Suchergebnisse

This article analyses three specific categories of the poor – immigrants, families with children and the retired – and compares the perceptions gained from this analysis to generic attributions of the causes of poverty. It examines whether different explanations can be attributed to certain socio-economic characteristics and political ideologies. The data derive from a survey conducted in Finland in 2008. The results indicate that the public shares distinctive causal beliefs when it comes to the different categories of the poor. When moving from the retired to families with children and to immigrants, support for explanations that blame the individual increases and support for explanations that blame structural conditions decreases. In addition, when the poor are divided into specific categories the dominant three-tier typology of poverty explanations does not seem to hold. Instead, the public is more likely to distinguish between internal and external reasons for non-generic poverty. The results suggest that the hypotheses of in-group favouritism and self-interest are supported. In addition, political ideology is strongly associated with attributions for poverty.

This article compares attributions for poverty among public and social security officials in Finland. The main question is: how similar or dissimilar are the perceptions of social security officials and citizens regarding the reasons for poverty? The article explores whether attributions for poverty vary between different categories of the poor - immigrants, families with children and retirees. The data derive from two e-mail surveys conducted in Finland in 2008. The results are as follows: first, there are significant differences between the public and social security officials. The public is more likely than the social security officials to attribute individual behaviour or society as causes of poverty. Second, the class affiliation of social security officials cannot explain their distinctive attributions, and thus it is suggested that their profession and professional values explain their perceptions of the causes of poverty. Third, both groups share distinctive causal beliefs when it comes to the different categories of the poor.

This article analyses three specific categories of the poor – immigrants, families with children and the retired – and compares the perceptions gained from this analysis to generic attributions of the causes of poverty. It examines whether different explanations can be attributed to certain socio-economic characteristics and political ideologies. The data derive from a survey conducted in Finland in 2008. The results indicate that the public shares distinctive causal beliefs when it comes to the different categories of the poor. When moving from the retired to families with children and to immigrants, support for explanations that blame the individual increases and support for explanations that blame structural conditions decreases. In addition, when the poor are divided into specific categories the dominant three-tier typology of poverty explanations does not seem to hold. Instead, the public is more likely to distinguish between internal and external reasons for non-generic poverty. The results suggest that the hypotheses of in-group favouritism and self-interest are supported. In addition, political ideology is strongly associated with attributions for poverty.

This article explores institutional change and the role of ideas in Finnish public sector reform from the late 1970s to 2007. The main purpose of the study is to explore the ideas advanced in favour of legislative reforms – what have been the objectives behind them and to what extent have the objectives and arguments changed. The analysis illustrates that there have been ideational changes behind the public sector reforms and that they have served as policy blueprints, ideological weapons and cognitive locks. The article shows that ideas are an important locus of policy development and a source of institutional change.

In the universalistic Nordic welfare states, targeted anti-poverty policies have not been considered as specific aims of social policy. The situation has, however, altered in Finland and there is now a new element in Finnish social policy that can be called 'anti-poverty policy'. This article explores when, how and why the policy paradigm relating to poverty changed in Finland. It includes an empirical analysis of the documents produced by key actors. Analyses show that the basic idea behind the policy prescriptions for alleviating poverty in Finland has changed from the idea of universalism to the idea of selectivism. The results emphasise that the Church, non-governmental organisations, the European Union's Lisbon agenda as well as an active opposition politics had an important agenda-setting role behind the ideational turn from universalism to the idea of selectivism.

AbstractThe apparent decline of partisan effects on social policies since the 1980s has encouraged the development of theories that challenge the traditional partisan politics theory. Although the new politics approach pointed to institutional path‐dependence and to the unpopularity of radical retrenchment, recent research has highlighted shifts in electoral landscapes, differences in party systems and institutional contexts, and changing party‐voter linkages. This in‐depth case study contributes to debates on partisan effects by focusing on Finland, whose dualistic unemployment benefit system and institutional and political conditions provide an interesting case to analyse changing partisan effects. The aim is to explain, through qualitative policy analysis, why government partisanship has not had a significant effect on unemployment benefit levels since 1985. The explanations are different for earnings‐related and flat‐rate benefits. For the former, retrenchment efforts have seen a distinct partisan divide, but trade unions have thwarted most cutbacks; thus, although partisanship has not mattered much for policy outcomes, power resources have remained important as inhibitor of cuts. For the latter, parties that in the late 1980s still had differing priorities have since converged on policies emphasizing activation and work incentives. Universal flat‐rate benefits have lacked political support and have been left to stagnate. The study suggests that one single theory is not sufficient to explain developments even in one single welfare policy—there are too many aspects to cover—not to speak of the entire welfare state consisting of an array of different schemes.

The focus of this study is to investigate whether there are links between social mobility and poverty from the viewpoint of the intergenerational transmission of poverty. The context for the study is the economic crisis of the early 1990s in Finland. The study seeks answers to questions such as whether there were changes in the intergenerational transmission of poverty during the first half of the 1990s and whether the intergenerational transmission of poverty is different among men and women. In addition, the study seeks to determine whether the intergenerational transmission of poverty is different among those coming from poor and non-poor family backgrounds in the period 1990 – 1995. The data are derived from the 1970–1995 Longitudinal Census Data File of Statistics Finland. The panel, gathered every fifth year, is a register-based dataset, containing information on around 700 000 Finns. The 1960 birth cohort, who were 10 years old in 1970, and consequently 30 years old in 1990, was selected as the basis for the analysis. The results of the study indicate that poverty shows clear signs of intergenerational transmission in Finland: those coming from a poor family background have around twice as high a risk of poverty in young adulthood compared to those from a non-poor family background. However, the transmission of poverty did not change during the depression: those coming from a poor family background had the same risk of poverty before and after the depression. In addition, intergenerational transmission of poverty was quite similar among men and women.

A growing field of discursive institutionalism has argued for the importance of ideas and discourse in policy changes. The aim of the study is to analyse framing effects empirically by examining how, and to what extent, competing frames can shape public opinion on the implementation of a specific policy change. The case study focuses on the administration of social assistance in Finland. Results indicate that the framing of ideas shapes public opinion. Analyses show that some types of frames are more effective than others. To be successful, a politician must simplify the issue and appeal to moral sentiments rather than present too many difficult 'factual' viewpoints. Our study also emphasizes that even frames that succeed in shaping popular opinion may fail if powerful political actors oppose reform. Therefore, we argue that the interplay between the 'old' power resource approach and the 'new' ideational approach should be taken into account when explaining institutional changes.

The study analysed views on poverty among Finnish frontline workers in three welfare sector institutions. Two different institutional logics, universal and selective, and two sectors, the public and the voluntary, were represented. A nationwide survey among social security officials, municipal social workers and diaconal workers was utilised (N = 2,124). The methods applied included factor analysis, the examination of means and multivariate analysis of variance. Frontline workers were found to support structural reasons for poverty regardless of institutional affiliation. Analyses, however, also revealed significant differences between the institutions, but not of the kind expected. Social security officials, working in a universal institution, were less likely to endorse structural factors and more likely to endorse individualistic poverty explanations than were social and diaconal workers. Type of education and personal political ideology, respectively, were also found to be of significant importance for poverty perceptions, independent of institutional logic.