Search results

AbstractThis paper theorises and empirically assesses how education and active labour market policy (ALMP) relate to each other in shaping individuals' employment chances in Europe. It provides a theoretical base for assessing policy complementarities building on sociological skill‐formation literature, varieties of capitalism and social investment literature. Two hypotheses of complementarity are advanced: reinforcement whereby higher investment in general skills via education boosts ALMP effectiveness; and substitution‐compensation whereby investments in either policy suffice, rendering individual employment chances less dependent on ALMPs at higher (prior) educational investment levels. The advanced theoretical propositions are empirically tested by looking at how individual employment chances are affected by national ALMP efforts conditional on workforce education, distinguishing between individual‐ and national‐level educational attainment. Analyses draw on micro‐level EU‐SILC longitudinal data 2003–2015 from 29 European countries and 285 country‐years applying mixed‐effects dynamic panel regression models. Results highlight the complementarity of education in the functioning of ALMPs and show that the education‐ALMP interplay follows different dynamics when individual or national education are considered, with substitution‐compensation for the former and reinforcement for the latter. Higher individual educational attainment is associated with lower marginal returns from national ALMP efforts, with higher ALMP effectiveness among the lower‐educated. By contrast, higher national educational attainment is associated with increased ALMP effectiveness, with ALMPs tending to be far less effective at low levels of highly educated workforce. Different interaction patterns are observed for youth, indicating increased difficulty in activating this risk group.

Social policy research is truly interdisciplinary with academics from very different theoretical perspectives working together in fervent open-mindedness towards diverse methodological approaches. The exploration of social investment (SI) welfare provision is a clear example of this spirit of interdisciplinary engagement, having stirred up critical scholarly reception and debate over the past decade. On the one hand, some colleagues underscore the potential of SI policies to improve life chances. On the other hand, some researchers voice concerns about perverse unintended consequences of SI. The most worrying scholarly critique of SI is the conjecture that SI policies reinforce rather than alleviate inequality and poverty, because of the operation of so-called Matthew effects (MEs). Parolin and Van Lancker's commentary on our article 'The social investment litmus test: family formation, employment and poverty' falls within the purview of the ME critique, with some extension to other shortcomings discussed in the literature. These criticisms certainly deserve engagement, and we are grateful to the editorial board of the Journal of European Social Policy for inviting us to do so fully. In our commentary, we commence with the multidimensionality of 21st-century welfare state provision. Subsequently, we turn to the welfare state's carrying capacity, which we maintain needs to be taken into consideration for leveraging positive feedback mechanisms between the micro and the macro level of welfare provision. By so doing, we elaborate on the implications of our research approach for understanding MEs, with insights as to how they are exacerbated or mitigated through policy (in-)complementarities. We then discuss the importance of considering synergies between policies for an improved understanding of SI returns and possible source(s) of MEs. Finally, we turn to the misconception that capacitating SI policies and compensatory consumption-smoothing and poverty alleviation are somehow in competition with each other, and discuss the normative orientation underlying SI welfare provision.

Over the past decade, the notion of 'social investment' (SI) has gained considerable traction in the political debates over welfare state futures. The multifaceted character of SI policy interventions, the effects of policy complementarities and interactions for different social groups and generational cohorts, and the challenge of delineating effects across different time dimensions, we argue, are not (yet) properly addressed by current empirical research. This paper contributes to reorienting the measurement of SI returns into a longer-term perspective, conceptualising them as people's work- and welfare- related outcomes. It operationalises in a novel fashion macro-level data across OECD countries to analyse the medium-term aggregate effects of SI stock, flow and buffer policies with a focus on arguably the most critical stages in the post-industrial life-cycle course: transition into employment and family formation. Our findings imply that the so-called 'Matthew effects', following the biblical proverb 'to him that hath shall be given', identified in previous research stem from a measurement of SI returns conceptualised in a short-term redistributive perspective. Moving on to longer-term returns to SI policies at the societal level reveals positive outcomes for families with children.

First published online 12 September 2020 ; Over the past decade, the notion of 'social investment' (SI) has gained considerable traction in the political debates over welfare state futures. The multifaceted character of SI policy interventions, the effects of policy complementarities and interactions for different social groups and generational cohorts, and the challenge of delineating effects across different time dimensions, we argue, are not (yet) properly addressed by current empirical research. This paper contributes to reorienting the measurement of SI returns into a longer-term perspective, conceptualising them as people's work- and welfare- related outcomes. It operationalises in a novel fashion macro-level data across OECD countries to analyse the medium-term aggregate effects of SI stock, flow and buffer policies with a focus on arguably the most critical stages in the post-industrial life-cycle course: transition into employment and family formation. Our findings imply that the so-called 'Matthew effects', following the biblical proverb 'to him that hath shall be given', identified in previous research stem from a measurement of SI returns conceptualised in a short-term redistributive perspective. Moving on to longer-term returns to SI policies at the societal level reveals positive outcomes for families with children.

AbstractWelfare provision is often conceived through the lens of decommodification and analysed in (re)distributive terms. This article argues that a distributive approach does not sufficiently capture the complexity of 21st century welfare state dynamics. It proposes re-conceptualizing provision as a mix of three policy functions: raising and maintaining human capital stock; easing the flow of gendered life-course and labour-market transitions; guaranteeing social safety-net buffers. This analytical perspective allows theorizing life-course multiplier effects and policy (non-)complementarities, both at the level of individual objective and subjective well-being and in terms of aggregate employment, poverty and fiscal sustainability. This perspective also enables us to extend the temporal horizon of welfare politics beyond short-term electoral logics for explaining welfare reform. The article underscores how methodological pluralism remains key for understanding contemporary welfare states, and for grasping welfare outcomes and institutional change in a research endeavour that involves both generalization and contextualization.

EPDF and EPUB available Open Access under CC-BY-NC licence. It is critical that the wellbeing of society is systematically tracked by indicators that not only give an accurate picture of human life today but also provide a window into the future for all of us. This book presents impactful findings from international longitudinal studies that respond to the United Nations' Agenda 2030 commitment to "leave no-one behind". Contributors explore a wide range and complexity of pressing global issues, with emphasis given to excluded and vulnerable populations and gender inequality. Importantly, it sets out actionable strategies for policymakers and practitioners to help strengthen the global Sustainable Development Goals framework, accelerate their implementation and improve the construction of effective public policy