Economic and Welfare Policy

Towards a New Political Economy of Development

“…Indeed, while the shift towards new constitutionalism is widely acknowledged as an empirical trend of the neoliberal era, its impact on progressive state policy and the power of the state is contested. Many critical scholars have identified key weaknesses in some versions Keynesian political economy and have recognised that in an increasingly interdependent, regionalised and globalised world, Keynesianism conceived as a part of a broader social democratic project must itself be subject to critical reconsideration and reinterpretation (Annesley and Gamble 2003;Clift and Tomlinson 2007;Strange 2012Strange , 2014. This extends to a critical scrutiny of the new constitutionalism and of democracy as conceived by many naïve Keynesians in majoritarian terms.…”

“…This introduced a greater degree of short to medium term flexibility, enabling eurozone member states to legitimately overshoot what had been rigid fiscal targets and pursue counter-cyclical adjustment policies if required by 'exceptional' economic circumstances. In moving towards more symmetrical reference values the SGP reforms signalled a shift by the eurozone authorities towards a form of rule-bound or 'constrained' Keynesianism as practiced, for example, by New Labour in Britain (Annesley and Gamble 2003;Clift and Tomlinson 2006). Both the British and French governments remained critical of the pact for its failure to grant still greater fiscal flexibility to countries with relatively low levels of accumulated debt (below the SGP's 60 per cent reference value), as well as its failure to exclude investment from spending targets (Buller and Gamble 2008: 264-5).…”

The Electoral Consequences of Third Way Welfare State Reforms : Social Democracy’s Transformation and its Political Costs

“…The programme was generally characterised as a clear break with Labour's social policy commitments in the post-war era, since it represented a 'welfare to work' strategy with mandatory shifts from welfare benefits to labour market programmes (e.g. Hewitt 2002;Annesley & Gamble 2004;Clasen 2005: 81f;Rueda 2007: 174ff;Merkel et al 2008: 49ff ). It left the somewhat far-reaching reforms of the previous conservative government in place; for instance, it did not reintroduce the Bismarckian status-maintaining elements of the former unemployment insurance legislation that had been abolished by the previous Conservative government.…”

“…Sources:Walker & Wiseman (2003);Annesley & Gamble (2004);Taylor-Gooby et al (2004);Clasen (2005);Clasen & Clegg (2007). Note: the classifi cation of reforms in terms of level of conditionality and direction draws on the scheme ofClasen & Clegg (2007); R: recommodifi cation, D: decommodifi cation.…”

‘An acceptance that it’s just your lot I suppose’: reflections on turbulent transitions between work and welfare

“…In return the role of the state in this 'welfare contract' (Harker, 2005: 274) has been portrayed as providing economic opportunities for all who are fit and of working age through tackling supply-side barriers to growth, macroeconomic management and the creation of a 'competitive' business environment (see Annesley and Gamble, 2004;Peck, 2001). However, spatial variations in labour market conditions mean that welfare programmes 'run the risk of having the least impact where they are most needed: in those labour markets with insufficient employment opportunities due to a lack of local demand for labour' (Sunley et al, 2006: 57).…”