Hyvinvointivaltion optimaalisen köyhyyspolitiikan määrittelyä

The purpose of this research is to identify the optimal poverty policy for a welfare state. Poverty is defined by income. Policies for reducing poverty are considered primary, and those for reducing inequality secondary. Poverty is seen as a function of the income transfer system within a welfare state. This research presents a method for optimising this function for the purposes of reducing poverty. It is also implemented in the representative population sample within the Income Distribution Data. SOMA simulation model is used. The iterative simulation process is continued until a level of poverty is reached at which improvements can no longer be made. Expenditures and taxes are kept in balance during the process. The result consists of two programmes. The first programme (social assistance programme) was formulated using five social assistance parameters, all of which dealt with the norms of social assistance for adults (€/month). In the second programme (basic benefits programme), in which social assistance was frozen at the legislative level of 2003, the parameter with the strongest poverty reduction effect turned out to be one of the basic unemployment allowances. This was followed by the norm of the national pension for a single person, two parameters related to housing allowance, and the norm for financial aid for students of higher education institutions. The most effective financing parameter measured by gini-coefficient in all programmes was the percent of capital taxation. Furthermore, these programmes can also be examined in relation to their costs. The social assistance programme is significantly cheaper than the basic benefits programme, and therefore with regard to poverty, the social assistance programme is more cost effective than the basic benefits programme. Therefore, public demand for raising the level of basic benefits does not seem to correspond to the most cost effective poverty policy. Raising basic benefits has most effect on reducing poverty within the group of people whose basic benefits are raised. Raising social assistance, on the other hand, seems to have a strong influence on the poverty of all population groups. The most significant outcome of this research is the development of a method through which a welfare state’s income transfer-based safety net, which has severely deteriorated in recent decades, might be mended. The only way of doing so involves either social assistance or some forms of basic benefits and supplementing these by modifying social assistance.

Sosiaalipalveluja kaikille ja kaiken ikää? : Tutkimus suomalaisten mielipiteistä ja kokemuksista sosiaalipalveluista sekä niiden suhteesta legitimiteettiin

This research analyses opinions on the system of social welfare services from the point of view of clients and the public in general in Finland. The approach is quantitative, drawing on theories of the welfare-state tradition. The data used comes from the comprehensive Welfare and Services in Finland survey compiled by STAKES. While previous research on the welfare state has predominantly focused on surveying public opinion on social protection, this research focuses on social welfare services. The main focus of this research is on publicly funded care provided by municipal social welfare services. In this research, social welfare services include child day care, services for people with disabilities, home-help services, counselling by social workers and social assistance. The research considered in particular whether the clients or the population has different opinions towards social welfare services or social benefits. In addition, the research partly covers areas of informal care provided by family and friends. The research material consisted of the STAKES Welfare and Services in Finland survey. The data was compiled in 2004 and 2006 by Statistics Finland. The research comprises five articles. Additional data have been extracted from social welfare statistics and registers. Multiple approaches were applied in the survey on welfare and services the methods in this research included interviews by phone and mail, and register data. The sample size was 5 810 people in 2004 and 5 798 in 2006. The response rates were 82.7% and 83.7%, respectively. The results indicate that a large majority (90%) of the Finnish population is of the opinion that the public sector should bear the main responsibility for organising social and health services. The system of social welfare services and its personnel have strong public support 73% and 80% respectively. However, new and even negative tones have emerged in the Finnish debate on social welfare services. Women are increasingly critical of the performance of social welfare services and the level of social protection. Furthermore, this study shows that women more often than men wish to see an increase in the amount of privately organised social welfare services. Another group critical of the performance of social welfare services are pensioners. People who had used social welfare services were more critical than those who had not used them. Thus, the severest criticism was received from the groups who use and gain most from public services and benefits. However, the education and income variables identified in earlier studies no longer formed a significant dividing line, although people with higher education tend to foster a more positive view of the performance of social welfare services as well as the level of social protection. Income differences did not bear any significance, that is, belonging to a high or low income group was not a determining factor in the attitude towards social welfare services or social benefits. According to the research, family and friends still form an informal yet significant support network in people's everyday lives, and its importance has not been diminished by services provided by the welfare state. The Finnish public considers child day care the most reliable form of social welfare services. Indeed, child day care has become the most universal sector of our system of social welfare services. Other services that instil confidence included counselling by social workers and services for people with disabilities. On the other hand, social assistance and home-help services received negative feedback. The negative views were based on a number of arguments. One argument contends that the home-help service system, which was originally intended for universal use, is crumbling. The preventive role of home-help services has been reduced. These results mirror the increasingly popular opinion that social welfare services are not produced for all those who need them, but to an increasing extent for a select few of them. Municipalities are struggling with their finances and this, combined with negative publicity, has damaged the public's trust in some municipal social welfare services. A welfare state never achieves a stable condition, but must develop over time, as the world around it changes. Following the 1990's recession, we are now in a position where we can start to develop a system that responds to the needs of the next generation. Study results indicating new areas of dissatisfaction reflect the need to develop and improve the services provided. It is also increasingly essential that social welfare services pay attention to the opinions of clients and the public. Should the gap between opinions and actual activities increase, the legitimacy of the whole system would be questioned. Currently, the vast majority of Finns consider the system of social welfare services adequate, which provides us with the continuity required to maintain and improve client-oriented and reasonably priced social welfare services. Paying attention to the signals given by clients and the general public, and reacting to them accordingly, will also secure the development and legitimacy of the system in the future.

