Advertisement

Social Policy Development in the International Context—Social Investment or a New Social Treatise?

  • Peter HerrmannEmail author
Chapter
  • 35 Downloads
Part of the Prekarisierung und soziale Entkopplung – transdisziplinäre Studien book series (PSETS)

Abstract

For the good or for the bad, social policy as we know or understand it today is very much a child of modern times, set up as cure against the illness of the system and also understood as move beyond its remits. Currently we find frequent debates on varieties of capitalism and pronouncedly since the early 1990s about different welfare regime. However only few considerations on the latter are put forward as genuinely reflecting differences as matter of different capitalisms though the latter is only vaguely approaching the topic, looking for complementarities instead of genuine integrity of the two.

References

  1. Albert, M. (1991). Capitalisme contre Capitalisme. Paris: Editions du Seuil.Google Scholar
  2. Bouget, D., et al. (2015). Social investment in Europe. A study of national policies 2015; Brussels: European Commission. Directorate-General for Employment, Social Affairs and Inclusion Directorate D, Europe 2020: Social Policies. Unit D.3, Social Protection and Activation Systems. http://ec.europa.eu/social/BlobServlet?docId=13805&langId=en. Accessed 10 July 2015.
  3. Boyer, R., & Saillard, Y. (Eds.). (2002). Régulation theory. The state of the art. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  4. Boyer, J., et al. (2004). Large-scale exploration of growth inhibition caused by overexpression of genomic fragments in Saccharomyces cerevisiae. Genome Biol, 5(9), 72.Google Scholar
  5. Buhr, D., & Frankenberger, R. (2014). Spielarten des inkorporierten Kapitalismus. In A. Nölke, C. May, & S. Claar (eds.), Die großen Schwellenländer. Ursachen und Folgen ihres Aufstiegs in der Weltwirtschaft (pp. 61–84). Wiesbaden: Springer VS.Google Scholar
  6. Drekonja-Kornat, G. (2005). Brasilien: Boom der Ungleichheit. Blätter der Deutschen und Internationalen Politik, 2, 407–409.Google Scholar
  7. Esping-Andersen, G. (1990). The three worlds of welfare capitalism. Cambridge: Polity Press.Google Scholar
  8. Esping-Andersen, G. (1999). Social foundations of postindustrial economies. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. European Commission. (2013). Towards social investment for growth and cohesion—Including implementing the European social fund 2014–2020; Brussels COM 2013.83 fin. ec.europa.eu/social/BlobServlet?docId=9761&langId=en. Accessed 18 April 2017.
  10. European Commission. (2015). A digital single market strategy for Europe; Communication; Brussels, Mai 6th; COM(2015) 192 final. http://ec.europa.eu/priorities/digital-single-market/docs/dsm-communication_en.pdf. Accessed 16 April 2017.
  11. European Commission, without date: College. (2014–2019). The Commissioners. The European Commission’s political leadership. http://ec.europa.eu/commission/2014-2019_en. Accessed 16 April 2017.
  12. European Social Policy Network. (2015). Social investment in Europe A study of national policies. Synthesis Report (Annexes). http://ec.europa.eu/social/BlobServlet?docId=13806&langId=en. Accessed 11 April 2017.
  13. Fouarge, D. (2003). Costs of non-social policy: Towards an economic framework of quality social policies and the costs of not having them. European commission. DG of employment and social affairs. http://www.ucc.ie/social_policy/EU-docs-socpol/Fouarge_costofnonsoc_final_en.pdf. Accessed 16 April 2017.
  14. Glyn, A., & Miliband, D. (Eds.). (1994). Paying for inequality: The economic cost of social injustice. London: Rivers Oram Press.Google Scholar
  15. Government UK. (ongoing). Policy. Social investment. https://www.gov.uk/government/policies/social-investment. Accessed 11 July 2015.
  16. Hall, P. A., & Soskice, D. (Eds.). (2001/2010). Varieties of capitalism. The institutional foundations of comparative advantage. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  17. Haug, F. (1997). Empirie/Theorie. In W. F. Haug, F. Haug, P. Jehle, & W. Küttler (Eds.), Historisch-Kritisches Wörterbuch Marxismus (Vol. 3, pp. 297–322). Berlin: Argument Verlag.Google Scholar
  18. Heimann, E. (1929/1980). Soziale Theorie des Kapitalismus. Theorie der Sozialpolitik. Suhrkamp: Frankfurt a. M.Google Scholar
  19. Hemerijck, A. (2011). 21st century welfare provision is more than the ‘social insurance state’: A reply to Paul Pierson. ZeS-Arbeitspapier 03/2011. https://www.econstor.eu/handle/10419/52138. Accessed 16 April 2017.
  20. Hemerijck, A. (2012). When changing welfare states and the eurocrisis meet. Sociologica, 6(1), 1–49.  https://doi.org/10.2383/36887.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Herrmann, P. (2011). The end of social services? Economisation and managerialism. Bremen: Europäischer Hochschulverlag.Google Scholar
  22. ILO. (2012). The strategy of the international labour organization. Social security for all: Building social protection floors and comprehensive social security systems; Geneva: International Labour Office, Social Security Department. http://www.ilo.org/wcmsp5/groups/public/—ed_protect/—soc_sec/documents/publication/wcms_secsoc_34188.pdf. Accessed 30 June 2015.
  23. Jessop, B. (2000). From the KMNS to the SWPR. In G. Lewis, S. Gewirtz und J. Clarke (eds.), Rethinking social policy (pp. 171–184). London: Sage.Google Scholar
