{"title":"试点政治。欧洲城市最低收入计划案例","authors":"Giorgia Nesti, Matide Cittadini, Matteo Bassoli","doi":"10.1111/ropr.12611","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"EU member states have adopted Minimum Income Schemes (MIS) to prevent destitution and ensure a minimum standard of living through means‐tested income support combined with Active Labor Market Policies (ALMPs). However, the effectiveness of MIS has been hindered by limited coverage, low take‐up rates, inadequate cash transfers, strict conditionalities, and the limited impact of ALMPs. Public opinion is polarized, leading to potential policy changes. Pilot projects have emerged as a strategy to address implementation barriers, facilitate evidence‐based policy making, and improve stakeholder relationships. This paper investigates the political conditions under which pilots are promoted and the effects these policy decisions have on scaling up through a qualitative analysis and comparison, using two exemplary cases—B‐MINCOME in Barcelona and <jats:italic>Weten Wat Werkt</jats:italic> in Utrecht.","PeriodicalId":47408,"journal":{"name":"Review of Policy Research","volume":"51 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.3000,"publicationDate":"2024-04-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The politics of piloting. The case of minimum income schemes in European cities\",\"authors\":\"Giorgia Nesti, Matide Cittadini, Matteo Bassoli\",\"doi\":\"10.1111/ropr.12611\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"EU member states have adopted Minimum Income Schemes (MIS) to prevent destitution and ensure a minimum standard of living through means‐tested income support combined with Active Labor Market Policies (ALMPs). However, the effectiveness of MIS has been hindered by limited coverage, low take‐up rates, inadequate cash transfers, strict conditionalities, and the limited impact of ALMPs. Public opinion is polarized, leading to potential policy changes. Pilot projects have emerged as a strategy to address implementation barriers, facilitate evidence‐based policy making, and improve stakeholder relationships. This paper investigates the political conditions under which pilots are promoted and the effects these policy decisions have on scaling up through a qualitative analysis and comparison, using two exemplary cases—B‐MINCOME in Barcelona and <jats:italic>Weten Wat Werkt</jats:italic> in Utrecht.\",\"PeriodicalId\":47408,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Review of Policy Research\",\"volume\":\"51 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-04-05\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Review of Policy Research\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"90\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1111/ropr.12611\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"社会学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"POLITICAL SCIENCE\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Review of Policy Research","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1111/ropr.12611","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"POLITICAL SCIENCE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
欧盟成员国已采用最低收入计划(MIS),通过经济情况调查收入支持与积极劳动力市场政策(ALMPs)相结合,防止赤贫并确保最低生活标准。然而,由于覆盖面有限、参与率低、现金转移不足、条件限制严格以及积极劳动力市场政策的影响有限,最低收入计划的有效性受到了阻碍。公众舆论两极分化,导致政策可能发生变化。试点项目已成为解决实施障碍、促进循证决策和改善利益相关者关系的一项战略。本文利用巴塞罗那的 B-MINCOME 和乌得勒支的 Weten Wat Werkt 这两个典范案例,通过定性分析和比较,研究了推动试点项目的政治条件以及这些政策决定对扩大规模的影响。
The politics of piloting. The case of minimum income schemes in European cities
EU member states have adopted Minimum Income Schemes (MIS) to prevent destitution and ensure a minimum standard of living through means‐tested income support combined with Active Labor Market Policies (ALMPs). However, the effectiveness of MIS has been hindered by limited coverage, low take‐up rates, inadequate cash transfers, strict conditionalities, and the limited impact of ALMPs. Public opinion is polarized, leading to potential policy changes. Pilot projects have emerged as a strategy to address implementation barriers, facilitate evidence‐based policy making, and improve stakeholder relationships. This paper investigates the political conditions under which pilots are promoted and the effects these policy decisions have on scaling up through a qualitative analysis and comparison, using two exemplary cases—B‐MINCOME in Barcelona and Weten Wat Werkt in Utrecht.
期刊介绍:
The Review of Policy Research (RPR) is an international peer-reviewed journal devoted to the publication of research and analysis examining the politics and policy of science and technology. These may include issues of science policy, environment, resource management, information networks, cultural industries, biotechnology, security and surveillance, privacy, globalization, education, research and innovation, development, intellectual property, health and demographics. The journal encompasses research and analysis on politics and the outcomes and consequences of policy change in domestic and comparative contexts.