3,845 research outputs found
sj-docx-1-wes-10.1177_09500170221096586 – Supplemental material for Flexible Working and the Division of Housework and Childcare: Examining Divisions across Arrangement and Occupational Lines
No full textSupplemental material, sj-docx-1-wes-10.1177_09500170221096586 for Flexible Working and the Division of Housework and Childcare: Examining Divisions across Arrangement and Occupational Lines by Heejung Chung and Cara Booker in Work, Employment and Society</p
Special Issue: Subjective Insecurity and the Role of Institutions
No full textThe issue of social insecurity is high on the public and scientific agenda. Most research, however, looks at
objective forms of insecurity like growing labour market volatilities or atypical employment. Less has been
done with regard to the way people perceive these changes and the role of institutions therein. While recent
studies have highlighted the relatively weak role of institutions in explaining different levels of subjective
insecurity, they were limited in their understanding in the institutions–security interplay. This special issue
aims to understand how institutions generate and moderate the outcomes of subjective insecurity, as well
as to overcome some of the methodological limitations of previous studies. The introduction provides
a state-of-the-art literature review and unfolds the research question addressed in the special issue. It
concludes with some thoughts for future research in the field of social insecurity and institutions
Introduction to Special Issue: Subjective Insecurity and the Role of Institutions
No full textThe issue of social insecurity is high on the public and scientific agenda. Most research, however, looks at objective forms of insecurity like growing labour market volatilities or atypical employment. Less has been done with regard to the way people perceive these changes and the role of institutions therein. While recent studies have highlighted the relatively weak role of institutions in explaining different levels of subjective insecurity, they were limited in their understanding in the institutions–security interplay. This special issue aims to understand how institutions generate and moderate the outcomes of subjective insecurity, as well as to overcome some of the methodological limitations of previous studies. The introduction provides a state-of-the-art literature review and unfolds the research question addressed in the special issue. It concludes with some thoughts for future research in the field of social insecurity and institutions
sj-docx-1-trs-10.1177_10242589221130597 – Supplemental material for Reflecting the changing world of work?: A critique of existing survey measures and a proposal for capturing new ways of working
No full textSupplemental material, sj-docx-1-trs-10.1177_10242589221130597 for Reflecting the changing world of work?: A critique of existing survey measures and a proposal for capturing new ways of working by Yvonne Lott, Clare Kelliher and Heejung Chung in Transfer: European Review of Labour and Research</p
Political legitimacy and welfare state futures: Introduction
No full textWelfare attitudes are pivotal in understanding the preferences and demands of citizens to help
shape future policy reforms in welfare states. Accordingly, and due to the availability of large
scale comparative survey data on attitudes, large numbers of studies of welfare attitudes have
emerged during the past few decades. However, some limitations still exist in the field, such
as the background assumptions informing the questionnaire design and top down framing of
issues, the population represented and finally limitations in teasing out the causal mechanisms
of relationships, especially pertaining to that of policy reform. This regional issue brings
together papers that address some of these issues and others in welfare attitude research to
provide some guidance for future studies. This paper first summarises the existing studies on
welfare attitudes to identify some of the key limitations, and introduces the five articles in this
special issue. It concludes with some suggestions for future studies in welfare attitudes
The Context: How European Welfare States Have Responded to Post-Industrialism, Ageing Populations, and Populist Nationalism
No full textWelfare states across Europe are changing: the future will not be like the past. This chapter examines the economic, social, and political challenges that have confronted European welfare states during the past fifteen years, including globalization and the post-industrial transformation, population ageing and shifts in family life, the ascendancy of neo-liberalism, and the growth of populist nationalism. It identifies new directions in policy: neo-liberal austerity; individual responsibility; neo-Keynesian interventionism; social investment; predistribution; fightback; and welfare chauvinism or protectionism. It argues that the European welfare state is undergoing radical transformation. Whether the European tradition of state intervention to meet the needs of citizens will survive in all countries is at present unclear
After Austerity: Welfare State Transformation in Europe after the Great Recession
No full textEuropean welfare states are undergoing profound change, driven by globalization, technical changes, and population ageing. More immediately, the aftermath of the Great Recession and unprecedented levels of immigration have imposed additional pressures. This book examines welfare state transformations across a representative range of European countries and at the EU level, and considers likely new directions in social policy. It reviews the dominant neo-liberal austerity response and discusses social investment, fightback, welfare chauvinism, and protectionism.
It argues that the class solidarities and cleavages that shaped the development of welfare states are no longer powerful. Tensions surrounding divisions between old and young, women and men, immigrants and denizens, and between the winners in a new, more competitive, world and those who feel left behind are becoming steadily more important. European countries have entered a period of political instability and this is reflected in policy directions. Austerity predominates nearly everywhere, but patterns of social investment, protectionism, neo-Keynesian intervention, and fightback vary between countries. The volume identify areas of convergence and difference in European welfare state futures in this up-to-date study - essential reading to grasp the pace and directions of change
Liberalism, Social Investment, Protection, and Chauvinism: New Directions for the European Welfare State
No full textPossibilities for Change and New Frontiers: Introduction to the Work and Family Researchers Network Special Issue on Advancing Equality at Work and Home
No full textThis special issue showcases recent scholarship that clarifies the nature of inequality as it emerges at the intersection of today's workplaces and homes. We bring together scholarly works presented during the Work and Family Researchers Network conferences from 2018 and 2020. These articles provide a foundation for the development of future knowledge that advances equality at work and home, paying special attention to the complex nature of work and family in diverse contexts. Our introduction to the issue further highlights the need to amplify the voices and experiences of marginalised groups of people around the world who have received limited attention in the work and family literature. We conclude by offering suggestions of the role each of us can play in helping the work-family field become more inclusive and expanding ways of knowing that better represent work-family occurrences across diverse contexts
Measuring Flexicurity: Precautionary Notes, a New Framework, and an Empirical Example
No full textRecently, there has been an increase and abundance of literature measuring flexicurity across countries. However, there is yet to be any agreement on the definition of the key concepts of flexicurity as well as the framework in which to base one’s research. Due to this, the outcomes found in the existing studies are rather diverse, far from reaching a consensus, and can be misleading. This paper addresses the issues by first introducing a framework, namely, the various levels and stages of flexicurity, as well as introducing some key issues that should be addressed when doing flexicurity indicators research. In addition, an empirical example is given to show how the framework derived can be used to carry out flexicurity research, and to show how by not regarding these frameworks one can come to misleading outcomes
- …
