Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Home

Reconsidering ‘What Works’ in Welfare-to-Work with the Vulnerable Unemployed: The Potential of Relational Causality as an Alternative Approach

  • Tanja Dall (a1) and Sophie Danneris (a2)

Abstract

There is growing interest in research that informs more effective practices in employment services across Europe, Australia and the USA. However, despite the ever-expanding amount of research on the implementation and efficacy of various policy programmes in practice, the knowledge on how to bring unemployed individuals closer to the labour market remains ambiguous and inconclusive. This is especially so in the context of the more vulnerable unemployed, who face physical, mental and social challenges in addition to unemployment. In this article, we examine the existing literature in terms of its potential to inform (the development of) effective employment policies. On this basis, we outline an alternative approach based on the concept of relational causality, and discuss the implications of such an approach for applied policy research.

Copyright

References

Hide All
Andersen, N., Caswell, D. and Larsen, F. (2017) ‘A new approach to helping the unemployed: the promise of developing new knowledge in an interactive and collaborative process’, European Journal of Social Policy, 19, 4, 335–52.
Behnke, S., Frölich, M. and Lochner, M. (2010) ‘Unemployed and their caseworkers: should they be friends or foes?’, Journal of the Royal Statistical Society, 173, 1, 67–92.
Biesta, G. J. J. (2010) ‘Why ‘what works’ still won’t work: from evidence-based education to value-based education’, Studies in Philosophy and Education, 29, 5, 491–50.
Bjørnholt, B. and Larsen, F. (2014) ‘The politics of performance measurement: “Evaluation use as mediator for politics”, Evaluation, 20, 4, 400–11.
Borland, J. (2014) ‘Dealing with unemployment: what should be the role of labour market programs?’, Evidence Base, 4, 1, 1–21.
Brady, M. and Cook, K. (2015) ‘The impact of welfare to work on parents and their children’, Evidence Base, 3, 1–23.
Bredgaard, T. (2015) ‘Evaluating what works for whom in active labour market policies’, European Journal of Social Security, 17, 4, 436–52.
Bredgaard, T. and Hansen, C. (2012) ‘Aktivering af unge kontanthjælpsmodtagere med problemer udover ledighed’, Samfundsoekonomen, 3, 31–7.
Brodkin, E.Z. (2011) ‘Policy work: street-level organizations under new managerialism’, Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 21, 253–77.
Brodkin, E. Z. (2013) ‘Street-level organizations and the welfare state’, in Brodkin, E. Z. and Marston, G. (ed.) Work and the Welfare State. Street-level Organizations and Workfare Politics, Washington: Georgetown University Press, 1734.
Brodkin, E. Z. and Larsen, F. (2013) ‘Changing boundaries: the policies of workfare in the U.S. and Europe’, Poverty and Public Policy, 5, 1, 3747.
Brodkin, E. Z. and Marston, G. (eds.) (2013) Work and the Welfare State. Street-level Organizations and Workfare Politics, Washington: Georgetown University Press.
Campbell, M., Thomson, H., Fenton, C. and Gibson, M. (2016) ‘Lone parents, health, wellbeing and welfare to work: a systematic review of qualitative studies’, BMC Public Health, 16, 188, 110.
Card, D., Kluve, J. and Weber, A. (2015) What Works? A Meta-Analysis of Recent Active Labour Market Program Evaluations, IZA DP No. 9236, http://ftp.iza.org/dp9236.pdf [accessed 01.02.2016].
Carter, E. and Whitworth, A. (2015) ‘Creaming and parking in quasi-marketised welfare-to-work schemes: designed out of or designed in to the UK Work Programme?’, Journal of Social Policy, 44, 2, 277–96.
Caswell, D., Eskelinen, L. and Olesen, S. P. (2011) ‘Identity work and client resistance underneath the canopy of active employment policy’, Qualitative Social Work, 12, 1, 823.
Caswell, D., Kupka, P., Larsen, F. and van Berkel, R. (2017) ‘The frontline delivery of welfare-to-work in context’, in van Berkel, R., Caswell, D., Kupka, P. and Larsen, F. (eds.), Frontline Delivery of Welfare-to-Work Policies in Europe: Activating the Unemployed, New York: Routledge.
Caswell, D., Larsen, J. E. and Sieling-Monas, S. M. (2015) ‘Cash benefit recipients – vulnerable or villains?’, in Bengtsson, T. T., Frederiksen, M. and Larsen, J. E. (eds.), The Danish Welfare State, New York: Palgrave Macmillan, 217–31.
