Globalisation and the Politics of Persuasion and Coercion

This paper argues that an economic liberal discourse of globalisation has been pivotal to the policy‐making process in Australia over the past 15 or so years. Both Labor and Coalition Governments have aimed to restrict the electoral fall‐out from the process of restructuring by persuading Australians that the world economy has forced particular policy changes and made alternative economic policy choices unviable. Policy‐makers act to influence conceptions of the appropriate role and responsibilities of the state through persuasion – the rhetoric they speak – and coercion – the policies they make. The pervasiveness of globalisation rhetoric in the public sphere has been essential to the governing process as a complement to and buffer for the coercive impact of economic liberal policy changes. As Australia has shifted from a protectionist to an economically liberal policy structure, the effects of globalisation have become clearer. Liberalisation has intensified pressures from the world political economy and coerced changes in all areas of policy and the economy, as well as in public perceptions about the ‘limits of government’. Globalisation and economic liberalism as persuasion and coercion are the component parts of a restructured system of political and economic governance: a paradigmatic shift away from the economic protectionism of the first 80 years of Australian federalism.     

‘A Common Sense of the Times’? Neo‐liberalism and Changing Public Opinion in New Zealand and the UK

Neo‐liberalism represents a significant and enduring shift in the politics shaping social policy. Although frequently ascribed a hegemonic, all‐powerful status that focuses our attention on the coherence found in neo‐liberal policies, this article builds on scholarly work highlighting variegation in the neo‐liberal project across different policy areas, national settings and time periods. Specifically, it employs Peck's and Tickell's (2002) view that neo‐liberalism has gone through multiple phases in response to both external and internal crises as an entry point for studying neo‐liberalism's impact on public support for the welfare state. Drawing upon New Zealand and British attitudinal data, the article argues that public reactions to an early period of retrenchment (‘roll‐back’ neo‐liberalism) differ from those reported in the ‘roll‐out’ or embedding phase of neo‐liberalism implemented by Third Way Labour Governments in both countries. Indeed, continuing public support in many policy areas arguably contributed to the internal crisis that provoked an adaptation to the neo‐liberal project. The article further explores public support for the welfare state following the external crisis provoked by the financial meltdown of 2008–09 asking whether New Zealand and British attitudes showed signs of resisting austerity measures or whether they, instead, indicated a third, ‘roll‐over’ period of neo‐liberalism where the public accepted not only a neo‐liberal economic agenda but also the need for further retrenchment of the welfare state. Conclusions about the politics of social policy at the level of public opinion offer both good and bad news for welfare state advocates.     

THE RUSH TO REGULATE: THE SHIFT IN AUSTRALIA FROM THE RULE OF MARKETS TO THE RULE OF CAPITAL

There has been a significant shift in the momentum of national economic policy in Australia, from the market as an end in itself, towards a regulated policy agenda that asserts the social, cultural and economic rule of capital. This ‘new’ policy is what neo‐liberalism really involves. Arguments about ‘free markets’ and ‘economic rationalism’ fail to recognise the shift and are thus not germane to current policy analysis.     

Gender in/and/of Health Inequalities

The relationship between gender and health inequalities is potentially complicated, raising questions for health and social research, practice and policy. In this paper, I use two population health case studies – obesity and smoking – to explore the interplay between gender and socioeconomic position. The cases show that, on its own, neither dimension of inequality affords a comprehensive picture of these significant risks to public health. Furthermore, historical change in the socioeconomic and gendered distribution of these health risks suggests that gender is best considered as a dynamic and layered form of differentiation, rather than as a simple or stable dichotomy. A more nuanced approach to the analysis of gender and health has the potential to generate both more fruitful research and more effective health and social policy.     

Public Satisfaction with the Health System and Popular Support for State Involvement in an East Asian Welfare Regime: Health Policy Legitimacy of Hong Kong

The legitimacy of social policies has gained increasing attention in the past decade, against the backdrop of fiscal austerity and retrenchment in many nations. Policy legitimacy encompasses public preferences for the underlying principles of policies and the actual outcomes as perceived by citizens. Scholarly knowledge concerning the legitimacy of health policy – a major element of modern social policy architecture – is, unfortunately, limited. This article seeks to extend the scholarly debates on health policy legitimacy from the West to Hong Kong, a member of the East Asian welfare state cluster. A bi‐dimensional definition of health policy legitimacy – encompassing both public satisfaction with the health system and the normative expectation as to the extent of state involvement in health care – is adopted. Based on analysis of data collected from a telephone survey of adult Hong Kong citizens between late 2014 and early 2015, the findings of this study demonstrate a fairly high level of satisfaction with the territory's health system, but popular support for government responsibility presents a clear residual characteristic. The study also tests the self‐interest thesis and the ideology thesis – major theoretical frameworks for explaining social policy legitimacy – in the Hong Kong context. Egalitarian ideology and trust in government are closely related to both public satisfaction with the system and popular support for governmental provision of care. However, the self‐interest thesis receives partial support. The findings are interpreted in the context of Hong Kong's health system arrangements, while implications for the territory's ongoing health policy reform are discussed.     

