The Relations of Intergenerational Social Mobility and the Degree of Welfare Generosity: A comparative case studies of United States Norway Japan and Thailand

Main Article Content

Sustarum Thammaboosadee


This paper illustrates the relationship between Welfare Generosity and the Intergenerational Social Mobility by considering the case studies in Norway, Japan, the United States and Thailand as a case study comparison. The analysis database is based on the Comparative Welfare Entitlements Dataset-2, which considers sickness, unemployment, and pension benefits in 2017, together with the World Bank's intergenerational social mobility database in 2018. The research found that welfare characteristics that are friendly to people, both in terms of quantity and quality, affect the promotion of intergenerational social mobility. Countries that use the universal welfare state system like Norway tend to reduce the transfer of property and poverty from parents to the younger generations when the universal welfare system is used continuously. While the countries that the welfare system is a joint venture between the employer and the employee like Japan, the welfare will depend on the expansion and contraction of the domestic economy.
Furthermore, in times of economic contraction, there is a tendency for elite groups to build high walls to maintain their status. Meanwhile, the United States and Thailand, where the welfare system focuses on self-responsibility through market mechanisms, using this system continuously, the generosity of welfare will not develop. Moreover, the elite group is more likely to maintain their status under this kind of welfare system.

Article Details

How to Cite
Thammaboosadee, S. (2021). The Relations of Intergenerational Social Mobility and the Degree of Welfare Generosity:: A comparative case studies of United States Norway Japan and Thailand. Journal of Human Rights and Peace Studies, 7(1), 1–20. Retrieved from
Research Articles


Alberto, A., Edward, G., & Bruce, S. (2001). Why Doesn't the US have a EUROPEAN-STYLE WELFARE STATE? [text].

Albæk, K., Andersen, T. M., Asplund, R., Barth, E., Bratsberg, B., Calmfors, L., et al. (2014). The Nordic model – challenged but capable of reform. Europe, Europe: Copenhagen.


Angresano, J., & Ley, R. D. (2001). The Political Economy of Gunnar Myrdal. [Article]. Atlantic Economic Journal, 29(2), 232.

Arnold, D. (2013). Thailand's Hidden Workforce: Burmese Migrant Women Factory Workers: Ruth Pearson and Kyoko Kusakabe (London: Zed Books, 2012). Journal of Contemporary Asia, 1-3.

Barth, E., & Moene, K. (2009). The Equality Multiplier. NBER Working Paper Series, 15076.

Becker, G. S., Murphy, K. M., Kominers, S. D., & Spenkuch, J. L. (2018). A Theory of Intergenerational Mobility. [Article]. Journal of Political Economy, 126, S7-S25.

Benetti, C., Béraud, A., Klimovsky, E., & Rebeyrol, A. (2018). Use values and exchange values in Marx's extended reproduction schemes. [Article]. European Journal of the History of Economic Thought, 25(5), 986-1021.

Bolukbasi, H. T., & Öktem, K. G. (2018). Conceptualizing and operationalizing social rights: Towards higher convergent validity in SCIP and CWED. Journal of European Social Policy, 28(1), 86.

Brown, W. (2015). Undoing the demos : neoliberalism's stealth revolution: Zone Books.

Crouch, C. (2011). The strange non-death of neoliberalism: Polity Press.

Crouch, C. (2014). Post-democracy: Polity.

Glassman, J. (2004). Thailand at the margins : internationalization of the State and the transformation of labour. Oxford ; New York: Oxford University Press.

Harvey, D. (2005). The new imperialism (2005 ed ed.). Oxford ; New York: Oxford University Press.

Harvey, D. (2007). A brief history of neoliberalism Available from


Ho, P. S.-w. (2004). Myrdal's backwash and spread effects in classical economics: implications for multilateral trade negotiations.(Gunnar Myrdal). Journal of Economic Issues, 38(2), 537.

Kabeer, N., Milward, K., & Sudarshan, R. (2013). Organising women workers in the informal economy. Gender & Development, 21(2), 249-263.

Kim, M., & Boyle, E. H. (2012). Neoliberalism, Transnational Education Norms, and Education Spending in the Developing World, 1983?2004 Law & Social Inquiry Volume 37, Issue 2. Law & Social Inquiry, 37(2), 367-394. Retrieved from

Miura, M. (2012). Welfare through work : conservative ideas, partisan dynamics, and social protection in Japan: Cornell University Press.

Narayan, A., Van der Weide, R., Cojocaru, A., Lakner, C., Redaelli, S., Mahler, D. G., et al. (2018). Fair Progress? : Economic Mobility Across Generations Around the World. Web server without geographic relation, Web server without geographic relation (org): Washington, DC: World Bank.

Nixon, J. O. N. (2018). Rosa Luxemburg and the Struggle for Democratic Renewal. [Place of publication not identified]: Pluto Press.

OECD. (2018). Japan Statistical Profile. Retrieved 1 Feb, 2020, from


Piaseu, N., & Mitchell, P. (2004). Household Food Insecurity Among Urban Poor in Thailand

Journal of Nursing Scholarship Volume 36, Issue 2. Journal of Nursing Scholarship, 36(2), 115-121. Retrieved from

Saltkjel, T., & Malmberg‐Heimonen, I. (2017). Welfare Generosity in Europe: A Multi-level Study of Material Deprivation and Income Poverty among Disadvantaged Groups. [Article]. Social Policy & Administration, 51(7), 1287-1310.

Scruggs, L. (2014). Social Welfare Generosity Scores in CWED 2: A Methodological Genealogy. from

Standing, G., & Ebrary. (2011). The precariat the new dangerous classpp. electronic text.). Available from

Available from

Stiglitz, J. E. (2012). The price of inequality : [how today's divided society endangers our future] (1. ed.). New York: W.W. Norton & Co.

Wacquant, L. c. J. D. (2009). Punishing the poor : the neoliberal government of social insecurity (English language ed.). Durham [NC]: Duke University Press.

World Bank Group. (2018). GDIM. 2018. Global Database on Intergenerational Mobility. In W. B. W. Development Research Group, D.C.: World Bank Group (Ed.).