New Law-Making and Regulatory Welfare Trade-offs
Noralv Veggeland
Lillehammer University College.
DOI: 10.4236/blr.2011.22009   PDF    HTML     3,947 Downloads   8,797 Views   Citations


The contemporary regulatory state has developed as a result of both new legislation and political struggles that accompanied an increasingly globalized world and the economic crisis in the 1970-1980s. The answer to this development was the reforms collectively known as New Public Management (NPM) which promoted the privatization and marketization of the public sector, and thereby the creation of the new regulatory state. The regulatory-state formation in Europe was affected extensively by the formation of the European Union and its administrative traditions and welfare-state models. Path-dependent developments influenced the achievements which have been described as innovative, that is, regulatory innovation. Socio-economic goals are linked to three distinct policy choices, which have been characterized by trade-offs. The trade-offs occur because it is difficult to pursue successfully all three goals simultaneously. In Scandinavia the trade-off and new law-making achieved as a regulatory innovation the much-lauded mechanism of “flexicurity”, that is, the combination by law of the flexible market with social security.

Share and Cite:

N. Veggeland, "New Law-Making and Regulatory Welfare Trade-offs," Beijing Law Review, Vol. 2 No. 2, 2011, pp. 88-96. doi: 10.4236/blr.2011.22009.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflicts of interest.