Help or hindrance? Social policy and the ‘social determinants of health’

In recent years, public health research has become increasingly focused on issues of social inequality and social disadvantage. This is because social issues, such as poor housing and unemployment, have been found to impact health significantly, and are now referred to as ‘the social determinants of health‘. As a result of this shift, public health is now principally concerned with what are historically considered to be social policy issues. This paper discusses the confluence of public health and social policy; it examines the opportunities and risks posed by this convergence for those working in social policy seeking to reduce poverty and inequality. We argue that, while much can be gained in the two fields by working more closely together, there remain fundamental differences in perspectives and approaches. In order to maximise benefits, these points of difference need to be thought through sooner rather than later.     

Changing policy,changing attitudes? Public opinion on employment relations in New Zealand, 1990–2008

Abstract

Did significant policy shifts in employment relations in the 1990s lead to equally large changes in the attitudes of New Zealanders towards employment relations? Have policy modifications made since 1999 further shaped public perceptions? This paper explores the role of policy feedback in influencing public opinion towards employers and unions and towards government responsibility for jobs and wages. Using data from New Zealand public opinion surveys, most notably the New Zealand Election Study (1990–2008), the paper finds some evidence that policy feedback has occurred in the employment relations arena, but the impact is not as strong or consistent as we might expect. As such, New Zealanders do not completely endorse the ‘there is no alternative’ arguments of neoliberalism, but they do not have an overwhelming desire to return to Keynesian demand-management employment policies.     

Risk and Public Protection: Responding to Involuntary and ‘Taboo’ Risk

Growing media, political and public concern with high‐risk offenders in the community has focused policy attention on the concept of ‘public protection’. A notion that the public has the right to be protected, particularly from ‘monstrous’ offenders such as predatory paedophiles, has infiltrated much recent legislation and penal policy. This article will explore the critical factors in the ‘public protection’ trend and the framing of risk and risky offenders that has ensued. In particular, attention will be given to the new surveillance and intervention mechanisms under the Multi‐Agency Public Protection Arrangements (MAPPA) and whether these arrangements manage risk or displace it. To what extent are they driven by the ‘precautionary principle’ and defensive responses to risks that are over‐inflated? To what extent does this result in ‘perverse incentives’ to over‐manage certain risks and to over‐concentrate on restrictive risk management techniques such as electronic tagging, satellite surveillance and curfews rather than treatment? Does the system represent effective risk management or a system for dealing with risk anxiety – both of the public(s) and of politicians?     

The distributive impact of private pensions in the context of the institutional designs of public pension systems across OECD countries

Income inequality has been increasing across the developed world for the last few decades. The welfare state has played an important role in reducing income inequality, but it has now entered into an era of transformation. The shift from public to private pension schemes is one of the main policy instruments in this shift. An increase in private pensions is expected to create an increase in income inequality. Therefore, using data from OECD SOCX, this study examined how the effect of private pensions on income inequality might be changed by the institutional design of public pension systems. The results suggest that the effect of private pensions differs when the institutional design of the public pension system is considered. An increase in private pensions is related to an increase in income inequality when the public pension has a low level of coverage and a high level of earnings‐relatedness.     

Redefining the 'Rural Question': The New 'Politics of the Rural' and Social Policy

Politics in the countryside has undergone a significant shift in emphasis in recent decades, which may be characterized as a transition from ‘rural politics’ to ‘a politics of the rural’. Whereas ‘rural politics’ refers broadly to politics located in rural space, or relating to ‘rural issues’, the ‘politics of the rural’ is defined by the centrality of the meaning and regulation of rurality itself as the primary focus of conflict and debate. However, far from marginalizing social issues – as early work on the new rural conflicts by Mormont implied – the paper argues that the new politics of the rural has liberated rural social policy from the shadow of agricultural policy, providing a new language and context through which rural social issues can be placed on the political agenda. Three examples of this are discussed, drawing on illustrations from Britain, Australia, New Zealand and North America – conflicts over the rationalization of public and commercial services in rural communities; campaigns around the closure of rural schools and their symbolic place at the heart of rural communities; and issues of difference and discrimination in the countryside, including responses to travellers and asylum‐seekers.     

