Active inclusion as an organisational challenge: integrated anti-poverty policies in three European countries

Abstract

Active inclusion aims at the reduction of poverty by strengthening the agency of excluded persons by the provision of a minimum income, activation and social services. The contribution to poverty alleviation is determined by expenditure levels and the organisation of these three policy fields. This can be shown by three examples: The comprehensive Swedish regime is characterised by high expenditures; the redistributive German regime is characterised by lower service levels and in Italy, all three dimensions are least developed. In addition, the organisation of services differs: Decentralised and discretionary system for the provision of services in Sweden, "creaming and parking" effects in Germany and fragmented providers in Italy. As a result of different expenditure levels and organisational patterns, the selectivity of active inclusion strategies is low in Sweden, medium in Germany and high in Italy. Both the financial and organisational dimensions of active inclusion therefore are decisive for poverty alleviation.

Institutional logics of service provision: The national and urban governance of activation policies in three European countries

“…The countries can loosely be considered to represent liberal, corporatist-statist, and social democratic welfare and employment regimes (Esping-Anderson, 1990). They also reflect expectations of different national logics: a market-based logic in the UK; a combination of state and corporatist logics in Germany; and a universalistic state logic in Sweden (Heidenreich et al, 2014).…”

“…In Germany, social services are provided either by the municipal social welfare offices (which are also stakeholders of the job centres) or third sector welfare associations based on religious, humanitarian or political convictions. In contrast, to the highly structured and centralized provision and monitoring of employment services, social services vary considerably between municipalities (Heidenreich et al, 2014; Künzel, 2012). Halle, with the highest number and relative share of unemployment assistance beneficiaries in our sample, developed a comprehensive and collaborative strategy for dealing with this group, while in Würzburg, a wealthy southern region where this group is smaller, collaboration played only a minor and residual role among relevant actors (Zimmermann and Rice, 2016).…”

Arbeitsmarkt und Beschäftigungspolitik in der Europäischen Union

“…Die Art der Wirkung des europäischen Feldes lässt sich entlang von fünf sozialen Mechanismen beschreiben (Zeitlin 2009), die sich weitgehend mit den in der policy-diffusion-Literatur identifizierten Mechanismen decken (Dobbin et al 2007 Ein Zwischenfazit der europasoziologischen Forschung zur EBS und OMK besteht darin, dass der Fokus bislang auf den Kampf um und die Diffusion von Ideen gelegt wurde. Politische Programmatiken werden in völlig unterschiedliche soziale Arrangements übersetzt, die ihrerseits die unterschiedlichen Welten des europäischen (Wohlfahrtsstaats-)Kapitalismus widerspiegeln (Heidenreich et al 2014). Eine besondere Herausforderung besteht darin, die Folgen des nun mehr als zwei Jahrzehnte beobachtbaren Fortbestehens jener sozialer Problemlagen, gegen die die EBS formuliert wurde -hohe (Langzeit-)Arbeitslosigkeit, steigender Anteil der working poor, Ersatz hochwertiger durch prekäre Arbeitsplätze -in ihrer politischen Sprengkraft und gesellschaftsverändernden Wirkung in Rechnung zu stellen.…”

The Provision of Skills Information in Scotland and Its Governance – Skills Investment Plans and Regional Skills Assessments

“…Although there are many definitions of governance, in this paper governance is taken to be the rules, norms and actions around the creation of some examples of skills information in Scotland, incorporating the authority, decision-making and accountability of how this information is created. Related governance systems are likely to be multi-level (supranational/national/regional/local agencies), multi-dimensional (seeking to integrate skills, training/educational demand and supply, economic development, business development policy areas) and multi-stakeholder (public-privatethird sector and individuals seeking training) (see Heidenreich et al, 2014). Different variations in governance types may lead to differing results in different locations (Savini et al, 2015), so it is important to be clear about the types of governance that are used.…”