福利体制视域中的“福利依赖”:三条路径与五个面向
|
摘要
在不同的初始动机下,福利体制限定了福利国家对待救助制度受助者的态度与方式、划定了受助者的受益规则及权利边界,影响着救助理念和制度实践,并最终引导了福利依赖研究的分野。在受助者的污名化、福利依赖行为的界定、福利依赖对象的识别、救助项目结构设置、受助规则调整等福利依赖的五个研究面向上,福利体制类型不同,各国的表现不同,并形成了三种福利依赖研究路径:包容与保护的社会民主主义路径、惩戒与再造的自由主义路径和敦促与监督的保守主义路径。
Under different original motivation, welfare regimes limit the way in which welfare states treat their social assistance recipients, designate the benefit rules and boundary of these recipients and influence the assistance concepts and institutional practices and finally lead to the differentiation of welfare dependency research. Countries under different welfare regimes have heterogeneous performance in five aspects: the stigma of welfare recipients,the definition of dependency behavior, and the identification of dependence person, the structure of social assistance programs and changing of welfare rules. Therefore, three welfare dependency research approaches are formed: the social democratic approach of tolerance and protection, the liberalism approach of punishment and reconstruction,and the conservatism approach of urging and supervision.
Under different original motivation, welfare regimes limit the way in which welfare states treat their social assistance recipients, designate the benefit rules and boundary of these recipients and influence the assistance concepts and institutional practices and finally lead to the differentiation of welfare dependency research. Countries under different welfare regimes have heterogeneous performance in five aspects: the stigma of welfare recipients,the definition of dependency behavior, and the identification of dependence person, the structure of social assistance programs and changing of welfare rules. Therefore, three welfare dependency research approaches are formed: the social democratic approach of tolerance and protection, the liberalism approach of punishment and reconstruction,and the conservatism approach of urging and supervision.
引文
(1)丁建定:《西方国家社会保障制度史》,北京:高等教育出版社,2010,第300-374页。
(2)皮尔逊:《拆散福利国家:里根、撒切尔和紧缩政治学》,舒绍福译,长春:吉林出版集团有限责任公司,2007,第1页。
(3)乔治·吉尔德:《财富与贫困》,上海:上海译文出版社,1985,第105页;Lawrence Mead.The Real Crisis.Society,1986,23(2):12-15;Charles Murray.Losing ground:American social policy,1950-1980.New York:Basic Books,1984.
(1) Ian Gough,Jonathan Bradshaw,John Ditch,Tony Eardley,Peter Whiteford.Social assistance in OECD countries.Journal of European Social Policy,1997(1):17-43;Ian Gough.Social assistance regimes:A cluster analysis.Journal of European Social Policy,2001,11(2):165-170.
(2)苏黛瑞《:社会救助的根源:对福利体制、目标与方法之差异的初步思考》,周凤华译《,华中师范大学学报(人文社会科学版)》,2013(1)。
(1) Christian Larson.The institutional logic of welfare attitudes:How welfare regimes influence public support.Comparative Political Studies,2007,41(2):145-168.
(2)迪肯:《福利视角:思潮、意识形态及政策争论》,周薇等译,上海:上海人民出版社,2011,第13-74页。
(3)钱宁:《“共同善”与分配正义论--社群主义的社会福利思想及其对社会政策研究的启示》,《学海》,2006(6)。
(1)苏黛瑞《:社会救助的根源:对福利体制、目标与方法之差异的初步思考》,周凤华译《,华中师范大学学报(人文社会科学版)》,2013(1)。
(1) T·H·马歇尔、安东尼·吉登斯:《公民身份与社会阶级》,郭忠华、刘训练编,南京:江苏人民出版社,2008,第68页。
(2) Neil Gilbert,Paul Terrell:《社会福利政策引论》,沈黎译,上海:华东理工大学出版社,2013,第134-150页。
(3) Christian Larson.The institutional logic of welfare attitudes:How welfare regimes influence public support.Comparative Political Studies,2007,41(2):145-168.
(1)蒂特玛斯:《蒂特玛斯社会政策十讲》,江绍康译,长春:吉林出版集团有限责任公司,2011,第19页。
(1)乔治·吉尔德:《财富与贫困》,上海:上海译文出版社,1985,第105页;Lawrence Mead.The Real Crisis.Society,1986,23(2):12-15;Charles Murray.Losing ground:American social policy,1950-1980.Tenth-anniversary edition.New York:Basic Books,1984.
(2)迪尼托:《社会福利:政治与公共政策》,何敬、葛其伟译,杨伟民校,北京:中国人民大学出版社,2007,第193页。
(2)皮尔逊:《拆散福利国家:里根、撒切尔和紧缩政治学》,舒绍福译,长春:吉林出版集团有限责任公司,2007,第1页。
(3)乔治·吉尔德:《财富与贫困》,上海:上海译文出版社,1985,第105页;Lawrence Mead.The Real Crisis.Society,1986,23(2):12-15;Charles Murray.Losing ground:American social policy,1950-1980.New York:Basic Books,1984.
(1) Ian Gough,Jonathan Bradshaw,John Ditch,Tony Eardley,Peter Whiteford.Social assistance in OECD countries.Journal of European Social Policy,1997(1):17-43;Ian Gough.Social assistance regimes:A cluster analysis.Journal of European Social Policy,2001,11(2):165-170.
(2)苏黛瑞《:社会救助的根源:对福利体制、目标与方法之差异的初步思考》,周凤华译《,华中师范大学学报(人文社会科学版)》,2013(1)。
(1) Christian Larson.The institutional logic of welfare attitudes:How welfare regimes influence public support.Comparative Political Studies,2007,41(2):145-168.
(2)迪肯:《福利视角:思潮、意识形态及政策争论》,周薇等译,上海:上海人民出版社,2011,第13-74页。
(3)钱宁:《“共同善”与分配正义论--社群主义的社会福利思想及其对社会政策研究的启示》,《学海》,2006(6)。
(1)苏黛瑞《:社会救助的根源:对福利体制、目标与方法之差异的初步思考》,周凤华译《,华中师范大学学报(人文社会科学版)》,2013(1)。
(1) T·H·马歇尔、安东尼·吉登斯:《公民身份与社会阶级》,郭忠华、刘训练编,南京:江苏人民出版社,2008,第68页。
(2) Neil Gilbert,Paul Terrell:《社会福利政策引论》,沈黎译,上海:华东理工大学出版社,2013,第134-150页。
(3) Christian Larson.The institutional logic of welfare attitudes:How welfare regimes influence public support.Comparative Political Studies,2007,41(2):145-168.
(1)蒂特玛斯:《蒂特玛斯社会政策十讲》,江绍康译,长春:吉林出版集团有限责任公司,2011,第19页。
(1)乔治·吉尔德:《财富与贫困》,上海:上海译文出版社,1985,第105页;Lawrence Mead.The Real Crisis.Society,1986,23(2):12-15;Charles Murray.Losing ground:American social policy,1950-1980.Tenth-anniversary edition.New York:Basic Books,1984.
(2)迪尼托:《社会福利:政治与公共政策》,何敬、葛其伟译,杨伟民校,北京:中国人民大学出版社,2007,第193页。