an article by Marius R Busemeyer (University of Konstanz, Germany) and Julian L Garritzmann (University of Zurich, Switzerland) published in Journal of Social Policy Volume 48 Issue 3 (July 2019)
Abstract
The debate on effects of globalisation on welfare states is extensive. Often couched in terms of a battle between the compensation and the efficiency theses, the scholarly literature has provided contradictory arguments and findings.
This article contributes to the scholarly debate by exploring in greater detail the micro-level foundations of compensation theory.
More specifically, we distinguish between individual policy preferences for compensatory social policies (unemployment insurance) and human capital-focused social investment policies (education), and expect globalisation to mainly affect demand for educational investment.
A multi-level analysis of International Social Survey Programme (ISSP) survey data provides empirical support for this hypothesis.
This finding provides an important revision and extension of the classical analytical perspective of compensation theory, because it shows that citizens value the social investment function of the welfare state above and beyond simple compensation via social transfers.
This might be particularly relevant in today's skill-centred knowledge economies.
Showing posts with label social_investment. Show all posts
Showing posts with label social_investment. Show all posts
Thursday, 11 July 2019
Friday, 21 April 2017
Labour Market Policy under Conditions of Permanent Austerity: Any Sign of Social Investment?
an article by Mattias Bengtsson and Kerstin Jacobsson (University of Gothenburg, Sweden) and Caroline de la Porte (Copenhagen Business School, Denmark) published in Social Policy & Administration Volume 51 Issue 2 (March 2017)
Abstract
Social investment (SI) is part of a strategy to modernise the European welfare states by focusing on human resource development throughout the life-course, while ensuring financial sustainability. Recognising that this strategy was only partially implemented by the EU member states prior to the financial and Eurozone crises, this article investigates whether reforms and expenditure patterns in labour market policy (LMP) have moved more towards or away from SI following the 2008 financial crisis.
We use quantitative and qualitative data to investigate the degree to which there have been shifts in the SI aspects of LMPs in eight countries across four welfare state regimes. We also investigate which aspects of LMPs have been strengthened and which have been weakened, enabling us to make a nuanced assessment of labour market SIs across the EU in a period of permanent austerity.
We find that although the eight countries under examination have different starting points, there is little evidence of increased SI-orientation of LMPs. Upskilling, which is at the heart of SI, did not increase from 2004–08 to 2009–13, while incentive reinforcement and employment assistance – more about labour market entry and marketing of skills – grew in importance.
If this trend continues across Europe, there is a risk that SI will become lost in translation and end up as a clearer neo-liberal version of workfarism.
Full text (HTML)
Abstract
Social investment (SI) is part of a strategy to modernise the European welfare states by focusing on human resource development throughout the life-course, while ensuring financial sustainability. Recognising that this strategy was only partially implemented by the EU member states prior to the financial and Eurozone crises, this article investigates whether reforms and expenditure patterns in labour market policy (LMP) have moved more towards or away from SI following the 2008 financial crisis.
We use quantitative and qualitative data to investigate the degree to which there have been shifts in the SI aspects of LMPs in eight countries across four welfare state regimes. We also investigate which aspects of LMPs have been strengthened and which have been weakened, enabling us to make a nuanced assessment of labour market SIs across the EU in a period of permanent austerity.
We find that although the eight countries under examination have different starting points, there is little evidence of increased SI-orientation of LMPs. Upskilling, which is at the heart of SI, did not increase from 2004–08 to 2009–13, while incentive reinforcement and employment assistance – more about labour market entry and marketing of skills – grew in importance.
If this trend continues across Europe, there is a risk that SI will become lost in translation and end up as a clearer neo-liberal version of workfarism.
Full text (HTML)
Monday, 29 December 2014
What use is ‘social investment’?
an article by Brian Nolan (University College Dublin, Ireland) published in Journal of European Social Policy Volume 23 Number 5 (December 2013)
Abstract
The notion of ‘social investment’ has come to play a major part in debates about the role of social spending and the future of welfare states in Europe. This paper argues that social investment can be seen as a more or less detailed orientation or paradigm for social policies and spending or as a conceptual base and framework for analysis, and that it is also increasingly employed for political or rhetorical as well as academic purposes.
