A Swedish Dilemma : Culture and Rule of Law in Swedish Sickness Insurance
(2019)- Abstract
- Swedish society has been described as both modern, liberal democratic and deeply humanitarian; and as more or less premodern, semi-authoritarian and potentially abusive of groups with weak political representation. In this dissertation, this Swedish dilemma is explored in an anthropology of law tradition, with disputing practices as an inroad to an understanding of law as culture.
Detailed data on twenty appeals of denials of sickness cash benefits between 2005 to 2008 and 2015 to 2018 are contextualised with 20 th century history, previous research, government oversight reports, media coverage, and interviews with jurists across the field. The theoretical framing is Geertz’s semiotic concept of law as culture, Charles Taylor’s... (More) - Swedish society has been described as both modern, liberal democratic and deeply humanitarian; and as more or less premodern, semi-authoritarian and potentially abusive of groups with weak political representation. In this dissertation, this Swedish dilemma is explored in an anthropology of law tradition, with disputing practices as an inroad to an understanding of law as culture.
Detailed data on twenty appeals of denials of sickness cash benefits between 2005 to 2008 and 2015 to 2018 are contextualised with 20 th century history, previous research, government oversight reports, media coverage, and interviews with jurists across the field. The theoretical framing is Geertz’s semiotic concept of law as culture, Charles Taylor’s social imaginaries of modernity and premodernity, the theoretical content of previous research about Sweden with a similar framing and objective, and John Borneman’s anthropological concept of rule of law. Based on Anglo-Saxon scholarship about administrative law and social insurance adjudication, I also develop a practice-based and more anthropological theory of modern Western rule of law in relation to sickness benefits.
This study identifies recurrent constructions of meaning, animating ideals, legal sensibilities and models of society. They are: the prerogatives of the state, corporatism, consensus lost, far-reaching administrative discretion, priority given to low costs, and conflictful paternalism. It also suggests that these aspects of Swedish administrative legal culture are made possible by weak elite accountability, weak legalistic awareness in the press, a priori trust in the state, and various forms of political and bureaucratic foul play, such as extra-legal regulations, arbitrary formalism, and government agencies and tribunals which respond to political demands.
Taken as a whole, the findings of this study suggest a form of unstable pseudo-rule by law, and even a fundamentally different basis for the Swedish political order. State prerogatives and conflictful paternalism seem to be more important than modern Western rule of law. Causal explanations in the social sciences are difficult, but the results nonetheless suggest that Sweden has had less influence from modern Western notions of natural law and individual rights because of a greater continuity from some version of a Lutheran-Orthodox Prussian Machtstaate and other premodern social imaginaries. (Less) - Abstract (Swedish)
- Sverige har både beskrivits som modernt, liberaldemoratiskt och djupt humanitärt; och som mer eller mindre förmodernt, halvauktoritärt och benäget att kränka svaga gruppers rättigheter. I den här avhandlingen undersöks detta svenska dilemma i en rättsantropologisk tradition, med studier av konfliktlösningspraktiker som ett sätt att förstå förhållandet mellan lag och kultur.
Detaljerade data från tjugo överklaganden av avslag på ansökningar om sjukpenning och sjukförsäkring mellan 2005-2008 och 2015-2018 kontextualiseras med 1900-tals historia, tidigare forskning, tillsynsrapporter, mediabevakning och intervjuer med jurister. Teorin består av Geertz kulturbegrepp, Charles Taylor om modernitet och förmodernitet, teori i tidigare... (More) - Sverige har både beskrivits som modernt, liberaldemoratiskt och djupt humanitärt; och som mer eller mindre förmodernt, halvauktoritärt och benäget att kränka svaga gruppers rättigheter. I den här avhandlingen undersöks detta svenska dilemma i en rättsantropologisk tradition, med studier av konfliktlösningspraktiker som ett sätt att förstå förhållandet mellan lag och kultur.
Detaljerade data från tjugo överklaganden av avslag på ansökningar om sjukpenning och sjukförsäkring mellan 2005-2008 och 2015-2018 kontextualiseras med 1900-tals historia, tidigare forskning, tillsynsrapporter, mediabevakning och intervjuer med jurister. Teorin består av Geertz kulturbegrepp, Charles Taylor om modernitet och förmodernitet, teori i tidigare forskning om det svenska dilemmat, och John Bornemans antropologiska rättsstatsbegrepp. Engelsk och amerikansk forskning om förvaltningsrätt och sjukförsäkring används för att utveckla en praktikbaserad teori om vad som menas med en modern rättsstat i relation till sjukförsäkring.