Considine, M., Lewis, J., O’sullivan, S. and Sol, E. (2015) Getting Welfare to Work: Street- Level Governance in Australia, the UK, and the Netherlands, Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Crisp, R. and Fletcher, D. (2008) A Comparative Review of Workfare Programmes in the United States, Canada and Australia, London: Department for Work and Pensions, http://www.splunderousnoog.com/rrep533.pdf [accessed 05.09.2018].
Dall, T. (2018) ‘Social work professionals’ management of institutional and professional responsibilities at the micro-level of welfare-to-work’, European Journal of Social Work, 1-13, doi: 10.1080/13691457.2018.1476330.
Dall, T. and Sarangi, S. (2018) ‘Ways of ‘appealing to the institution’ in interprofessional rehabilitation team decision-making’, Journal of Pragmatics, 129, 102–19.
Danneris, S. (2016) ‘One size doesn’t fit all: diversifying research on active labor market policies’, Journal of Social Work and Society, 14, 1, 122.
Danneris, S. and Caswell, D. (2019) ‘Exploring the ingredients of success: studying trajectories of the vulnerable unemployed who have entered work or education in Denmark’, Social Policy and Society, doi: 10.1017/S1474746419000198.
Danneris, S. and Dall, T. (2017) ‘Expressing and responding to self-efficacy in meetings between clients and social work professionals’, Nordic Social Work Research, 7, 2, 115–40.
Danneris, S. and Nielsen, M. H. (2018) ‘Bringing the client back in: a comparison between political rationality and the experiences of the unemployed’, Social Policy and Administration, 52, 7, 1441–54.
Davies, P. (2012) ‘The state of evidence-based policy evaluation and its role in policy formation’, National Institute Economic Review, 129, 1, R4152.
Dépelteau, F. (2018) ‘Relational thinking in sociology: relevance, concurrence and dissonance’, in Depéltheau, F. (ed.) The Palgrave Handbook of Relational Sociology, New York: Palgrave Macmillan, 333.
Diaz, C. and Drewery, S. (2016) ‘A critical assessment of evidence-based policy and practice in social work’, Journal of Evidence-Informed Social Work, 13, 4, 425–31.
Diefenbach, T. (2009) ‘New public management in public sector organizations– the dark sides of managerialistic “enlightenment”’, Public Administration: An International Quarterly, 87, 4, 892909.
Drew, P., Toerien, M., Irvine, A. and Sainsbury, R. (2010) A Study of Language and Communication between Advisers and Claimants in Work Focused Interviews, (Research report no. 633), Norwich: Department of Work and Pensions, http://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/20130314010810/http://research.dwp.gov.uk/asd/asd5/rports2009-2010/rrep633.pdf [accessed 05.09.2018].
Dubois, V. (2010) The Bureaucrat and the Poor: Encounters in French Welfare Offices, Aldershot: Ashgate.
Eskelinen, L. and Olesen, S. P. (2010) Beskæftigelsesindsatsen Og Dens Virkninger set fra Kontanthjælpsmodtagernes Perspektiv, København: AKF.
Graversen, B. K. and van Ours, J. C. (2009) ‘How a mandatory activation program reduces unemployment durations: the effects of distance’, SSRN Working Paper Series, Copenhagen: Danish National Centre for Social Research (SFI); Tilburg University - Department of Economics: Social Science Research Network.
Griggs, J. and Evans, M. (2010) Sanctions within Conditional Benefit Systems. A Review of Evidence, New York: Joseph Rowntree Foundation, https://www.jrf.org.uk/sites/default/files/jrf/migrated/files/conditional-benefit-systems-full.pdf [accessed 05.09.18].
Hall, C. and White, S. (2005) ‘Looking inside professional practice: discourse, narrative and ethnographic approaches to social work and counselling’, Qualitative Social Work, 4, 4, 379–90.
Hansen, H. and Natland, S. (2017) ‘The working relationship between social worker and service user in an activation policy context’, Nordic Social Work Research, 7, 2, 101–14.
Head, B. W. (2010) ‘Reconsidering evidence-based policy: key issues and challenges’, Policy and Society, 29, 2, 7794.
Heinrich, C. J. and Marschke, G. (2010) ‘Incentives and their dynamics in public sector performance management systems’, Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, 29, 1, 183208.
Herz, M. and Lalander, P. (2016) ‘Neoliberal management of social work in Sweden’, in Kamali, M. and Jönsson, J. H. (eds.), Neoliberalism, Nordic Welfare States and Social Work. Current and Future Challenges, London: Routledge, 5766.