It then sets out some serious issues and concerns in that regard, including whether social investment can credibly be presented as the paradigm most likely to underpin economic growth per se or indeed employment-friendly growth, whether the distinction between social ‘investment’ and other social spending is robust conceptually and the difficulties faced in seeking to make such a distinction empirically, and whether focusing on that distinction and on a narrowly economic rationale is the most useful way to frame the debate about the future of social spending.
Abstract
The notion of ‘social investment’ has come to play a major part in debates about the role of social spending and the future of welfare states in Europe. This paper argues that social investment can be seen as a more or less detailed orientation or paradigm for social policies and spending or as a conceptual base and framework for analysis, and that it is also increasingly employed for political or rhetorical as well as academic purposes.
It then sets out some serious issues and concerns in that regard, including whether social investment can credibly be presented as the paradigm most likely to underpin economic growth per se or indeed employment-friendly growth, whether the distinction between social ‘investment’ and other social spending is robust conceptually and the difficulties faced in seeking to make such a distinction empirically, and whether focusing on that distinction and on a narrowly economic rationale is the most useful way to frame the debate about the future of social spending.
Tuesday, 16 April 2013
From Growing Interest to Interest Grown: Is the youth sector ready for social investment?
a discussion paper by Gemma Rocyn Jones published by The Young Foundation (March 2013)
Introduction
Local authority expenditure on services for young people fell by £307.5 million between 2010–1 and 2011–12. During this period, social sector organisations saw their funding reduced by 14 per cent.1 Over the same time, the social finance market has grown rapidly to over £600 million offering funding to generate both a social and financial return. The potential of this emerging breed of social investors to support youth sector organisations to innovate and scale, was the subject of a 2011 report by The Young Foundation, Growing Interest.2
We found evidence to suggest that social finance could offer both financial breathing space and the freedom to innovate to a sector that had suffered significant funding cuts. Moreover, this opinion was shared by one in five youth sector organisations surveyed for the report, who expected social investment to have become an integral source of funding by 2014.
However, this number fell to just one in 10 when asked whether they were immediately ‘ready’ for investment. Our interviews with youth sector leaders, and The Young Foundation’s wider experience of the social investment market, enabled us to identify three key areas that organisations needed to strengthen to access social investment: their capability to understand the requirements of social finance and how to articulate their impact; their capacity to develop new skills and adopt new business practices; and their confidence in their future sources and volume of income – in other words, the financial sustainability of their operating model.
These findings formed the basis of an investment readiness programme targeting voluntary youth sector organisations, which The Young Foundation ran between October 2011 and March 2013 on behalf of Catalyst.
The programme was designed to build the sector’s awareness of social investment and address the three challenges identified by our earlier work. We did this through a series of seminars, masterclasses and one-to-one advice. This report outlines the lessons from 18 months of working with over 350 youth sector organisations. Was our assessment of investment readiness needs correct? Is social investment living up to its potential in the youth sector? And if not, what lessons have we learned?
Our observations are based on qualitative feedback from group sessions and one-to-one discussions and quantitative data from a survey on sources and need for financing. The report aims to further understand what the appropriate role for social investment might be within the youth sector as well as recognise the support needed to realise this potential.
------------------------------------------------
1 http://www.education.gov.uk/rsgateway/DB/SFR/s001114/index.shtml
2 Growing Interest: Mapping the market for social finance in the youth sector, The Young Foundation, July 2011
Full text (PDF 22pp)
Introduction
Local authority expenditure on services for young people fell by £307.5 million between 2010–1 and 2011–12. During this period, social sector organisations saw their funding reduced by 14 per cent.1 Over the same time, the social finance market has grown rapidly to over £600 million offering funding to generate both a social and financial return. The potential of this emerging breed of social investors to support youth sector organisations to innovate and scale, was the subject of a 2011 report by The Young Foundation, Growing Interest.2
We found evidence to suggest that social finance could offer both financial breathing space and the freedom to innovate to a sector that had suffered significant funding cuts. Moreover, this opinion was shared by one in five youth sector organisations surveyed for the report, who expected social investment to have become an integral source of funding by 2014.
