Social problems and social policy.

1925 ◽  
Vol 22 (11) ◽  
pp. 666-666
Author(s):  
Charles A. Ellwood
Author(s):  
Dirk Geldof ◽  
Mieke Schrooten ◽  
Sophie Withaeckx

This chapter assesses transmigration. Within the fields of migration studies and superdiversity, transmigration and its impact on social policy are still underexplored. Yet, the rising number of transmigrants within Europe — from outside the EU as well as intra-EU-mobility — does not only challenge ideas of belonging and integration, but also existing concepts of governance and social policy. By foregrounding the cases of Brazilian, Ghanaian, and Moroccan transmigrants residing in Belgium in 2014–15, the chapter contributes to a scientific debate regarding these topics. It presents the results of a research project in the two main superdiverse Belgian cities (Brussels and Antwerp), focusing on the social problems and vulnerabilities that relate to transmigration and its inherent temporality and the way that these are experienced and addressed by social workers in superdiverse urban areas within policy frameworks that often do not (yet) recognise the changing context.


Author(s):  
Peter C. Caldwell

This book describes how experts in the “old” Federal Republic of Germany (1949–1989) sought to make sense of the vast array of state programs, expenditures, and bureaucracies aimed at solving social problems. These observers worked in the fields of politics, economics, law, social policy, sociology, and philosophy. They made sense of the developing welfare state by describing discrete programs and by explaining what the programs meant as a whole. Their real concern was to grasp their state, which was now social (one German word for the welfare state is indeed ...


1971 ◽  
Vol 36 (6) ◽  
pp. 1117
Author(s):  
Marvin Glenn Weber ◽  
Deborah I. Offenbacher ◽  
Canstance H. Poster ◽  
Edward R. Tufte ◽  
Jack D. Douglas

2019 ◽  
Vol 18 (3) ◽  
pp. 467-477 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jan Macvarish ◽  
Ellie Lee

In December 2017, the House of Commons Parliamentary Science and Technology Committee put out a call for submissions to an Inquiry that would consider the evidence-base for early intervention policies, with a particular focus on ‘Adverse Childhood Experiences’ or ACEs. This article analyses those submissions and the transcripts of the Inquiry’s oral sessions in the belief that they constitute a useful window through which to explore the types of claims being made in ACEs discourse. Our aim is to assess whether the ACEs phenomenon represents a continuity with what has been termed the ‘first three years movement’ (Thornton, 2011a, 2011b) – social policy and philanthropic activism which focuses on the earliest years of life in the name of preventing social problems ‘down the line’. In particular, we consider constructions of parents as determinate of these social problems through their influence on their children and the ways in which these are gendered in new ways.


1991 ◽  
Vol 34 (1) ◽  
pp. 43-64 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sheila Blackburn

The issue of sweated labour formed one of the most intractable social problems of the nineteenth and early twentieth centuries. Numerous remedies to solve sweating, such as the restriction of female and child labour, the abolition of domestic workshops, consumers' leagues, and co-operative production were variously advanced but subsequently found to be wanting. Eventually, and bowing to the inevitable, Edwardians finally sanctioned one cautious measure which they thought would curb sweating at its root – that is the legal control of low pay in the form of the 1909 Trade Boards Act. Initially, the act applied to domestic chain-making, ready-made and wholesale bespoke tailoring, paper-box making, and the machine-made lace and finishing trade. In these four industries in which wages were deemed unduly low, boards were established consisting of equal numbers of employers' and workers' representatives, plus independent members nominated by the state. In effect, the boards were thus a form of compulsory arbitration on pay.


2000 ◽  
Vol 10 (2) ◽  
pp. 146-161 ◽  
Author(s):  
Bob Deacon

This article is divided into four parts. First there is a summary of the social policy of the old state-socialist regimes, some description of the legacy of social problems which they bequeathed to those making the transition to capitalism and a brief summary of the major social costs of the early years of the transition process. Second, the broad social-policy strategies of the new governments of Eastern Europe and the former USSR are reviewed as they have attempted to manage both the legacy of social problems from the past and the new social costs of transition. Third, in more detail developments in five specific fields are described: levels of public expenditure on social welfare; income maintenance policy; health and medical care; housing; and education. The article concludes by attempting to explain these changes, asking whether the policy changes have been motivated by a perceived need to reduce social provision, with a view to becoming more competitive within the global economy.


1973 ◽  
Vol 2 (3) ◽  
pp. 209-224 ◽  
Author(s):  
John Carrier ◽  
Ian Kendall

The resources of sociology do not appear to have been extensively or systematically utilized in the study of social policy and administration. One source of evidence for this statement is the absence of explicit references to sociological theories in some of the most well known general texts on British social policy and administration. Pinker's recent analysis of social theory and social policy also lends support to the view that there has been, and still remains, something of a division between sociologists and students of social policy and administration. He concludes that the ‘founding fathers’ of sociology (Marx, Durkheim, Weber and Spencer) had a tendency to be ‘not greatly interested…(in)…remedies for social problems’, and makes the general observation that ‘sociologists have been oddly diffident about the subject-matter of social administration’, possibly because of the latter's atheoretical nature.


2015 ◽  
Vol 11 (2) ◽  
pp. 122-136 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lynne Andersson ◽  
Lisa Calvano

Purpose – This paper aims to examine how the globally mobile elite (GME) uses its capital and networks to create a perception that market-driven solutions to social problems are superior to the efforts of government and civil society. Design/methodology/approach – Drawing on a number of emerging literatures, the authors introduce and develop the concept of the “perceived mobility of impact” and use the case of the “Bono effect” to illustrate how this phenomenon is enacted. The authors then employ a critical lens to challenge the consequences of this perceived mobility of impact. Findings – Global elites use their mobility to generate network capital, which in conjunction with celebrity affinity for global humanitarian causes builds a self-reinforcing consensus and legitimizes market-driven solutions to social problems. While this approach may make the GME feel generous about their contribution, it raises questions about accountability and representation in shaping global social policy. Originality/value – This paper contributes to the burgeoning literature on the GME, offering a unique critical perspective on their motives and actions, and introduces the concept of ‘perceived mobility of impact’.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document