Challenging scalar fallacy in state-wide welfare studies: A UK sub-state comparison of civil society approaches to addressing youth unemployment
Challenging scalar fallacy in state-wide welfare studies: A UK sub-state comparison of civil society approaches to addressing youth unemployment
复制标题
DOI：
10.1111/ijsw.12572
复制
发表时间：
2022-11-15
影响因子：
1.9
通讯作者：
Lagana，Giada
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Pearce，Sioned;Lagana，Giada
在这里，我们通过比较英格兰、苏格兰和威尔士民间社会解决青年失业的方法，在有关福利多元化、福利混合经济和领土重新调整的辩论中做出了原创性的、经验性的贡献。我们的核心发现是，学术和政策文献经常将英国描述为一个单一的自由福利制度，这是基于方法论上的民族主义，优先于全州范围的分析。简而言之，国际福利研究中普遍存在着一种标量谬误。在全球兴起的中间政府和所谓的“无国籍国家”迫切要求更大自治权的背景下，我们的案例研究挑战了主导范式。我们的分析表明，工作优先的政策取向和市场化的公民社会的自由主义特征集中在英格兰，然后被权力下放(社会)政策所缓和。基于根植于多层次选举政治的截然不同的中间偏左和公民民族主义执政传统，我们展示了权力下放的国家对威斯敏斯特采取了不同的方式，部分避开了市场，并纳入了集体主义和联合制作。
Here we make an original, empirical contribution to debates on welfare pluralism, the mixed economies of welfare and territorial rescaling by comparing civil society approaches to tackling youth unemployment in England, Scotland and Wales. Our core finding is that academic and policy literature's frequent characterisation of the UK as a single Liberal welfare regime is based on methodological nationalism privileging state‐wide analyses. In short, a scalar fallacy pervasive in international welfare studies. In the context of the global rise of meso‐government and so‐called ‘stateless nations’ pressing for greater autonomy, our case‐study challenges the dominant paradigm. Our analysis shows the liberal characteristics of work‐first policy orientation and marketised civil society are concentrated in England then tempered by devolved (social) policy. Based on contrasting, left‐of‐centre and civic nationalist governing traditions, grounded in multi‐level electoral politics, we show the devolved nations taking a different approach to Westminster, partially eschewing the market and incorporating collectivism and co‐production.