This book has presented a set of empirical evidence from ten in-depth, evaluative case studies in ten European countries. In this concluding chapter, we highlight outstanding themes from the case studies and then go on to put forward a few implications of this research intended to inform experts, stakeholders and interested readers. Nearly two decades ago, Esping Anderson and colleagues (2002) made a case for a new welfare state that in the face of heightening uncertainties would adopt a generational life course logic. An emerging Social Investment paradigm became widely acknowledged, informed EU policy (European Commission, 2013), and has been influential worldwide (Deeming and Smyth, 2017). There is now shared understanding in scholarship and policy of a Social Investment paradigm, albeit sometimes more in the form of ‘engaged discord’ (Hemerijck, 2017: 5) than thoroughgoing consensus. We begin this chapter by reminding the reader (traveller) of the main stop-over that we took him/her to visit in this book. It has been a daring journey across ten European countries (from south to north and from west to east) in order to see social innovation initiatives in the Social Investment policy framework. Thematically we followed in turn the policy domains of early interventions in the life course, active labour markets, and social solidarity. Cases were selected because, based on initial understandings of the vision of the projects and programmes, they fit with the Social Investment paradigm and literature, and because there was some evidence of innovation. Most importantly, there was the opportunity for learning.
Social Investment in theory and praxis: a ‘quiet revolution’ in innovative local services?
Bassi AndreaMembro del Collaboration Group
;
2019
Abstract
This book has presented a set of empirical evidence from ten in-depth, evaluative case studies in ten European countries. In this concluding chapter, we highlight outstanding themes from the case studies and then go on to put forward a few implications of this research intended to inform experts, stakeholders and interested readers. Nearly two decades ago, Esping Anderson and colleagues (2002) made a case for a new welfare state that in the face of heightening uncertainties would adopt a generational life course logic. An emerging Social Investment paradigm became widely acknowledged, informed EU policy (European Commission, 2013), and has been influential worldwide (Deeming and Smyth, 2017). There is now shared understanding in scholarship and policy of a Social Investment paradigm, albeit sometimes more in the form of ‘engaged discord’ (Hemerijck, 2017: 5) than thoroughgoing consensus. We begin this chapter by reminding the reader (traveller) of the main stop-over that we took him/her to visit in this book. It has been a daring journey across ten European countries (from south to north and from west to east) in order to see social innovation initiatives in the Social Investment policy framework. Thematically we followed in turn the policy domains of early interventions in the life course, active labour markets, and social solidarity. Cases were selected because, based on initial understandings of the vision of the projects and programmes, they fit with the Social Investment paradigm and literature, and because there was some evidence of innovation. Most importantly, there was the opportunity for learning.File | Dimensione | Formato | |
---|---|---|---|
bassi_Social investment in theory and praxis.pdf
accesso aperto
Descrizione: Conclusione volume
Tipo:
Versione (PDF) editoriale
Licenza:
Licenza per Accesso Aperto. Creative Commons Attribuzione - Non commerciale (CCBYNC)
Dimensione
616.46 kB
Formato
Adobe PDF
|
616.46 kB | Adobe PDF | Visualizza/Apri |
I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.