In Sweden, individuals with disabilities obtain social security entitlements based on their employment and residential status. The Swedish disability support system consists mainly of social insurance, employment-related assistance, and social services. Disability determination is carried out in a comprehensive manner from the bio-psycho-social perspective, in line with the WHO’s International Classification of Functioning, Disability, and Health (ICF). In Sweden, where no disability registration system is in place, individuals who wish to receive disability support have to first go through a needs assessment or an eligibility evaluation for the applied service. Social insurance benefits and employment-related disability benefits are determined based on insurance and medical assessments. Anyone medically determined as disabled should go through an additional evaluation to become eligible for such benefits. The decisive factor here is a “reduced work capability.” Social services for disabled persons, including law-regulated support and services (LSS), are the responsibilities of local governments, which may, to a point, exercise autonomy in delivering these services. Far from being monolithic and rigidly standardized, Swedish disability policies and the disability determination system, committed instead to the principle of tailored services, focus on providing support to each disabled person, with their needs evaluated through an interdisciplinary and professionalized approach involving various experts and stakeholders.
This study examines the U.S. disability support system and disability determination rules, drawing policy implications for Korea. In the U.S., disability is broadly defined under the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) and the Rehabilitation Act, with determination criteria varying across domains such as education, transportation, employment, and social welfare. The Social Security Administration’s (SSA) disability determination rules have become the standard framework for assessing whether an impairment “substantially limits” major life activities. The determination process considers both medical evidence and work capacity, evaluating whether an individual can engage in gainful employment or perform essential daily living tasks. Korea may consider incorporating work capacity and medical evidence into future policy efforts to improve its disability determination system.
Germany’s disability support can be classified generally into three types based on recipient selection criteria. The first type targets individuals registered as disabled. The second type, also based on disability registration, extends support to individuals at risk of developing a disability. For the third category, beneficiaries are selected based on the objectives each service aims to achieve. Such flexibility in the selection criteria has helped close gaps in support and enhance the stability of the support system. The German disability registration system, underpinned by an inclusive disability determination approach, plays a crucial role in ensuring that those in need of disability benefits are not left unsupported. The German case demonstrates that it is possible to put into practice a disability registration system with a balance of administrative efficiency, social inclusiveness, and fairness. In this study, I examine how Germany’s disability support system is administered based on disability registration and in accordance with recipients’ needs for income support, employment benefits, and care. I also discuss its policy implications for Korea.
In Sweden, individuals with disabilities obtain social security entitlements based on their employment and residential status. The Swedish disability support system consists mainly of social insurance, employment-related assistance, and social services. Disability determination is carried out in a comprehensive manner from the bio-psycho-social perspective, in line with the WHO’s International Classification of Functioning, Disability, and Health (ICF). In Sweden, where no disability registration system is in place, individuals who wish to receive disability support have to first go through a needs assessment or an eligibility evaluation for the applied service. Social insurance benefits and employment-related disability benefits are determined based on insurance and medical assessments. Anyone medically determined as disabled should go through an additional evaluation to become eligible for such benefits. The decisive factor here is a “reduced work capability.” Social services for disabled persons, including law-regulated support and services (LSS), are the responsibilities of local governments, which may, to a point, exercise autonomy in delivering these services. Far from being monolithic and rigidly standardized, Swedish disability policies and the disability determination system, committed instead to the principle of tailored services, focus on providing support to each disabled person, with their needs evaluated through an interdisciplinary and professionalized approach involving various experts and stakeholders.
Japan’s system of support for disabled persons, similar to Korea’s, consists of services provided at various administrative levels, each governed by its respective legal framework. However, a key difference is that while Korea’s system, pursuant to the Act on Welfare of Persons with Disabilities, primarily targets individuals registered as disabled, within the Japanese system, the definition of disability and the eligibility criteria for disability support are determined differently depending on the objectives of each support scheme and the legal framework that underpins it. The variation in selection criteria within Japan’s disability support system underscores the need for discussions that incorporate diverse viewpoints, including those of disabled persons themselves, on whether these criteria are appropriate, and, if so, by what standards, in determining recipients for a given policy or program.
AI’s rapid advancement is making a far-reaching impact. Governments worldwide are seeking regulations to maximize AI’s benefits while minimizing its risks. Enacted in 2024, the EU AI Act is the most encompassing transnational legal framework to date concerning AI use. It regulates AI use in four areas, classified by their respective risk levels. Within the field of social security, the Act entirely prohibits AI-based social scoring, labeling it as an “unacceptable” and highly harmful risk. However, as administering social security inherently involves some form of social scoring, disputes are likely as the law phases into effect. The use of AI in “essential private and public services,” such as social welfare programs, is classified as “high risk,” just below the “unacceptable” category, and is subject to strict regulations. Meanwhile, Korea’s AI Framework Act, enacted in December 2024, does not address in any substantial way AI use in the area of social security. Given that AI technology is already in use in the field of social security, urgent policy action is necessary to address the associated challenges.
French children begin their compulsory education when they start preschool at the age of three. Preschools and elementary schools make up primary education in France. These schools generally deliver a regular, curriculum-based education from eight in the morning till four-thirty in the afternoon. They also offer after-school programs, allowing children to stay until dismissal at six or six-thirty, the usual time when parents arrive from work to pick them up. On average, most children in the French primary education system spend over 9 hours daily at school. This article examines, through historical, social, and policy factors, how long school hours have become a structured norm in France and explores implications for Korea’s policies on child education and child care.
Northern European countries including Sweden, with their Nordic welfare models, have maintained higher fertility rates than other high-income countries. After 2010, however, these Nordic countries had noticeable declines in fertility rates. This trend, which no existing social science theories could predict or explain and which portends the possibility of a long-term decline in birthrates beyond mere delayed childbirths, has prompted researchers in many social-science fields, including demography, to embark on studying the factors driving it. One of the most promising explanations proposed to date is what is known as the “narrative of the future framework,” which suggests that delaying or forgoing childbirth is closely related to the growing uncertainty perceived by individuals. Research on uncertainty narratives provides valuable insights into Korea’s low-fertility issues, as it not only addresses objective factors―such as economic, social, and political conditions―but also sheds light on the effect of individuals’ perceptions of the future on their fertility behavior. In addition, recent research on the correlation between life satisfaction and mental health suggests that improved life satisfaction and better mental health can lead to higher birth rates.
