Roots of the concept
Under capitalism, workers must sell their labour power to live, so labour becomes a 'commodity'. Polanyi (1944) argued that a market society treating labour, land and money as commodities provokes protective reactions, the double movement. Offe (1984) analyzed the welfare state's contradictory role in sustaining commodification while partly decommodifying labour. Esping-Andersen (1990) defined decommodification as how far social citizenship reduces market dependence.
The index and three regimes
Esping-Andersen scored pensions, unemployment and sickness benefits on replacement rates, eligibility conditions, contribution periods and coverage. Nordic social democratic regimes scored highest, conservative (corporatist) regimes such as Germany and France were intermediate, and liberal regimes such as the US and UK lowest, grounding the three worlds typology. He attributed variation to the political power of labour and its allies, linking it to power resources theory.
Re-measurement and critiques
Scruggs and Allan (2006) replicated and updated the data, showing that some country scores and classifications change, and Bambra (2006) re-examined the stability of the typology. Orloff (1993) argued that decommodification assumes male workers already in the labour market; for women doing unpaid care, the right to enter paid work and 'defamilialization' matter first. Esping-Andersen (2000) discussed the concept's scope in reply to proposals to make it multidimensional.
FAQ
- What is decommodification in simple terms?
- How well you can live decently on pensions or benefits without having to sell your labour, for example when you cannot work.
- Which countries score highest?
- In Esping-Andersen's analysis, Nordic countries such as Sweden, Norway and Denmark.
Sources reviewed: 2026-10-26
References
- Esping-Andersen, G. (1990). The three worlds of welfare capitalism. Princeton University Press. Defines and measures decommodification.
- Polanyi, K. (1944). The great transformation. Farrar & Rinehart. Intellectual roots in the critique of labour as a commodity.
- Offe, C. (1984). Contradictions of the welfare state. Hutchinson. Critical theory of welfare-state contradictions.
- Orloff, A. S. (1993). Gender and the social rights of citizenship: The comparative analysis of gender relations and welfare states. American Sociological Review, 58(3), 303–328. Feminist critique of decommodification.
- Esping-Andersen, G. (2000). Multi-dimensional decommodification: A reply to Graham Room. Policy & Politics, 28(3), 353–359. The author's reply on broadening the concept.
- Scruggs, L., & Allan, J. (2006). Welfare-state decommodification in 18 OECD countries: A replication and revision. Journal of European Social Policy, 16(1), 55–72. Replication and revision of the index.
- Bambra, C. (2006). Decommodification and the worlds of welfare revisited. Journal of European Social Policy, 16(1), 73–80. Revisits regime classification.