荷兰监控福利国家的崩溃

IF 2.6 2区 社会学 Q2 DEVELOPMENT STUDIES
Menno Fenger, Robin Simonse
{"title":"荷兰监控福利国家的崩溃","authors":"Menno Fenger, Robin Simonse","doi":"10.1111/spol.12998","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"From the 1990s onwards, fraud detection has become an increasingly important focus in the design and implementation of a variety of welfare schemes, including unemployment benefits, social assistance benefits, pensions, and personal care budgets. This culminated in the 2014 Fraud Act, which introduced a system of high sanction in all cases of benefit fraud, even if they were causes by administrative errors. In 2020 a parliamentary investigation committee concluded that the Dutch government had violated the foundational principles of the rule of law through the way suspected fraudsters with childcare allowances had been treated. This so-called Childcare allowances affair undermined the support for the harsh approach to fraud and led to a series of proposals to reform the Dutch ‘surveillance welfare state’. The Dutch Childcare allowances affair is an interesting case of a social policy crisis because its origins are not external events but lie in the regular implementation of policies that have been approved and supported rather widely by politicians, policymakers and street-level bureaucrats. In this article, we define and apply the concept ‘institutional implosion’ to analyse the Childcare allowances affair and its consequences. Moreover, we argue that the implosion in this affair follows from an extension of the target group from ‘non-deserving’ to ‘deserving’ citizens. Whereas the Fraud Act primarily was aimed towards recipients of unemployment, disability and social assistance benefits, a change in the system of childcare allowances extended the scope of the Fraud Act to an almost universal group of parents that use childcare facilities.","PeriodicalId":47858,"journal":{"name":"Social Policy & Administration","volume":"29 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-01-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The implosion of the Dutch surveillance welfare state\",\"authors\":\"Menno Fenger, Robin Simonse\",\"doi\":\"10.1111/spol.12998\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"From the 1990s onwards, fraud detection has become an increasingly important focus in the design and implementation of a variety of welfare schemes, including unemployment benefits, social assistance benefits, pensions, and personal care budgets. This culminated in the 2014 Fraud Act, which introduced a system of high sanction in all cases of benefit fraud, even if they were causes by administrative errors. In 2020 a parliamentary investigation committee concluded that the Dutch government had violated the foundational principles of the rule of law through the way suspected fraudsters with childcare allowances had been treated. This so-called Childcare allowances affair undermined the support for the harsh approach to fraud and led to a series of proposals to reform the Dutch ‘surveillance welfare state’. The Dutch Childcare allowances affair is an interesting case of a social policy crisis because its origins are not external events but lie in the regular implementation of policies that have been approved and supported rather widely by politicians, policymakers and street-level bureaucrats. In this article, we define and apply the concept ‘institutional implosion’ to analyse the Childcare allowances affair and its consequences. Moreover, we argue that the implosion in this affair follows from an extension of the target group from ‘non-deserving’ to ‘deserving’ citizens. Whereas the Fraud Act primarily was aimed towards recipients of unemployment, disability and social assistance benefits, a change in the system of childcare allowances extended the scope of the Fraud Act to an almost universal group of parents that use childcare facilities.\",\"PeriodicalId\":47858,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Social Policy & Administration\",\"volume\":\"29 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-01-07\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Social Policy & Administration\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"90\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1111/spol.12998\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"社会学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"DEVELOPMENT STUDIES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Social Policy & Administration","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1111/spol.12998","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"DEVELOPMENT STUDIES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

从 20 世纪 90 年代起,在设计和实施各种福利计划(包括失业救济金、社会援助福利金、养老金和个人护理预算)的过程中,欺诈侦查已成为一个日益重要的重点。这在 2014 年的《反欺诈法》中达到了顶峰,该法引入了对所有福利欺诈案件进行严厉制裁的制度,即使这些案件是由行政错误造成的。2020 年,一个议会调查委员会得出结论,荷兰政府对待儿童保育津贴欺诈嫌疑人的方式违反了法治的基本原则。这一所谓的 "育儿津贴事件 "削弱了人们对严厉打击欺诈行为的支持,并引发了一系列改革荷兰 "监督福利国家 "的提案。荷兰育儿津贴事件是一个有趣的社会政策危机案例,因为它的起源并非外部事件,而是政治家、决策者和基层官僚广泛认可和支持的政策的正常执行。在本文中,我们将定义并应用 "制度内爆 "这一概念来分析托儿津贴事件及其后果。此外,我们认为该事件的内爆源于目标群体从 "非应得 "公民扩展到 "应得 "公民。欺诈法》主要针对的是失业、残疾和社会救济金的领取者,而托儿津贴制度的改变则将《欺诈法》的适用范围扩大到了几乎所有使用托儿设施的父母群体。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
The implosion of the Dutch surveillance welfare state
From the 1990s onwards, fraud detection has become an increasingly important focus in the design and implementation of a variety of welfare schemes, including unemployment benefits, social assistance benefits, pensions, and personal care budgets. This culminated in the 2014 Fraud Act, which introduced a system of high sanction in all cases of benefit fraud, even if they were causes by administrative errors. In 2020 a parliamentary investigation committee concluded that the Dutch government had violated the foundational principles of the rule of law through the way suspected fraudsters with childcare allowances had been treated. This so-called Childcare allowances affair undermined the support for the harsh approach to fraud and led to a series of proposals to reform the Dutch ‘surveillance welfare state’. The Dutch Childcare allowances affair is an interesting case of a social policy crisis because its origins are not external events but lie in the regular implementation of policies that have been approved and supported rather widely by politicians, policymakers and street-level bureaucrats. In this article, we define and apply the concept ‘institutional implosion’ to analyse the Childcare allowances affair and its consequences. Moreover, we argue that the implosion in this affair follows from an extension of the target group from ‘non-deserving’ to ‘deserving’ citizens. Whereas the Fraud Act primarily was aimed towards recipients of unemployment, disability and social assistance benefits, a change in the system of childcare allowances extended the scope of the Fraud Act to an almost universal group of parents that use childcare facilities.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
6.50
自引率
6.20%
发文量
93
期刊介绍: Social Policy & Administration is the longest established journal in its field. Whilst remaining faithful to its tradition in academic excellence, the journal also seeks to engender debate about topical and controversial issues. Typical numbers contain papers clustered around a theme. The journal is international in scope. Quality contributions are received from scholars world-wide and cover social policy issues not only in Europe but in the USA, Canada, Australia and Asia Pacific.
×
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