The rational legitimacy of the welfare state: popular support for ten income transfer schemes in Finland

This article explores how popular support for social benefits is connected to their entitlement rules. In addition, the role of self-interest regarding support for social benefits is examined. The importance of these factors is empirically evaluated using a sample of 1,117 Finns. Popular support for ten essential income transfer schemes in Finland is determined. Some of these schemes represent purely means-tested programmes, others are universal. Programmes also vary in their importance to different subgroups of the population. The results give qualified support to the 'welfare backlash' model: universal benefits are found to be more legitimate than selective ones. However, the situation is a little more complicated. Benefits maintaining basic security are also highly legitimate, which indicates that people do not support social security schemes only out of selfish motives. They also have a moral commitment to help those in need. The analysis also reveals clear choices based on self-interest: families with children, for example, strongly defend family benefits and younger people do not allow cutbacks in study allowances.