9. The role of public organisations and their frontline workers in providing ‘active’ welfare
Convener: Rik van Berkel
Van der Aa Paul (Centre for Social policy studies, NL )
Activation and discretion at the front lines of active welfare states
Havlikova Jana and Olga Hubíková (Masaryk University, CZ)
Users' involvement: a new trend in social services as experienced by frontline workers in the Czech Republic
Beguin Helene and Bertrand Louis (Université Paris-Est, FR)
Adjusting social policies to their beneficiaries - paradoxes and limits.
Born Asmund W. (Copenhagen Business School, DK) and Jensen Per H. (Aalborg University, DK)
Dialogued based activation - a new dispositif?
Active welfare state reforms have significantly strengthened the role of public organisations and their frontline workers in shaping what social policies and interventions practically mean for citizens at whom these policies are targeted. The strong service orientation of active welfare states, processes of decentralisation and devolution, the ambition to make services ‘tailor-made’ and ‘individualised’, and the increasing emphasis on what in US literature are called ‘people changing’ rather than ‘people processing’ technologies are factors contributing to this. Seen from the perspective of clients, not only ‘where you live’ can make a difference, but also who you are and how you lead your life.
This stream will address two series of interconnected issues. First, the issue how public organisations involved in implementing policies (e.g. benefit and welfare agencies, PES agencies) as well as frontline workers adjust to these reforms, for example through redesigning case management, (re- or de-)professionalization and (de- or re-)bureaucratisation of service provision, the introduction of new public management instruments, etcetera. Secondly, the issue of the impact of the increasing role of public organisations and their frontline workers on clients, the treatment and services they receive and the accessibility of services. For example, what does service individualisation mean in terms of equality of treatment and transparency of entitlements? Have inter-municipal differences in quality, nature and level of services increased, and if so, how should these be interpreted: as reflecting differences in labour market situations, in client groups, in organisational capacities, in availability of resources, or otherwise? What attempts have been made to counteract the increasing influence of public organisations and frontline workers, for example in terms of strengthening the voice and choice of clients?
As international comparative research in these issues is scarce, we particularly invite comparative paper proposals. However, national case studies are very welcome as well.
Rik van Berkel
Utrecht University
Utrecht School of Governance
Bijlhouwerstraat 6
3511ZC Utrecht – Netherlands
r.vanberkel@uu.nl
|
