List of abbreviations and acronyms

281 Pages·2014·4.68 MB·English

VU Research Portal
Building active welfare states: How policy shapes caseworker practice
Rice, D.A.
2015
document version
Publisher's PDF, also known as Version of record
Link to publication in VU Research Portal
citation for published version (APA)
Rice, D. A. (2015). Building active welfare states: How policy shapes caseworker practice. [PhD-Thesis -
Research and graduation internal, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam]. VU University Press.
General rights
Copyright and moral rights for the publications made accessible in the public portal are retained by the authors and/or other copyright owners
and it is a condition of accessing publications that users recognise and abide by the legal requirements associated with these rights.
• Users may download and print one copy of any publication from the public portal for the purpose of private study or research.
• You may not further distribute the material or use it for any profit-making activity or commercial gain
• You may freely distribute the URL identifying the publication in the public portal ?
Take down policy
If you believe that this document breaches copyright please contact us providing details, and we will remove access to the work immediately
and investigate your claim.
E-mail address:
[email protected]
Download date: 06. Feb. 2023
List of abbreviations and acronyms
AA Assistant Adviser
ALMP Active Labour Market Policy
COV Co-Variational Analysis
CPT Causal Process-Tracing
DA Disability Adviser
DWP Department for Work and Pensions
EEA European Economic Area
EU European Union
ESA Employment and Support Allowance
ESF European Social Fund
EVS European Values Study
FA Financial Assessor
GDP Gross Domestic Product
ILO International Labour Organization
JCP Jobcentre Plus
JSA Jobseeker’s Allowance
LAB Lov om aktiv beskæftigelsesindsats (Act on an Active Employment
Policy)
LAS Lov om aktiv socialpolitik (Act on an Active Social Policy)
NGO Non-Governmental Organization
NLP Neuro-Linguistic Programming
NPM New Public Management
NUTS Nomenclature of Units for Territorial Statistics
OECD Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development
PA Personal Adviser
PES Public Employment Service
PhD Philosophiae Doctor
SLB Street-Level Bureaucracy
SUWI Wet structuur uitvoeringsorganisatie werk en inkomen (Work and
Income Implementation Structure Act)
X | Listofabbreviationsandacronyms
UK United Kingdom
US United States
UWV Uitvoeringsinstituut Werknemersverzekeringen (Employee Insurances
Institute)
VNG Vereniging van Nederlandse Gemeenten (Association of Dutch
Municipalities)
WIJ Wet investeren in jongeren (Act Investing in Young People)
WIW Wet inschakeling werkzoekenden (Act on the Insertion of Jobseekers)
WSW Wet sociale werkvoorziening (Sheltered Employment Act)
WWB Wet werk en bijstand (Work and Social Assistance Act)
C H A P T E R 1
Introduction
As most PhD students will recognize, the greatest challenge in any PhD project
istheformulationofa‘good’researchquestion.WhenIstartedmyPhDtrajectory
atVUUniversityAmsterdamin2009,InaivelythoughtthatIcouldskipthispart
of the scientific process because I became part of a larger research project that
alreadyassignedaspecificsub-topictome.However,astimewentbyandIstarted
todelvedeeperintotheliteratureonactivelabourmarketpolicies(ALMPs),Ibegan
to realize that things would not be as easy as I had thought and that I had to
modifymyresearchtopicinordertofindagoodfit,asmycolleagueHiddeRinze
Koornstra would put it, between my own personality, curiosity and academic
interest, the limited timeframe available to me, the topics that promised to be of
interesttoawideracademicandpractitionercommunity,andtheformalagreements
made with our funding agency.
Insteadofbeginningthisintroductionbywayofpresentingmyresearchques-
tionasifithadalwaysbeensetinstoneorasifithadbeenborneexclusivelyfrom
theoretical considerations (two harmless lies that we academics have become all
too used to telling each other), I will introduce my research topic and question
byoutliningthebumpyroadthatleaduptoit.Beingareflectivepost-modernindi-
vidual, I realize that it may be risky to provide the readers of this work with a
manualtodetectingthe weakpointsinmyresearch designall the morequickly.
