Social Stratification and Welfare Regimes for the Twenty-first Century: Revisiting The Three Worlds of Welfare Capitalism

By L. Scruggs, James P. Allan, Lisa Blaydes, Drew A. Linzer, J. López-Córdova, Christopher M. Meissner, Kent Eaton, D. Ziblatt. 2008

129 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Finance, General Health Professions, Political Science and International Relations

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/81799681a35ab9673fc6ac25d78cbe99d1b33275

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Finance

1. A. Kammer
2. Judith Niehues
3. Andreas Peichl

In General Health Professions

1. Huoyun Zhu
2. A. Walker

In Political Science and International Relations

1. A. Kammer
2. Judith Niehues
3. Andreas Peichl

Citations in the corpus

• Pension system reform in China: Who gets what pensions? (2018, background): “Social democratic welfare regimes emphasized universalism in a broad sense—across class lines—linking state policies to social citizenship (Esping‐Andersen, 1990; Scruggs & Allan, 2008).”
• Historical Trust Levels Predict the Current Size of the Welfare State (2011, unknown): “Replicating and correcting errors in the Esping-Andersen classification, Scruggs and Allan (2008) later found very limited empirical support for the “three worlds” typology.”
• Welfare regimes and welfare state outcomes in Europe (2012, background): “Furthermore, the classification of stratification regimes could not prove sufficient stability and therefore the analytic power of the concept is not undisputed (Scruggs and Allan, 2006, 2008).”