Why deservingness theory needs qualitative research. An analysis of focus group discussions on social welfare in three welfare regimes

This article argues that the ever-growing research field of welfare deservingness is in need of qualitative research. Using data from focus groups conducted in three different welfare regimes, we aim to unravel which deservingness criteria citizens apply when discussing social welfare distribution, and what concrete meaning such abstract criteria have to them. Our analyses show that the focus group participants applied the criteria of control, reciprocity and need, but not attitude and identity. Participants also articulated a number of alternative normative criteria (i.e. equality/universalism, cost awareness, social investment), which are different from deservingness in that they refer to the broader context instead of characteristics of welfare targets. Furthermore, our findings suggest the existence of an institutional logic to welfare preferences, as the participants to some extent echoed the normative criteria that are most strongly embedded in the institutional structure of their country’s welfare regime. Whereas financial need was the guiding criterion in liberal UK, reciprocity was dominant in corporatist-conservative Germany. In social-democratic Denmark, it proved impossible to single out one dominant normative criterion. Instead, the Danish participants seemed torn between the criteria of need, reciprocity, and equality/universalism.status: publishe