Summaries
Social security: A European comparison M. Einerhand
This article tries - both a theoretical and at a more practical level - to analyse if and to what extent different social security systems can be made comparable. At a theoretical level we use the so-called 'idealtypes', as developed amongst others by Esping-Andersen. At a more practical level three aspects of social sys tems are analysed. Trying to control for 'insti tutional' differences between countries the analysis is aimed at presenting comparable in formation.
Central question in the article is whether the idealtypes as described at a theoretical level in deed in practice always produce those out comes which are suggested by the description of idealtypes.
The comparison of social systems will focus on the following three theme's,
a the role of private social security;
b de magnitude of the 'true' net social expen ditures;
c social security and unemployment. Flexibilisation of employment in Europe L. Delsen
Over the past decade a policy of labour market deregulation and decentralisation has been ap plied in Europe. European policy makers see the flexibilisation of labour as an important in strument to create new jobs and to reduce un employment. Despite this policy the labour market in the European Union is characterised by a high and persistent level of (long-term) un employment. The article discusses the con tents and the theoretical and empirical basis of this policy of flexibilisation of labour.
Public Employment Service in North-West Europe
R. van Bekkum
Public expenditure on active and passive la bour market policy shows considerable variety in volume and composition across the north western member-states of the European Un ion, with the United Kingdom holding the most parsimoneous position and Sweden the most generous one. The Netherlands are high- ranked as regards expenditure on unemploy ment benefits, but are spending a relatively small budget on active measures and even less on measures focusing on the regular labour market.
The 'public employment service', (PES), being the historical offspring of 'active labour market policy' and allways more or less its central ex ecutive agency, is well-developed in all north western member-states of the European Un ion. Its organisational structure, task-domain, character of its intermediary activities and marketshare bear peculiar characteristics in every member-state, rooted in national his tory. In The Netherlands the implementation of labour market policy is organized in a rather decentralized and dispersed manner requiring intensive 'networking' by its managers. Re sponsibilities of the 'Arbeidsvoorzieningsorga nisatie'are limited, actual demonopolisation of placement services is rather substantial, and the share of public placement in total laboural- location seems (by international standards) rather restricted. As regards the total number of staff engaged in the execution of active and passive provisions, our country meets the highest international standards.
