Suchergebnisse

One. Analysing social policies -- Two. What is a 'social problem'? The social construction of welfare -- Three. Who benefits from welfare? The social division of welfare -- Four. Who is a member of society? Social inclusion and exclusion -- Five. How does inequality persist? Social closure -- Six. Why are people so mistaken about welfare? Myth -- Conclusion: What is the point of social policy?

Successive UK governments have sought to increase financial inclusion by investing in credit unions. However, responses within the British credit union movement to the government's latest modernisation and expansion proposals reveal a conflict over perceptions of the purpose of credit unions between those who regard them as a means to provide financial services to low income communities, and those who regard them as self-help organisations offering an alternative to mainstream financial services which should remain independent from government initiatives. While this division is not new, it highlights potential limitations to the viability of achieving social inclusion through voluntary mutualism.

Purpose
– The article aims to discuss findings from a knowledge exchange review of financial inclusion in Britain and compare these to key features of financial exclusion evident from European analyses.


Design/methodology/approach
– This paper is based on an innovative knowledge exchange project. Rapid research reviews analysed evidence on financial exclusion in Britain in relation to access to banking services; to credit; to household insurance; personal savings and assets; money advice provision; and financial capability. The findings from these reviews were discussed by stakeholders representing the private, government, community and civil society sectors in a series of evidence review forums. The results of these discussions were summarised and reconsidered at a national knowledge exchange conference. Throughout the project, stakeholders exchange opinions about the state of financial exclusion knowledge through an online discussion forum.


Findings
– The research identified agreement among British stakeholders over several aspects of financial exclusion, in particular continuing problems of access to mainstream banking services for low income customers and a lack of appropriate and affordable credit provision. Areas of controversy included whether banks denied services to lower income customers or were withdrawing from deprived communities, and the necessity for further regulation of mainstream financial services.


Originality/value
– Comparing these findings to research from other European countries raises questions about how financial inclusion should be defined, and whether existing indicators capture this adequately across contrasting social, institutional and regulatory contexts. The research raises challenges for policy transfer between countries.

Community Planning Partnerships (CPPs) are a central feature of a programme of local government modernization and public service reform in Scotland. CPPs are intended to ensure that local authorities, other local public agencies, the voluntary, community and private sectors develop a shared vision for their area and work in partnership to implement this. CPPs therefore have much in common with similar initiatives in other parts of the UK, such as communities strategies, Local Strategic Partnerships, and proposals contained in the 2007 Local Government and Public Involvement in Health Bill in England. This article discusses how the development of CPPs relates to devolution in Scotland. It identifies systemic dilemmas, if not contradictions, encountered in implementing community planning in Scotland. Tensions exist reconciling partnership working with local authority leadership; between community planning as an additional or core duty of public agencies; between community engagement and the practical demands of policy making; and between central government direction and local partnership autonomy.

Intro -- SOCIAL INNOVATION AND SOCIAL POLICY -- Contents -- Preface -- 1. Introducing social innovation -- The promise of social innovation -- Entrepreneurship and innovation -- Defining social innovation -- Principal characteristics of social innovation -- Social innovation and social enterprise -- Public sector innovation and intrepreneurialism -- Conclusions -- 2. Social innovation and social policy -- Introduction -- Theorising and thinking about social innovation -- Normative social innovation questions -- Analytic social innovation questions -- Substantive social innovation questions -- Limitations to social innovation -- Social innovation and social movements -- Contesting social innovation -- Conclusions -- 3. Social innovation and food poverty -- Introduction -- Food insecurity, surplus and waste -- Social innovation through organisational innovation -- Inter-sectoral and organisational partnerships -- Interpersonal innovation: valuing people -- Social innovation and policy impact -- Conclusions -- 4. Social innovation and care provision -- Supporting lone parents and families with children -- Integrating migrants -- Supporting independent and mutual living -- Conclusion -- 5. Social innovation and employment -- Introduction -- Labour market and employment contexts of social innovation -- Social innovation and employment -- Social innovation in corporatist, pluralist and state-centred policy contexts -- Comparing and contrasting employment social innovations -- Conclusion -- 6. Conclusion -- The operation and impact of social innovation -- Social innovation and the future of social and public policy -- References -- Index

This themed section discusses the conceptual development and related empirical applications of social innovation (SI), a concept acquiring a prominent position in both academia and the world of policy. When SI started being used in the early 1990s relatively few social scientists were familiar with it, mainly those interested in urban policy. Less than two decades later, not only is SI at the heart of the largest public research funding programme in Europe (Horizon 2020), it is also constantly referred to in the discourses of senior level policy makers on both sides of the Atlantic.

Social innovation (SI) is an increasingly prominent but contested issue in discussions of social policy reform. Although not yet a familiar concept, nor widely understood (least of all by policy makers), it has entered mainstream policy discourses. However whether SI marks a significant departure in either theory or in practice, or merely in rhetoric, remains to be determined. This Review Article, and the Themed Section as a whole, aims to set out some of the questions social policy analysts should ask about SI, and to help clarify whether or not it is a significant development which merits attention. The Review begins by considering some of the reasons for the recent interest shown in SI before clarifying the meaning of the concept and outlining some of the different forms SI has taken. This discussion is followed by a consideration of some of the practical and theoretical questions which SI raises for social policy analysis. The Review concludes that social policy analysts cannot afford to ignore SI, but that the most effective contribution the discipline can make is to apply a critical empirical perspective to test the significance, value and impact of SI.