Welfare to work and the republican theory of non-domination

Author(s):  
Anja Eleveld

This chapter examines how the republican theory of non-domination can be used for a normative analysis of WTW relationships. It is argued that Lovett’s conception of non-domination captures some of the defining elements of these relationships. However, his conception of rules is (too) strongly rooted in the ideas of reasonability and impartiality, as a result of which vulnerable people in particular are at risk of being excluded from its (potentially protective) scope. Therefore, a republican normative analysis of WTW practices should also take account of Pettit’s more inclusive, democratic account of the republican theory of non-domination that is more attentive to the need for democratic oversight over discretionary spaces of welfare officers and work supervisors.

2013 ◽  
Vol 7 (2) ◽  
pp. 185-212 ◽  
Author(s):  
Katrina M. Wyman

Abstract There is considerable concern that climate change will displace many people in developing countries from their homes. This article examines whether developed countries are morally obligated to assist people displaced by climate change in developing countries. The article argues that there may not be a moral duty to assist climate change migrants as a category. Nonetheless, developed countries may have duties to assist vulnerable people elsewhere and may be obligated to assist climate change migrants along with other vulnerable people. In addition, there likely is a duty to assist a particular subset of climate change migrants, specifically the citizens of small island countries existentially threatened by climate change. The article concludes by assessing the implications of its moral analysis for the focus of law and policy. Instead of developing new treaties to assist climate change migrants as a number of academics and practitioners have recently proposed, law and policy should be concerned with assisting migrants at risk generally, and/or the citizens of small island countries existentially threatened by climate change.


2021 ◽  
pp. 1-15
Author(s):  
Anja Eleveld

Drawing on the neo-republican theory of non-domination and a qualitative case study conducted in three Dutch municipalities, this article explores the extent to which external rules are able to prevent arbitrary power in relationships between welfare officers and work supervisors, on the one hand, and welfare recipients participating in mandatory work programmes, on the other hand. It concludes that external rules were insufficiently implemented in the three municipalities in question. In addition, it found that rules cease to be capable of constraining arbitrary power where institutional contexts themselves are unpredictable and insecure. Under these conditions, welfare recipients may seek to avoid risks and act in accordance with the preferences (or their expectation of the preferences) of the welfare officer or work supervisor by playing the role of the ‘good recipient’ instead of relying on available rules of a protective nature or rules that enable them to have a say in their participation in mandatory work programmes.


Author(s):  
Josien Arts

This chapter shows the differences between local welfare-to-work programmes in the Netherlands in terms of the ways in which social assistance recipients are directed towards paid labour: through pressing, repressing and accommodating modes of governing. Based on 13-month ethnographic research in three Dutch social assistance offices, this chapter argues, first, that the observed local differences result from decentralisation of policy design and implementation as well as increased discretionary power for case managers. Second, that the different local practices can be understood as varieties of neoliberal paternalism legitimised through various forms of stigmatisation of social assistance recipients that leave little room for them to revolt against disfunctioning policy and wrongful treatment. Third, by means of using the republican theory of non-domination, this chapter argues that the observed local differences (between as well as within municipalities) and limited room for social assistance recipients to voice their concerns indicate that Dutch welfare-to-work policies work partly in arbitrary ways and are insufficiently democratically controlled.


Author(s):  
Abolghasem Khodadi

At-risk groups are the elderly, the disabled, and women. Some of the reasons for the victimization of at-risk groups are due to their own characteristics. These include financial and emotional dependence, physical, mental and psychological weakness, inability to control and manage property and assets. Other causes of vulnerability and harassment are related to their relatives, social workers and nurses, such as costly care for the elderly and disabled, the inability of their relatives and social worker to care them. This article seeks to provide support for groups at risk of victimization. This article tries to provide health, financial and insurance services to improve the unfavorable situation of these people. With these strategies, the risk of victimization of vulnerable people is reduced.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document