激活态度的两面性。解释公民对要求型激活政策和扶持型激活政策的不同看法

IF 2.6 2区 社会学 Q2 DEVELOPMENT STUDIES
Bart Meuleman, Arno Van Hootegem, Federica Rossetti, Koen Abts
{"title":"激活态度的两面性。解释公民对要求型激活政策和扶持型激活政策的不同看法","authors":"Bart Meuleman, Arno Van Hootegem, Federica Rossetti, Koen Abts","doi":"10.1111/spol.13055","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This study examines public attitudes towards two types of ALMPs: enabling activation, which prioritises training, skill formation, and human capital improvement; and demanding activation, which involves leading people towards employment through sanctions and benefit cuts. While previous research has predominantly focused on demanding activation, this study is the first to compare public support for the two distinct faces of activation. Analysing data from the 2020 Belgian National Elections Study, we examine the role of self‐interest, political ideology, social justice preferences, and stereotypical images towards the unemployed in explaining both types of activation attitudes. We find that attitudes towards enabling and demanding activation policies are clearly distinct in their measurement and driving forces. While the enabling type appeals especially to the principle of equality and positive attitudes towards the unemployed, support for demanding ALMPs is based on the principle of equity and stereotypical views about the jobless.","PeriodicalId":47858,"journal":{"name":"Social Policy & Administration","volume":"39 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Two faces of activation attitudes. Explaining citizens' diverging views on demanding versus enabling activation policies\",\"authors\":\"Bart Meuleman, Arno Van Hootegem, Federica Rossetti, Koen Abts\",\"doi\":\"10.1111/spol.13055\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"This study examines public attitudes towards two types of ALMPs: enabling activation, which prioritises training, skill formation, and human capital improvement; and demanding activation, which involves leading people towards employment through sanctions and benefit cuts. While previous research has predominantly focused on demanding activation, this study is the first to compare public support for the two distinct faces of activation. Analysing data from the 2020 Belgian National Elections Study, we examine the role of self‐interest, political ideology, social justice preferences, and stereotypical images towards the unemployed in explaining both types of activation attitudes. We find that attitudes towards enabling and demanding activation policies are clearly distinct in their measurement and driving forces. While the enabling type appeals especially to the principle of equality and positive attitudes towards the unemployed, support for demanding ALMPs is based on the principle of equity and stereotypical views about the jobless.\",\"PeriodicalId\":47858,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Social Policy & Administration\",\"volume\":\"39 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-07-12\",\"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.13055\",\"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.13055","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

本研究探讨了公众对两种 ALMP 的态度:一种是以培训、技能培养和人力资本改善为优先事项的 "扶持性激活";另一种是通过制裁和削减福利来引导人们就业的 "要求性激活"。以往的研究主要集中在 "要求型激活 "方面,而本研究则是首次比较公众对这两种截然不同的激活方式的支持程度。通过分析 2020 年比利时全国大选研究的数据,我们研究了自身利益、政治意识形态、社会正义偏好以及对失业者的刻板印象在解释这两种激活态度中的作用。我们发现,对扶持型激活政策和要求型激活政策的态度在衡量和驱动力方面明显不同。扶持型激活政策特别诉诸平等原则和对失业者的积极态度,而对要求型激活政策的支持则基于公平原则和对失业者的刻板印象。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Two faces of activation attitudes. Explaining citizens' diverging views on demanding versus enabling activation policies
This study examines public attitudes towards two types of ALMPs: enabling activation, which prioritises training, skill formation, and human capital improvement; and demanding activation, which involves leading people towards employment through sanctions and benefit cuts. While previous research has predominantly focused on demanding activation, this study is the first to compare public support for the two distinct faces of activation. Analysing data from the 2020 Belgian National Elections Study, we examine the role of self‐interest, political ideology, social justice preferences, and stereotypical images towards the unemployed in explaining both types of activation attitudes. We find that attitudes towards enabling and demanding activation policies are clearly distinct in their measurement and driving forces. While the enabling type appeals especially to the principle of equality and positive attitudes towards the unemployed, support for demanding ALMPs is based on the principle of equity and stereotypical views about the jobless.
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