Asset-based Welfare and Social Investment: Competing, Compatible, or Complementary Social Policy Strategies for the New Welfare State?

被引:37
作者
Lennartz, Christian [1 ]
Ronald, Richard [1 ,2 ]
机构
[1] Univ Amsterdam, Amsterdam Inst Social Sci Res, Amsterdam, Netherlands
[2] Univ Birmingham, Sch Social Policy, Birmingham, W Midlands, England
基金
欧洲研究理事会;
关键词
Social investment; Homeownership; Asset-based welfare; Welfare state change; Comparative social policy; POLITICAL-ECONOMY; FINANCIAL CRISIS; HOME-OWNERSHIP; POVERTY; RETRENCHMENT; REDUCTION; MARKETS; REFORM;
D O I
10.1080/14036096.2016.1220422
中图分类号
X [环境科学、安全科学];
学科分类号
08 ; 0830 ;
摘要
More recently, two key developments have been observed in the comparative social policy literature: on the one hand, the implementation of a proactive social investment strategy, either alongside or in replacement of their established social security programs, and on the other hand, a concomitant shift towards the increased macroeconomic and political importance of private property assets - and homeownership in particular - in defining the economic well-being of individuals. At first glance, it seems that we are dealing with two conflicting policy paradigms here; after all, social investment relies on stable or even expansive welfare states, while the accumulation of private property wealth as a welfare resource seems to realign better with the notion of welfare state retrenchment. This contribution aims to illustrate that the fault lines between the two policy paradigms are, however, not that clear-cut. Based on comparative national-level statistics for all OECD member states in the 1995-2007 pre-crisis period and theoretical reasoning the paper argues that the two approaches may be understood as compatible welfare readjustment strategies, which have opened out into a more radical form of productive welfare capitalism, particularly in the liberal and social-democratic welfare states in North-Western Europe.
引用
收藏
页码:201 / 220
页数:20
相关论文
共 56 条
[11]  
Bonoli G., 2012, The Politics of the New Welfare State
[12]   Three Shortcomings of the Social Investment Perspective [J].
Cantillon, Bea ;
Van Lancker, Wim .
SOCIAL POLICY AND SOCIETY, 2013, 12 (04) :553-564
[13]  
Castles Francis., 1998, Acta Politica, V33, P5, DOI DOI 10.1080/14616718.2014.984827
[14]   Privatised Keynesianism: An Unacknowledged Policy Regime [J].
Crouch, Colin .
BRITISH JOURNAL OF POLITICS & INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS, 2009, 11 (03) :382-399
[15]   Social Investment after Neoliberalism: Policy Paradigms and Political Platforms [J].
Deeming, Christopher ;
Smyth, Paul .
JOURNAL OF SOCIAL POLICY, 2015, 44 (02) :297-318
[16]   Home-Ownership and Pensions: Negative Correlation, but No Trade-off [J].
Delfani, Neda ;
De Deken, Johan ;
Dewilde, Caroline .
HOUSING STUDIES, 2014, 29 (05) :657-676
[17]   Income Inequality and Access to Housing in Europe [J].
Dewilde, Caroline ;
Lancee, Bram .
EUROPEAN SOCIOLOGICAL REVIEW, 2013, 29 (06) :1189-1200
[18]  
ECB (European Central Bank), 2006, MONTHL B DEC
[19]  
Elsinga Marja., 2015, Critical Housing Analysis, V2, P32, DOI [10.13060/23362839.2015.2.1.174, DOI 10.13060/23362839.2015.2.1.174]
[20]  
European Mortgage Federation, 2010, HYP 2010