Paper presented to 27th ICSW International Conference
July 29-August 3, 1996, Hong Kong
 

Abstract

     In the 20th Century most democratic industrialized countries have strived to be a "welfare state".  Social policy planners, including politicians, scholars (if referred British models, Beveridge, Titmuss, T. H. Marshall, Tawney and others) contributed and invented tools.　Those are social security system, social insurance and public assistance; social services in health, housing, education, personal social service, often with positive discrimination; full-employment policy; redistribution policy by inheritance tax and progressive income tax; and workers protection law etc. .
     The root of the "welfare state" is to eliminate absolute poverty of its nation at least.  We have succeeded in it to some extent in the developed countries.  Despite many problems and dissatisfaction remains, basic orientation to "welfare state" survived.
     But when we turn to global situation, states which can be called by the name are still minor.  There remains enormous (more than one billion) absolute poverty on the earth.  When the welfare state idea is extended, a definition of "welfare world" must be that every people who is born on the earth has a right to live minimum meaningful life (world citizenship).

  We must mobilize our idea and tactics to make "welfare world" to be realized in the 21st century, as we have succeeded in to establish "welfare state" in the 20th century.  We must invent new world social policy.  It will largely confront to world economic policy, and one of the most important points will be to control multinational corporations.
     Most urgent problems or even crises which humankind faces today could be summarized as 3W: Want (starving, absolute poverty and population explosion); Waste (earth scale destruction of environment); War (crazy killings and refugees discharge).  Those are all closely interrelated.  We must attack them simultaneously and systematically.
     The models invented so far are models mainly applicable to industrialized countries.  They can not be applied directly to the developing or under-developed countries.  And when thinking about the capacity of earth, it may be impossible for all nations to develop life styles at the same level as present developed countries enjoy.  We might have to change our approaches to social development drastically.  Some developed countries might have to lower their standards of living in several critical respects.  We must understand and respect each others diversity and learn to coexist.  People have rights to live in their own culture peacefully.  We must secure a safe earth environment cohabiting    Strategically and logically, if each country became a "welfare state", a "welfare world" can be simply and readily established.  But even within the United Nations, there are many oppressive non-democratic governments, so it is not realistic to expect too much from state initiatives.  There must also be roles and tasks of NGOs in the context of a more internationally cooperative civil society.  Emerging "information society" offers some grounds for optimism in this respect. 
  with other creatures too.

1, Achievement of "Welfare State"

(Policy Models)
     Throughout the 20th Century most of the democratic industrialized countries have strived to become "welfare states".  Social policy planners, including politicians, scholars (if referred British models, Beveridge, titmuss, T. H. Marshall, Tawney and others) have contributed towards the achievement of these goals.  Beveridge developed an integrated social security plan consisting of social insurance and public assistance.  Tawney and Titmuss emphasized the role of redistribution policies through social services and the tax system.  And T. H. Marshall explained the development of the Welfare State in terms of the growth of citizenship i. e. welfare statism consisting of a combination of factors: democracy in the political sector; a mixed economy in the economic sector; a welfare society in the social sector.
     Models which are invented could be summarized as follows: the social security system, mainly consist of social insurance and public assistance; the social services in health, housing, education, personal social service, sometimes with forms of positive discrimination; full-employment policy; redistribution policy through the use of inheritance taxes and progressive income taxes; as well as workers protection law etc. .

(The case of Japan)
     These models have most relevance to the western industrialized counties often with strong labor movements, including Japan.  In the Introduction to his Japanese translation of William Beveridge`s autobiography Power and Influence, 1953, Mr. Hideo Ide, who was high commissioner of the Ministry of Welfare, wrote that `the Recommendation of Social Security Council of 1950 was may be the country which was most influenced by the Beveridge Plan`.  The growth of the welfare state contributed greatly to the postwar political stability therefore economic development of Japan.

(Survival of Welfare State Ideal: Defense of Welfare Statism)
     One definition of the welfare state is that it expresses a commitment to guaranteeing certain basic levels of provision as aright of citizenship and as a connective obligation that must be met.  This definition does not preclude the possibility of guaranteeing needs above the minimum but elimination of absolute poverty is seen as the essential firs step.
     T. H. Marshall described the aims of social policy by reference to three concepts most likely command a national consensus: the elimination of poverty; the maximization of welfare; and pursuit of equality.  Poverty, for Marshall, was synonymous with absolute poverty

Throughout las five decades there have been a number of policy innovations such as the new liberalism, privatization, pluralism and community care etc. .  Some of which have challenged the traditional concepts of a unitary welfare state.  There have also been new challenges such as increase in the incidence of unemployment and homelessness which have caused new demands for social resources.  Nevertheless, the basic commitment to the welfare state was not changed and its basic frameworks have survived.