Spending-based welfare state measures omit rights central to women’s welfare.

Evidence

A gendered analysis thus includes new spending dimensions that should be included in the sum. However, a gendered analysis of the welfare state suggests a more radical reconceptualization of the welfare state, along with common quantitative measures. With rare exceptions, all post–World War II analyses of the welfare state use spending data. However, the gender analysis of the welfare state often focuses quite explicitly on rights. For example, O’Connor et al. (1999) in their analysis of Australia, Canada, Great Britain, and the United States include abortion rights as a central dimension of comparison. Rights to divorce, contraception, and abortion are absolutely fundamental to women’s welfare. In addition to the spending dimensions of the welfare state, one could well add a series of rights as new secondary-level dimensions. — Gary Goertz, Social Science Concepts and Measurement, 1452

Categorization

• XREF: Connects to the sum-versus-family-resemblance measurement contrast already developed in this book, and to literature on gendered welfare regimes.
• SEED: Angle: ‘What GDP-style welfare spending stats systematically fail to count’ — how abortion, divorce, and contraception access are welfare-state dimensions that never enter the budget tables.