The final chapter concludes with five contemporary ‘uses’ of social investment, in full recognition of limits underscored by critics. The first ‘use’ of social investment therefore concerns its ‘paradigmatic’ bearings. To what extent does social investment represent a distinct policy paradigm for twenty-first-century welfare capitalism? A second ‘use’ relates to paradigm change, in the sense of theoretical progress inspiring interdisciplinary methodological innovation, in particular with respect to the empirical assessment of well-being ‘returns’ on social investment. The third more practical ‘use’ covers the identification of virtuous social investment policy mixes of ‘stocks’, ‘flows’, and ‘buffers’. The fourth ‘use’ is geographically confined to the European conundrum of overcoming the fiscal austerity to make way for social investment reform, as means to reignite socioeconomic convergence, at least for the Eurozone. The more general final use of social investment bears on the ‘politics of social investment’ in the aftermath of the financial crisis.

No abstract

By 2010, when the Greek sovereign debt crisis changed into an existential crisis of the euro, all developed democracies entered a phase in which they had to consolidate their budgets, typically implying a politics of austerity. The scholarly literature, as well as the popular press, suggests thatconsequently -welfare retrenchment and cost containment became the only games left in town. In this article, we study the welfare state reform measures taken between 2010 and 2012 in four countries characteristic of mature welfare state regimes (liberal, UK; conservative, Germany; social democratic, Denmark; and hybrid, the Netherlands) to examine empirically whether austerity has indeed become the only item left on the policy menu. Our analysis reveals that retrenchment features prominently on the agenda everywhere, but nowhere by itself. While compensation for income loss is rare since 2010, this still happens. More unexpectedly, reforms in line with a social investment agenda (like expansion of child care or active labour market policies) are still being pursued in all our four cases.

No abstract

The chapter presents, in synthesis form, some key elements of what is now understood about welfare regimes, their respective pathologies of development, their current paths of reform, and the challenges that still confront them. The first section examines welfare state performance thematically, focusing on employment, the scale and shape of social security systems, and distributive outcomes. The second section takes Europe’s four welfare regimes (those of Scandinavia, the United Kingdom, continental Europe and Southern Europe) and analyses their respective strengths and vulnerabilities. The conclusion considers where the literature on welfare states is likely to go in the future.

No abstract

Since the late 1970s, the developed welfare states of the European Union have been recasting the policy mix on which their systems of social protection were built. They have adopted a new policy orthodoxy that could be summarised as the 'social investment strategy'. Here we trace its origins and major developments. The shift is characterised by a move away from passive transfers and towards the maximalisation of employability and employment, but there are significant national distinctions and regime specific trajectories. We discuss some caveats, focusing on the question whether the new policy paradigm has been established at the expense of social policies that mitigate poverty and inequality.

No abstract