Disability, employment and welfare reform: A comparative analysis of Australia and Denmark

IF 2 2区 社会学 Q2 SOCIAL ISSUES
Gyu-Jin Hwang, Natasja Koitzsch Jensen, Dinesh Wadiwel
{"title":"Disability, employment and welfare reform: A comparative analysis of Australia and Denmark","authors":"Gyu-Jin Hwang,&nbsp;Natasja Koitzsch Jensen,&nbsp;Dinesh Wadiwel","doi":"10.1002/ajs4.327","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>From the poor-relief tradition to the social citizenship-based development of the welfare state, the question of available social supports for people with disability has been one of the central issues of welfare reform agendas. Under the increasing influence of neoliberal rationalities, many welfare states have engaged in the redefinition of capacity and incapacity to work in an attempt to manage the fiscal cost of a growing number of people on disability pension and work incapacity benefits. These reconfigurations of income transfers have significant implications for the social and economic participation of people with disability. This article seeks to build knowledge about the policy implications of these changes by comparing recent disability policies in two very different welfare states—Australia and Denmark—who have contrasting approaches to activation measures concerning people with disability. This article examines how these welfare states have reconfigured the meaning of disability, thereby either restricting further or relaxing the conditions of labour market activation. Through these two cases, we argue that there is a case for labour market participation insofar as rights to work through improved employment opportunities take precedence over punitive regimes that reduce access to income support.</p>","PeriodicalId":46787,"journal":{"name":"Australian Journal of Social Issues","volume":"59 4","pages":"1013-1030"},"PeriodicalIF":2.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-03-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/ajs4.327","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Australian Journal of Social Issues","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/ajs4.327","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"SOCIAL ISSUES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

From the poor-relief tradition to the social citizenship-based development of the welfare state, the question of available social supports for people with disability has been one of the central issues of welfare reform agendas. Under the increasing influence of neoliberal rationalities, many welfare states have engaged in the redefinition of capacity and incapacity to work in an attempt to manage the fiscal cost of a growing number of people on disability pension and work incapacity benefits. These reconfigurations of income transfers have significant implications for the social and economic participation of people with disability. This article seeks to build knowledge about the policy implications of these changes by comparing recent disability policies in two very different welfare states—Australia and Denmark—who have contrasting approaches to activation measures concerning people with disability. This article examines how these welfare states have reconfigured the meaning of disability, thereby either restricting further or relaxing the conditions of labour market activation. Through these two cases, we argue that there is a case for labour market participation insofar as rights to work through improved employment opportunities take precedence over punitive regimes that reduce access to income support.

残疾、就业与福利改革:澳大利亚与丹麦的比较分析
从扶贫传统到福利国家的社会公民权发展,残疾人的社会支持问题一直是福利改革议程的核心问题之一。在新自由主义理性的影响下,许多福利国家重新定义了工作能力和丧失工作能力,试图管理越来越多的人在残疾养老金和丧失工作能力福利方面的财政成本。这些收入转移的重新配置对残疾人的社会和经济参与具有重大影响。本文试图通过比较两个截然不同的福利国家(澳大利亚和丹麦)最近的残疾政策,建立有关这些变化的政策含义的知识,这两个国家在残疾人激活措施方面有着截然不同的方法。本文考察了这些福利国家如何重新配置残疾的含义,从而进一步限制或放松劳动力市场激活的条件。通过这两个案例,我们认为,只要通过改善就业机会获得工作的权利优先于减少获得收入支持的惩罚性制度,就有理由参与劳动力市场。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
3.90
自引率
4.00%
发文量
45
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信