THE PUBLIC-PRIVATE MIX IN SOUTH EUROPE What changed in the last decade?

(a)How far have Europeanization trends, in parallel with endogenous (national, subnational) pressures, stimulated significant social reforms in these countries since the early 1990s? (b)Has there been a substantial rearrangement in the boundaries between the public and private sector ? (c)What changes in regulation, institutional design, planning and delivery of social welfare have ensued and how are these changes linked to decentralization and regionalization processes that are highly prevalent particularly in Spain and Italy?

1.REFORM TRENDS 2.FINANCE AND EXPENDITURE TRENDS – REGULATION AND DELIVERY 3.OVERALL PERFORMANCE OF SE COUNTRIES ON THE BASIS OF THE LISBON STRATEGY OBJECTIVES

SHARED CHARACTERISTICS OF SOCIAL PROTECTION IN ITALY, SPAIN, GREECE & PORTUGAL “delayed” development of welfare state arrangements key-role of the family/household as a clearing institution for the redistribution of resources, transfer-heavy social budget with a strong pension bias, an excessive burden placed on women for service provision, fragmented and emergency-driven social assistance leaving many of the needy groups unprotected.

Main Features  A male breadwinner / family care model combining a universalist element in health care?  Density of historical time ( i.e. very shortly –only a few years- after health reform laws were enacted in SE, the austerity era began, posing increased challenges and bringing the need for efficiency and cost control into the reform equation) © M. PETMESIDOU 2007 All four countries faced serious fiscal constraints in their attempt to meet the EMU criteria.

 1980s, expansionary phase  1990s, austerity era, comprehensive social reforms  2000s, recovery but also continuing changes in financing, regulation and delivery A common language for institutional change and policy reform emerged in the context of Europeanization Significant differences as to how each country responded to Europeanization so far - a formalistic absorption process in Greece - more profound changes in Italy, Spain & Portugal Europeanization runs parallel to an enhancement of multilevel governance through decentralization and a wider distribution of power among institutions at various jurisdictions, national, regional and local (Italy & Spain)

Major features of reform trends Trends run in opposite directions Reform meant more than a recasting of public expenditure Structural change took place on the basis or more or less consensual processes

(change) Greece Italy Spain Portugal Germany 28.8*25.4* UK Denmark EU-12* 24.3*25.3* EU Increases in social expenditure as per cent of GDP © M. PETMESIDOU 2007

Social expenditure trends in SE in comparison to the three North-European “worlds” of welfare capitalism © M. PETMESIDOU 2007

Gap1* 1990/ 2004 Gap2* 1990/ 2004 GDP per cap Greece /5760/6775 Italy /74100/8795 Spain /5260/6189 Portugal /4841/5666 Germany /85118/ UK /8387/96109 Denmark / EU EU Per capita social expenditure (in PPS) [*gap-1= in respect to the highest spender; gap-2= in respect to the EU-15 average; GDP per capita as % of EU-15 average] © M. PETMESIDOU 2007

Poverty rates before & after social transfers (SE countries in the EU 25 context, 2003) © M. PETMESIDOU 2007

The public-private mix in health care financing Source: OECD 2006 © M. PETMESIDOU 2007

Final Index Inform ation society In- nov- ation, R&D Libe- raliz- ation Net- work ind. Fina- ncial serv. Enter- prise Soc. in- clu- sion Sust. devel. Denmark Finland 25, Sweden Netherlands Germany UK Austria Luxembourg France Belgium Ireland Source: World Economic Forum 2006 Performance in terms of the Lisbon Strategy objectives-1 © M. PETMESIDOU 2007

Final Index Informa- tion society In- nov- ation, R&D Libe- raliz- ation Net- work ind. Fi- nanc- ial serv. Enter- prise Soc. in- clu- sion Sust. devel. Estonia Portugal Czech Rep Spain Slovenia Hungary Slovac Rep Malta Lithuania Cyprus Latvia Greece Italy Poland Performance in terms of the Lisbon Strategy objectives-2 © M. PETMESIDOU 2007

Overall performance and degree of inequality Source: WEF and Eurostat data (our elaboration) © M. PETMESIDOU 2007

Liberalization and level of social expenditure Source: WEF & OECD data (our elaboration) © M. PETMESIDOU 2007

Employment protection and social inclusion score Source: WEF & OECD data (our elaboration) © M. PETMESIDOU 2007