However, this number fell to just one in 10 when asked whether they were immediately ‘ready’ for investment. Our interviews with youth sector leaders, and The Young Foundation’s wider experience of the social investment market, enabled us to identify three key areas that organisations needed to strengthen to access social investment: their capability to understand the requirements of social finance and how to articulate their impact; their capacity to develop new skills and adopt new business practices; and their confidence in their future sources and volume of income – in other words, the financial sustainability of their operating model.
These findings formed the basis of an investment readiness programme targeting voluntary youth sector organisations, which The Young Foundation ran between October 2011 and March 2013 on behalf of Catalyst.
The programme was designed to build the sector’s awareness of social investment and address the three challenges identified by our earlier work. We did this through a series of seminars, masterclasses and one-to-one advice. This report outlines the lessons from 18 months of working with over 350 youth sector organisations. Was our assessment of investment readiness needs correct? Is social investment living up to its potential in the youth sector? And if not, what lessons have we learned?
Our observations are based on qualitative feedback from group sessions and one-to-one discussions and quantitative data from a survey on sources and need for financing. The report aims to further understand what the appropriate role for social investment might be within the youth sector as well as recognise the support needed to realise this potential.
------------------------------------------------
1 http://www.education.gov.uk/rsgateway/DB/SFR/s001114/index.shtml
2 Growing Interest: Mapping the market for social finance in the youth sector, The Young Foundation, July 2011
Full text (PDF 22pp)
Monday, 11 March 2013
Parenting support in Europe
a report by Daniel Molinuevo for Eurofound (European Foundation for the Improvement of Living and Working Conditions)
Summary
The influence of parenting on the well-being and future opportunities of children is widely acknowledged, but it is only recently that parenting support and education have come to be viewed as a social investment that contributes towards reducing parental stress and helping parents to manage their work-life balance.
European Member States provide support for parenting in many different ways, from very practical medical-based interventions such as support with breastfeeding, to programmes that aim to increase the confidence and self-esteem of parents and thus improve their relationship with their children.
This report gives an up-to-date overview of the main elements of parenting support services and the structure of services across Europe.
It includes more detailed information about parenting support in seven Member States: Austria, Belgium, Estonia, Hungary, Ireland, Portugal and Sweden.
The report summarises common challenges faced by all providers of parenting support, and concludes with policy recommendations based on what has been observed to work in different countries.
Full report (PDF 58pp)
Executive summary (PDF 2pp)
Summary
The influence of parenting on the well-being and future opportunities of children is widely acknowledged, but it is only recently that parenting support and education have come to be viewed as a social investment that contributes towards reducing parental stress and helping parents to manage their work-life balance.
European Member States provide support for parenting in many different ways, from very practical medical-based interventions such as support with breastfeeding, to programmes that aim to increase the confidence and self-esteem of parents and thus improve their relationship with their children.
This report gives an up-to-date overview of the main elements of parenting support services and the structure of services across Europe.
It includes more detailed information about parenting support in seven Member States: Austria, Belgium, Estonia, Hungary, Ireland, Portugal and Sweden.
The report summarises common challenges faced by all providers of parenting support, and concludes with policy recommendations based on what has been observed to work in different countries.
Full report (PDF 58pp)
Executive summary (PDF 2pp)
Friday, 3 August 2012
‘Regulating the Poor’: Observations on the ‘Structural Coupling’ of Welfare, Criminal Justice and the Voluntary Sector in a ‘Big Society’
an article by John J. Rodger (University of the West of Scotland) published in Social Policy & Administration (Special Issue: Crime and Social Policy) Volume 46 Issue 4 (August 2012)
Abstract
The article argues that the criminalising tendency in contemporary social policy gets to the heart of how contemporary welfare systems work today. Analyses which point to criminalizing social policy (Rodger 2008), governing through crime (Simon 2007), cultures of control (Garland 2001) and the penalisation of the poor (Wacquant 2009) all focus on what I will argue is actually the normal working of contemporary Western welfare systems.
