Abstract Sozialpolitische Einstellungen werden oft durch die Position auf dem Arbeitsmarkt erklärt. Dieser Artikel dagegen untersucht eine spezifische Vermögensform, das Wohneigentum, als Erklärungsfaktor für sozialpolitische Präferenzen. Mit Verweis auf die Figur der investiven Statusarbeit wird Wohneigentum als der Mittelschicht eigene Investitionsform eingeführt. Der Artikel differenziert Wohneigentümer/-innen zusätzlich nach dem Wert des Wohneigentums und der Region, in der sich die Immobilie befindet. Mit Daten des ALLBUS 2014 kann gezeigt werden, dass Wohneigentümer/-innen Sozialpolitik grundsätzlich skeptischer gegenüberstehen als Mieter/-innen. Ein höherer Wert des Wohneigentums verringert dabei die Zustimmung zu sozialpolitischen Maßnahmen. Eigentümer/-innen mit Immobilien in peripheren Regionen sind zudem Sozialpolitik gegenüber positiver eingestellt als Personen, deren Eigentum sich in wachsenden Großstädten und deren Umland befindet.
{"title":"Wohneigentum, sozialpolitische Einstellungen und Region","authors":"Julia Heide","doi":"10.1515/zsr-2021-0006","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1515/zsr-2021-0006","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract Sozialpolitische Einstellungen werden oft durch die Position auf dem Arbeitsmarkt erklärt. Dieser Artikel dagegen untersucht eine spezifische Vermögensform, das Wohneigentum, als Erklärungsfaktor für sozialpolitische Präferenzen. Mit Verweis auf die Figur der investiven Statusarbeit wird Wohneigentum als der Mittelschicht eigene Investitionsform eingeführt. Der Artikel differenziert Wohneigentümer/-innen zusätzlich nach dem Wert des Wohneigentums und der Region, in der sich die Immobilie befindet. Mit Daten des ALLBUS 2014 kann gezeigt werden, dass Wohneigentümer/-innen Sozialpolitik grundsätzlich skeptischer gegenüberstehen als Mieter/-innen. Ein höherer Wert des Wohneigentums verringert dabei die Zustimmung zu sozialpolitischen Maßnahmen. Eigentümer/-innen mit Immobilien in peripheren Regionen sind zudem Sozialpolitik gegenüber positiver eingestellt als Personen, deren Eigentum sich in wachsenden Großstädten und deren Umland befindet.","PeriodicalId":83585,"journal":{"name":"Zeitschrift fur Sozialreform","volume":"67 1","pages":"153 - 182"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-08-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"44541708","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Abstract Mit der Veröffentlichung der Armuts- und Reichtumsberichte der Bundesregierung seit 2001 hat sich ein politischer Armutsdiskurs in Deutschland verstetigt. Gesundheit ist in allen bisherigen fünf Berichten eine zentrale Dimension. Jedoch ist für Deutschland bis heute wenig erforscht, welche Rolle Gesundheit in der politischen Debatte zu Armut einnimmt. Aufbauend auf der Medikalisierungstheorie untersuchen wir in diesem Beitrag mit einer qualitativen und quantitativen Inhaltsanalyse, wie Gesundheit und Krankheit in den Berichten dargestellt werden. Über den gesamten Zeitraum wird Armut eher als Ursache von Krankheit gesehen. Der Schwerpunkt der Lösungen für armutsbedingte Krankheiten liegt vor allem auf Verbesserungen des Gesundheitssystems und nicht bei der Armutsbekämpfung. Verhältnisprävention spielt erst in den letzten beiden Berichten eine bedeutsame Rolle. Auch werden gesundheitsbedingte Armutslagen nach dem vierten Armuts- und Reichtumsbericht (2013) weniger individualisiert und stattdessen strukturelle Ursachen wie Arbeitsbedingungen stärker diskutiert.
