Essays on the Welfare State

Titmuss, Richard M.

doi:10.1332/policypress/9781447349518.001.0001

Cited by 105 publications

(121 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

Section: Defining Occupational Welfare In Europementioning

confidence: 99%

“…As already mentioned, the concept of OW was originally introduced by Titmuss (), who proposed to differentiate three types of welfare provision: “social welfare”, “fiscal welfare”, and “occupational welfare”. For Titmuss, the latter type “is provided by virtue of employment status, achievement and record, and may take the form of social security provisions in cash or in kind” (Titmuss, , p. 50). While not necessarily differing in their functions and aims, what distinguishes the types of welfare provision are “[…] the administrative methods and institutional devices used” (Titmuss, , p. 42).…”

Section: Defining Occupational Welfare In Europementioning

confidence: 99%

“…For Titmuss, the latter type “is provided by virtue of employment status, achievement and record, and may take the form of social security provisions in cash or in kind” (Titmuss, , p. 50). While not necessarily differing in their functions and aims, what distinguishes the types of welfare provision are “[…] the administrative methods and institutional devices used” (Titmuss, , p. 42). Whilst the three systems interact, they should be considered as three distinct spheres.…”

Section: Defining Occupational Welfare In Europementioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Sixty years after Titmuss: New findings on occupational welfare in Europe

et al. 2018

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Following the seminal work of Richard Titmuss, who coined the term occupational welfare (OW) 60 years ago, the article approaches OW provision in Europe today. We first define OW as the sum of extra‐statutory social benefits and services provided by employers and/or trade unions as a result of employment. We then look at its recent evolution: OW expenditure and coverage have been increasing significantly in Europe since the 1990s. While pensions are still the main policy area of OW, the latter has also advanced in other social protection areas (e.g., health insurance, reconciliation). This has led to four different ideal types of OW—defined on the base of their organizing principle (voluntarism vs. collectivism) and the level of OW scheme coverage and expenditure. By looking at the main drivers of OW, the analysis has found no evidence of a “crowding out” effect between public welfare and OW. Collective bargaining, national political economy, and the timing of reforms prove to be important factors explaining the OW development. As for the present and future of OW, dualization is a major risk. At present, the main fault lines created by OW follow sectoral, industry, company size, and occupational group lines. To avoid the worsening of inequalities originated by OW, even in those countries which were able in the past to avoid dualization, strong industrial relations may play a key role. The article concludes with some suggestions on the agenda of future OW research.

show abstract

Section: Defining Occupational Welfare In Europementioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Defining Occupational Welfare In Europementioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Defining Occupational Welfare In Europementioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Sixty years after Titmuss: New findings on occupational welfare in Europe

et al. 2018

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Faced with a range of fiscal and social pressures, industrialised countries are moving away from the collective social provision that drove the development of post-war welfare states [1] and which functioned as a social safety net, providing a range of services and financial assistance directly to citizens [2]. …”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

A longitudinal study of the implementation experiences of the Australian National Disability Insurance Scheme: investigating transformative policy change

Carey

Dickinson

2017

BMC Health Serv Res

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BackgroundInternationally there has been a growth in the use of publicly funded service markets as a mechanism to deliver health and social services. This has accompanied the emergence of ‘self-directed care’ in a number of different policy areas including disability and aged care – often referred to as ‘personalisation’ (Giaimo and Manow, Comp. Pol Stud 32:967–1000, 1999; Needham, Public Money Manage 30:136–8, 2010; [Hood], [The Idea of Joined-up Government: A Historical Perspective], [2005]; Klijn and Koppenjan, Public Manage 2:437–54, 2000, Greener, Policy Polit 36:93–108, 2008). These reforms are underpinned by an idea that individuals should be placed in control of their own service needs, given funding directly by government and encouraged to exercise choice and control through purchasing their own services. A major challenge for governments in charge of these reforms is determining the best way to structure and govern emerging service markets markets. Given the growing international embrace of market-based reform mechanisms to provide essential services to citizens, finding ways to ensure they promote, and not diminish, people’s health and wellbeing is vital.MethodsThe Australian National Disability Insurance Scheme (NDIS) is Australia’s first national approach to the use of personalised budgets. The program of research outlined in this paper brings together streams from a range of different studies in order to investigate the implementation of the NDIS longitudinally across different administrative levels of government, service providers and scheme participants.ConclusionThis programme of research will make a contribution to our understanding of the Australian scheme and how individualised funding operates within this context, but will also generate much needed evidence that will have relevance to other jurisdictions and help fill a gap in the evidence base.

show abstract

“…The only difference is that the labour of successful people is highly prized by the job market. Social democrats recognized that welfare states would rise and fall in terms of whether not more affluent groups would have a stake in the same life-enabling mechanisms that the poor depend on (Titmuss, 1958). Indeed, it is through the Balkanization of social membership into communities that affluent groups have, in effect, seceded from the nations of which they were once a part (Reich, 1991).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Community and the Balkanization of social membership

Ballard¹

2016

Dialogues in Human Geography

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Although the idea of community opens up possibilities for thinking about agency, sociality and collectivity in the face of austerity, it also has significant limitations. It can reify and ossify collectives in ways that do not align particularly well with complex and fluid social realities. Where ideas of community are adopted popular and political levels, they can result in processes of social purification that demand either assimilation or exclusion. Furthermore, they can lead to moralizing assessments about responsibilities of marginal members of society to engage in 'good' community. Finally, they can also limit the scale of social membership and allow those with resources to abdicate responsibility towards those who do not. This commentary notes that the idea of community might be most productively deployed not to understand the resilience of homogenously defined groupings (such as poor/white/British) but rather the ways in which responses to injustice can bring people into redistributional and common cause relationships across demographic and class divides.The social is depicted as somehow lacking in these [hard-pressed] areas, as something that needs building up in them, as a regenerative tonic -if only people were more trusting, cohesive, and socially engaged, they would live long, prosper, and put something back into the community, so the argument goes. (Amin, 2005: 614) The term community, as Raymond Williams proposed, is a 'warmly persuasive word ' (1983 [1976]: 76). It is also, as he showed, promiscuous in its meaning and is taken up as a signifier for many different and sometimes contradictory things. Its appeal in the social sciences includes the way it seems to offer an antidote to top-down approaches, by locating powers to decide and act at the grassroots level. It also seems to offer an antidote for individualism by providing a vehicle for collective problem-solving and mutuality (see Herbert, 2005). For their part, Merry, Harris and Manley consider the ways in which the 'White British poor' are

show abstract

Essays on the Welfare State

Cited by 105 publications

References 0 publications

Sixty years after Titmuss: New findings on occupational welfare in Europe

Sixty years after Titmuss: New findings on occupational welfare in Europe

A longitudinal study of the implementation experiences of the Australian National Disability Insurance Scheme: investigating transformative policy change

Community and the Balkanization of social membership

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About