Introduction

Since welfare state reform is generally considered to be a difficult enterprise, drastic policy changes should not be expected. It is therefore a theoretical challenge to compare a case in which such reforms occurred with a case that, under similar conditions, did not produce similar drastic reforms. Given the dearth of cases in which drastic social security reform does occur (Pierson 1994; Esping-Andersen 1999), a large-N study is a dubious task. Moreover, since a welfare state's institutional structure is generally assumed to have a crucial influence on the possibilities and shape of policy reform, it is necessary to control for this parameter. This chapter explains how the selected countries have similar institutional settings, how the problems posed to both governments were comparable, and how the immediate outcomes of the two reform efforts were vastly different.

This study compares two institutionally similar cases in order to identify differences in the process leading to contradictory reform outcomes. Theory is used to detect possibly relevant differences. The next step is to show how these differences are causally relevant to the intended outcome. The research will conclude with more refined general statements about the phenomenon studied. As any comparative approach, this one is not without problems.

In qualitative studies, cases are compared as whole entities, with regard to how causal factors are expected to interact: their influence depends on the different combinations of factors. Therefore, the total situation must be analyzed and compared to another case in its entirety (Ragin 1987: 25). The theory applied here is less rigid than in quantitative studies, to allow for an enriched dialogue between ideas and evidence during the research process. This enables the researcher to identify other differences in the cases than the ones assumed at the onset of the comparative case study. These can be incorporated into the next step of theory generation.

Similar Institutional Structures

This study claims that the Netherlands and Belgium are very comparable on three equally important, though not mutually exclusive, levels: the institutional structure of the welfare state regime, the configuration of the policy sector, and the characteristics of the political system. The welfare state regime is a categorization of ways in which Western democracies have shaped their principles and foundations of state responsibility for the welfare of citizens (Esping-Andersen 1990).