Skip to main content Accessibility help
  • ISSN: 2169-9763 (Print), 2169-978X (Online)
  • Editors: Stefan Kühner Lingnan University, Hong Kong, Ijin Hong Sun Yat-sen University, China, Markus Ketola University of Edinburgh, UK, and Antonios Roumpakis University of York, UK
  • Editorial board
The Journal of International and Comparative Social Policy welcomes articles on all dimensions of comparative and international social policy. Papers will enhance and develop theoretical, empirical and methodological insights and knowledge in the field and a greater understanding of different welfare systems and policy actors operating nationally and internationally. We welcome papers that are comparative and/or international in scope including those that focus on national, world regional or global social policies. Country case studies that locate national welfare systems within a comparative or international context are also welcome. Articles may deal with policy processes as well as welfare outcomes and cover the full range of the 'welfare mix' within social policy.

This journal has previous editions under the titles of Journal of International and Comparative Social Welfare (1984-1994), New Global Development: JI&CSW (1995-2005), and Journal of Comparative Social Welfare (2006-2012) - which are all available via Taylor & Francis.

May Article of the Month

A human rights approach to disability assessment

Lisa Waddington and Mark Priestley


Disability assessments play a key role in welfare states but are increasingly contested, not least for their compatibility with the United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (CRPD). This paper draws on evidence of global governance and assessment practices in 34 European countries, the largest international study to date. The paper reflects on the model of disability in the CRPD and its implications for disability assessment, drawing on the work of the CRPD Committee. The paper also examines examples of promising practice in assessment in European countries and concludes by identifying elements of a CRPD-compatible approach. Disability assessments must be underpinned by both a social-contextual concept of disability and a human rights approach. Administrative attribution of disability status based on categorical diagnosis or individual functioning alone is incompatible with this approach. This approach challenges the historic individualization of disability assessments and the knowledge relationships underpinning them.

Latest Content

Read the latest issue here.

Also published by Cambridge for the Social Policy Association: