One of the most substantial additions made by the ‘three worlds of welfare’ thesis to the welfare state modelling business is that comparisons should examine what welfare states actually do rather than how much they are afforded or which services they provide. This paper extends this basic principle by comparing the health outcomes (measured in terms of infant mortality rates) of welfare states and welfare state regimes. It examines whether there are significant differences in health status between the ‘three worlds of welfare’ and to what extent a relationship exists between health and decommodification. It concludes by reflecting upon the implications for the ‘three worlds of welfare’. Introduction How we classify welfare states has long been a concern in social policy (Wilensky and Lebaux, 1958; Titmuss, 1974; Therborn, 1987; Esping-Andersen, 1990; Castles and Mitchell, XXXXXXXXXXRecently, the literature has been dominated by Esping-Andersen’s ‘three worlds of welfare’ typology and the intensive academic debate that has surrounded it (Esping-Andersen, 1990; 1999; Lewis, 1992; Leibfreid, 1992; Castles and Mitchell, 1993; Orloff, 1993; Borchost, 1994; Daly, 1994; Kangas, 1994; Ragin, 1994; Ferrera, 1996; Shalev, 1996; Bonoli, 1997; Albrahamson, 1999; Goodin et al., 1999; Sainsbury, 1999; Pitruzzello, 1999; Arts and Gelissen, 2002; Kasza, 2002; Bambra, 2004a; 2004b; 2005a, 2005b, XXXXXXXXXXIn The Three Worlds of Welfare Capitalism (1990: 52), Esping-Andersen presents a decommodification typology of welfare states: Liberal, Conservative, and Social Democratic. In the welfare states of the liberal regime (UK, USA, Ireland, Canada, Australia), state provision of welfare is minimal, benefits are modest and often attract strict entitlement criteria; and recipients are usually means-tested and stigmatised (Esping-Andersen, 1990: 26). The conservative welfare state regime (Germany, France, Austria, Belgium, Italy and, to a lesser extent, the Netherlands) is distinguished by its ‘status differentiating’ welfare programmes in which benefits are often earnings related, administered through the employer; and geared towards maintaining existing social patterns. Provision in the ‘third world of welfare’, the social democratic (Nordic countries), is characterised by universal and comparatively generous benefits, a commitment to full employment and income protection; and a strongly interventionist state (1990: 28). Five substantive critiques of this typology have emerged: the range of countries and number of regime types; the methodology used; the usefulness of the regime concept; the analytical dominance of income maintenance schemes over welfare services; and the omission of gender in the analysis. Leibfreid (1992), Ferrera XXXXXXXXXXand Bonoli XXXXXXXXXXassert that a distinctive fourth type of welfare state regime is emerging in the countries of the Latin rim of the European Union (Spain, Portugal, Greece and to a lesser extent Italy)