1 / 28

Civil Associations and the formation of the welfare state

How Do Nonprofit Human Services Construct Social Citizenship in a Market-oriented Welfare State? The New Politics of Social Care Yeheskel ‘Zeke’ Hasenfeld and Eve Garrow UCLA Department of Social Welfare. Civil Associations and the formation of the welfare state.

keith
Télécharger la présentation

Civil Associations and the formation of the welfare state

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript


  1. How Do Nonprofit Human Services Construct Social Citizenship in a Market-oriented Welfare State? The New Politics of Social CareYeheskel ‘Zeke’ Hasenfeld and Eve GarrowUCLA Department of Social Welfare

  2. Civil Associations and the formation of the welfare state The American welfare regime can be understood against a background of a richly developed civil society. • Have given political voice to under-represented constituencies; • Identified and provided needed services; • Mobilized to influence social policies.

  3. Social Citizenship Signal achievement of civil associations has the institutionalization of social rights or social citizenship. • “The whole range from the right to a modicum of economic welfare and security to the right to share to the full in the social heritage and to live the life of a civilized being according to the standards prevailing in the society” (T.H. Marshall). • “Provision for need that is given universally, that is provided without supplication or stigma, and that avoids as much as possible the invidious operation of official discretion.”

  4. Threat to social rights • Civil associations played pivotal role in the • Progressive era • Great Depression • Civil rights movement of the 1960s • The current dominant of Neoliberalism and NPM • Social rights become dependent on market • Advocacy and mobilization has shifted away from social rights

  5. The Rise of Social Rights • Progressive Era • Dense landscape of voluntary human services; • Coalitions of federated women’s associations; • Combination of services and advocacy; Social policies to protect mothers and children, public education, juvenile justice, public health. • The settlement house movement • Social activism – child labor laws, women’s suffrage. • Services and education for citizenship.

  6. The Great Depression • Social work “bearing witness” and advocacy; • Mobilization of the unemployed; • Organization of industrial workers; • Broad progressive coalitions; • Powerful pension movement; • Network of women reformist leaders. Social security; unemployment insurance; Aid to Dependent Children

  7. The War on Poverty --1960s • Civil rights movement; • Women’s rights movement; Expansion of public welfare, Medicare and Medicaid, SSI, Food stamps • The Community Action Centers • Services to disfranchised poor communities; • Grassroots activism. • The rise of the National Welfare Rights Org. • Expansion of welfare eligibility and cash aid.

  8. The “crisis” of the welfare state • Explosion of welfare expenditures from 1960 to 1980. • Aging population; • Entry of women to the labor force; • Rise in single parent households; • Global economy and industrial transformation; • Rise of corporate power and decline of labor unions; • Retrenchment of employment-based benefits.

  9. Ideological shift to Neo-liberalism • Rationale for market deregulation; • State decentralization; • Reduced state intervention into economic affairs; • Recasting role of the welfare state; • Shifting responsibility from state to market; • From collectivity to individuals.

  10. New Public Management (NPM) • Reducing the size of government; • Adopting business models in government; • Moving decision making closer to citizens; • Restructuring government to emphasize results over processes; • Privatization.

  11. The New Politics of Care Guiding assumptions • Devolution brings government closer to the citizens. • Services tailored to local needs. • Privatization brings the efficiency of the market; • Privatization as a source of flexibility and innovation

  12. Impact of Devolution • Devolution confers considerable discretion to local authorities. • Politicization of the delivery of social care. • Financial incentives to reduce costs. • Social rights contingent on local political and bureaucratic practices. • Devolution is associated with increased economic inequality.

  13. Privatization and Social Care • Three conditions: • Services must be defined in advance. • Performance readily measured. • Competition sustained. • In social care none exist: • Diverse needs. • Difficult to assess outcome. • Lack of competition.

  14. Effects of Privatization • Underlying motive to contract social care is primarily ideological and political rather than economic. • Little competition exists and there is little evidence of cost saving. • Contractors become an interest group to shape policies in their favor. • Contractors may use their advantageous position to engage in opportunistic behavior.

  15. The problem of accountability • Measuring results of care services is exceedingly difficult; • Government depends on providers for data; • Clients have limited capacity to evaluate results; • Government has limited resources (e.g., staff and expertise) to monitor providers. • “The hollow state.”

  16. The Erosion of Social Rights? • Citizen vs. Consumer. • Citizens’ social rights are made contingent on their desirability as consumer. • Needs and services are subject to a calculus of efficiency and profitability. • Discrimination between ‘desirable’ and ‘undesirable’ clients. • Devolution and privatization increase the variability in the quality of services citizens are likely to experience.

  17. Impact on Vulnerable Citizens • Poor and marginalized citizens face a greater risk of getting inferior services. • They lack adequate recourse when they get inferior services. • Those with personal resources are more likely to exit, leaving behind the marginalized who are least likely to voice their protest.

  18. Privatization and Democracy • Dilutes political linkages between citizens and state; • Obscures government accountability; • Distorts citizens’ understanding of how tax revenues are spent; • Allows government to displace the risks of downsizing and policy shifts onto nongovernmental entities.

  19. Welfare Reform as Neoliberal Policy • No entitlement; Five-year lifetime limit. • Block grants to states. • Receipt of aid contingent on work test. • Compliance via sanctions. • Devolution to local level. • Privatization of welfare-to-work services. • Welfare recipients as customers. • Desirable vs. undesirable recipients.

  20. Erosion of social rights of poor single mothers • In 1995 TANF lifted 62% of children out of deep poverty (50% below poverty line). • In 2005 TANF lifted only 21% of children out of deep poverty.

  21. Rate of Participation of Eligible Families

  22. Impact on advocacy and Mobilization • Citizen empowerment as “market choice.” • Consumer option of exit makes political voice less potent. • Privatization shifts responsibility for quality from state to consumer. • Privatization lowers political participation. • Devolution and privatization reinforce an anti-state ideology.

  23. Privatization and Nonprofits • Dampens advocacy and innovation. • State co-optation of the nonprofit sector. • Decline of collective purpose. • Nonprofits achieve goals by contracting than by grassroots mobilization. • Social problems become localized making national mobilization difficult.

  24. Impact on Advocacy Groups • Acceptance of an individualistic culture of care; • Privatization of advocacy. • Elite and professionally let advocacy. • Identity and narrow issue oriented rather than cross-class based mobilization. • Pitting the need of one group against another.

  25. Role of Grassroots movements • ACORN • PICO –Faith based community organizing • Gamaliel Foundation. • Effective grassroots mobilization on local issues. • Does local mobilization discourage national mobilization?

  26. Concluding thoughts • Signal achievement of civil society has been the expansion of the welfare state and the institutionalization of social rights. • This historic role is being challenged under the new politics of social care. • Devolution and privatization erode social citizenship. • They threaten the autonomy and mobilization of civil society on behalf of the marginalized. • The poor turn from citizens to poor consumers.

  27. Thank you

More Related