Migrant youth and social policy in multicultural Australia: exploring cross-cultural networking

This chapter explores the extent to which the direction of Australia’s official multicultural and civic integration policies, reflects the social attitudes and networking practices of migrant youth. The chapter pays particular attention to the Federal Government’s “Anti-Racism Strategy” announced in 2012 as part of its Multicultural Policy. On a theoretical level, direct efforts to mitigate racism have the potential to augment strategies that reaffirm pluralism and address disadvantage often associated with the migrant experience. On an empirical level, it is important to explore the extent to which such top-level discourses have actual founding in the social lives of migrant youth. Therefore this chapter presents the empirical findings of an empirical longitudinal on “Social Networks, Belonging and Active Citizenship among Migrant Youth” (Australian Research Council Linkage project 2009–2013). Migrant youth in this study pointed to a number of instances of racism, which act as significant barriers to cross-cultural networking. Analysis of the data shows, among other things, that there is a persistent tendency among migrant youth to point to their social distance from the metaphorical “Aussie Aussie” people of Anglo origins who are perceived as symbolising Australia’s mainstream. Such manifestations of racial discrimination preclude the emergence of a genuinely inclusive society that supports and nurtures cultural diversity as a significant part of the Australian national identity, as well as the stated objectives of its social policy repertoire.

Kitāb Manāhij al-albāb al-Miṣrīyah fī mabāhij al-ādāb al-ʻaṣrīyah

taʼlīf Rifāʻah Rāfiʻ.

The social inclusion policy agenda in Australia: A case of old wine, new bottles?

The election of an Australian Labor Government in Australia in 2007 saw ‘social inclusion’ emerge as the official and overarching social policy agenda. Being ‘included’ was subsequently defined by the ALP Government as being able to ‘have the resources, opportunities and capabilities needed to learn, work, engage and have a voice’. Various researchers in Australia demonstrated an interest in social inclusion, as it enabled them to construct a multi-dimensional framework for measuring disadvantage. This research program resulted in various forms of statistical modelling based on some agreement about what it means to be included in society. The multi-dimensional approach taken by academic researchers, however, did not necessarily translate to a new model of social policy development or implementation. We argue that, similar to the experience of the UK, Australia’s social inclusion policy agenda was for the most part narrowly and individually defined by politicians and policy makers, particularly in terms of equating being employed with being included. We conclude with discussion about the need to strengthen the social inclusion framework by adopting an understanding of social inequality and social justice that is more relational and less categorical.

Balancing Social Citizenship and New Paternalism : Finnish activation policy and street-level practice in a comparative perspective

The study examines the origin and development of the Finnish activation policy since the mid-1990s by using the 2001 activation reform as a benchmark. The notion behind activation is to link work obligations to welfare benefits for the unemployed. The focus of the thesis is policy learning and the impact of ideas on the reform of the welfare state. The broader research interests of the thesis are summarized by two groups of questions. First, how was the Finnish activation policy developed and what specific form did it receive in the 2001 activation reform? Second, how does the Finnish activation policy compare to the welfare reforms in the EU and in the US? What kinds of ideas and instruments informed the Finnish policy? To what extent can we talk about a restructuring or transformation of the Nordic welfare policy? Theoretically, the thesis is embedded in the comparative welfare state research and the concepts used in the contemporary welfare state discourse. Activation policy is analysed against the backdrop of the theories about the welfare state, welfare state governance and citizenship. Activation policies are also analysed in the context of the overall modernization and individualization of lifestyles and its implications for the individual citizen. Further, the different perspectives of the policy analysis are applied to determine the role of implementation and street-level practice within the whole. Empirically, the policy design, its implementation and the experiences of the welfare staff and recipients in Finland are examined. The policy development, goals and instruments of the activation policies have followed astonishingly similar paths in the different welfare states and regimes over the last two decades. In Finland, the policy change has been manifested through several successive reforms that have been introduced since the mid-1990s. The 2001 activation reform the Act on Rehabilitative Work Experience illustrates the broader trend towards stricter work requirements and draws its inspiration from the ideas of new paternalism. The ideas, goals and instruments of the international activation trend are clearly visible in the reform. Similarly, the reform has implications for the traditional Nordic social policies, which incorporate institutionalised social rights and the provision of services.

