The Uses of Affordable Social Investment

Abstract

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.

Social Investment and Youth Labor Market Participation

“…Our analysis of regional spending suggests that, even though the evidence is consistent with previous analyses using national data to what concern the compensatory component ( Hemerijck , ; Heitzmann, Wukovitsch, et al ), there is higher regional variation in the investment component, even within the same country. The results from our SVAR analysis also suggest that investment policies are effective to reduce the level of NEETs and increase the level of youth employment.…”

Social Investment Risks? An explorative analysis of new social risks in the social investment state

“…Even though countries with different types of welfare systems have implemented elements of the social investment paradigm (see Hemerijck, 2017), the ways in which the social investment paradigm has been implemented differ significantly. This may lead to different outcomes in terms of the persistence of inequality and the position of vulnerable groups.…”

The triple bind of single-parent families

“…Their traditional pillar of 'passive' income support for families with children has been complemented with 'activating' services and measures, such as childcare services and parental-leave schemes. These are designed to reconcile work and family life, to foster female employment and gender equality and to promote child development, all of which are important pillars of the social-investment perspective (for example, Hemerijck, 2017). In that regard, activating family policies (or work-family reconciliation policies) are considered important instruments to deal with the perfect storm of inadequate resources, employment and policies: a triple bind experienced by many single parents.…”