Hood, C. and Dixon, R. (2015) ‘What we have to show for 30 years of new public management: higher costs, more complaints’, Governance: An International Journal of Policy, Administration, and Institutions, 28, 3, 265–67.
Irvine, A., Sainsbury, R., Drew, P. and Toerien, M. (2010) An Exploratory Comparison of the Interactions between Advisers and Younger and Older Clients during Work Focused Interviews, Research Report no 634, London: Department for Work and Pensions.
Kirkwood, S., Jennings, B., Laurier, E., Cree, V. and Whyte, B. (2014) ‘Towards an interactional approach to reflective practice in social work’, European Journal of Social Work, 19, 3–4, 484–99.
Koivisto, J. (2007) ‘What evidence base? Steps towards the relational evaluation of social interventions’, Evidence and Policy, 3, 4, 527–37.
Latour, B. (2005) Reassembling the Social. An Introduction to Actor-Network-Theory, New York: Oxford University Press.
Lauri, N. (2016) Narratives of Governing: Rationalization, Responsibility and Resistance in Social Work, Ph.D. Thesis, Department of Political Science and Umeå Centre for Gender Studies, Graduate School for Gender Studies, Umeå: Umeå University.
Lindsay, C. and Houston, D. (2013) ‘Fit for work? Representations and explanations of the disability benefit ‘crisis’ in the UK and beyond’, in Lindsay, C. and Houston, D. (eds.), Disability Benefits, Welfare Reform and Employment Policy, New York: Palgrave Macmillan, 114.
Lipsky, M. (2010) Street-Level Bureaucracy. Dilemmas of the Individual in Public Services, New York: Russel Sage Foundation.
Maibom, J., Rosholm, M. and Svarer, M. (2016) ‘Experimental evidence on the effects of early meetings and activation’, The Scandinavian Journal of Economics, 119, 3, 541–70.
Mäkitalo, M. (2014) ‘Categorization’, in Hall, C., Juhila, K., Matarese, M. and van Nijnatten, C. (eds.), Analysing Social Work Communication. Discourse in Practice, New York: Routledge, 2543.
Mäkitalo, M. and Säljö, R. (2002a) ‘Invisible people: institutional reasoning and reflexivity in the production of services and “social facts” in public employment agencies’, Mind, Culture, and Activity, 9, 3, 160–78.
Mäkitalo, M. and Säljö, R. (2002b) ‘Talk in institutional context and institutional context in talk: categories as situated practices’, Text, 22, 1, 5782.
Malmberg-Heimonen, I. E. (2015) ‘Social workers’ training evaluated by a cluster- randomized study: Reemployment for welfare recipients?’, Research on Social Work Practice, 25, 6, 643–53.
Malmberg-Heimonen, I. E. and Vuori, J. (2005) ‘Activation or discouragement– the effect of enforced participation on the success of job-search training, European Journal of Social Work, 8, 4, 451–67.
Marston, G. and Watts, R. (2003) ‘Tampering with the evidence: a critical appraisal of evidence-based policy-making’, The Drawing Board: An Australian Review of Public Affairs, 3, 3, 143–63.
Martin, J. P. (2015) ‘Activation and active labour market policies in OECD countries: stylised facts and evidence on their effectiveness’, IZA Journal of Labor Policy, 4, 4, 129.
Matarese, M. and Caswell, D. (2018) ‘I’m gonna ask you about yourself so I can put it on paper: analysing street level bureaucracy through form-related talk in social work’, British Journal of Social Work, 48, 3, 714–33.
McDonald, C. and Marston, G. (2008) ‘Motivating the unemployed? Attitudes at the front line’, Australian Social Work, 61, 4, 315–26.
McIntosh, I. and Wright, S. (2018) ‘Exploring what the notion of lived experiences might offer for social policy analysis’, Journal of Social Policy, 119, doi: 10.1017/S0047279418000570.
McNeese, C. A. and Thyer, B. A. (2004) ‘Evidence-based practice and social work’, Journal of Evidence-Based Social Work, 1, 1, 725.
Møller, M. Ø., Andersen, V. N. and Iversen, K. (2016) Review af resultatbaseret styring: Resultatbaseret styring på grundskole-, beskæftigelses- og socialområdet, København: KORA.
Møller, M. Ø. and Stone, D. (2013) ‘Disciplining disability under Danish active labour market policy’, Social Policy and Administration, 47, 5, 586604.
Müller, H. and Wolf, S. (2015) Democracy and the Public Service, Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Nevo, I. and Slonim-Nevo, V. (2011) ‘The myth of evidence-based practice: towards evidence-informed practice’, British Journal of Social Work, 41, 1176–97.