Policy difference and policy ownership under UK devolution: social housing policy in Northern Ireland

This paper assesses the impact of UK devolution on social housing policy in Northern Ireland from 1999 until 2011, with a particular focus on the administration from May 2007 until April 2011, the first in which the elected elements of the process functioned for the entire period. Housing is one of the responsibilities of the Minister for Social Development. Northern Ireland has had a political commitment to the provision of good quality social housing for many years, both before and after the 1998 Good Friday/ Belfast Agreement and the establishment of the Northern Ireland Assembly and Executive in 1999.
The paper begins with an analysis of factors contributing to policy difference within the United Kingdom under the 1999 devolution settlement, noting that these factors may contribute either to policy convergence or divergence between the four UK jurisdictions. There follow reflections on the concept of ‘policy ownership’ in multi-level states and the benefits of this analytical approach for consideration of housing policy under UK devolution. A review of social housing policy since 1999 is followed by discussion of three key issues from the 2007-11 administration: the governance of social housing; the procurement of new social housing; and improving access to shared space and a shared future. The paper concludes that, in Northern Ireland, the 2007-11 administration marked a transition between a technocratic past and the future policy ownership of the social housing policy field by locally elected politicians. Reflections on wider implications for UK social policy, for UK devolution, and for the complex governance structures of devolved and federal states are also included.

Towards universal social protection: Latin American pathways and policy tools

This book reflects on the public policies, programmes and regulatory frameworks that are taking a rights-based approach to expanding social protection coverage and benefits in Latin America, with a view to achieving universal coverage. The book’s discussion of the policy tools and programmes pursued in the region aims to provide the reader with technical and programmatic insights for assembling and coordinating public policies within consistent and sustainable social protection systems. The combination of normative orientations and stock of technical knowledge, together with advances regarding the rights-based approach to social protection within a life cycle framework, afford the reader not only a tool box of specific social protection instruments, but also an in-depth examination of related political economy aspects.

Policy Contexts of Social Work in Britain: the wider implications of 'New' Labour and the 'New Legal Regime'

Several commentators have expressed disappointment with New Labour's apparent adherence to the policy frameworks of the previous Conservative administrations. The employment orientation of its welfare programmes, the contradictory nature of the social exclusion initiatives, and the continuing obsession with public sector marketisation, inspections, audits, standards and so on, have all come under critical scrutiny (c.f., Blyth 2001; Jordan 2001; Orme 2001). This paper suggests that in order to understand the socio-economic and political contexts affecting social work we need to examine the relationship between New Labour's modernisation project and its insertion within an architecture of global governance. In particular, membership of the European Union (EU), International Monetary Fund (IMF) and World Trade Organisation (WTO) set the parameters for domestic policy in important ways. Whilst much has been written about the economic dimensions of 'globalisation' in relation to social work rather less has been noted about the ways in which domestic policy agenda are driven by multilateral governance objectives. This policy dimension is important in trying to respond to various changes affecting social work as a professional activity. What is possible, what is encouraged, how things might be done, is tightly bounded by the policy frameworks governing practice and affected by those governing the lives of service users. It is unhelpful to see policy formulation in purely national terms as the UK is inserted into a network governance structure, a regulatory framework where decisions are made by many countries and organisations and agencies. Together, they are producing a 'new legal regime', characterised by a marked neo-liberal policy agenda. This paper aims to demonstrate the relationship of New Labour's modernisation programme to these new forms of legality by examining two main policy areas and the welfare implications they are enmeshed in. The first is privatisation, and the second is social policy in the European Union. Examining these areas allows a demonstration of how much of the New Labour programme can be understood as a local implementation of a transnational strategy, how parts of that strategy produce much of the social exclusion it purports to address, and how social welfare, and particularly social work, are noticeable by their absence within policy discourses of the strategy. The paper details how the privatisation programme is considered to be a crucial vehicle for the further development of a transnational political-economy, where capital accumulation has been redefined as 'welfare'. In this development, frameworks, codes and standards are central, and the final section of the paper examines how the modernisation strategy of the European Union depends upon social policy marked by an employment orientation and risk rationality, aimed at reconfiguring citizen identities.The strategy is governed through an 'open mode of coordination', in which codes, standards, benchmarks and so on play an important role. The paper considers the modernisation strategy and new legality within which it is embedded as dependent upon social policy as a technology of liberal governance, one demonstrating a new rationality in comparison to that governing post-Second World War welfare, and which aims to reconfigure institutional infrastructure and citizen identity.

