In this paper, we attempt to incorporate an innovative and more comprehensive view of defamilization into the comparative analysis of real-type welfare state models. The study presents four empirically distinguished welfare state regimes where we consider separately both notions associated with (de)familization and (de)genderization together with other dimensions characterizing different welfare state models. In a multivariate statistical analysis framework, we examine 25 European countries using data covering the period between 2014 and 2017. Our findings suggest that whereas Southern European countries represent various welfare state models, most of the analyzed Central and Eastern European countries form a separate group. Similarly, the Nordic countries, except Iceland, belong to the same cluster. However, CEE countries and Nordic countries represent extremely divergent models in terms of the degree of degenderization, but similar in terms of family policy, the public–private mix, as well as welfare state generosity. The data also show that the extensive welfare state coexists with the state’s predominance in delivering welfare provisions. Moreover, we demonstrate that neither the general size of the welfare state or its public–private mix nor a pro-family policy differentiate the socio-economic situation of women across countries studied.

在本文中，我们试图将一种创新的、更全面的去家庭化观点纳入对真实福利国家模型的比较分析中。该研究提出了四种根据经验区分的福利国家制度，我们分别考虑与（去）家庭化和（去）性别化相关的概念以及表征不同福利国家模型的其他维度。在多元统计分析框架中，我们使用 2014 年至 2017 年期间的数据检查了 25 个欧洲国家。我们的研究结果表明，虽然南欧国家代表各种福利国家模型，但大多数被分析的中欧和东欧国家形成了一个单独的组。同样，除冰岛外的北欧国家也属于同一集群。然而，中东欧国家和北欧国家在性别化程度方面表现出极其不同的模式，但在家庭政策、公私组合以及福利国家的慷慨方面相似。数据还表明，广泛的福利国家与国家在提供福利方面的优势共存。此外，我们证明，福利国家的总体规模或其公私组合或亲家庭政策都无法区分所研究国家/地区妇女的社会经济状况。