestar (EdB) es «peligroso, inútil y perverso». Asimismo, empleamos datos del Manifesto Project para las 94 elecciones generales celebradas en la UE-15 desde 1993 e incluidas en la versión 2017b de su base de datos principal (729 observaciones). Se analizan, al nivel meso de los partidos y al nivel macro de los Parlamentos nacionales, la posición sobre la extensión del gasto en políticas de bienestar y el énfasis en los recortes sociales. En España, se halla que Podemos y Ciudadanos no han ampliado la oferta de servicios para los jóvenes; sin embargo, estos partidos prestan escasa o nula atención a los mayores como destinatarios de atención social. Por su parte, ni el PP ni el PSOE han dado prioridad a las pensiones sobre otros programas de gasto, como la educación y el empleo. Aunque con poca intensidad, PP, UPyD y Ciudadanos han sido los únicos partidos en incluir recortes sociales en su oferta programática desde 1993. El PP ha ido variando la racionalidad de su discurso antisocial. En 2016, se ajustó a la idea de perversidad del EdB.
Keywords
Population Ageing; Welfare State; Manifesto Corpus; Manifesto Project; welfare spending; social retrenchment.
Abstract
Since the start of the Great Recession in 2007, increased concern has emerged about the amount of social expenditure devoted to the elderly in various European societies.
In Spain, this debate has been linked to the irruption of two new political parties Podemos (We can) and Ciudadanos (Citizens). This paper presents a methodological proposal that aims to define, in comparative perspective, parties´ social policy profiles. It is based on the annotated manifestos issued by the Manifesto Corpus (Merz et al., 2016) and on the Hirschman´s conceptual model. The latter summarises critiques of the Welfare State (WS) in three arguments of perversity, futility, and jeopardy. Data from the Manifesto Project on the 94 general elections held in the EU-15 from 1993 onwards, and covered in the “2017b” version of its main dataset (729 observations), are used. Parties’ positions on the expansion of welfare spending and emphases on social cuts are examined, both at the meso-level of political parties and the macro-level of national Parliaments. In Spain, Podemos and Ciudadanos have not offered to expand social services for the young generations and, moreover, they have paid scarce attention to the elderly. Neither the Partido Popular (PP, Popular Party), nor the Partido Socialista Obrero Español (PSOE, Socialist Party), have given greater priority to pensions in comparison to other welfare programmes, such as education or employment. Finally, since 1993, the PP, Ciudadanos and Unión Progreso y Democracia (UPyD, Union, Progress and Democracy) have been the only parties supportive of cuts to social spending, albeit infrequently. The PP has changed its reasons for proposing cuts to social spending over time. By 2016, these reasons were consistent with the idea of the perversity of the welfare state.
In Spain, this debate has been linked to the irruption of two new political parties Podemos (We can) and Ciudadanos (Citizens). This paper presents a methodological proposal that aims to define, in comparative perspective, parties´ social policy profiles. It is based on the annotated manifestos issued by the Manifesto Corpus (Merz et al., 2016) and on the Hirschman´s conceptual model. The latter summarises critiques of the Welfare State (WS) in three arguments of perversity, futility, and jeopardy. Data from the Manifesto Project on the 94 general elections held in the EU-15 from 1993 onwards, and covered in the “2017b” version of its main dataset (729 observations), are used. Parties’ positions on the expansion of welfare spending and emphases on social cuts are examined, both at the meso-level of political parties and the macro-level of national Parliaments. In Spain, Podemos and Ciudadanos have not offered to expand social services for the young generations and, moreover, they have paid scarce attention to the elderly. Neither the Partido Popular (PP, Popular Party), nor the Partido Socialista Obrero Español (PSOE, Socialist Party), have given greater priority to pensions in comparison to other welfare programmes, such as education or employment. Finally, since 1993, the PP, Ciudadanos and Unión Progreso y Democracia (UPyD, Union, Progress and Democracy) have been the only parties supportive of cuts to social spending, albeit infrequently. The PP has changed its reasons for proposing cuts to social spending over time. By 2016, these reasons were consistent with the idea of the perversity of the welfare state.