Different levels of policy change: A comparison between the public discussion on social security in Sweden and in Finland

The deep economic recession that hit Sweden and Finland at the beginning of the 90s, and the fall in public revenues and rapidly growing public debts that followed on it, triggered a development of cutbacks and restructuring measures which has resulted in a scientific debate over what this has meant for these countries’ systems of social policy, traditionally resting on the Nordic welfare state paradigm. In this connection, questions of to what extent changes made can be ascribed mainly to the economic constraints posed by the recession at all, or rather, to other more long-term societal trends or phenomena, including globalisation, European integration and/or ideational or ideological shifts among influential (elite) groups, have often been touched upon. Applying an ideas-centred approach, this paper attempts to contribute to the knowledge on the reasoning of influential elite societal groups in social policy issues before, during and after the 90’s recession, by empirically analysing their statements on social security made in the press. A distinction is made between three different levels of proposed policy changes, reaching from minor alterations of single programs to changes of the policy paradigm. Results show that the 1990s did not only mean the emergence of suggestions for minor cutbacks in and alterations of prevailing programmes. The share of suggestions implying de facto a (further) departure from the basic features of the social security system also showed that the model was under continuous pressure throughout the 90s. However, many of the changes suggested were not justified by any clear references to a policy paradigm in either country (or not justified at all). Instead, references to “purely” structural justifications did become more common over time. In this respect, as regards social security, our results cannot confirm the fairly popular notion among many researchers of a clearly ideological attack on the welfare state. However, it remains uncertain whether and to what extent the increased proportion of references to “structural realities” in the 90s should be interpreted as an indication of a change in the idea of what the welfare state is and what the goals behind it are. Results further show that the patterns of the discussion in the two countries studied bore a remarkable resemblance at a general level, whereas there are indications of differences in the driving forces behind suggestions for similar reforms in these two countries.

How Social is European Integration? Bruges European Economic Policy (BEEP) Briefing 18/2007

The social dimension of the internal market or of the EU more generally has recently been under quite fundamental attack. Calls for 'Europe' to be 'more social' have been heard repeatedly. Witness the polarized debates about the services directive, the anxieties concerning several ECJ cases about what limitations of the free movement of workers (posted or not) are justified or the assertion of a 'neo-liberal agenda' in Brussels disregarding or eroding the social dimension. This BEEP Briefing paper takes an analytical approach to these issues and to the possible 'framing' involved. Such an analysis reveals a very different picture than the negative framing in such debates has it: there is nothing particular 'a-social' about the internal market or the EU at large. This overall conclusion is reached following five steps. First, several 'preliminaries' of the social dimension have to be kept in mind (including the two-tier regulatory & expenditure structure of what is too loosely called 'social Europe' ) and this is only too rarely done or at best in partial, hence misleading, ways. Second, the social acquis at EU and Member States' levels is spelled out, broken down into four aspects (social spending; labour market regulation; industrial relations; free movements & establishment). Assessing the EU acquis in the light of the two levels of powers shows clearly that it is the combination of the two levels which matters. Member States and e.g. labour unions do not want the EU level to become deeply involved ( with some exceptions) and the actual impact of free movement and establishment is throttled by far-reaching host-country control and the requirement of a 'high level of social protection' in the treaty. Third, six anxieties about the social dimension of the internal market are discussed and few arguments are found which are attributable to the EU or its weakening social dimension. Fourth, another six anxieties are discussed emerging from the socio-economic context of the social dimension of the EU at large. The analysis demonstrates that, even if these anxieties ought to be taken serious, the EU is hardly or not the culprit. Fifth, all this is complemented by a number of other facts or arguments strengthening the case that the EU social dimension is fine.