{"title":"Die Rolle von Gesundheit und Krankheit im deutschen Armutsdiskurs","authors":"Mareike Ariaans, N. Reibling","doi":"10.1515/zsr-2021-0005","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1515/zsr-2021-0005","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract Mit der Veröffentlichung der Armuts- und Reichtumsberichte der Bundesregierung seit 2001 hat sich ein politischer Armutsdiskurs in Deutschland verstetigt. Gesundheit ist in allen bisherigen fünf Berichten eine zentrale Dimension. Jedoch ist für Deutschland bis heute wenig erforscht, welche Rolle Gesundheit in der politischen Debatte zu Armut einnimmt. Aufbauend auf der Medikalisierungstheorie untersuchen wir in diesem Beitrag mit einer qualitativen und quantitativen Inhaltsanalyse, wie Gesundheit und Krankheit in den Berichten dargestellt werden. Über den gesamten Zeitraum wird Armut eher als Ursache von Krankheit gesehen. Der Schwerpunkt der Lösungen für armutsbedingte Krankheiten liegt vor allem auf Verbesserungen des Gesundheitssystems und nicht bei der Armutsbekämpfung. Verhältnisprävention spielt erst in den letzten beiden Berichten eine bedeutsame Rolle. Auch werden gesundheitsbedingte Armutslagen nach dem vierten Armuts- und Reichtumsbericht (2013) weniger individualisiert und stattdessen strukturelle Ursachen wie Arbeitsbedingungen stärker diskutiert.","PeriodicalId":83585,"journal":{"name":"Zeitschrift fur Sozialreform","volume":"67 1","pages":"123 - 152"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-08-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"41327340","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Abstract This article examines the role of the media in the EU freedom of movement debate through the lens of high-circulation German and UK newspapers during the first half of 2014. It explores how the media problematised migration from Eastern European member states and its influence on national host country labour markets and welfare systems. It also analyses how different media outlets positioned themselves in relation to relevant policies or policy proposals. The findings show that most articles in our sample present low-skill, low-wage working European Union (EU) migrant class referred to as “poverty migrants” as a problem to be addressed at the policy level in contrast with the economically self-sufficient migrant with marketable skills. The article contributes to discussions on work, welfare, and mobility in the EU by cross-fertilising the literature on migration policy, freedom of movement, social rights, and the media.
{"title":"Beware of the “poverty migrant”: media discourses on EU labour migration and the welfare state in Germany and the UK","authors":"S. Danaj, Ines Wagner","doi":"10.1515/zsr-2021-0001","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1515/zsr-2021-0001","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract This article examines the role of the media in the EU freedom of movement debate through the lens of high-circulation German and UK newspapers during the first half of 2014. It explores how the media problematised migration from Eastern European member states and its influence on national host country labour markets and welfare systems. It also analyses how different media outlets positioned themselves in relation to relevant policies or policy proposals. The findings show that most articles in our sample present low-skill, low-wage working European Union (EU) migrant class referred to as “poverty migrants” as a problem to be addressed at the policy level in contrast with the economically self-sufficient migrant with marketable skills. The article contributes to discussions on work, welfare, and mobility in the EU by cross-fertilising the literature on migration policy, freedom of movement, social rights, and the media.","PeriodicalId":83585,"journal":{"name":"Zeitschrift fur Sozialreform","volume":"67 1","pages":"1 - 27"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-05-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1515/zsr-2021-0001","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"45410805","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Abstract Die Versorgung von Geflüchteten ist auch eine Herausforderung für das Gesundheitssystem in Deutschland. Diverse rechtliche und praktische Zugangshindernisse erschweren hier die Versorgung. Gesundheitsförderung und Prävention sind daher umso wichtiger. Doch die Lebensbedingungen und die Möglichkeiten zur Gesundheitsförderung neu ankommender Menschen werden durch Entscheidungen in der Flüchtlingspolitik bestimmt. Der Beitrag untersucht, welche Regelungen des Bundes die Lebenswelten von Geflüchteten (u. a. Unterkunft, Bildung, Arbeit) seit 2015 geprägt haben. Eine qualitative Inhaltsanalyse von Dokumenten aus elf Gesetzgebungsverfahren ergab, dass Belange der Gesundheitsförderung in der Flüchtlingspolitik kaum Berücksichtigung finden. Der Beitrag argumentiert, dass dies zur Verankerung von Strukturen beiträgt, die sowohl die Gesundheit als auch die soziale Integration von Geflüchteten beeinträchtigen können.
