Ingo Bode, Laurent Gardin and Marthe Nyssens
This paper seeks to explore various types of quasi‐market governance in domiciliary elderly care with an interest in both the institutional variety of these governance…
Abstract
Purpose
This paper seeks to explore various types of quasi‐market governance in domiciliary elderly care with an interest in both the institutional variety of these governance arrangements and their assumable consequences, against the twofold background of the EU care policy agenda and the Nordic experience.
Design/methodology/approach
Based on evidence from four Western European countries, the paper examines how recent reforms have changed the provision of domiciliary care, including the shape of vertical and horizontal governance arrangements. Moreover, summarizing results of previous research and drawing on theoretical reflections rooted both in economics and sociology, the paper discusses the wider impact of these reforms.
Findings
The analysis points to country‐specific limitations of the quasi‐market approach regarding issues such as the work‐life balance of carers and the access to adequate services.
Originality/value
By combining different scientific approaches and exploring several institutional contexts, the paper offers new insights both in problems of quasi‐market governance and their cultural colouring.
Details
Keywords
Viola Burau and Signy Irene Vabo
The purpose of this paper is to introduce the papers included in this special issue and discuss the theme – shifts in Nordic welfare governance.
Abstract
Purpose
The purpose of this paper is to introduce the papers included in this special issue and discuss the theme – shifts in Nordic welfare governance.
Design/methodology/approach
The paper discusses the major themes and sets out the structure of the special issue.
Findings
The picture emerging is mixed and there is evidence for strong decentralisation where policy instruments allow for considerable local room to manoeuvre. Organisational arrangements for governance are also highly localised, but (over time) oscillate between decentralisation and centralisation. As for the consequences for universalism, the contributions point to three contrasting scenarios. The first, relatively optimistic assessment suggests that while decentralisation challenges territorial equality, in some Nordic countries there seems to be inbuilt self‐correcting mechanisms pulling in the opposite direction. The second scenario is more critical and here it is argued that shifts in welfare governance, such as decentralisation and the introduction of elements of self and market governance, challenge universalism; universalism has become highly contingent on local circumstances and the practice of welfare delivery mixes different types of justice. The final scenario is rather pessimistic about the prospects of universalism and suggests that the shifts in welfare governance challenge universalism on all counts and lead to a wide range of new inequalities among citizens. This echoes the analysis of non‐Nordic countries in Europe where the scope for universalism remains limited.
Originality/value
The contribution of this special issue is twofold. First, using elderly care as a case study, the special issue analyses the complexity of welfare governance by looking at changes in both the vertical and the horizontal dimensions of governing. Second, focusing on Nordic countries, it assesses the substantive implications of shifts in welfare governance, notably in terms of universalism.
Details
Keywords
Jacques Defourny and Marthe Nyssens
Twelve years ago, the concept of social enterprise was rarely discussed in Europe, however it is now making significant breakthroughs in European Union (EU) countries. Within this…
Abstract
Purpose
Twelve years ago, the concept of social enterprise was rarely discussed in Europe, however it is now making significant breakthroughs in European Union (EU) countries. Within this context, the purpose of this paper is to synthesize major evolutions experienced by social enterprises across Europe and the key challenges they are facing; and specific members of the EMES European Research Network provide a more in‐depth update as to current trends and debates in their respective countries
Design/methodology/approach
This paper is based on a comparative analysis of the different institutions (legal frameworks, public policies, supporting structures, public procurement policies …) which support the development of social enterprises in the different EU countries. To delimit the field, the paper relies on the “ideal‐type” social enterprise as defined by the EMES network: “Social enterprises are not‐for‐profit private organizations providing goods or services directly related to their explicit aim to benefit the community. They rely on a collective dynamics involving various types of stakeholders in their governing bodies, they place a high value on their autonomy and they bear economic risks linked to their activity”.
Findings
It was found that although the concept of social enterprise itself has not gained the same recognition in all EU countries (and is even still poorly understood in several of them), the reality is that growth and social enterprise are being experienced in most EU countries.
Originality/value
If the concept of social enterprise is on the public agenda of several EU countries, the understanding as well as the institutions to support their development vary from one country to the other. This paper provides a comparative analysis of this heterogeneous but rich landscape.