However,beingalsoanidealist,Itrustthathonestlyandopenlyoutliningmyinitial
strugglewithmyowntopicofresearchwillmakethisdissertationalessartificial
and more living document in the end, and the findings of my research more
weather-proof and robust.1
1 SeeAppendix1forsomeseriousandhumoroussupportformyapproachtoscientifichonesty.
2 | Chapter1
1.1 The rocky path towards a ‘good’ research question
The initial idea behind my research project was to study local networks among
publicandprivateactorsprovidingjobinsertionservicestounemployedcitizens
in three countries: the Netherlands, Denmark, and Great Britain. However, after
oneyearofreadingandthinkingaboutthevariouselementsofthistopic,Ireached
two conclusions that caused me to go in a different direction. Most importantly
perhaps,Irealizedthatthecaseselectionhasgraveimplicationsfortheanalytical
level on which one expects to find the answers to one’s scientific puzzle, as well
asforthemethodologiesonecanorcannotapplyinsolvingthatpuzzle.Toelabor-
ate,ifonedecidestostudyhybridactivationgovernancearrangementsacrossthree
countriesrepresentingdifferent“welfareregimes”(Esping-Andersen1990,1999),
this already presupposes that supra-national welfare-regime logics are expected
toshapelocalactivationgovernancetoaverysignificantdegree(witheachofthe
country cases shedding more light on the exact nature of that relationship) or
conversely, that welfare-regime logics have no influence whatsoever on local
activation governance (with all three country cases displaying similar hybrid
governancearrangements).Neitherofthosetwo‘radical’presuppositionsseemed
realistic to me and besides, I felt that many intermediate factors are potentially
ofinfluenceonlocalgovernancestructuresthatcouldimpossiblybeaccommodated
and controlled for within a cross-country qualitative research design – yet that I
wanted to do qualitative research was certain to me. The first rite of passage in
myinitiationprocessasascientistthereforeconsistedinthefollowinginsight:The
sample selection automatically has repercussions on the research questions that
onecanorcannotanswer,aswellasforthemethodologiesthatonecanorcannot
apply in answering the answerable ones of those research questions. Therefore,
one cannot formulate a good research question without first gaining a thorough
understanding of methodological issues – something that most PhD students
probably underestimate at the beginning of their projects, and I certainly did.
The second rite of passage I had to undergo consisted in the realization that
in qualitative research at least, one cannot formulate a good research question
without first having caught a glimpse of ‘how things really work’ in practice. I
learnedthislessonthehardwaywhenafterhavingreadpilesofacademicliterature
onactivation,welfareregimesandwelfaregovernance,Ifinallyvisitedanumber
ofDutchreintegrationcompaniesinearly2010.Duringthosevisits,theactivation
governance story that unfolded before my scientific eye was one in which both
publicandprivateactorswereinvestingmuchtimeandmonetaryresourcesinto
learningabouteachother’s‘waysofdoingthings’,eliminatingcognitivebarriers
andbuildingopenandtrust-basedcommunicationchannelswhilesimultaneously
improving formal cooperation procedures, e.g. via relational contracting or the
design of activation modules that municipalities can purchase separately and
Introduction | 3
combine freely (cf. Bertelli and Smith 2010; Bovaird 2006; Plantinga, De Ridder
and Corra 2011; for a purely conceptual discussion of the relationship between
identity,trustandcollaboration,seeRice2014).Itthereforeseemedtomethatthe
mostsalientissuetostudyaboutpublic-privateactivationarrangementswasnot
thecomparativequestionofhowsucharrangementsvaryacrosscountriesoreven
supra-national welfare regimes, but rather the anthropological question of how
public and private actors learn to cooperate with each other while continuously
adaptingtheiridentities,strategiesandorganizationalproceduresinthatprocess.
Sucharesearchquestionwouldhavecalledforasingle-countryratherthancross-
countryresearchdesign,notonlybecauseIwouldhavehadtospendmuchtime
at each research site to grasp the subtleties of the relevant interactive processes
butalsobecauseaddingcountryorevensupra-nationalwelfare-regimedifferences
to my observations would have created too much noise in the collected data.
However,sinceIhaddeliberatelyappliedformyPhDpositionbecauseIwanted
todocomparativeresearch,switchingtoasingle-countryresearchdesignwasnot
an option for me. So here I was, a second-year PhD student, having just learned
thatIhadwaitedtoolongwithexposingmytheoreticalnotionsabout‘activation
governance’ and ‘hybridity’ to the scrutiny of daily reality. How was I to go
forward?
Knowing that I had limited time to finish my project, for which reason I had
tostartpreparingmyempiricaldatacollectionwithoutmuchfurtherdelay,Itook
apragmaticdecision–thethirdimportantstepinmyscientificinitiationprocess.
