Canadian Social Welfare in the Twenty-First CenturyIn Pursuit of the Public Good: Essays in Honour of Allan J. MacEachen. Ed. Tom Kent. Montreal/Kingston: McGill-Queen's University Press, 1997.207 pp.Patchworks of Purpose: The Development ofProvincial Social Assistance Regimes in Canada. Gerald William Boychuk. Montreal/Kingston: McGill-Queen's UniversityRetooling the Welfare State: What's Right, What's Wrong, What's To Be Done. John Richards. Toronto: C.D. Howe Institute, 1997.304 pp.Women and the Canadian Welfare State: Challenges and Change. Eds. Patricia M. Evans and Gerda R. Wekerle. Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1997. 329 pp.

2001 ◽  
Vol 35 (4) ◽  
pp. 297-304 ◽  
Author(s):  
John R. Graham ◽  
Louise M. Querido
Keyword(s):  
Welfare State ◽  
Social Welfare ◽  
Public Good ◽  
Social Assistance ◽  
The Public ◽  
University Of Toronto ◽  
Queen's University ◽  
The Welfare State

scholarly journals The precarious inclusion of homeless EU migrants in Norwegian public social welfare: Moral bordering and social workers’ dilemmas

2021 ◽  
pp. 026101832110365
Author(s):  
Turid Misje
Keyword(s):  
Welfare State ◽  
Social Welfare ◽  
Labour Market ◽  
Social Workers ◽  
Social Assistance ◽  
Welfare Provision ◽  
The Public ◽  
The Welfare State ◽  
Human Worth ◽  
Policies And Practices

This article discusses public social welfare provision to homeless EU migrants in Norway. Most of these migrants have no or weak affiliations with the formal labour market, resulting in restricted rights to public social assistance. Drawing on the concept of precarious inclusion, I suggest that rather than being simply excluded from public social welfare, homeless EU migrants are included in the welfare state but in fragile and insecure ways through provisions directed at safeguarding bodily survival. I understand these limited inclusionary policies and practices as forming part of the Norwegian state’s management of ‘undesired’ migrants. Building on interviews with social workers in the public social welfare administration, I reflect on how assessments of cases involving homeless EU migrants signal hierarchical conceptions and differentiation of human worth within Norway’s borders and how territorial belonging emerges as a prerequisite for ‘deservingness’ in social workers’ accounts.

scholarly journals REGULATIONS IN THE SOCIAL WELFARE STATE: NORDIC COUNTRIES AND TURKEY EXAMPLE

2021 ◽  
Vol 6 (3) ◽  
Author(s):  
Nagihan Ozkanca Andic ◽  
Ekrem Karayilmazlar
Keyword(s):  
Welfare State ◽  
Social Welfare ◽  
Public Expenditure ◽  
Nordic Countries ◽  
Data Envelopment ◽  
Analysis Method ◽  
Political Factors ◽  
The Public ◽  
The Social ◽  
The Welfare State

The Public Expenditure/GDP ratio is one of the most significant metrics that measure the state's share of the economy. It can be said that there is an interventionist state type in countries where this rate is high, or it can be argued that the share of the public sector in the economy is low in countries where this rate is low. It is also possible to argue that the countries' economic, sociological, and political factors play an essential role in determining this ratio. Regulations, which are the most important tools of the welfare state, may arise through economic controls as well as through social policies. This study aims to find an answer to the question of whether this situation is possible for a developing country such as Turkey while Nordic countries, which determine a system different from other welfare models, succeed in raising social welfare without giving up the principles such as equality and justice that they have despite the globalization effect. The data obtained by various methods were subjected to comparison using the Data Envelopment Analysis method in order to achieve this purpose. <p> </p><p><strong> Article visualizations:</strong></p><p><img src="/-counters-/edu_01/0777/a.php" alt="Hit counter" /></p>

The Beveridge Report and the Implementation of the Welfare State

2018 ◽  
pp. 260-285
Author(s):  
George R. Boyer
Keyword(s):  
National Health Service ◽  
Health Service ◽  
Welfare State ◽  
Social Welfare ◽  
Universal Coverage ◽  
Social Welfare Policy ◽  
Economic Insecurity ◽  
The Public ◽  
Welfare Reforms ◽  
The Welfare State

This chapter explores the story of the 1942 Beveridge Report and the beginnings of the welfare state. The policies proposed by Beveridge and the 1945–48 legislation were logical extensions of government's expanding role in social welfare policy beginning with the Liberal Welfare Reforms. This does not mean that the importance of the postwar legislation should be downplayed. Because of the adoption of the National Health Service, universal coverage, and equality of treatment, Britain after 1948 deserves to be called a welfare state, while Edwardian and interwar Britain do not. Unfortunately, despite the enthusiasm with which the public greeted the welfare state, the postwar policies did not eliminate economic insecurity.