  24. Kannankulam, J., & Georgi, F. (2014). Varieties of capitalism or varieties of relationships of forces? Outlines of a historical materialist policy analysis. Capital & Class, 38(1), 1–13.  https://doi.org/10.1177/0309816813513088.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Kondratiev, N. D. (1926/1998). Long cycles of economic conjunture. In N. D. Kondratiev (eds.), The Works of Nicolai D. Kondratiev. Volume 1: Economic Statics, Dynamics and Conjuncture (pp. 25–63). London: Pickering & Chatto.Google Scholar
  26. Kowalsky, W. (2015). The European digital agenda: Unambitious and too narrow. Social Europe, 6 July 2015. http://www.socialeurope.eu/2015/07/european-digital-agenda-unambitious-narrow. Accessed 12 July 15.
  27. Lin, K., & Chan, R. K. (2013). Repositioning three models of social policy with reference to East Asian welfare systems. International Social Work.  https://doi.org/10.1177/0020872813503857.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Lipietz, A. (1986). New tendencies in the international division of labor: Regimes of accumulation and modes of regulation. In A. J. Scott & M. Storper (Eds.), Production, work, erritory: The geographical anatomy of industrial capitalism (pp. 16–40). Boston: Allen & Unwin.Google Scholar
  29. Mandeville, B. (1705). The fable of the bees. http://www.iep.utm.edu/mandevil/#H2. Accessed 16. April 2017.
  30. Mandl, I., Curtarelli, M., Riso, S., Vargas, O., & Gerogiannis, E. (2015). New forms of employment. Luxembourg: Eurofound, Publications Office of the European Union, Luxembourg.Google Scholar
  31. OECD. (2015a). All on Board. Making inclusive growth happen.  https://doi.org/10.1787/9789264218512-en.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. OECD. (2015b). The future of productivity (p. 34). Paris: OECD. http://www.oecd.org/eco/growth/OECD-2015-The-future-of-productivity-book.pdf. Accessed 10 July 2015.
  33. OECD. (n. d. a). Better life initiative. Executive summary. http://www.oecdbetterlifeindex.org/media/bli/documents/BLI%20exec%20summary%20updated%202015-final.pdf. Accessed 10 July 2015.
  34. OECD. (n. d. b.). Relaunch productivity to boost growth and well-being. http://www.oecd.org/economy/relaunch-productivity-to-boost-growth-and-well-being.htm. Accessed 10 July 2015.
  35. OHCHR (Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights). (2013). Report on austerity measures and economic, social and cultural rights, presented to ECOSOC, Substantive Session of 2013, Geneva, 1–26 July, E/2013/82; Geneva. http://www.ohchr.org/Documents/Issues/Development/RightsCrisis/E-2013-82_en.pdf. Accessed 30 June 2015.
  36. Ostrom, E. (2005). Understanding institutional diversity. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
  37. Ostrom, E. (2010). Beyond markets and states: Polycentric governance of complex economic systems. The American Economic Review 100(3), 641–672. http://www.jstor.org/stable/27871226. 23.06.2015. Accessed 16 April 2017.
  38. Pearson, M., & Scherer, P. (1997). Balancing security and and sustainability in social policy. The OECD Observer, 205, 6–9.Google Scholar
  39. Pierson, C., Castles, F. G., & Naumann, I. K. (Eds.). (2014). The welfare state reader. Cambridge: Polity Press.Google Scholar
  40. Pierson, P. (2001). The new politics of the welfare state. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Piketty, T. (2013/2014). Capital in the twenty-first century. Cambridge: Belknap Press.Google Scholar
  42. Polanyi, K. (1944/1957). The great transformation. The political and economic origins of our time. Boston: Beacon Press.Google Scholar
  43. Schroeder, M. (2008). Integrating welfare and production typologies: How refinements of the varieties of capitalism approach call for a combination of welfare typologies. Journal of Social Policy, 38(1), 19–43.  https://doi.org/10.1017/S0047279408002535.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Streeck, W. (2010). E Pluribus Unum? Varieties and commonalities of capitalism. MPIfG Discussion Paper 10/12. Köln: MPIfG.Google Scholar
  45. Titmuss, R. (1958). Essays on the welfare state. London: George Allen & Unwin.Google Scholar
  46. Titmuss, R. (1974). Social policy. An introduction. Routledge: London.Google Scholar
  47. Todd, E. (1990/1996). L’invention de l’Europe. Paris: Éditions du Seuil.Google Scholar
  48. Tohyama, H. (2015). Varieties of Asian welfare capitalisms and the influence of globalization. Journal of International and Comparative Social Policy, 31(1), 51–73.  https://doi.org/10.1080/21699763.2014.982154.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. van der Maesen, L. J. G., & Walker, A. (2012). Social quality and sustainability. In L. J. G. van der Maesen & A. Walker (Eds.), Social quality: From theory to indicators (pp. 250–274). Basingstoke: Macmillan.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Vandenbroucke, F., Hemerijck, A., & Palier, B. (2011). The EU Needs a Social Investment Pact. OSE Paper Series, Opinion paper No. 5, May 2011. Brussels: Ose.Google Scholar
  51. Wilensky, H. L., & Lebeaux, C. N. (1965). Industrial society and social welfare. New York: The Free Press.Google Scholar
  52. Wilkinson, R. G., & Picket, K. (2009). The spirit level: Why greater equality makes societies stronger. London: Bloomsbury Press.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Fachmedien Wiesbaden GmbH, part of Springer Nature 2020

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Human Rights Centre at the Law SchoolCentral South UniversityChangshaChina

Personalised recommendations