Laying out before me the literature strands that I already knew reasonably well,
theelementsofmyoriginalresearchquestionthatIdefinitelywantedtokeepdue
tomypersonalresearchambitionsandinterests,thepositionofmyresearchwithin
ourlargerresearchproject,andthelittlepersonalexperienceIhadalreadygained
inthe‘real’worldofactivation,Idecided(a)toeliminatethepublic-privateelement
fromtheresearchquestionbuttoretainafocusonthemicro-levelofpolicyimple-
mentation and especially the role of caseworkers in the policy-implementation
process;and(b)tokeepacross-countryfocusbutturnthe(welfare)regimefactor
intoaquestionratherthananunderlyingassumptioninmyresearchdesign.This
ledmetothefollowing‘working’researchquestion(versionofSeptember2010):
RQ’. How are unemployed clients activated by municipal caseworkers in different
welfare settings (welfare states/welfare organizations), and how can the observed
differences or similarities in activation patterns be explained?
Based on this working research question, I selected my cases and research sites
(jobcentres)andbeganmyempiricalresearchinDecember2010.Inthecourseof
thefollowing18months,Ilearnedafourthlessonthatwasdecisiveforthecurrent
form of this dissertation: Due to great difficulties with gaining access to British
4 | Chapter1
Jobcentreoffices,Ihadtosplitmyinitialsampleofthreecountriesintotwoprimary
cases(theNetherlandsandDenmark)andoneexploratory‘litmustestcase’(Great
Britain). Also the sampling logic underlying this dissertation had to be adjusted
accordingly, as will be explained in more detail in Chapter 3. Based on this ex-
perience,Iwouldthereforeaimtoestablishrelationswithactorsinthefieldmuch
earlierinanyfutureresearchproject,soastoallowtimetoeitherswitchtoother
casesiffieldaccessprovesdifficult,ortoadjusttheexplanatoryambitionsofthe
research to practical feasibilities at an early stage of the research process.
Another insight I gained during the research process is that not only one’s
research sample but also one’s research question may have to be adapted in the
course of doing the research (see also Van Thiel 2014: 12). This insight came to
megraduallyasIsatdowntotranscribeandcodetheinterviewsIhadconducted
withjobcentrecaseworkersandmanagers.Whilepreliminarypatterns(andpotential
explanations) of micro-level activation discourses and practices were emerging
before my inner eye, I realized that contrary to my initial expectations, country-
specific policy and welfare-state regime logics stood out more starkly in case-
workers’policy-implementationpatternsthanlocalandindividualidiosyncrasies,
evenindecentralizedpolicycontextssuchastheNetherlandsandDenmark.2By
implication,althoughlocaldifferencesinactivationdiscoursesandpracticeswere
observable not only between countries but also within countries, I saw that my
researchpointedtowardstheexistenceofcountry-specificALMPimplementation
regimesthatarecloselyrelatedto,butnotalwaysadirectmirrorimageof,national
activation-policy regimes and welfare-state regimes. For this reason, I deemed it
advisable to fine-tune the formulation of my working research question more
specifically to the findings emerging from my data, so that the final research
question I will answer in this dissertation reads as follows:
RQ.Howareactivelabourmarketpoliciestranslatedintostreet-leveldiscoursesand
practicesintheNetherlands,DenmarkandGreatBritain,andwhatistheroleofpolicy
design and the wider welfare-state context in shaping caseworker agency?
ThisresearchquestionwillbeansweredbytheempiricalanalysisinChapters4-8
in three consecutive steps (alias sub-questions):
2 Inthisdissertation,Iusetheterm‘welfare-stateregime’todenotethecultural,institutional,and
socio-economiccharacteristicsofsingularwelfarestates,asoffsetbothagainstEsping-Andersen’s
typologicalandsupra-national‘welfareregime’conceptaswellasmorespecificnationalpolicy-
regimes.NotethatEsping-Andersenhimselfusedtheterm‘welfare-stateregime’inhisinitialwork,
butinameaningthatcorrespondstothenowcommonly-used‘welfareregime’.Esping-Andersen
abandonedtheterm‘welfare-stateregime’infavouroftheterm‘welfareregime’from1996onwards.