In the face of autonomous global economic processes, and largely uncontrollable macro-economic systems which place governments in a subordinate relationship to global financial forces, governance of present-day society is increasingly focused on the management of the behavioural dispositions of populations.
In order to make these key themes and relationships visible, the article draws on Niklas Luhmann’s functional structural systems theory and his concept of structural coupling to theorise the emerging policy relationships between the welfare system, the criminal justice system and civil society.
Abstract
The article argues that the criminalising tendency in contemporary social policy gets to the heart of how contemporary welfare systems work today. Analyses which point to criminalizing social policy (Rodger 2008), governing through crime (Simon 2007), cultures of control (Garland 2001) and the penalisation of the poor (Wacquant 2009) all focus on what I will argue is actually the normal working of contemporary Western welfare systems.
In the face of autonomous global economic processes, and largely uncontrollable macro-economic systems which place governments in a subordinate relationship to global financial forces, governance of present-day society is increasingly focused on the management of the behavioural dispositions of populations.
In order to make these key themes and relationships visible, the article draws on Niklas Luhmann’s functional structural systems theory and his concept of structural coupling to theorise the emerging policy relationships between the welfare system, the criminal justice system and civil society.
Friday, 6 July 2012
Understanding social investment policy: evidence from the evaluation of Futurebuilders in England
an article by Peter Wells (affiliation(s) not provided) published in Voluntary Sector Review Volume 3 Number 2 (July 2012)
Abstract
The concept of social investment has attracted interest from policy makers, financial markets and not-for-profit organisations. It is an emergent notion that is multifaceted and includes different market forms, policy responses and institutional configurations.
There is relatively little empirical evidence on the design, implementation and impacts of the various initiatives that have been perceived as falling within the field of social investment. This article begins to address this gap.
It draws on the national evaluation of Futurebuilders in England, which was undertaken between 2005 and 2010. At the time, Futurebuilders was one of the largest examples of a public policy initiative to support social investment; based on a policy model of government seeking to promote the use of loan funding to third sector organisations as part of a wider agenda of expanding the sector’s role in the delivery of public services.
The article explores the effects of the programme on the third sector, on public service delivery and on service users. In conclusion, the article challenges some of the assumptions of this policy model, as well as the potential for “impact investing” to become a framework for welfare provision.
Hazel’s comment:
I have never approved of the third sector delivering public services and, given my involvement from the central government side of the fence in the Training Access Point project, it is unlikely that I ever will.
There is old saying about pipers and tunes which may well bring the receiver of funding into conflict with the paymaster. I am not saying that this is inevitable but it is certainly likely.
Abstract
The concept of social investment has attracted interest from policy makers, financial markets and not-for-profit organisations. It is an emergent notion that is multifaceted and includes different market forms, policy responses and institutional configurations.
There is relatively little empirical evidence on the design, implementation and impacts of the various initiatives that have been perceived as falling within the field of social investment. This article begins to address this gap.
It draws on the national evaluation of Futurebuilders in England, which was undertaken between 2005 and 2010. At the time, Futurebuilders was one of the largest examples of a public policy initiative to support social investment; based on a policy model of government seeking to promote the use of loan funding to third sector organisations as part of a wider agenda of expanding the sector’s role in the delivery of public services.
The article explores the effects of the programme on the third sector, on public service delivery and on service users. In conclusion, the article challenges some of the assumptions of this policy model, as well as the potential for “impact investing” to become a framework for welfare provision.
Hazel’s comment:
I have never approved of the third sector delivering public services and, given my involvement from the central government side of the fence in the Training Access Point project, it is unlikely that I ever will.
There is old saying about pipers and tunes which may well bring the receiver of funding into conflict with the paymaster. I am not saying that this is inevitable but it is certainly likely.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