Social Networks and Everyday Practices in Russia

My doctoral dissertation in sociology and Russian studies, Social Networks and Everyday Practices in Russia, employs a "micro" or "grassroots" perspective on the transition. The study is a collection of articles detailing social networks in five different contexts. The first article examines Russian birthdays from a network perspective. The second takes a look at health care to see whether networks have become obsolete in a sector that is still overwhelmingly public, but increasingly being monetarised. The third article investigates neighbourhood relations. The fourth details relationships at work, particularly from the vantage point of internal migration. The fifth explores housing and the role of networks and money both in the Soviet and post-Soviet era. The study is based on qualitative social network and interview data gathered among three groups, teachers, doctors and factory workers, in St. Petersburg during 1993-2000. Methodologically it builds on a qualitative social network approach. The study adds a critical element to the discussion on networks in post-socialism. A considerable consensus exists that social networks were vital in state socialist societies and were used to bypass various difficulties caused by endemic shortages and bureaucratic rigidities, but a more debated issue has been their role in post-socialism. Some scholars have argued that the importance of networks has been dramatically reduced in the new market economy, whereas others have stressed their continuing importance. If a common denominator in both has been a focus on networks in relation to the past, a more overlooked aspect has been the question of inequality. To what extent is access to networks unequally distributed? What are the limits and consequences of networks, for those who have access, those outside networks or society at large? My study provides some evidence about inequalities. It shows that some groups are privileged over others, for instance, middle-class people in informal access to health care. Moreover, analysing the formation of networks sheds additional light on inequalities, as it highlights the importance of migration as a mechanism of inequality, for example. The five articles focus on how networks are actually used in everyday life. The article on health care, for instance, shows that personal connections are still important and popular in post-Soviet Russia, despite the growing importance of money and the emergence of "fee for service" medicine. Fifteen of twenty teachers were involved in informal medical exchange during a two-week study period, so that they used their networks to bypass the formal market mechanisms or official procedures. Medicines were obtained through personal connections because some were unavailable at local pharmacies or because these connections could provide medicines for a cheaper price or even for free. The article on neighbours shows that "mutual help" was the central feature of neighbouring, so that the exchange of goods, services and information covered almost half the contacts with neighbours reported. Neighbours did not provide merely small-scale help but were often exchange partners because they possessed important professional qualities, had access to workplace resources, or knew somebody useful. The article on the Russian work collective details workplace-related relationships in a tractor factory and shows that interaction with and assistance from one's co-workers remains important. The most interesting finding was that co-workers were even more important to those who had migrated to the city than to those who were born there, which is explained by the specifics of Soviet migration. As a result, the workplace heavily influenced or absorbed contexts for the worker migrants to establish relationships whereas many meeting-places commonly available in Western countries were largely absent or at least did not function as trusted public meeting places to initiate relationships. More results are to be found from my dissertation: Anna-Maria Salmi: Social Networks and Everyday Practices in Russia, Kikimora Publications, 2006, see www.kikimora-publications.com.