ABSTRACT
Many recent accounts of work-family policy reforms have their roots in comparative welfare state studies. Most of these theories have been developed to explain similarities and differences in states’ approaches to provide for the economic security of their populations. State-provided social security schemes insure citizens against the risk of loss of employment and loss of income due to old age or sickness. They enable citizens to maintain a living without being forced to sell their working power on the market (decommodification). At the same time, their respective configuration stratifies society inasmuch as it determines who benefits from social policies and who does not. For example, in continental welfare states, wage earners are the main beneficiaries, while in universalist welfare states, all citizens receive benefits irrespective of their employment status. Hence functionalist, actor-centered and institutionalist theories have been applied to explain why countries differ in their approaches; when, why and how social policies are being reformed; and which groups prevailed in the distributive struggles.
