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.     

Housing and the Social Exclusion Agenda in England

In the period immediately following its election in 1997 the current Labour government in the UK declared a commitment to ‘combating social exclusion’ to be at the core of the domestic policy agenda. The interpretation of the term ‘social exclusion’ has been the source of extensive debate. This paper focuses on one aspect of the current debate, exploring the relationship between housing and social exclusion, both in theory and in contemporary central government policy in England. I argue that theoretical imprecision is a very real issue, not least because it allows policy makers to refer to rather vague causal mechanisms or social processes to justify actions and interventions. I identify some of the areas that require further exploration and theoretical development if we are to have a rigorous understanding of the concept of social exclusion and its link to housing. Most fundamentally, I suggest that the question of whether the concept of ‘social exclusion’ contributes anything valuable to our ability to understand social disadvantage needs to be addressed directly.     

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.     

Garbage‐can Policy‐making Meets Neo‐liberal Ideology: Twenty Five Years of Redundant Reform of the English National Health Service

The garbage‐can theory of decision‐making (Cohen et al. 1972), has been adapted into a perspective on policy‐making, with adaptations of the approach placing notable emphasis upon the health sector (Kingdon 2006; Paton 2006). This article creates an adapted ‘garbage‐can’ framework to help explain each stage of the reform of the English National Health Service (NHS) over the last 25 years. The emergence of the key idea and resultant policy at each stage of reform of the English NHS has been arational and indeed sometimes irrational. Policy has reflected advocacy by policy‐salesmen (Kingdon 2002), proffering ‘solutions’ to ill‐defined problems and answers to unasked questions, and politicians' short‐termist responses at each decision‐point. Yet the garbage‐can alone is not enough: if arationality rules in policy‐making day to day, this does not mean that there is not an overall ideological context, trend or bias in reform. The article also posits that ‘market reform’ has derived from the ideological hegemony of a naive anti‐statism (hostility to a misleadingly defined and often mythological ‘centralist state’) in public services and enthusiasm for market competition rather than any evidence‐based application of pro‐market ideas to health policy. A question arises: how are these two approaches (short‐term arationality and longer‐term ideological bias) combined in explanation of how policy over time is biased in a particular direction while seemingly arbitrary and directionless at each messy decision‐point. The article attempts to combine the insights of a garbage‐can approach with wider explanations of ideological hegemony.     

Policy Diffusion and Policy Transfer in Comparative Welfare State Research

For many years, comparative welfare state research has followed a ‘methodological nationalism’ in the sense that countries were treated as independent units. Yet the recent ‘spatial turn’ in comparative politics has also influenced welfare state research. For some years now, the field has been witnessing a growing interest in questions about interdependencies and policy diffusion between countries. In this article, we provide a structured overview of the state of the art in the policy diffusion and transfer literature that deals specifically with social policy. We present and critically evaluate existing theoretical concepts and quantitative and qualitative methodological approaches that enable the analysis of interdependencies between countries. Moreover, we summarize the empirical findings of quantitative and qualitative studies on the diffusion and transfer of social policy, from some pioneering studies to the latest findings. Against this background we point out what we believe to be promising avenues for future research. We focus on five areas: theoretical work on the mechanisms underlying diffusion and transfer; methodological approaches; the impact of domestic institutions and policy characteristics on social policy diffusion and transfer; programme‐specific dynamics; and the systematic combination of horizontal and vertical interdependencies.     

HUGH STRETTON AND THE WISE ADMINISTRATOR

His massive textbook, Economics: A New Introduction, is in many ways the culmination of Hugh Stretton's work as a theoretician of the social sciences. From his first major publication in 1969, The Political Sciences, Stretton has wrestled with two major issues. One has been the nature of the social sciences, particularly the role of moral ideas in shaping the theory and practice of social inquiry. The second has been the relationship between social theory and social practice, particularly in terms of policy development. His first book was the most ‘academic’. Since then he has written more in response to the problems of the age than out of a desire to solve merely academic questions. Hence his involvement in issues of housing, the environment and, during the last decade and a half, economic policy. One of his favourite techniques has been to use ‘speculative history’, providing alternative futures to illustrate what he believes to be the consequences of particular policy choices.     