Reinforcing substantive religious inequality: a critical analysis of submissions to the Review of Freedom of Religion and Belief in Australia Inquiry

The parties contributing to the Freedom of Religion and Belief in Australia Inquiry had a strong interest in the role of religion in society. Those making submissions were parochial about the status and importance of their own faith, less positive about religious diversity, more likely to be culturally supremacist, and more likely to independently express anti‐Islamic sentiment than the general population. A large proportion of submissions (40 per cent) included the religio‐centric assertion that Australia is a Christian nation. Alternative voices – that Australia is a multi‐faith country or those that saw Australia as secular – were much less ‘present’ in the submissions. Most submissions argued for the retention of religious exemptions from anti‐discrimination laws and against anti‐religious‐vilification legislation that would protect religious minorities. Christian‐centric voices purposefully undermined movement towards more inclusive social policy and protection of rights. The Christian majority insisted that their position of dominance be affirmed in Australia. The failure of the inquiry to advocate for policy and legislative change to expand religious freedoms (especially to minorities) was a performance of professed ‘state neutrality’ that reproduced substantive inequality. The public submission process was an effective mechanism for reinforcing a privileged relation between the state and Christian organisations, and fails the tests of both fairness and more substantively equality.     

Does family still matter? Public and private transfers in emerging welfare state systems in a comparative perspective

Kim JW, Choi YJ. Does family still matter? Public and private transfers in emerging welfare state systems in a comparative perspective Int J Soc Welfare 2011: 20: 353–366 © 2010 The Author(s), International Journal of Social Welfare © 2010 Blackwell Publishing Ltd and the International Journal of Social Welfare. While the role of the family has been a distinctive feature of East Asian welfare systems, rapid social policy development and reforms in South Korea and Taiwan over the last two decades have led to an increase in public welfare. Yet, despite a growing number of studies, little is known about the role of family support – private transfers – and public programmes in the performance of state welfare. This article reports on a comparative analysis of the role of public and private transfers aimed at poverty and inequality reduction in 12 Western and two East Asian states employing the Luxemburg Income Study data set. Results indicate that, in contrast to the West, private transfers that rest primarily on family support remain more important than public transfers in reducing income inequality and poverty in South Korea and Taiwan.     

Disenfranchised Not ‘Deficient‘: How the (Neoliberal) State Disenfranchises Young People

Young people's declining electoral participation has been considered a problem in a range of democracies, including Australia. In this paper I examine youth electoral participation through the eyes and voices of young marginalised Australians. In the policy arena young people's electoral participation is usually considered a subject for education policy. Here I make the case for considering it as an issue for social policy, and as a welfare issue. In this context I examine the effects of neoliberalism and Australia's shrinking welfare state on young people's citizenship and ability to access the franchise. Whilst acknowledging the liberal roots of neoliberalism I argue that whereas the neoliberal state identifies young people's political disengagement as a problem, and constructs participation using the language of ‘choice‘, that its own social policies act to create barriers to the franchise for young people and thus effectively disenfranchise them.     

Nudge or nuzzle? Improving decisions about active citizenship

In recent years ‘nudge’ has come into fashion as a form of policy intervention, under the inspiration of behavioural economics. It has encouraged policy analysts to move away from models of the ‘rational actor’ and instead to start from consumers, clients and citizens as they actually are. Nevertheless, nudge raises larger questions about public policy and the relationship between government and the citizen. This paper takes critical stock of nudge, offers an alternative in terms of ‘nuzzle’ and lays out the very different standpoint on policy to which this points. In doing so, it also puts in question the disciplinary paradigms which underpin ‘nudge’ in the scientific literature, and their underplaying of the social and institutional context of individual behaviour. It offers a perspective on public policy as providing security and supporting creativity: with government under critical scrutiny by citizens, rather than vice versa.     

Business Mobilization and Public Policy in the U.S. States*

Objective. The goal of this study is to examine how the political mobilization of business interests influences aggregate public policy outputs in the states. We examine the relationship between business mobilization and general state policy liberalism, as well as policy that we term state “business policy climate.” Methods. We construct a measure of the “business policy climate” from a number of tax and regulatory indicators in the states and examine whether business influences it and policy liberalism using ordinary least squares regression. Results. The analysis shows that business mobilization does not influence general policy liberalism but is a significant influence on a state's business policy climate. Specifically, the dominance of a state's campaign finance system by business interests makes policy more favorable toward business. Conclusions. The extent of business mobilization in a state is an important influence on public policy outputs but is constrained by the activities of other political actors such as unions.     

