ECPR

Install the app

Install this application on your home screen for quick and easy access when you’re on the go.

Just tap Share then “Add to Home Screen”

ECPR

Install the app

Install this application on your home screen for quick and easy access when you’re on the go.

Just tap Share then “Add to Home Screen”

Social Policy by Other Means? Mutual Aid and the Origins of the Modern Welfare State in Britain during the Nineteenth and Twentieth Centuries

Civil Society
Public Administration
Social Welfare
Welfare State
Bernard Harris
University of Strathclyde
Bernard Harris
University of Strathclyde

Abstract

During the last thirty years, historians and social scientists have become increasingly attuned to the concept of the ‘mixed economy of welfare’ (see e.g. Harris and Bridgen 2007). However, by seeking to rescue the roles played by organisations such as charities and mutual-aid societies from the shadow of the modern welfare state, we may also fail to understand the limitations of these measures and the roles they played in the growth of statutory or public welfare provision. This paper addresses this concern by exploring the role played by friendly societies in Britain’s ‘mixed economy of welfare’ during the nineteenth and twentieth centuries. Friendly societies were mutual-aid organisations providing insurance against sickness and death to approximately 6,000,000 people at the end of the nineteenth century. After examining the origins and growth of these organisations, the paper discusses the challenges they faced from the late-nineteenth century onwards. It then looks at the debates which took place within the friendly-society movement in the run-up to the introduction of old-age pensions in 1908 and national insurance in 1911. The final section explores the history of the friendly societies between the introduction of these reforms and the creation of the ‘classic’ welfare state after 1945. Before the UK General Election in 2010, the Conservative leader and future Prime Minister, David Cameron, drew a sharp contrast between ‘the synthetic bonds of the state – regulation and bureaucracy’ and the more natural bonds of the ‘Big Society’. This concept drew on an imagined past of philanthropic and mutual welfare provision. Since the election, the idea of the Big Society has become increasingly absent from political debate. A better understanding of the limitations of mutual aid and its relationship to the expansion of statutory welfare provision may help to illuminate some of the reasons for this.