The social inclusion policy agenda in Australia: a case of old wine,new bottles?

The election of an Australian Labor Government in Australia in 2007 saw ‘social inclusion’ emerge as the official and overarching social policy agenda. Being ‘included’ was subsequently defined by the ALP Government as being able to ‘have the resources, opportunities and capabilities needed to learn, work, engage and have a voice‘. Various researchers in Australia demonstrated an interest in social inclusion, as it enabled them to construct a multi‐dimensional framework for measuring disadvantage. This research program resulted in various forms of statistical modelling based on some agreement about what it means to be included in society. The multi‐dimensional approach taken by academic researchers, however, did not necessarily translate to a new model of social policy development or implementation. We argue that, similar to the experience of the UK, Australia's social inclusion policy agenda was for the most part narrowly and individually defined by politicians and policy makers, particularly in terms of equating being employed with being included. We conclude with discussion about the need to strengthen the social inclusion framework by adopting an understanding of social inequality and social justice that is more relational and less categorical.     

From Social Instrument to Migration Management Tool: Assisted Voluntary Return Programmes – The Case of Belgium

The return of migrants to their country of origin and the development of efficient return measures have become more prominent on the political agenda of many Western European countries. Since policymakers prefer ‘voluntary’ return, governmental programmes to support the return of migrants – Assisted Voluntary Return (AVR) programmes – were developed as far back as the 1970s and have played an increasingly important role in migration policy over the last three decades. At the same time, general migration policy and welfare systems have undergone profound change, including in the meanings and connotations attached to social welfare, return support and return policy. This raises questions about the implications of these broader societal and policy changes for the widely implemented AVR programmes. In this article, we discuss the interpretation and evolution of AVR programmes by analyzing how one particular European country, Belgium, has developed its AVR programme over time. We explore the evolution of the programme's content, target group and institutional positioning, which shed light on its changing goals and are closely linked to a broader shift towards a ‘managerial’ approach to migration policy and the welfare state. We argue that return support may become decontextualized when it adopts ‘conditional entitlement’ as a central principle. This leads to strong differentiation, based on personal responsibility, between ‘deserving’ and ‘undeserving’ migrants, the levelling down of the support given to returnees, and a more coercive voluntary return policy in which social support is linked to deportation.     

‘Active Families’: Familization,Housing and Welfare across Generations in East Asia

Debates around welfare change have tended to concentrate on the balance between market and state provision. Although there is increasing reference to a mixed economy of welfare, this generally signifies a greater emphasis on a third sector of voluntary/community level provision. However, the family sphere has been, and still remains, an important and dynamic source of welfare provision across changing regimes and between generations. With this as background, the article addresses three particular questions. First, how has the role of families in the welfare mix changed over time? Second, how do family ‘strategies’ adapt to structural changes in order to maximize collective/individual benefits in certain areas and how do these strategies evolve over generations? Third, is such family engagement in welfare influenced by policy shifts appropriately conceptualized as ‘re‐familization’ or ‘de‐familization'? These issues are explored in the comparative socio‐economic and cultural contexts of China and Japan and draw on qualitative research with three generations of families in Shanghai and Tokyo.     

Attributing Outcomes to Social Policy Interventions – ‘Gold Standard’ or ‘Fool's Gold’ in Public Policy and Management?

In recent years there has been increased interest in outcome‐based social policy‐making and management. The UK has been in the forefront of this movement but similar movements have been identified internationally. This interest in outcome‐based decision‐making has been given particular impetus through the ‘results’‐based movement in evaluation and performance management since the 1980s, which has increased in scope over time, slowly changing its emphasis from cost reduction and measuring outputs to measuring outcomes. This change has been widely welcomed by policymakers, practitioners and academics. However, there is evidence that the reality is often rather less than the rhetoric. Moreover, the ‘attribution problem’ of attributing changes in outcomes to specific social policies has remained a major issue. The conceptual solution of constructing ‘cause‐and‐effect’ models, imported from the policy evaluation field, has only recently become common for operationalising these models. This article outlines the evolution of interest in outcome‐based social policy‐making up to recent times and the growing realization of the importance of the attribution problem. It then outlines both how the ‘cause‐and‐effect’ policy modelling approach can partially tackle the attribution problem, but also its inherent limitations. Lastly, the article uses several case studies in current UK social policy‐making to demonstrate the potential importance of the reasoning embedded within cause‐and‐effect models but also the dangers in policy‐making which adopts this approach without understanding its conceptual basis or in fields where it is inappropriate, given the current state of our knowledge of social policy systems.     