Introduction | 5
SQ1.Whichstreet-levelALMPdiscoursesandpracticescanbeexpectedintheNether-
lands,DenmarkandGreatBritain,basedonkeycharacteristicsoftherespectivewelfare-
state/activation-policy regimes? (Chapter 4)
SQ2.Whichreal-worlddiscursiveandpracticepatternscanbeobservedinDutchand
Danish jobcentres, and how do those patterns relate to the wider welfare-state and
activation-policy context? (Chapters 5-7)
SQ3. Which systematic relations between context structures and caseworker agency
emergefromthefindingsofChapters4-7,andaretheserelationsconfirmed,qualified,
or contradicted by the British case? (Chapter 8)
To summarize the fifth and final core lesson I have learned about designing a
qualitative research project, it can be necessary and even advisable (at least for
inexperiencedresearchers)todistinguishbetweenaworkingresearchquestionon
whosebasistheempiricaldatacollectionisplanned,andarefinedresearchquestion
thatisformulatedonlyafterthedatacollectioniscompletedandthataccommodates
anyadditionallessonslearnedinthecourseoftheresearchprocess.Tomymind,
adaptingone’sresearchquestiontothe(possiblyunexpected)realitythatemerges
fromthefieldisnotbyanymeansbadsciencebut,quiteonthecontrary,diligent
science–and,letus be honest,common practiceanyhow,although thisis rarely
acknowledged in research reports and scientific publications.
Havingherebyunburdenedmymindandconfessedaboutthebothintriguing
andtorturousprocessthatleaduptomyfinalresearchquestion,Iwillnowturn
to a more established and matter-of-factly style of scientific reporting. In the
remainderofthischapter,Iintroducethetopicofthisdissertationandexplainwhy
I deem that topic important both from a theoretical and a practical perspective.
Theintroductorychapterendswithanoverviewofthestructureofthisdissertation.
1.2 Research on activation: Old and new
Although most readers of this dissertation will presumably be familiar with the
policyagendaofactivation,letusbeginbyabriefintroductionofwhatactivation
is.Theactivationprincipleasitispresentlyunderstoodbecameprominentinthe
late 1980s andearly 1990s,although its originscan betracedback to theconcept
ofmanpower policy devisedbytheSwedish economistsGøstaRehn andRudolf
Meidner in the late 1940s (Sihto 2001). Focusing originally on the promotion of
full employment through demand-side labour policies, the concept underwent a
shifttowardssupplyside-orientedpoliciesinlateryearsandespeciallysincethe
OrganisationforEconomicCo-operationandDevelopment(OECD)adopted“active
manpowerpolicies”asitsflagshipemploymentstrategyin1964(ibid.).Nowadays,
6 | Chapter1
theactivationprinciplehasbeenstrippedalmostentirelyofitsoriginalstructural
agendaduetoavanishingtrustinthestate’sabilitytocontrolthelabourmarket;
initscurrentmeaning,activationimpliesmainlythatindividualswhorelyonpublic
support are offered strong incentives to no longer do so, either in the form of
“carrots”(e.g.personalre-educationbudgets)or“sticks”(e.g.benefitcuts)(Lødemel
andTrickey2000:14;seealsoDingeldey2007;Eichhorstetal.2008;Eichhorstand
Konle-Seidl2008).Althoughtheactivationprincipleismostprominentlyapplied
in the area of unemployment policy, it also plays an increasing role in the area
of disability benefits and early retirement (Carmel, Hamblin and Papadopulous
2007; Van Oorschot and Boos 2000).
Becausethetoolboxofactivationissoverylarge,scholarshaveearlyonasked
the question whether different activation trends can be observed across welfare
statesorevensupra-nationalwelfare-regimeclusters.Bydrawingonthetheoretical
repertoireofhistoricalinstitutionalism(Pierson1996;Thelen1999),suchcomparative
researchonactivationhasusuallydepartedfromthenullhypothesisthatdistinct
policy goals, policy instruments, actor networks, and stratification effects are
prevalentindifferent“worldsofactivation”(BarbierandLudwig-Mayerhofer2004;
seealsoClasenandClegg2006;Dingeldey2007;EichhorstandKonle-Seidl2008;
Genova2008;LødemelandTrickey2000;SerranoPascualandMagnusson2007).
For example, Angela Genova (2008: 381) observes that the Anglo-Saxon welfare
regimedisplaysthe“greateststressoncompulsoryactivationandconditionality”
whereastheNordic“regimefostersmoreempoweringpolicies”,theContinental
Europeanregime“balancesobligationandempowerment”andthe“familialistic”
SouthernEuropeanregime“reproducespastarrangements”.AlsoJørgenE.Larsen
(2005: 137) claims: “The two polar examples in Europe are the UK, representing
themostpureformofworkfare,andDenmark,representingthemostpureform
of activation [as] social investment” (see also Sol and Westerveld 2005: 401).