Studien identifierar återkommande kulturella föreställningar, värderingar, rättsuppfattningar och idéer om samhället. De är: statsintresset, korporatism, förlorad konsensus, en maktfullkomlig förvaltning, effektivitet och konfliktfylld paternalism. Den föreslår samtidigt att dessa aspekter av svensk förvaltningsrättskultur möjliggörs av svagt ansvarsutkrävande, svagt rättsmedvetande i media, förtroende för staten, och olika former av politiska och byråkratiska manipulationer, såsom utomrättslig normering, godtycke och myndigheter och domstolar som är lyhörda för den politiska viljan.
Den sammanfattande beskrivningen av svensk förvaltningsrättskultur på detta område är att den utgör en form av kvasilagstat. Det kan till och med vara så att grunden för det svenska sammhällskontraktet är något annat än rättsstatlighet. Statsintresset och konfliktfylld paternalism verkar vara viktigare än modern västerländsk rättsuppfattning. Orsaksförklaringar är svåra i samhällsvetenskap, men resultaten tyder ändå på att Sverige har haft ett svagt inflytande från västerländsk rättsuppfattning på grund av större kontinuitet med en Luthersk-Ortodox, preussisk maktstat, och andra förmoderna föreställningar om stat och rätt. (Less)
Please use this url to cite or link to this publication:
https://lup.lub.lu.se/record/7e17c30a-97f1-49ae-9438-f7c778300fc0
- author
- Abelin, Matthias LU
- supervisor
- opponent
-
- Docent Thedvall, Renita, Stockholm University
- organization
- alternative title
- Ett svenskt dilemma : Rättsstat, rättskultur och den svenska sjukförsäkringen
- publishing date
- 2019-05-10
- type
- Thesis
- publication status
- published
- subject
- keywords
- Rule of law, Sickness benefits, Disability benefits
- pages
- 256 pages
- publisher
- Lund University
- defense location
- Eden auditorium, Paradisgatan 5H, Lund
- defense date
- 2019-05-10 13:00:00
- ISBN
- 978-91-7895018-8
- project
- A Swedish Dilemma: Culture and Rule of Law in Swedish Sickness Insurance
- language
- English
- LU publication?
- yes
- id
- 7e17c30a-97f1-49ae-9438-f7c778300fc0
- date added to LUP
- 2019-03-20 08:25:16
- date last changed
- 2019-05-14 11:21:03
@phdthesis{7e17c30a-97f1-49ae-9438-f7c778300fc0,
abstract = {{Swedish society has been described as both modern, liberal democratic and deeply humanitarian; and as more or less premodern, semi-authoritarian and potentially abusive of groups with weak political representation. In this dissertation, this Swedish dilemma is explored in an anthropology of law tradition, with disputing practices as an inroad to an understanding of law as culture.<br/><br/>Detailed data on twenty appeals of denials of sickness cash benefits between 2005 to 2008 and 2015 to 2018 are contextualised with 20 th century history, previous research, government oversight reports, media coverage, and interviews with jurists across the field. The theoretical framing is Geertz’s semiotic concept of law as culture, Charles Taylor’s social imaginaries of modernity and premodernity, the theoretical content of previous research about Sweden with a similar framing and objective, and John Borneman’s anthropological concept of rule of law. Based on Anglo-Saxon scholarship about administrative law and social insurance adjudication, I also develop a practice-based and more anthropological theory of modern Western rule of law in relation to sickness benefits.<br/><br/>This study identifies recurrent constructions of meaning, animating ideals, legal sensibilities and models of society. They are: the prerogatives of the state, corporatism, consensus lost, far-reaching administrative discretion, priority given to low costs, and conflictful paternalism. It also suggests that these aspects of Swedish administrative legal culture are made possible by weak elite accountability, weak legalistic awareness in the press, a priori trust in the state, and various forms of political and bureaucratic foul play, such as extra-legal regulations, arbitrary formalism, and government agencies and tribunals which respond to political demands.<br/><br/>Taken as a whole, the findings of this study suggest a form of unstable pseudo-rule by law, and even a fundamentally different basis for the Swedish political order. State prerogatives and conflictful paternalism seem to be more important than modern Western rule of law. Causal explanations in the social sciences are difficult, but the results nonetheless suggest that Sweden has had less influence from modern Western notions of natural law and individual rights because of a greater continuity from some version of a Lutheran-Orthodox Prussian Machtstaate and other premodern social imaginaries.}},
author = {{Abelin, Matthias}},
isbn = {{978-91-7895018-8}},
keywords = {{Rule of law; Sickness benefits; Disability benefits}},
language = {{eng}},
month = {{05}},
publisher = {{Lund University}},
school = {{Lund University}},
title = {{A Swedish Dilemma : Culture and Rule of Law in Swedish Sickness Insurance}},
year = {{2019}},
}