Suchergebnisse

PurposeThe so‐called individual action plan (IAP) has become a major policy instrument in providing active welfare for social benefit claimants, and as such it has attracted quite a research interest. The purpose of this paper is to maintain that research hitherto has been founded in a too narrow notion of the IAP, arguing instead that IAP represents a new societal rationality, in relation to which the scope of research questions should be broadened.Design/methodology/approachThe paper explores the basic dynamics and internal features of the IAP dialogue theoretically and ideal typically. It is furthermore argued that IAP‐like arrangements have extended far beyond the domain of social policy; IAP‐like dialogues are practiced in all corners of society in the form of HRM conversations, supervision, coaching etc. Relating to Foucault it is therefore argued that IAP represents a new dispositif.FindingsThe paper states that the emerging dispositif demands that the individual constitutes herself as a creative and self‐expressive subject in dynamic dialogue. Accordingly the microphysics of the interaction change for the clientele as well as for the case worker. Purpose and procedures turn singular, which undermines collective endeavours and general criteria for success in social policy.Originality/valueThe paper employs a theoretical and sociological perspective on the IAP as a new technology in the organisation of social policy, and its contribution lies in its displacement of the perspective on IAP and its consequences on research questions.

From 1989 to 1991 we studied the relationship between legal regulation and decisions about acceptable risk at off‐shore installations in the North Sea. The study focused on the interaction between authorities and private actors, when they develop subsidiary rules, discuss projects, and execute audits. This article discusses the case of regulation within the framework of communicative systems theory; the problem is how to couple differentiated, closed functional systems (e.g., law and economy). Applying empirical data we attempt to create a more complex understanding of the communicative processes, on the basis of which we can elaborate upon the coupling between systems, and the potential effects of law. The point of the article is that the coupling itself may develop into a new independent system (the discursive system). If this is correct and fairly generalizable, legal regulation contributes to the differentiation of society into closed systems. At the practical level the differentiation will have consequences for both regulation and democracy.

Durant la période 1989-1991, nous avons étudié la relation entre régulation juridique et décisions relatives au risque admissible dans des installations offshore de la Mer du Nord. L'étude a été centrée sur l'interaction entre autorités et acteurs privés lors du développement de règles subsidiaires, de la discussion de projets et de l'exécution d'audits. Cet article comporte une discussion du cas de régulation dans le cadre de la théorie des systèmes communicationnels, où le problème de régulation est de savoir comment coupler des systèmes fonctionnels fermés et différenciés (par exemple droit et économie). En nous appuyant sur des données empiriques, nous essayons de créer une compréhension plus complexe des processus communicationnels sur la base de laquelle il est possible d'élaborer le couplage entre systèmes et d'évaluer les effets potentiels du droit. La thèse soutenue dans l'article est que le couplage lui-même peut se développer en un système indépendant nouveau (le système discursif). Si cela est exact et vraiment généralisable, la régulation juridique contribue à la différenciation de la société en systèmes fermés. Au niveau pratique, la différenciation aura des conséquences aussi bien pour la régulation que pour la démocratie.

There have been major shifts in the framework of social policy and welfare across Europe. Adopting a multi-level, comparative and interdisciplinary approach, this book develops a critical analysis of policy change and welfare reform in Europe. The book applies a dynamic and change oriented perspective to shed light on policy changes that are often poorly understood in the welfare literature, and contributes to a further development of the theoretical and conceptual frameworks for understanding social change. Using citizenship as a focus, several dimensions of change are analysed simultaneously: changes in the discipline of social policy itself; the changing character of social problems; changes in social policy and citizenship; and the emergence of new forms of social integration. The book also speculates on how different dimensions of change are interlinked