Jens Lind and Iver Hornemann Møller
This paper evaluates why activation programmes are still an important and core component of most European countries’ social‐ and labour market policies when it has become…
Abstract
Purpose
This paper evaluates why activation programmes are still an important and core component of most European countries’ social‐ and labour market policies when it has become increasingly clear that the employment effects are most often either unknown or very small.
Design/methodology/approach
To answer this issue, an in‐depth investigation of the evolution of activation programmes in the specific national context of Denmark is investigated.
Findings
Charting in detail the evolution of labour market activation (or workfare) programmes in Denmark, this paper displays the ongoing intensification of activation policies and ways in which this has reduced the living standards of marginalised groups and explains this to be the result of a power block that has a wider intent of disciplining the whole workforce, not least by encouraging more people to work harder and for longer hours, and rarely with overtime compensation.
Research limitations/implications
This paper explains the reasons for the continuing use of labour market insertion programmes when there is a lack of evidence that they are effective in achieving their goal of inserting people into employment.
Originality/value
This paper uses the notion of a power block to understand the reasons for advanced economies persisting with labour market activation programmes.
Details
Keywords
John Andersen, Jørgen Elm Larsen and Iver Hornemann Møller
The purpose of this paper is to discuss and theorise the links and possible dilemmas posed by the politics of redistribution and the politics of recognition taking the case of…
Abstract
Purpose
The purpose of this paper is to discuss and theorise the links and possible dilemmas posed by the politics of redistribution and the politics of recognition taking the case of Denmark as the point of departure.
Design/methodology/approach
The empirical observations in this paper consist of the political and discursive climate around legislation on ethnic minority matters, information from the Danish Statistical Bureau, the “Danish Level of Living Survey”, and the experiences from Danish urban districts which have a high concentration of immigrants.
Findings
Since the 1990s, the political discourse has changed with the emergence of right‐wing, anti‐immigration populism seriously affecting immigrants’ and refugees’ legal rights and their possibilities for socio‐cultural and socio‐economic inclusion. On the one hand, these changes have been driven by a strong “work first” discourse which has led to a reduction of the duration and level of social benefits, and increased poverty. On the other hand, other policy changes have been more inclusive examples being education policy, active labour market policy measures and innovative empowerment programmes in deprived urban districts.
Practical implications
Social innovation – here defined as the ability to organise bottom linked collective action/empowerment (including efficient political representation) – is a condition for reaching sustainable democratic and social development. But without more far‐reaching changes in the socio‐cultural and socio‐economic opportunity structures based on universal welfare principles and which also clearly address structural ethnic discrimination in all spheres of the social fabric, local empowerment and recognition strategies are likely to fail.
Originality/value
The paper addresses a crucial issue in the Danish and other European societies in relation to the exclusion and marginalisation of immigrants. The value of the paper is that it integrates different theoretical approaches to inclusion and exclusion of immigrants and employs different empirical material (quantitative and qualitative) to both underpin, discuss and challenge these theoretical approaches.