Theory in the Bedroom: A Report from the Macquarie University AIDS and Heterosexuality Project

The political and social questions raised by AIDS/HIV are particularly complex ones, concerned as they are with changing the sexual practices of both the heterosexual and the homosexual population. In many ways these questions have tested the limits of orthodox policy-making processes. The Macquarie University ‘AIDS and Heterosexuality’ project is one of a small number of research projects which have attempted both to analyse critically existing AIDS policy assumptions and to provide alternative conceptual methods for understanding the processes of changing sexual practices. The Macquarie University project is particularly concerned with the way that women have been represented within mainstream policy: this paper describes this representation and presents some alternative suggestions for understanding the place of women in preventing transmission within the heterosexual population.     

Third Way Social Governance: Where is the State?

The ‘Third Way’ politics of Blair's New Labour government of the United Kingdom has popularised a number of policy reforms centred on a supposedly new discourse of ‘devolution’, ‘inclusion’, ‘partnerships’ and ‘community’. These notions reflect a re‐emergence of the ideas and values of civil society, participation and localism. Key drivers of this discourse are: new conceptions of citizenship; a retreat from the social state to a politics of community; and a questioning of both ‘big‐state’ interventionist and competitive market approaches to public policy. These trends have resonance in the Australian context. The welfare reform agenda of the Australian Commonwealth government together with community building and engagement initiatives of State governments have been sites for these policy directions. Much of the debate surrounding these policies excludes or minimises the fundamental role of an active state by focusing on an uncritical conception of community. Drawing on the notion of network governance, an alternative framework for re‐conceptualising state‐community relations and delivering improved community outcomes is posited. The paper concludes by suggesting possible social governance methodologies for actioning this framework.     

Making Markets in the English National Health Service

Many commentators point to the rise of markets in public services such as healthcare. However, the conventional ‘similarity’ thesis has been challenged by the ‘difference’ thesis. This article critiques and extends the analysis of a recent contribution by Jane Gingrich to the ‘difference thesis’ with a more detailed case study of the English National Health Service (NHS). It argues that the text tends to ignore earlier models and other associated variables; provides a rather crude monolithic characterization of ‘left’ and ‘right’; and assumes rather than demonstrates strategic choice. It modifies some of her major conclusions: markets in public services matter (correct); markets vary in profound and important ways (correct, but perhaps in other ways); and partisan politics are central to explaining and shaping markets (perhaps over‐stated). While Gingrich's ‘breadth’ account is persuasive at the macro‐level, some questions arise from a more detailed account of the English NHS. First, it is not certain that Gingrich's typology is based on the most important dimensions. Second, her account tends to under‐state the importance of issues such as the nature of contracts, price competition, regulation and policies such as Private Finance Initiative. Third, it is not clear that the Conservative healthcare market can be characterized as an Austerity Market, and the Labour market as a Consumer‐Controlled Market. Fourth, this static characterization under‐states the degree of change between and within governments. Lastly, it is not clear what type of market the coalition government has introduced, but this hybrid type may be marked more by policy learning than ideology.     

The Australian Social Inclusion Agenda: A New Approach to Social Policy?

The Social Inclusion Agenda (‘SIA’) was introduced by the Australian Labor Party (‘ALP’) in the lead up to the 2007 federal election. The rhetoric was hopeful, proposing to reframe the government's approach to disadvantage. Rhetoric aside, what the then opposition meant when it talked of building social inclusion (‘SI’) was less clear than may have immediately met the eye. This paper offers an introductory analysis and review of the SIA. It first considers why Australia might benefit from a readjustment in its social policy direction, reflecting on the concepts of poverty and Amartya Sen's ‘capabilities approach‘. Second, it offers a critical overview of the main conceptions of SI/Social Exclusion. Third, it applies these first two parts of analysis to developments to date with the SIA. This part, whilst limited in scope and preliminary at best, offers some general comments as to the possibilities and pitfalls of the SIA and proposes the way forward from an analytical perspective in terms of guiding the SIA in a desirable direction.     

