Faces of inequality

By W. Korpi. 2000

995 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: General Health Professions, Political Science and International Relations, Public Administration

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/df5b910551f38ee031c29e834088fd3e9d5904d9

How researchers see this paper

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

In General Health Professions

In Political Science and International Relations

In Public Administration

Citations in the corpus

Varieties of familialism: Comparing four southern European and East Asian welfare regimes (2016, background): “Unlike what Korpi (2000) argued, supported familialism does not always imply keeping women at home.”
The Emergence of the Post-Socialist Welfare State : the Case of the Baltic States : Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania (2004, background): “Numerous studies provide strong evidence that this approach can potentially explain a lot about the variation of the welfare states as well as their development (see Ferrarini 2003; Korpi 2000; Korpi and Palme 2003; Palme 1990).”
Explaining convergence of OECD welfare states: a conditional approach (2011, background): “With respect to the gender dimension, Korpi (2000) distinguishes welfare states that follow policies of ‘general family support’ (for example, Italy) from those that provide ‘dual-earner support’ (the Nordic countries).”
Gender and welfare state change1 (2002, background): “Thus Korpi (1999) has sought to categorize policies according to the extent to which they enable the redistribution of care work with the policy goal of promoting women’s 12.”
Family policies and gender in Hungary, Poland, and Romania (2002, background): “Researchers have found a strong correlation between the character of the welfare state and class (Esping-Anderson, 1990; Korpi, 2000) and gender inequalities (O’Connor et al., 1999; Orloff, 1993; Sainsbury, 1996).”
CAN WE IDENTIFY INTERGENERATIONAL POLICY REGIMES IN EUROPE? (2010, background): “To a lesser degree, this may also happen with supported familialism (also see Korpi 2000), in so far as, given prevalent gender scripts and division of labour, women rather than men are more likely to take advantage of leave and of different care allowances.”
Health Status and the Worlds of Welfare (2006, background): “…and other typologies have extended this principle by examining levels of income inequality (Korpi and Palmer, 1998), the decommodification of key welfare services (Bambra, 2005a, 2005b), or levels of defamilisation (Lewis, 1992; Orloff, 1993; Sainsbury, 1999; Korpi, 2000; Bambra, 2004a).”
Counteracting material deprivation: The role of social assistance in Europe (2012, background): “…influence labour force and employment patterns, thereby increasing the earnings capacity of individuals and households in lower income segments.2 Public provision of care for dependents is one example (Cantillon et al., 2001; Ferrarini, 2006; Gornick and Meyers, 2003; Korpi, 2000; Sainsbury, 1999).”
The Role of Family Policy Institutions in Explaining Gender-Role Attitudes: A Comparative Multilevel Analysis of Thirteen Industrialized Countries (2004, methodology): “Korpi (2000) has distinguished between three ideal-typical models of gendered welfare state institutions of relevance to the above discussion.2 In this typology the distinction between paid and unpaid labour is of central importance, and institutionalized family policy measures are conceived in a…”
Cash Versus Services: ‘Worlds of Welfare’ and the Decommodification of Cash Benefits and Health Care Services (2005, neutral): “…has suggested that welfare states divide into not three (Esping-Andersen, 1990, 1999), or four (Castles and Mitchell, 1993; Korpi and Palme, 1998; Korpi, 2000; Bambra, 2005), but five different clusters (Pitzurello, 1999): (1) Finland, Norway, Sweden; (2) Germany, Netherlands, Switzerland; (3)…”
Women's Opportunities under Different Family Policy Constellations: Gender, Class, and Inequality Tradeoffs in Western Countries Re-examined (2013, background): “…affect the extent to which women join the labor force, and we contend that in these processes family policies interact with class in ways relevant for the socioeconomic composition of women in employment—a selection effect (Korpi 2000; Mandel and Shalev 2009a; Montanari 2000a; Shalev 2008).”
Putting the Child-Centred Investment Strategy to the Test: Evidence for the EU27: (2013, background): “…(with strong emphasis on active policies and training programs), influenced by the notion that gender equality could only be achieved by increasing women’s employment opportunities and men’s opportunities to take care of the children (the socalled ‘dual earner/dual carer’ model, Korpi, 2000).”