Whilethereisthusevidencetosupporttheclaimthat“formal”nationalactiva-
tion-policy regimes correspond with more or less established, supra-national
welfare-regimeclusters,asmallerbutgrowingliteratureonthe“operational”street-
levelimplementationofactivationpoliciesarguesthatmacro-levelpolicydifferences
never translate 1:1 to the policy implementation level because they have to be
appropriatedtolocalcircumstancesandspecificclientcasesbyindividualpolicy-
implementers who follow not only formal regulations and procedures, but also
theirown(strategicandpsycho-emotional)utilityfunctions(cf.VanBerkel2010).
This“street-levelbureaucracy”phenomenon,whichwasfirstdescribedbyMichael
Lipsky (1978, 1980, 1991) based on sociological and rational choice-institutional
premises and in the context of the American welfare state of the 1970s, can be
expected to be even amplified in the era of activation because activation implies
astrengthenedfocusonindividualizedservices(suchasjob-searchadvice,employ-
ment measures and ‘flanking’ social services but also job-search monitoring and
Introduction | 7
sanctions),alongsideagovernanceshifttowardsdecentralizationandmulti-actor
networks,therebypotentiallyleadingtoincreasedvariationinthelocalandindi-
vidual application of activation directives (see Durose 2011; Ellis 2011; Henman
and Fenger 2006; Rice 2013c; Van Berkel and Borghi 2008; see also Martin 2004).
Whenitcomestoactivation,thewelfare-regimeliteratureandthestreet-level
bureaucracy(SLB)literaturethusmakepartlycompetingclaimsaboutthecorres-
pondence between abstract policy-regimes and practice-based implementation
regimes–agapwhichhasalwaysexistedbutthatislikelytohaveevenwidened
in the era of activation. However, when looking from a slightly different angle,
onemightalsoseethetwoperspectivesascomplementarybecausewhiletheformer
postulatesthesuperiorityofpolicy-regimestructuresovertheagencyofindividual
policy-implementerswhereasthelatteremphasizesagenticcapacitywithinstructur-
ally determined policy-regime contexts, both approaches coincide on the key
institutionalist premise of (structurally) embedded agency. The complementary
qualitiesofthewelfare-regimeapproachandtheSLBapproachfurthermoresuggest
thatitmaybepossibletoconstructamulti-levelregimeframeworkthatisapplic-
abletoboth(agency-dominated)implementationregimesand(structure-dominated)
policy or even welfare (state) regimes, thereby providing a conceptual tool for
unearthing systematic mechanisms that translate formal policy into operational
discourses and practices. Such is a key goal of this dissertation, which presents
amulti-levelregimeframeworkinChapter2andsubsequentlyappliesthatframe-
worknotonlyinamacro-levelanalysisofstatisticalandlegaldatabutalsoinan
analysis of micro-level data collected in Dutch, Danish and British jobcentres.
Theresearchpresentedinthisdissertationcontributestoexistingresearchon
activation and more specifically, ALMPs because although the implementation
literature on ALMPs is already fairly small, cross-country research on activation
atthelocalandindividuallevelisevenmorescant.Amongtheearliestexploratory
exceptionsisTheodoreandPeck’s(1999)casestudyoflocalresponsestounemploy-
mentandsocialexclusionintheUKandtheUS,whichconcludedthat“theeffect-
ivenessofsuchprogrammes…isstronglydependentupon thestateof thelocal
labourmarket”(pp.502-3).AlsoFinn’s(2000)studyondecentralizedwelfare-to-
workprogrammesinGreatBritain,theUSandtheNetherlandsdiagnosed“very
different” ALMP governance arrangements at the local level, while voicing the
overarching concern that “without effective ways of continuing to ensure core
entitlements, significant variations in services and quality are likely to emerge
between different localities, with corresponding differences in the opportunities
offeredtoeligibleclients”(p.54).Athirdearlyexampleoflocal-levelresearchon
activation isSchridde’s (2002)study on“local welfare regimes”,which observed
fragmented local employment measures for young people in Germany and the
UnitedKingdom,butremainedsomewhatinconclusiveontheinfluenceofnational
policiesonlocalALMPgovernance:“Whilein theUKtheconceptualizationofa