Newman, J. (2017) ‘Deconstructing the debate over evidence-based policy’, Critical Policy Studies, 11, 2, 211–26.
Nielsen, M. H. (2015) ‘Det aktive menneskes triumf?– en analyse af de omfattende forandringer af kategoriseringen af kontanthjælpsmodtageren’, Tidsskrift for Arbejdsliv, 17, 1, 4460.
Nothdurfter, U. (2016) ‘The street-level delivery of activation policies: constraints and possibilities for a practice of citizenship’, European Journal of Social Work, 19, 3–4, 420–40.
Okpych, N. J. and Yu, J. L-H. (2014) ‘A historical analysis of evidence-based practice in social work: the unfinished journey toward an empirically grounded profession’, Social Service Review, 88, 1, 358.
Olesen, S. P. and Eskelinen, L. (2011) ‘Short narratives as a qualitative approach to effects of social work interventions’, Nordic Social Work Research, 1, 1, 6177.
Petersén, A. C. and Olsson, J. I. (2015) ‘Calling evidence-based practice into question: acknowledging phronetic knowledge in social work’, British Journal of Social Work, 45, 1581–97.
Porpora, D. V. (2018) ‘Critical realism as relational sociology’, in Dépeltheau, F. (ed.), The Palgrave Handbook of Relational Sociology, New York: Palgrave Macmillan, 413–29.
Raffass, T. (2017) ‘Demanding activation’, Journal of Social Policy, 46, 2, 349–65.
Rehwald, K., Rosholm, M. and Svarer, M. (2017) ‘Do public or private providers of employment services matter for employment? Evidence for a randomized experiment’, Labour Economics, 45, 169–87.
Schram, S., Flyvbjerg, B. and Landman, T. (2013) ‘ Political political science: a phronetic approach’, New Political Science, 35, 3, 359–72.
Shortall, S. (2012) ‘The role of subjectivity and knowledge power struggles in the formation of public policy’, Sociology, 47, 6, 1088–103.
Smedslund, G., Dalsbo, T. K., Hagen, K. B., Johme, T., Rud, M. G. and Steiro, A. (2006) ‘Work programmes for welfare recipients: a systematic review’, Campbell Systematic Reviews, 2, 1122.
Solberg, J. (2011a) ‘Accepted and resisted: the client’s responsibility for making proposals in activation encounters’, Text and Talk, 31, 6, 733–52.
Solberg, J. (2011b) ‘Activation encounters: dilemmas of accountability in construction clients as ‘knowledgeable’’, Qualitative Social Work, 10, 3, 381–98.
Solberg, J. (2014) Defensive Accountings. An Ethnomethodological Study of Clients’ Resistance Practices in Vocational Rehabilitation Encounters, PhD Dissertation, University of Oslo, Norway, Department of Sociology and Human Geography.
Soss, J., Fording, R. C. and Schram, S. F. (2011) Disciplining the Poor. Neoliberal Paternalism and the Persistent Power of Race, Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.
Toerien, M., Sainsbury, R., Drew, P. and Irvine, A. (2015) ‘Understanding interactions between social security claimants and frontline employment advisers– public and private provision in the UK’, Social Work and Society, 13, 1, 121.
Triantafillou, P. (2015) ‘The political implications of performance management and evidence-based policymaking’, American Review of Public Administration, 45, 2, 167–81.
van Berkel, R. (2017) ‘State of the art in frontline studies of welfare-to-work. A literature review’, in van Berkel, R., Caswell, D., Kupka, P., and Larsen, F. (eds.), Frontline Delivery of Welfare-to-Work Policies in Europe: Activating the Unemployed, New York: Routledge, 1235.
van Berkel, R., Caswell, D., Kupka, P., and Larsen, F. (eds.) (2017) Frontline Delivery of Welfare-to-Work Policies in Europe: Activating the Unemployed, New York: Routledge.
van Berkel, R. and Knies, E. (2016) ‘Performance management, caseloads and the frontline provision of social services’, Social Policy and Administration, 50, 1, 5978.
van Berkel, R. and van der Aa, P. (2012) ‘Activation work: policy programme administration or professional service provision?’, Journal of Social Policy, 41, 3, 493510.

Keywords

Metrics

Altmetric attention score

Full text views

Total number of HTML views: 0
Total number of PDF views: 0 *
Loading metrics...

Abstract views

Total abstract views: 0 *
Loading metrics...

* Views captured on Cambridge Core between <date>. This data will be updated every 24 hours.

Usage data cannot currently be displayed