The moral domain is broader than the empathy and justice concerns assessed by existing measures of moral competence, and it is not just a subset of the values assessed by value inventories. To fill the need for reliable and theoretically grounded measurement of the full range of moral concerns, we developed the Moral Foundations Questionnaire on the basis of a theoretical model of 5 universally available (but variably developed) sets of moral intuitions: Harm/Care, Fairness/Reciprocity, Ingroup/Loyalty, Authority/Respect, and Purity/Sanctity. We present evidence for the internal and external validity of the scale and the model, and in doing so we present new findings about morality: (a) Comparative model fitting of confirmatory factor analyses provides empirical justification for a 5-factor structure of moral concerns; (b) convergent/discriminant validity evidence suggests that moral concerns predict personality features and social group attitudes not previously considered morally relevant; and (c) we establish pragmatic validity of the measure in providing new knowledge and research opportunities concerning demographic and cultural differences in moral intuitions. These analyses provide evidence for the usefulness of Moral Foundations Theory in simultaneously increasing the scope and sharpening the resolution of psychological views of morality.

http://www.matchism.org/refs/Graham_2011_MappingTheMoralDomain.pdf

Mapping the Moral Domain

Three worlds of welfare capitalism or more? A state-of-the-art report

This paper surveys the debate regarding Esping-Andersen's typology of welfare states and reviews the modified or alternative typologies ensuing from this debate. We confine ourselves to the classif...

Three worlds of welfare capitalism or more? A state-of-the-art report:

dismantling the welfare state reagan thatcher and politics of retrenchment are a good way to achieve details about operating certainproducts. Many products that you buy can be obtained using instruction manuals. These user guides are clearlybuilt to give step-by-step information about how you ought to go ahead in operating certain equipments. Ahandbook is really a user's guide to operating the equipments. Should you loose your best guide or even the productwould not provide an instructions, you can easily obtain one on the net. You can search for the manual of yourchoice online. Here, it is possible to work with google to browse through the available user guide and find the mainone you'll need. On the net, you'll be able to discover the manual that you might want with great ease andsimplicity

Dismantling the Welfare State? Reagan, Thatcher, and the Politics of Retrenchment

Summary Welfare states treat different groups of needy people differently. Such differential rationing may reflect various considerations of policymakers, who act in economic, political and cultural contexts. This article aims at contributing to a theoretical and empirical understanding of the popular cultural context of welfare rationing. It examines European public perceptions of the relative deservingness of four needy groups (elderly people, sick and disabled people, unemployed people, and immigrants). Hypotheses, deduced from a literature review, are tested against data from the 1999/2000 European Values Study survey. It is found that Europeans share a common and fundamental deservingness culture: across countries and social categories there is a consistent pattern that elderly people are seen as most deserving, closely followed by sick and disabled people; unemployed people are seen as less deserving still, and immigrants as least deserving of all. Conditionality is greater in poorer countries, in countries with lower unemployment, and in countries where people have less trust in fellow citizens and in state institutions. At the national level there is no relation with welfare regime type or welfare spending. Individual differences in conditionality are determined by several socio-demographic and attitudinal characteristics, as well as by certain features of the country people live in.

/pdf/making-the-difference-in-social-europe-deservingness-3ub59urzg8.pdf

Making the difference in social Europe: deservingness perceptions among citizens of European welfare states

In this article, we investigate whether and, if so, to what extent, people’s notions of solidarity and their choices of justice principles are related to the type of welfare state regime they live under, as well as to individual socio-demographic and ideological factors. We analyse data from the International Social Survey Program 1996 and the European Values Study 1999, which together cover preferences of citizens from 20 welfare states. Hypotheses pertaining to people’s notions of solidarity and preferences for justice principles in the different welfare state regimes are derived from the work of Esping-Andersen and his critics, as well as from sociological and socialpsychological theories of solidarity and distributive justice. We find important, although not decisive, evidence for the thesis that the actual state of affairs with respect to the welfare state regime under which citizens live determines their views about which level of solidarity should be achieved and which justice principles should be emphasized. However, differences found are often not very pronounced, and we argue that this is a consequence of the fact that values of solidarity and justice are matters of priority to all welfare states. Taking into account the differences which exist between welfare state regimes, we also find important differences between individuals and social groups in their preferred level of solidarity and in their choice of justice principles.

/pdf/welfare-states-solidarity-and-justice-principles-does-the-2gh4nm2d9s.pdf

Welfare States, Solidarity and Justice Principles: Does the Type Really Matter?

Which factors explain intra- and inter-country variations in levels of public support for national health care systems within the European Union, and why? We propose that public opinion towards public health care is dependent on (1) the type of welfare state regime to which the various European welfare states belong, (2) typical features of the national care system and (3) individual social and demographic characteristics, which are related to self-interest or morality oriented motives. To assess the explanatory power of these factors, data from the Eurobarometer survey series are analysed. Support for public health care appears to be particularly positively related to social-democratic attributes of welfare states, whereas support drops with increasing degrees of liberalism and conservatism. Further, support for public health care proves to be associated with wider coverage and public funding of national care services. We also find higher levels of support in countries with scarce social services for children and the elderly, and larger proportions of female (part-time) employment. Lastly, with respect to individual characteristics, we find remarkably little evidence for self-interest oriented motives affecting the preference for solidary health care arrangements.

Public health care in balance : Exploring popular support for health care systems in the European Union

/pdf/public-health-care-in-the-balance-exploring-popular-support-8j0x74jbjx.pdf

Public health care in the balance: exploring popular support for health care systems in the European Union

When people in Europe are interviewed about the values, which they consider fundamental for the design of their health and social care systems, they often refer to the values of equity and solidarity. While equity may be a term for which most people have a quite similar and clear-cut understanding, solidarity is a less familiar notion that is subject to divergent interpretations and reflections. In general, the idea of solidarity is associated with mutual respect, personal support and commitment to a common cause. These interpretations come to the fore when Europeans in large-scale surveys are questioned about their understandings of this idea of solidarity. Their verbal answers to these kind of questions reflect notions as ‘belonging together’, ‘mutual understanding’, ‘support of the weak and needy (benevolence)’, ‘shared responsibility’ and commitment to the common good. To explain these notions, solidarity is often juxtaposed against individualistic and even egoistic behaviour or contrasted with the alleged self-centred individualism that is often superficially associated with the cultural habits, societal norms and liberal values of the United States. For example, the plain evidence that forty-five millions of inhabitants of the United States lack any sort of health care insurance is for many Europeans, especially on the leftist stance, writing on the wall. In contrast to the alleged irresponsibility and lack of concern that is generally associated with this kind of individualism, Europeans proudly refer to the notion of solidarity and how it shaped their national health and social care systems. How ill-defined solidarity often is, the basic understanding is that everyone is assumed to make a fair financial contribution to a collectively organised insurance system that guarantees equal access to health and social care for all members of society. This equally applies to other systems of social protection, which are operating in Europeans welfare states, such as social insurance systems covering the financial risks of unemployment and work related illness and disability, as well as old age insurance systems and pension schemes.

W.A. Arts

Papers

Three worlds of welfare capitalism or more? A state-of-the-art report:

Welfare States, Solidarity and Justice Principles: Does the Type Really Matter?

Public health care in balance : Exploring popular support for health care systems in the European Union

Public health care in the balance: exploring popular support for health care systems in the European Union

Solidarity, Health and Social Care in Europe. Introduction to the volume