[1] N. Veggeland, “Taming the Regulatory State: Politics and Ethics,” Edward Elgar, Cheltenham, 2009.
[2] N. Veggeland, “The New Regulatory State: Idea Dis- courses and Governance Conflicts,” Gyldendal Akade- misk, Oslo, 2010.
[3] J. Tinbergen, “International Economic Integration,” Else- vier, Amsterdam, 1965.
[4] J. P. Olsen, “Maybe It Is Time to Rediscover Bureaucracy?” Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, Vol. 16, No. 1, 2005, pp. 1-24. doi:10.1093/jopart/mui027
[5] M. Ferrera, “European Integration and National Social Sovereignty: Changing Boundaries, New Structuring,” Paper, University of Padavia, Italy, 2002.
[6] P. Pierson, “Post-Industrial Pressures on the Mature Welfare States,” In: J. Pierre, Ed., Debating Governance: Authority, Steering, and Democracy, Oxford University Press, Oxford, 2001, pp. 80-106.
[7] B. Rosamond, “Theories of European Integration,” MacMillan Press, London, 2000.
[8] L. Jan-Erik, “New Public Management,” Routledge, London, 2000.
[9] G. Majone, “The Rise of the Regulatory State in Europe,” West European Politics, Vol. 17, No. 3, 1994, pp. 77-101. doi:10.1080/01402389408425031
[10] N. Veggeland, “Europapolitikk, Innenrikspolitikk og Kommunene,” Kommuneforlaget, Oslo, 2005.
[11] N. Veggeland, “Post-National Governance and Transboundary Regionalization: Spatial Partnership Formations as Democratic Exit, Loyalty and Voice Options,” In: O. Kramsch and B. Hooper, Eds., Cross-Border Governance in the European Union, Routledge, London, 2004, pp. 157-170.
[12] Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development, “Modernising Government: The Way Forward,” Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development Publishing, Paris, 2005.
[13] T. Iversen, “Capitalism, Democracy and Welfare,” Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 2005.
[14] Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development, “Distributed Public Governance: Agencies, Authorities and Other Government Bodies,” Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development Publishing, Paris, 2002.
[15] A. S. Millward, “The European Rescue of the Nation- State,” Routledge, London, 2000.
[16] P. de Buck, “The Social Dialogue and the Role of Social Partners in the EEA,” EFTA Bulletin, 2004, pp. 73-78.
[17] D. W. Urwin, “The Community of Europe: A History of European Integration since 1945,” Longman, London, 1996.
[18] O. G. Austvik, “Internasjonal Handel og ?konomisk Integrasjon,” Gyldendal Akademisk, Oslo, 2002.
[19] H. Wallace and W. Wallace, “Policy-Making in the Euro- pean Union,” Oxford University Press, Oxford, 2004.
[20] C. Pollitt and G. Bouckaert, “Public Management Reform: A Comparative Analysis,” Oxford University Press, Oxford, 2004.
[21] I. D. Koukiadis, “The Imminent Retirement of Socialism and the Hope of a New Social State,” Epitheorisi Ergasia- kon Scheseon, Athens, 2006.
[22] J. Hayward and A. Menon, “Governing Europe,” Oxford University Press, Oxford, 2003. doi:10.1093/0199250154.001.0001
[23] J. K. Glenn, “EU Enlargement,” In: M. Cini, Ed., Euro- pean Union Politics, Oxford University Press, Oxford, 2004, pp. 211-228.
[24] D. Janssen, “Retreat or Relaunch: Choices for the Lisbon Agenda,” Europe's World: The Only Europe-Wide Policy Journal, No. 1, 2005, pp. 54-57.
[25] EU Program 2006.
[26] N. Veggeland, “Paths of Public Innovation in the Global Age: Lessons from Scandinavia,” Edward Elgar, Chelten- ham, 2007.
[27] European Policy Centre, “The Nordic Model: A Recipe for European Success?” European Policy Centre, Working Paper, Vol. 20, 2005.
[28] V. Timonen, “New Risks—Are They Still New for the Nordic Welfare States?” In: P. Taylor-Gooby, Ed., New Risks, New Welfare: The Transformation of the European Welfare State, Oxford University Press, Oxford, 2004, pp. 55-83.
[29] A. Mayhew, “Lisbon’s Single Size Doesn’t Fit All,” Europe’s World, 2005.
[30] D. O’Sullivan, “Prize Pupil or Prodigy? The Nordic Model and the Lisbon Reform Agenda,” European Policy Centre, Working Paper, 2005, pp. 32-37.
[31] S. Kuhnle, “The Scandinavian Welfare State in the 1990s: Challenged but Viable,” In: M. Ferrera and M. Rhodes, Ed., Recasting European Welfare States, Frank Cass, London, 2000, pp. 209-228.
[32] P. Pierson, “Politics in Time: History, Institutions and Social Analysis,” Princeton University Press, Princeton, 2004.
[33] K. A. R?vik, “Translations and Trends: Ideas That Shape the 21 Century,” Fagbokforlaget, Bergen, 2007.
[34] C. Knill, “The Europeanization of the National Administrations,” Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 2001. doi:10.1017/CBO9780511491986
[35] G. Majone, “Regulating Europe,” Routledge, London, 1996. doi:10.4324/9780203439197
[36] G. Majone, “From the Positive to the Regulatory State: Causes and Consequences of Change in the Mode of Government,” Journal of Public Policy, Vol. 17, No. 3, 1997, pp. 139-189.
[37] U. Beck, “Risk Society: Towards a New Modernity,” Sage Publication, London, 1992.
[38] P. Taylor-Gooby, “New Risks, New Welfare: The Transformation of European Welfare State,” Oxford University Press, Oxford, 2004.
[39] F. Scharpf, “Governing in Europe: Effective and Democratic?” Oxford University Press, Oxford, 1999.
[40] T. Iversen, “Capitalism: Democracy and Welfare,” Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 2005.
[41] D. Beetham, L. Byrne, P. Ngan and S. Weir, “Democracy under Blair: A Democratic Audit of the United Kingdom,” Politico’s Publishing, London, 2002.
[42] J. P. Olsen, “Europeanization,” In: M. Cini, Ed., European Union Politics, Oxford University Press, Oxford, 2004, pp. 333-348.
[43] Europe’s World, The Only Europe-Wide Policy Journal, Autumn 2005.
[44] A. Wren, “Distributional Tradeoffs and Partisan Politics in the Postindustrial Economy,” Dissertation, Department of Government, Harvard University, 2000.
[45] R. K. Weaver, “The Politics of Blame Avoidance,” Journal of Public Policy, Vol. 6, No. 4, 1986, pp. 371-398. doi:10.1017/S0143814X00004219
[46] M. Cini, “European Union Politics,” Oxford University Press, Oxford, 2004.
[47] U. Sverdrup, “Implementation,” In: P. Graziano and M. P. Vink, Eds., Europeanization: New Research Agendas, MacMillan, Palgrave, 2007.
[48] P. N. Rasmussen, “What Lisbon Has Lacked Is Political Courage,” Europe’s World, Autumn 2005, pp. 60-70.
[49] T. Iversen and A. Wren, “Equality, Employment, and Budgetary Restraint: The Trilemma of the Service Economy,” World Politics, Vol. 50, No. 4, 1998, pp. 507-546.

Copyright © 2024 by authors and Scientific Research Publishing Inc.

Creative Commons License

This work and the related PDF file are licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.