Social policy in the European Union has developed rapidly in recent years, following the 2000 Lisbon Summit and the subsequent adoption of National Action Plans on Social Inclusion and a set of common social indicators for all Member States. This paper describes European initiatives and examines the role played by social science research in these developments. It refers specifically to the role of theory and conceptual analysis, to the availability and quality of data, and to policy modelling. It draws lessons from the experience of European social policy for the relationship between research and policy formation.

This article aims to clarify the meaning of the much-used term ‘empowerment’ in order to contribute to a more theoretically coherent development of policy and practice aimed at facilitating the empowerment of health and social care service users. The liberational and consumerist models of empowerment are highlighted, with the former having a broader emphasis on people's roles within society than the latter. The concept of ‘empowerment as professional practice’ is also critically explored, with the conclusion that professionals can work with people in empowering ways if they recognise and work to address the structural causes of oppression.

This paper aims to promote greater discussion and debate on the implications and legitimacy of the current UK government policy approach that seeks to nurture voluntary activity by encouraging participation in voluntary groups (formal volunteering) and neglects the cultivation of one-to-one help (informal volunteering). Analysing the 2001 Home Office Citizenship Survey data on the geographical variations in volunteering, this policy approach is argued to privilege the development of a volunteering culture characteristic of affluent areas and to fail to recognise and value the informal volunteering culture more characteristic of lower-income populations. Why this is the case and how it might be resolved is then considered.

In most developed and developing nations individuals are actively being encouraged to save towards retirement via a plethora of savings mechanisms. In Malaysia, the reliance on individual savings through the Employees Provident Fund has costly implications for those in low paid, insecure employment, women and those working in the informal sector. Focussing on Malaysia, this paper seeks to present the pitfalls of such over reliance on the provident fund mechanism, which allows early access to savings and diverts members' contributions to subsidiary accounts. In conclusion, the paper suggests paths of reform which would, at the very least, lessen the growing threat of poverty and social exclusion amongst older Malaysians.

Social capital has become a key concept in Government policy-making and in academic circles. Broadly, social capital concerns norms and networks: the values people hold and the resources that they can access, which both result in and are the result of collective and socially negotiated ties and relationships. Where people share a sense of identity, hold similar values, trust each other and reciprocally do things for each other, then this is felt to have an impact on the social, political and economic nature of the society in which we live. Across the political spectrum, there are concerns that levels of social capital are being eroded in contemporary society.

Social capital has become an increasingly popular concept within some academic and government circles as a means of exploring how communities can embark upon a process of civic renewal by establishing bridges of reciprocity between community members from diverse social and cultural backgrounds. In this article we place the popularity of social capital within the historical context of the ‘hollowing out of the welfare state’. This allows us to highlight four interrelated problems that hollowing out processes pose for the establishment of social capital in the UK today.

This paper analyses existing research on social capital, school choice and educational attainment to consider the questions that need to be answered if the role of social capital in reducing or extending social inequality is to be addressed. We identify a need to distinguish between: social surveillance and genuinely educative forms of social capital; between parent–pupil interactions and family: school links that generate positive external spin-overs and those that simply enhance the competitive position of the individual child. We argue for a more gendered and more child-centred analysis of social capital that considers the role of social capital in protecting and enhancing school reputation, and for an analysis which considers possible linkages between bonding, bridging and linking social capital.

In this paper we outline some key aspects of the relationship between ethnicity and social capital in contemporary British society. This is a question that has begun to attract a good deal of attention in recent times, particularly in the context of public debate about the changing position of ethnic minority groups and migrant communities within an increasingly multicultural society. We begin by looking at the ways in which the relationship between ethnicity and social capital has been conceptualised. We then explore the ways that the notion of social capital has begun to shape policy debates about ethnicity and families. In doing so we seek to highlight the limitations of existing accounts and the kinds of questions that need to be addressed in conceptual and empirical research.

Three major emphases in interpretations of the state of contemporary intimate relationships can be broadly characterised. These are (i) breakdown and demoralisation; (ii) individualisation and democratisation; and (iii) a recognition of elements of continuity, particularly around power relations. We consider these three positions, which are not necessarily mutually exclusive, relating them to key themes of identities and values, networks and trust and reciprocity, and major theorisations of the concept of social capital. We offer a critique of existing positions and suggestions for the future, cast in the light of potential policy relevance.

S. Baron, J. Field and T. Schuller (eds) (2000) Social Capital: Critical Perspectives, Oxford University Press, Oxford

A. Portes (1998) ‘Social capital: its origins and perspectives in modern sociology’, Annual Review of Sociology, 243, 1, 1–24.

R. Putnam (2000) Bowling Alone: The Collapse and Revival of American Community, Simon & Schuster, New York