The Case for a European Social Union. European Policy Brief No. 23, March 2014

This Policy Brief discusses the notion of a ‘European Social Union’, in which European countries would cooperate with an explicit social purpose. A European Social Union should not be seen as an idealistic bridge too far. Instead, a Social Union is both desirable and necessary for the eurozone and wider European integration.

Families 'at risk' and the family nurse partnership:the intrusion of risk into social exclusion policy

This article considers why the family nurse partnership (FNP) has been promoted as a means of tackling social exclusion in the UK. The FNP consists in a programme of visits by nurses to low-income first-time mothers, both while the mothers are pregnant and for the first two years following birth. The FNP is focused on both teaching parenthood and encouraging mothers back into education and/or into employment. Although the FNP marks a considerable discontinuity with previous approaches to family health, it is congruent with an emerging new approach to social exclusion. This new approach maintains that the most important task of social policy is to identify quickly the most 'at-risk' households, individuals and children so that interventions can be targeted more effectively at those 'at risk', either to themselves or to others. The article illustrates this new approach by analysing a succession of reports by the Social Exclusion Unit. It indicates that there is a considerable amount of ambiguity about the relationship between specific risk-factors and being 'at risk of social exclusion'. Nonetheless, this new approach helps to explain why British policy-makers may have chosen to promote the new FNP now. © 2009 Cambridge University Press.

Social justice and high-quality human services : visioning the place of a contemporary professional association

The current world situation is plagued by “wicked problems” and a widespread sense of “things are going to get worse”. We confront the almost imponderable consequences of global habitat destruction and climate change, as well as the meltdown of the financial markets with their largely yet to be seen damage to the “real economy”. These things will have considerable negative impacts on the social system and people's lives, particularly the disadvantaged and socially excluded, and require innovative policy and program responses delivered by caring, intelligent, and committed practitioners. These gargantuan issues put into perspective the difficulties that confront social, welfare, and community work today. Yet, in times of trouble, social work and human services tend to do well. For example, although Australian Social Workers and Welfare and Community Workers have experienced phenomenal job growth over the past 5 years, they also have good prospects for future growth and above average salaries in the seventh and sixth deciles, respectively (Department of Education, Employment and Workplace Relations, 2008). I aim to examine the host of reasons why the pursuit of social justice and high-quality human services is difficult to attain in today's world and then consider how the broadly defined profession of social welfare practitioners may collectively take action to (a) respond in ways that reassert our role in compassionately assisting the downtrodden and (b) reclaim the capacity to be a significant body of professional expertise driving social policy and programs. For too long social work has responded to the wider factors it confronts through a combination of ignoring them, critiquing from a distance, and concentrating on the job at hand and our day-to-day responsibilities. Unfortunately, “holding the line” has proved futile and, little by little, the broad social mandate and role of social welfare has altered until, currently, most social programs entail significant social surveillance of troublesome or dangerous groups, rather than assistance. At times it almost seems like the word “help” has been lost in the political and managerial lexicon, replaced by “manage” and “control”. Our values, beliefs, and ethics are under real threat as guiding principles for social programs.