2 results
nine - Individualising citizenship
- Edited by Jørgen Goul Andersen, Anne-Marie Guillemard, Per H. Jensen, Birgit Pfau-Effinger
-
- Book:
- The Changing Face of Welfare
- Published by:
- Bristol University Press
- Published online:
- 18 January 2022
- Print publication:
- 12 October 2005, pp 151-168
-
- Chapter
- Export citation
-
Summary
Activation policies are at the core of the changing face of welfare. Previous analyses of the activation phenomenon have focused on whether activation policies fit into or cause changes in different welfare regimes (Torfing, 1999; Barbier, 2004; Barbier and Ludwig-Mayerhofer, 2004). Similarly, a significant number of studies have demonstrated that activation policies rebalance the relationship between rights and obligations (Kildal, 2001; Kvist, 2002; Gilbert, 2002; van Oorschot and Abrahamson, 2003). Conversely, the number of studies examining the field-level administration of activation programmes is limited (Handler, 2003; Olesen, 2003). In other words, our knowledge concerning the implementation of activation policies is relatively rudimentary.
This chapter is aimed at contributing to filling this gap in our understanding of the implementation of activation policies. More specifically, the article will present reflections concerning the so-called ‘individual action plan’ (IAP) that serves as an instrument in the activation efforts in countries such as Denmark. Activation in Denmark is not allowed to proceed in an abstract, unstructured manner. Prior to being activated, an IAP has to be drawn up. It explicitly has to account for the content and purpose of the activation (OECD, 1995), that is, the means of activation that are employed (such as education or job-training), have to be tailored to fit a well-defined ultimate objective. The client has to engage in dialogue with a social worker to negotiate the IAP. This dialogue must be built on the basic understanding that the unemployed person is genuinely interested in becoming integrated in the labour market. Subsequently, another basic premise for this dialogue is that the IAP embodies an attempt at balancing the wishes of the individual with the needs of the labour market (as failure to grant consideration to the needs of the labour market will render integration in the ordinary labour market impossible). Mutual rights and obligations must be specified in the negotiations and, by signing an IAP, unemployed individuals are obliged to act in the manner agreed upon. Conversely, the administration is obliged to make the resources available that render it possible for the unemployed persons to fulfil the IAP objectives. Thus, an IAP assumes the form of a mutual contract between the agency and the client.
twelve - A second order reflection on the concepts of inclusion exclusion
- Edited by Jørgen Goul Andersen, Per H. Jensen
-
- Book:
- Changing Labour Markets, Welfare Policies and Citizenship
- Published by:
- Bristol University Press
- Published online:
- 20 January 2022
- Print publication:
- 23 January 2002, pp 257-280
-
- Chapter
- Export citation
-
Summary
Citizenship is a multidimensional concept. It refers to (a) rights and duties, (b) the individual's ability to participate in various spheres of society, such as social, economic and political life, and (c) citizenship which helps to construct identities. Citizenship leads to inclusion in society, while loss of citizenship leads to exclusion or marginalisation. Within this frame of reference, the foregoing chapters have elaborated on theories, concepts and knowledge. They have contributed to the political and scientific debate concerning the relationship between changes in labour market, welfare policies, citizenship and marginalisation. The discussion frames a space rich with overlapping, conflicting scientific theories and political implications. However, so far the basic line of argument has never really been questioned. Thus, a common feature has been that these arguments proceeds from problems (labour market), then to deficits in remedies (welfare state) designed to rectify diminishing rights/participation (citizenship) and finally to marginalisation. Differences certainly exist – this has been shown by the way in which the authors contributing to this book have disagreed over the exact nature of the relationship between the labour market (problem or solution) and the welfare state (solution or problem). However, as a political project the authors unanimously agree that citizenship is good and marginalisation is bad.
Most probably, this is due to the fact that most research into the causes and effects of marginalisation and exclusion predominantly communicates with the political system. Researchers who actually use the concepts of marginalisation and exclusion usually have the objective of developing new empirical insights that may pave the way for the formulation of new strategies and new policies for re-integrating marginalised and excluded groups back into the societal fabric. Hence, researchers who use the concepts of marginalisation and exclusion use, as a starting point for their analysis, observations of marginalised positions, such as long-term unemployment, social vulnerability and poverty. Questions such as ‘from what and by whom are vulnerable groups excluded?’, ‘why is integration desirable?’ and ‘into what are they being integrated?’ are seldom thematised. Much research into marginalisation and exclusion rests on an implicit notion of normality and deviance, on the basis of which observations are made, interpretations promulgated and distinctions theorised into models. As a consequence, research into marginalisation and exclusion is first and foremost descriptive and normative, leaving the relationship between the phenomena in focus and the changes in their societal perception in the shade as ‘objective’ staging.