{"title":"Die politische Gestaltung der Lebenswelten Geflüchteter: Gesundheitsförderung und Prävention als Leerstelle in der Flüchtlingspolitik","authors":"R. Henkel","doi":"10.1515/zsr-2021-0003","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1515/zsr-2021-0003","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract Die Versorgung von Geflüchteten ist auch eine Herausforderung für das Gesundheitssystem in Deutschland. Diverse rechtliche und praktische Zugangshindernisse erschweren hier die Versorgung. Gesundheitsförderung und Prävention sind daher umso wichtiger. Doch die Lebensbedingungen und die Möglichkeiten zur Gesundheitsförderung neu ankommender Menschen werden durch Entscheidungen in der Flüchtlingspolitik bestimmt. Der Beitrag untersucht, welche Regelungen des Bundes die Lebenswelten von Geflüchteten (u. a. Unterkunft, Bildung, Arbeit) seit 2015 geprägt haben. Eine qualitative Inhaltsanalyse von Dokumenten aus elf Gesetzgebungsverfahren ergab, dass Belange der Gesundheitsförderung in der Flüchtlingspolitik kaum Berücksichtigung finden. Der Beitrag argumentiert, dass dies zur Verankerung von Strukturen beiträgt, die sowohl die Gesundheit als auch die soziale Integration von Geflüchteten beeinträchtigen können.","PeriodicalId":83585,"journal":{"name":"Zeitschrift fur Sozialreform","volume":"67 1","pages":"59 - 87"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-05-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"47206583","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Kerstin Bruckmeier, Jannek Mühlhan, Jürgen Wiemers
Abstract In diesem Papier simulieren wir die Auswirkungen einer deutlichen Ausweitung der Hinzuverdienstmöglichkeiten für Bezieher/-innen der Grundsicherung für Arbeitsuchende (SGB II) auf das Arbeitsangebot, die öffentlichen Haushalte und die Zahl der Leistungsbeziehenden. Die Analyse beruht auf einem statischen Mikrosimulationsmodell (IAB-MSM), das ein ökonometrisches Arbeitsangebotsmodell beinhaltet und Daten des Sozioökonomischen Panel (SOEP) verwendet. Bei der Ermittlung der Effekte werden Wechselwirkungen mit den vorgelagerten Leistungen Wohngeld und Kinderzuschlag berücksichtigt. Die Ergebnisse zeigen, dass die Arbeitsangebotseffekte moderat ausfallen, während die Effekte auf die Empfängerzahlen beim SGB II und bei Kinderzuschlag ebenso wie auf die Kosten dieser Leistungen deutlich sind. Die Ergebnisse legen nahe, dass eine Verbesserung der Hinzuverdienstmöglichkeiten für Erwerbstätige aus einkommensschwachen Haushalten, ohne gleichzeitig die Zahl der Grundsicherungsbeziehenden deutlich auszuweiten, nur durch umfassende Reformen gelingen kann, die das gesamte Steuer- und Transfersystem betrachten.
{"title":"Reform der Hinzuverdienstmöglichkeiten für Grundsicherungsbeziehende und Wechselwirkungen mit vorrangigen Leistungen: Auswirkungen auf Arbeitsangebot und Empfängerzahlen","authors":"Kerstin Bruckmeier, Jannek Mühlhan, Jürgen Wiemers","doi":"10.1515/zsr-2021-0002","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1515/zsr-2021-0002","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract In diesem Papier simulieren wir die Auswirkungen einer deutlichen Ausweitung der Hinzuverdienstmöglichkeiten für Bezieher/-innen der Grundsicherung für Arbeitsuchende (SGB II) auf das Arbeitsangebot, die öffentlichen Haushalte und die Zahl der Leistungsbeziehenden. Die Analyse beruht auf einem statischen Mikrosimulationsmodell (IAB-MSM), das ein ökonometrisches Arbeitsangebotsmodell beinhaltet und Daten des Sozioökonomischen Panel (SOEP) verwendet. Bei der Ermittlung der Effekte werden Wechselwirkungen mit den vorgelagerten Leistungen Wohngeld und Kinderzuschlag berücksichtigt. Die Ergebnisse zeigen, dass die Arbeitsangebotseffekte moderat ausfallen, während die Effekte auf die Empfängerzahlen beim SGB II und bei Kinderzuschlag ebenso wie auf die Kosten dieser Leistungen deutlich sind. Die Ergebnisse legen nahe, dass eine Verbesserung der Hinzuverdienstmöglichkeiten für Erwerbstätige aus einkommensschwachen Haushalten, ohne gleichzeitig die Zahl der Grundsicherungsbeziehenden deutlich auszuweiten, nur durch umfassende Reformen gelingen kann, die das gesamte Steuer- und Transfersystem betrachten.","PeriodicalId":83585,"journal":{"name":"Zeitschrift fur Sozialreform","volume":"67 1","pages":"29 - 58"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-05-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"47760874","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Roland Atzmüller, Alban Knecht, Michael Bodenstein
Abstract The paper analyses and assesses social policy reforms of the conservative, far-right and right-wing populist coalition government in Austria between 2017 and 2019 in the light of the debates about welfare chauvinist, authoritarian and populist social policies. The latter had gained in importance over the previous years due to the upsurge of far-right and right-wing populist parties and the (at least partial) accommodation of mainstream parties to this tendency in many countries. The policies of the government were based on the view that the social problems associated with immigration were (at least) one of the main underlying causes for the problems affecting the Austrian society. The paper shows that the government initiated strategies to tackle these developments via a renationalisation of social policies. The analysis is focused on implemented and planned activities geared mainly towards the (former) margins of the Austrian welfare regime (social assistance, active labour market policies, unemployment assistance, youth integration policies), as well as on the ideological articulations the government uttered to justify these reforms via the combination of welfare chauvinist orientations with centre-right concerns about market dynamics and public finances. Our analysis concludes that nativist/racialised, nationalist and welfare chauvinist social policies transcend the distinction of deserving and non-deserving social groups, which raises the question about the social imaginaries that lie beneath the attempts of far-right political actors to shape societies through the reform of welfare.
