Payment of Universal Credit for couples in the UK: Challenges for reform from a gender perspective

Universal Credit has been rolled out gradually in the United Kingdom since 2013 as one integrated means-tested benefit replacing six different transfers with a single monthly payment. Previously, these benefits were awarded for distinct purposes and, for couples who claimed them, were potentially payable to different partners. Concerns about Universal Credit’s single payment include the opportunities it may create for facilitating domestic abuse, the fostering of more unequal power relations within couples, the reduction of financial autonomy for individuals, and the de-labelling of benefit payments. This article explores debates about the prospects for individual payments to partners in couples of Universal Credit as a jointly assessed integrated means-tested benefit, including different approaches emerging from the United Kingdom’s devolved governments (mainly Scotland and Northern Ireland). Whilst payment to each partner is likely to be more feasible where there are separate rather than integrated means-tested benefits, it concludes that genuine financial autonomy for partners in couples is best pursued via individually based non-means-tested benefits.     

Social protection and revenue collection: How they can jointly contribute to strengthening social cohesion

Social protection and revenue collection are often regarded as potential drivers of social cohesion. The article joins this debate, providing three main contributions. First, we carefully discuss the concept of social cohesion and endorse one specific definition. Second, we propose using the concept of the “fiscal contract” as the key theoretical lens to understand the often neglected potential joint effects of social protection and revenue collection policies on social cohesion. Third, we illustrate three main mechanisms through which these policies can have positive or negative impacts on the different components of social cohesion and highlight the relevance of these for policy-makers deliberations.     

How portable is social security for migrant workers? A review of the literature

This article reviews the recent literature on existing mechanisms that allow for the portability of social security entitlements for migrant workers and finds that North–North migrants have the best access to portability. There is limited coordination between origin and destination countries regarding the portability of social entitlements of South–North migrants. These migrants are dealing with discourses and policies that treat them as second class citizens, even as they are providing much‐needed labour to their host countries. South–South migrants are seeing new regional mechanisms addressing portability. However, many of the impacts of these mechanisms are not yet known. Other knowledge gaps on portability relate to internal and South–South migration, the role of gender and other social identities, migrants’ occupations as well as their legal immigration status.     

自酿葡萄酒的卫生指标和理化指标的检测

本实验以手工酿造的葡萄酒为原料,分别用维生素C试验盒法、密度瓶法、甲醇比色法和大肠菌群9管发酵法来测定葡萄酒酿造过程中的酒精度、甲醇的含量,维生素C含量、菌落总数和大肠菌群情况.结果显示,自酿葡萄酒的酒精度达（8.24～8.28）%、甲醇含量为0.029g/100mL,符合国家新标准中规定的红葡萄酒甲醇含量.维生素C随着酿造时间的延长,含量逐渐下降,由20d的28.536μg/mL降低到90d的25.013μg/mL.菌落总数和大肠菌群均符合国家标准.     

对“既不能全盘肯定又不全盘否定”的反思

本文根据肯定否定两种不同内涵的区分,认为：从客体发展的否定之否定过程推出既不能肯定一切又不能否定一切。混淆了两种不同含义的肯定否定;根据社会规律不同于自然规律的特点,认为：既不能肯定一切又不能否定一切的观点,混淆了社会规律和自然规律的区别。本文还探讨了作为社会规律的否定之否定规律是如何影响主体对社会客体的肯定否定形式的。     

论民族主义对国际格局的影响

本文首先就研究民族主义对国际政治影响的必要性以及民族主义概念进行了说明 ,并在对民族主义与国际格局演变的历史进行简要回顾的基础上 ,分析了民族主义对国际格局的影响 :民族主义通过瓦解帝国霸权影响国际格局的变迁 ;民族主义通过否定其他意识形态影响国际格局的转型 ;民族主义通过对国家的建构与解构改变国际格局。     

交通运输网络最短路径关键边问题研究

因自然灾害、运输组织等原因,造成道路与铁路运输网络线路中断、车站枢纽车流堵塞的现象普遍存在。本文就运输网络模型及最短路径关键边问题进行了分析研究,并给出了求解运输路径关键边的算法,对预防灾害、优化运输组织、降低因关键边(线路)中断而造成的损失、提高运输效率提供了科学的量化依据。     

Introduction: Social security,inclusive growth and social cohesion

This special issue selectively addresses the relationship linking social security systems, inclusive growth and social cohesion. Inclusive growth and social cohesion are viewed as political expedient and necessary goals for national economies. The desirability of their attainment reflects political pragmatism, the “social contract”, as much as it does a commitment to the wider emancipative goal of social justice. The International Social Security Association (ISSA) has often paraphrased these assertions to argue that there can be “no social justice without social security”. Of course, progress achieved towards the realization of the goals of inclusive growth and social cohesion should be equally beneficial for the adequacy, sustainability and coverage of social security systems. The aim of this special issue is to unpack and better understand the nature of this relationship.     

Second‐pillar pensions in Central and Eastern Europe: Payment constraints and exit options

During 1998–2007, a majority of Central and Eastern European (CEE) governments enacted laws obligating workers to save for retirement in privately managed individual accounts. The governments funded these accounts with a portion of public pension revenues, thus creating or increasing deficits in public systems. After the onset of the global financial and economic crisis (2008), most CEE governments reduced these funding diversions and scaled back the accounts. Now, a decade after the crisis, this article examines the benefits that the accounts are beginning to pay retiring workers. In general, these benefits are shown to be disadvantageous compared with public pensions. Some pay lump sums in lieu of regular monthly benefits, most fail to adjust pensions regularly for inflation, and some pay women less than men with equal account balances. In several countries, pensioners with individual accounts receive lower benefits than those without them. To enable retiring workers to avoid these disadvantages, several CEE governments have allowed them to refund their account balances and receive full public pensions. Yet while this strategy diffuses worker dissatisfaction, it also places strains on public pension finance. To assist second‐pillar account holders without weakening public pensions, governments should consider making private pension savings voluntary and financing these schemes independently of public pensions – i.e. by worker and employer contributions and, possibly, direct state support.     

Biometric technology and beneficiary rights in social protection programmes

Over the past decade, the use of biometric technology in the identification and authentication of beneficiaries of social protection programmes has increased. However, there has been little debate among governments, donors and civil society organizations on the potential implications of this technology in relation to the inclusion of the most vulnerable sectors of the population, as well as for the protection of privacy and personal data. This article aims to fill that gap. First, the article reviews how biometric technology is used in various social protection programmes around the world. Then, it examines the potential risks and challenges of deploying biometric technology in social protection programmes. Finally, it assesses the requirements necessary to ensure that biometric technology is implemented in compliance with international law standards. The focus is on developing countries, where the use of biometric technology in identification systems has increased considerably in recent years. Among the key conclusions of the article is that the adoption of biometric technology, often encouraged by donors, needs to be preceded by democratic debate where all alternatives are discussed. The adoption of this technology should be accompanied by a context‐specific assessment of risks, and the adoption of an appropriate legal and institutional framework to protect rights and ensure that the most vulnerable and disadvantaged members of the population are not excluded.