Despite the advances in the welfare state change research (cf. Streeck and Thelen 2005) that have facilitated scholars to break through the stability bias and sketch change in the ‘frozen’ welfare states, only very few accounts are able to explain the policy developments in the recent decades. One potential explanation suggested in the literature (Schmidt 2008, Seeleib-Kaiser and Fleckenstein 2007) is the interpretative approach introducing learning and discourse as a (partial) explanation of the recent major reforms. By using the framework of Vivienne Schmidt (2008) on discursive institutionalism, this article intends to contribute to this debate on argumentative policy analysis and explanations of welfare state change. Applying the method of process tracing, we examine the reform process of the ‘immovable’ Dutch disability benefit scheme between 1980 and 2010 and seek answers to the questions how and why the discursive turn took place in the Dutch disability politics. The data consist of interview material, existing literature and analysis of policy documents. The findings show how the governmental actors, together with social partners, were eventually able to bring about a paradigmatic change where cognitive and normative reorientations culminated into a new disability benefit system, in which claimant’s rights no longer were determined with respect to their incapability but with respect to their ability to work. The findings of this article highlight the importance of normative justifications in the reform process, and consequently the importance of political discourse and learning as key factors explaining this policy reform.
