보편주의 사회프로그램의 성장과 쇠퇴 - 캐나다 가족수당의 사례 -
The Rise and Fall of Universal Social Programs The Case of Canadian Family Allowance
0
조회
0
다운로드
1
인용
0
참고문헌
키워드
초록
사회보험연금이나 의료보험 혹은 중앙정부 수준의 공공부조프로그램조차 갖추지 못했던 복지후진국 캐나다에서 이차대전 기간 동안 가족수당이 도입되었다. 복지선진국의 특징이라는 점에서 가장 선진화된 복지프로그램으로 평가받는 보편급여가 복지후진국에서 도입되었다는 사실은 매우 흥미로운 연구주제를 던져준다. 이 연구의 목적은 캐나다에서 보편주의 사회프로그램이 도입된 사회적 배경을 밝히는 데 있다. 이를 위해서 이 연구는 기존의 연구들을 이론적․경험적으로 평가하고, 이를 통해서 가장 설득력 있는 견해가 무엇인지를 제시할 것이다. 평가 대상이 되는 견해들이 강조하는 요인들은 사회민주주의 정당의 계급동원 전략, 집권정당의 개혁적 성향, 노동계급의 급진화, 집권정당의 정치적 위기이며, 이 가운데 이 연구는 사회민주주의정당의 도전으로부터 발생한 집권 자유당의 정치적 위기가 가장 유력한 요인이었다고 주장한다. 그 이외의 다른 요인들은 캐나다의 현실과 부합하지 않거나 계층에 관계없이 모든 시민들에게 급여를 제공하는 보편주의 사회프로그램의 도입 배경으로 간주되기 어렵기 때문이다. 사회적인 관심과 전폭적인 지지 속에 도입되었던 가족수당은 시행 이후 급속하게 위축되면서결국 폐지되었다. 이 글의 부차적인 목적은 왜 가족수당이 그러한 쇠퇴와 몰락의 길을 밟게 되었는가를 설명하는 데 있다. 이 연구에서는 집권정당의 정치적 위기가 사라지면서 관대한 성격의 가족수당을 유지하고자 하는 정치적 이해관계도 줄어들었다는 점에 주목하고자 한다. 이렇게 함으로써 이 연구는 캐나다의 가족수당의 성립과 쇠퇴에 대한 일관성 있는 설명을 제시할 수 있게 되었다.
Abstract
Family allowance was instituted during the Second World War in Canada, which did not have a contributory old-age pension, health insurance and public aids at the federal level until the 1960s. Therefore, it is very natural to ask why such an advanced welfare program as family allowance was introduced in the welfare laggard like 1940s' Canada. This research aims to seek for the social background, which was directly related to the making of the universal social program in Canada. This article attempts to present the most persuasive explanation after examining several possible factors, which include the class mobilization of social democratic party, the reformist character of the ruling party, the radicalization of the working class, and the political crisis of the ruling party. This research selects the last one as the most appropriate, because the other factors were either unapplicable to the Canadian society or unsuitable to the explanation for the introduction of the universal social program, which provides benefits to all citizens, not to a particular social group or class. The Canadian family allowance continued to be cut back after its inauguration and was abolished in the 1990s. The secondary aim of this article is to explain why the family allowance, which was supported by almost all the social groups and political parties when introduced, went through such a process. This research focuses on the fact that the political interests to maintain the generous family allowance were reduced as the political crisis harassing the ruling Liberal Party disappeared during the 1950's economic growth and social stabilization.
참고문헌 (25)
- The Restructuring of the Canadian Welfare State: Ideology and Policy, "Baker, M.", The Social Policy Research Centre, ~, pp.SPRC Discussion Paper No. 77 (1997)
- Battle, K., "Clawback: The Demise of Universality in Canadian Welfare State. in: Social Effects of Free Market Policies" (1990), Harvester Wheatsheaf
- Public Pensions in a Development Context: The Case of Canada, "Battle, K.", U N Research Institute for Social Development, ~, pp.Social Policy and Development Programme Paper No. 31 (2007)
- Blake, R., "In the Children's Interest? Change and Continuity in a Century of Canadian Social Welfare Initiatives for Children. in: Social Fabric or Patchwork Quilt?: The Development of Social Welfare in Canada" (2006), Broadview Press
- Blake, R., "Mackenzie King and the Genesis of Family Allowances in Canada, 1939-1944. in: Social Welfare Policy in Canada: Historical Readings" (1995), Copp Clark
- Evans, P., "Eroding Canadian Social Welfare: the Mulroney Legacy, 1984-1993", Social Policy and Administration, 28(2), pp.107~119 (1994)
- Finkel, A., "0. Waterloo" (2006), Wilfrid Laurier University Press
- Guest, D., "The Emergence of Social Security in Canada(3rd Edition)" (1997), University of British Columbia Press
- Guest, D., "World War Ⅱ and the Welfare State in Canada. in: The Benevolent State: The Growth of Welfare in Canada" (1987), Garamond Press
- Hick, S., "Social Welfare in Canada: Understanding Income Security(2nd edition)" (2007), Thompson Educational Publishing
- Ismael, S., "Child Poverty and the Canadian Welfare State: From Entitlement To Charity" (2006), University of Alberta Press
- Johnson, A. W., "Social Policy in Canada: The Past as It Conditions the Present. in: The Future of Social Welfare Systems in Canada and the United Kingdom" (1987), Institute for Research on Public Policy
- Johnson, A. W., "Restructuring Family Allowances: Good Politics at No Cost?. in: Canadian Social Welfare Policy: Federal and Provincial Dimensions" (1985), McGill-Queen's University Press
- Kitchen, B., "The Introduction of Family Allowances in Canada. in: The Benevolent State: The Growth of Welfare in Canada" (1987), Garamond Press
- Marshall, D., "Social Origins of the Welfare State: The Quebec Families, Compulsory Education, and Family Allowances 1940-1955" (2006), Wilfrid Laurier University Press
- Pal, L. A., "State, Class and Bureaucracy: Canadian Unemployment Insurance and Public Policy" (1988), McGill-Queen's University Press
- "History of Federal Ridings Since 1867" (2009)[URL]
- Pierson, P., "Dismantling the Welfare State? Reagan, Thatcher, and the Politics of Retrenchment" (1994), Press syndicate of the University of Cambridge
- Piven, F., "Regulating the Poor: The Functions of Public Welfare" (1971), Random House
- Prince, M., "From Meech Lake to Golden Pond: The Elderly, Pension Reform and Federalism in the 1990s. in: How Ottawa Spends, 1991-1992: The Politics of Fragmentation" (1991), Carleton University Press
- Rice, J., "Changing Politics of Canadian Social Policy" (2000), University of Toronto Press
- "Section G: Government Finance" (1983)[URL]
- "Section E: Wage and Working Conditions" (1983)[URL]
- Struthers, J., "Universality Revisited: Family Allowances, Old Age Security, and the Construction of Entitlement Within the Canadian Welfare State, 1944-1951. in: Social and Secure?: Politics and Culture of the Welfare State: A Comparative Inquiry" (1996), VU University Press
- Woolley, F., "Ending Universality: The Case of Child Benefits", Canadian Public Policy, 22(1), pp.24~39 (1996)