121 / 169
DIGITAL INNOVATION NEEDS WELFARE
121
Why these cases
To answer the core research questions of this
study, a comparative design was selected. This
process examines in particular the development
paths and responses of various welfare states to
the challenges and opportunities of digitalisa-
tion. Countries were selected on the basis of the
various welfare state types distinguished by
Esping-Andersen and Lessenich, with examples
of each of the five types included in the exami-
nation. Germany and France represent the “con-
servative” welfare state type, Sweden the “so-
cial democratic” welfare model and the United
Kingdom the “liberal” welfare state. Estonia is
primarily considered to be a post-socialist wel-
fare state given its collectivist welfare structures
in many areas, even if the country today exhibits
a number of “liberal” characteristics following
the comprehensive economic and social state
reforms that took place after independence: a
very low proportion of social spending (14.8 %
of GDP), above-average income inequality, a
very low level of organisation of workers and
only a very weak institutionalisation of labour
market relationships. Spain and Italy are includ-
ed here as examples of the “Mediterranean”
welfare state. While Spain is a classic represent-
ative of this type, Italy may also be considered a
“conservative” welfare state, given the domi-
nant role of social insurance and, at the same
time, the fairly passive role of the state. There is
disagreement among researchers over this clas-
sification, however. According to Ferrera
(Ferrera, 1996); (see also Lynch, 2014), Italy be-
longs to the group of “Mediterranean” welfare
states, but the latest social state reforms point
towards a gradual departure from this in the di-
rection of the “conservative” model.
The worlds of digitalisation
The European Commission is prioritising digi-
talisation in the ongoing development of the
European Union at social and economic level.
The creation of the digital single market has
been one of the priorities of the European
Commission since 2015. A number of core ob-
jectives were set out in the Digital Single Market
Strategy for Europe. As well as creating trust-
worthy and powerful technical infrastructure
and reducing digital barriers and the digital di-
vide, key targets include improving digital skills
among citizens and adminis-trations, investing
in research and development and enhancing
digital public services. To accompany the pro-
cess of digitalisation, a monitoring instrument
was implemented in the Digital Economy and
Society Index (DESI), which enables individual
countries’ progress to be benchmarked (
cf.
European Commission 2017). Examination of
the comparative data on the status of digitalisa-
tion across EU states reveals sometimes huge dif-
ferences between the aspirations and reality of
digitalisation. Even average data speeds in broad-
band and mobile networks and the shares of fast
broadband connections vary widely between
countries. While the Nordic countries of Sweden,
Finland and Norway, as well as Belgium and the
United Kingdom – and to a lesser degree
Germany – have above-average speeds in both
broadband and mobile networks, it is mainly the
southern European states such as Greece, Croatia
and Italy, as well as France that clearly need to
catch up to some extent in both areas.
Even if the EU Member States fare relatively
well by international comparison in terms of
technical infrastructure and are generally ranked
in the third of the world, there is also consider-
able need to catch up, particularly in the area of