The Accord,Wages Policy and Social Security

The Accord remains the key policy commitment of the Government. Whilst the operation of the Accord encompasses many policy areas, in practice the Accord has been fundamentally a wages policy. As such, other policy commitments of the Accord, such as those in the area of social security, have become secondary to the maintenance of a sustainable wages policy which produces the ‘correct’ macroeconomic outcomes. In this context two ‘objective’ social security objectives of the Accord are assessed — the indexation of benefits, and the targetting of single benefits to 25 per cent of average weekly male earnings. Both objectives have been compromised by the trade-offs and deals carried out to sustain the wages regulation component of the Accord. Alternative criteria for indexing benefits and for adjusting benefits relative to other income claims are outlined.     

From blank spaces to flows of life: transforming community engagement in environmental decision-making and its implications for localism

Localism advocates the participation of ‘local’ groups in governmental decision-making processes. While making policy more context/place specific is a progressive goal, this paper suggests that the processes through which this occurs, and underlying conceptual approaches to scale and place, require a careful analysis. Although often side-lined, Indigenous experiences of localism are key to seeing these issues as critical responses to place and politics, rather than relegating them to an ‘Aboriginal’-specific issue. This paper outlines two practical implementations of Aboriginal inclusion in environmental decision-making, in Canada and Australia. These case studies demonstrate both the failings of current framings of localism and ‘environment’ in policy-making and the inadequate responses of governments to the complexities of place making. These challenges are illustrative and symptomatic of wider issues about how environmental policy and place are currently envisaged. This paper suggests a new methodological framing of these issues that positions the current framing as one view among many, offers a non-relativist frame of communication for moving beyond inclusion and outlines the implications of this reframing for localism.     

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.     

Social inclusion under Labor in South Australia

Social inclusion policies were championed by the former Rann Labor government in South Australia from 2002 to 2011. In 2011 the Social Inclusion Unit was dissolved by the South Australian government. It is argued that the relatively narrow focus of the former SIU on ‘problem’ communities limited its capacity to provide more than residual solutions. The diminishing political returns on social inclusion also encouraged the South Australian government to abandon this initiative. In 2014 this government has had to grapple with the end of car making in Australia and a declining manufacturing labour force, traditionally a ‘mainstream’ constituency of the Labor Party. The return to ‘mainstreaming’ social policy in South Australia might offer limited space for realignment of social policy with the concept of social citizenship. It might also represent a move away from the functionalist morality of social inclusion. Social inclusion as practiced in South Australia has limited capacity to address generalised social disadvantage. The latter is likely to concern a re‐elected Labor minority government grappling with significant job losses and a declining local economy.     

The 'Dole or Drudgery' Dilemma: Education, the Work Ethic and Unemployment

Before the recession, Labour ministers claimed that much unemployment in the UK was voluntary. While social policy authors have repeatedly countered such claims by stressing that unemployed people generally possess a strong work ethic and employment commitment, their accounts typically neglect the role that choosiness in job search behaviour plays in deciding individuals' employment status. Fifty in‐depth interviews with both unemployed and employed respondents exposed considerable diversity in attitudes towards ‘dole’ (being unemployed and claiming unemployment benefits) and ‘drudgery’ (doing less attractive jobs). The more educated were more likely to prefer ‘dole’ to ‘drudgery’ (this was also found using National Child Development Study survey data), yet they usually found jobs despite their greater choosiness. Those with very low educational attainment often desperately wanted jobs but could not find them due to their low employability – which might offer an explanation for the often replicated (yet paradoxical) finding that unemployed people generally exhibit a strong work ethic and pro‐employment attitudes and behaviours. Furthermore, the findings indicate that the scope for many Jobseeker's Allowance claimants to increase their net income by undertaking an unattractive job is greater than social policy authors often imply. The question of ‘who must do the least attractive jobs?’ has been neglected by both social policy academics and policy‐makers.