Public Policy and Inequalities of Choice and Autonomy

Choice by service users has been promoted in social policy across many developed welfare states, often on the grounds that it will incentivize providers to enhance quality and efficiency. But this instrumental motivation for the promotion of choice overlooks the possibility that choice, understood in the deeper sense of autonomy, has intrinsic value, as suggested by egalitarian and capability‐based theories of social justice. This article argues that the narrow motivation of choice policies leads to a focus on services rather than outcomes for individuals and fails to address deep‐seated inequalities in the opportunities people have for real autonomy. We test this concept using newly collected data for the UK. Our empirical findings indicate that disabled people are more likely to experience constrained autonomy in all respects, while being from a low socio‐economic group and/or lacking educational qualifications is a risk factor across several components. We conclude that improving the ‘choice’ agenda for policy requires: (1) adopting a more sophisticated concept of ‘choice’ such as the conceptualization of ‘choice as autonomy’ outlined here; (2) developing a better understanding of existing inequalities in autonomy, such as we begin to explore in our empirical results; and (3) tackling these inequalities through, for example, the removal of obstacles to active decision‐making by providing effective support and advocacy, especially for disabled people, and addressing the major structural barriers – poverty, ill health and geographical inequality – which place significant restrictions on the autonomy of those who are already disadvantaged.     

Informal Self-Employment in Developing Countries: Entrepreneurship or Survivalist Strategy? Some Implications for Public Policy

A central debate around labor market informality, which has enormous implications for the design and implementation of public policy, relates to the nature of informal employment. Is informal employment and, in particular, informal self-employment, a symptom and, at the same time, a reproductive factor of precariousness and inequality, as well as social and individual poverty? Or is it, on the contrary, a space of individual and social action that reflects economic initiative and business potential which, if channeled and fostered properly, could contribute to social and economic development and, consequently, to the reduction of inequality and poverty? In this article, the findings of the 2005 edition of the Mexican version of the World Value Survey—concerning relevant values and attitudes of informal participants in the labor force in Mexico—are used to assess whether informal self-employment is a reflection of incipient entrepreneurship and individual choice or, rather, a survival strategy forced on individuals by their precarious circumstances. This article explores the public policy implications of the results obtained.     

The limits of inequality: Public support for social policy across rich democracies

Does public opinion react to inequality, and if so, how? The social harms caused by increasing inequality should cause public opinion to ramp up demand for social welfare protections. However, the public may react to inequality differently depending on institutional context. Using ISSP and WID data (1980?2006), we tested these claims. In liberal institutional contexts (mostly English‐speaking), increasing income inequality predicted higher support for state provision of social welfare. In coordinated and universalist contexts (mostly of Europe), increasing inequality predicted less support. Historically higher income concentration predicted less public support, providing an account of the large variation in inequality within the respective liberal and coordinated contexts. The results suggest opinions in liberal societies – especially with higher historical inequality – reached the limits of inequality, reacting negatively; whereas in coordinated/universalist societies – especially with lower historical inequality – opinions moved positively, as if desiring more inequality.     

Varieties of liberalism: A comparative analysis of family policy and poverty outcomes across the 50 United States

The United States is generally recognised as an exemplar of liberal policy regime types. However, given evidence of state-level divergence in social policy, this article investigates to what extent such variation is present and relevant in state-level family policy. To this end, we pose a primary and secondary research question. Our primary question is whether varieties of liberalism exist across the 50 states in the United States. Our secondary question is whether these varieties of liberalism correspond to variety in social indicators of families' economic well-being. To answer our primary question, we first construct a family policy index that scores the relative generosity and coverage of state-administered social programmes that contribute to the (de)commodification and (de)familialisation of households with children. We then perform a cluster analysis to group states by shared decommodifying and defamilialising features. To answer our secondary question, we investigate how our family-policy clusters are associated with social indicators of families' financial security. Our findings suggest that varieties of liberalism do, indeed, exist within the United States. With the exception of Vermont, which stands out with respect to its comparatively generous family policies, we classify states into two groups: those with ‘soft’ liberal family policy in states featuring relatively generous and accessible policies and ‘hard’ liberal family policy in states achieving little of either. We find that these differences help explain state-level heterogeneity in levels of economic security among households with children, particularly single-mother households.     

Process over outcome: How perceptions of procedural fairness influence conservative support for redistributive taxes

Though majorities of Americans express support for redistributive tax policies as a cure for income inequality in the United States, this general support tends to dissipate when the public evaluates their support for specific proposals. The dominant explanations emphasize elite behavior and the disconnect between American values and political representation. An alternative view is that this counter-intuitive finding is entirely consistent with individual values. Some people place higher priority on policy processes than policy outcomes. This paper demonstrates that conservatives think about redistributive tax policy differently than liberals. Conservative support (opposition) for redistributive taxes is based on evaluations of the fairness of processes of government that lead to economic inequality. When conservatives believe that these processes are not fair, they are very supportive of wealth redistribution as a cure for economic inequality, whereas liberal support for wealth redistribution is more outcome-dependent.