The Rational Legitimacy of the Welfar State: popular support for ten income transfer schemes in Finland

Abstract

This article explores how popular support for social benefits is connected to their entitlement rules. In addition, the role of self-interest regarding support for social benefits is examined. The importance of these factors is empirically evaluated using a sample of 1,117 Finns. Popular support for ten essential income transfer schemes in Finland is determined. Some of these schemes represent purely means-tested programmes, others are universal. Programmes also vary in their importance to different subgroups of the population. The results give qualified support to the ‘welfare backlash’ model: universal benefits are found to be more legitimate than selective ones. However, the situation is a little more complicated. Benefits maintaining basic security are also highly legitimate, which indicates that people do not support social security schemes only out of selfish motives. They also have a moral commitment to help those in need. The analysis also reveals clear choices based on self-interest: families with children, for example, strongly defend family benefits and younger people do not allow cutbacks in study allowances.