Public Nightmares and Communitarian Dreams: The Crisis of the Social in Social Welfare

1997 ◽  
Vol 44 (1_suppl) ◽  
pp. 66-91
Author(s):  
John Clarke
Keyword(s):  
Welfare State ◽  
Social Welfare ◽  
Public Realm ◽  
Social Democratic ◽  
The Public ◽  
The Social ◽  
Crisis Of Representation ◽  
Break Up ◽  
The Welfare State

This chapter examines the break-up of the welfare state as a process that involved a crisis of representation. In particular, social democratic images of the public and their embodiment in the organizational regimes of welfare bureau-professionalism were dislocated by the New Right's attack on the welfare state. The chapter argues that the attempt to reinvent the public's relationship to social welfare through the couplet of managerialism and consumerism created an impoverished conception of the public realm. Communitarianism has been presented as a response to this impoverishment. However, both lessons from history and the contemporary inflections of community suggest that communitarianism needs to be seen as an attempt to resolve the ‘crisis of the social’ in social welfare in regressive directions.

The Rise of Block-Granting as a Tool of Conservative Statecraft

The Forum ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 18 (2) ◽  
pp. 223-247
Author(s):  
Ryan LaRochelle
Keyword(s):  
Welfare State ◽  
Social Welfare ◽  
Ronald Reagan ◽  
Safety Net ◽  
Block Grant ◽  
Welfare Programs ◽  
Block Grants ◽  
Social Welfare Programs ◽  
Political Weapon ◽  
The Welfare State

AbstractThis article sheds new light on how conservatism has affected American state development by tracing the history of how block-granting transformed from a bipartisan tool to solve problems of public administration in the 1940s into a mechanism to roll back and decentralize the welfare state that had reached its zenith in the 1960s. By the early 1980s, conservative policymakers had coopted the previously bipartisan tool in their efforts to chip away at the increasingly centralized social welfare system that emerged out of the Great Society. In the early 1980s, Ronald Reagan successfully converted numerous categorical grants into a series of block grants, slashing funding for several social safety net programs. Block-granting allows conservative opponents of the postwar welfare state to gradually erode funding and grant more authority to state governments, thus using federalism as a more palatable political weapon to reduce social welfare spending than the full dismantlement of social programs. However, despite a flurry of successes in the early 1980s, block-granting has not proven as successful as conservatives might have hoped, and recent efforts to convert programs such as Medicaid and parts of the Affordable Care Act into block grants have failed. The failure of recent failed block grant efforts highlights the resilience of liberal reforms, even in the face of sustained conservative opposition. However, conservatives still draw upon the tool today in their efforts to erode and retrench social welfare programs. Block-granting has thus transformed from a bipartisan tool to improve bureaucratic effectiveness into a perennial weapon in conservatives’ war on the welfare state.

Public and Private Social Welfare

2021 ◽  
pp. 152-172
Author(s):  
Willem Adema ◽  
Peter Whiteford
Keyword(s):  
Welfare State ◽  
Social Welfare ◽  
Public Spending ◽  
Social Expenditure ◽  
Public And Private ◽  
Incorrect Measurement ◽  
Definition Of ◽  
Distributional Impact ◽  
The Impact ◽  
The Welfare State

This chapter contributes to the discussion of public and private social welfare by drawing together recent information on these different ways of providing social benefits. It presents data on public social expenditure for 2015–17 and accounts for the impact of the tax system and private social expenditure to develop indicators on net social expenditure for 2015. The chapter shows that conventional estimates of gross public spending differ significantly from estimates of net public spending and net total social expenditure, leading to an incorrect measurement and ranking of total social welfare effort across countries.Just as importantly, the fact that total social welfare support is incorrectly measured implies that the outcomes of welfare state support may also be incorrectly measured. Thus, the main objectives of the chapter include considering the implications of this more comprehensive definition of welfare state effort for analysis of the distributional impact of the welfare state and for an assessment of the efficiency and incentive effects of different welfare state arrangements.

Ripples from the First Wave: The Monarchical Origins of the Welfare State

2015 ◽  
Vol 13 (4) ◽  
pp. 992-1016 ◽  
Author(s):  
Eileen McDonagh
Keyword(s):  
Welfare State ◽  
Max Weber ◽  
Care Work ◽  
Public Provision ◽  
The Public ◽  
Goods And Services ◽  
Parental Roles ◽  
The People ◽  
The Family ◽  
The Welfare State

Before the welfare state, people were protected from disabilities resulting from illness, old age, and other infirmities by care work provided within the family. When the state assumes responsibility for care-work tasks, in effect it assumes parental roles, thereby becoming a form offamilial governmentin which the public provision of goods and services is analogous to care work provided in the family. My research pushes back the origins of the state’s obligation to care for people to a preindustrial form of government, hereditary monarchies—what Max Weber termed patrimonialism. It explicates how monarchs were cast as the parents of the people, thereby constituting kingship as a care work regime that assigned to political rulers parental responsibility for the welfare of the people. Using historical and quantitative analysis, I establish that retaining the legitimacy of monarchies as the first form of familial government in the course of Western European democratizing makes it more credible to the public and to political elites to accept the welfare state as the second form of familial government. That, in turn, promotes a more robust public sector supportive of social provision. The results reformulate conceptions of the contemporary welfare state and its developmental legacies.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document