{"title":"Punishing the Poor and Fighting “Immigration into the Social System” – Welfare Reforms by the Conservative and Far-right Government in Austria 2017–2019","authors":"Roland Atzmüller, Alban Knecht, Michael Bodenstein","doi":"10.1515/zsr-2020-0022","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1515/zsr-2020-0022","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract The paper analyses and assesses social policy reforms of the conservative, far-right and right-wing populist coalition government in Austria between 2017 and 2019 in the light of the debates about welfare chauvinist, authoritarian and populist social policies. The latter had gained in importance over the previous years due to the upsurge of far-right and right-wing populist parties and the (at least partial) accommodation of mainstream parties to this tendency in many countries. The policies of the government were based on the view that the social problems associated with immigration were (at least) one of the main underlying causes for the problems affecting the Austrian society. The paper shows that the government initiated strategies to tackle these developments via a renationalisation of social policies. The analysis is focused on implemented and planned activities geared mainly towards the (former) margins of the Austrian welfare regime (social assistance, active labour market policies, unemployment assistance, youth integration policies), as well as on the ideological articulations the government uttered to justify these reforms via the combination of welfare chauvinist orientations with centre-right concerns about market dynamics and public finances. Our analysis concludes that nativist/racialised, nationalist and welfare chauvinist social policies transcend the distinction of deserving and non-deserving social groups, which raises the question about the social imaginaries that lie beneath the attempts of far-right political actors to shape societies through the reform of welfare.","PeriodicalId":83585,"journal":{"name":"Zeitschrift fur Sozialreform","volume":"66 1","pages":"525 - 552"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2020-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1515/zsr-2020-0022","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"45421314","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Abstract The special issue discusses the intersections between social welfare and migration control, as well as how stratified access to welfare services is used to govern ‘unwanted’ groups. This article explores these intersections in Denmark’ deterrence-oriented asylum policy regime, analysing the discourses and practices whereby people seeking protection are constructed as ‘undeserving’ poor. Drawing on ethnographic fieldwork in different sites of enforcement of Denmark’s asylum regime as well as interviews with street-level workers and people who sought asylum in Denmark, I trace how the Danish deterrence approach operates through the production of poverty and precarity among people seeking protection in asylum reception camps, deportation-oriented integration programmes, and finally, deportation camps. I show how the Danish welfare state, as a result of the merging of external and internal bordering practices, produces a condition of precarity and (non)deportability that extends from the asylum camps to those awarded temporary protection status. Hence, while the deterrence-oriented Danish policy regime has not proven ‘effective’ from the point of view of immigration control, it has served to reinforced a dualised, hierarchically ordered welfare rights’ regime that gradually erodes the rights and life opportunities of unwanted noncitizen ‘others’.
{"title":"The Production of Precarity in Denmark’s Asylum Regime","authors":"A. Lindberg","doi":"10.1515/zsr-2020-0018","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1515/zsr-2020-0018","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract The special issue discusses the intersections between social welfare and migration control, as well as how stratified access to welfare services is used to govern ‘unwanted’ groups. This article explores these intersections in Denmark’ deterrence-oriented asylum policy regime, analysing the discourses and practices whereby people seeking protection are constructed as ‘undeserving’ poor. Drawing on ethnographic fieldwork in different sites of enforcement of Denmark’s asylum regime as well as interviews with street-level workers and people who sought asylum in Denmark, I trace how the Danish deterrence approach operates through the production of poverty and precarity among people seeking protection in asylum reception camps, deportation-oriented integration programmes, and finally, deportation camps. I show how the Danish welfare state, as a result of the merging of external and internal bordering practices, produces a condition of precarity and (non)deportability that extends from the asylum camps to those awarded temporary protection status. Hence, while the deterrence-oriented Danish policy regime has not proven ‘effective’ from the point of view of immigration control, it has served to reinforced a dualised, hierarchically ordered welfare rights’ regime that gradually erodes the rights and life opportunities of unwanted noncitizen ‘others’.","PeriodicalId":83585,"journal":{"name":"Zeitschrift fur Sozialreform","volume":"66 1","pages":"413 - 439"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2020-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1515/zsr-2020-0018","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"49421494","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Abstract Until recently, the Mongolian welfare system was entirely category based. However, a new food stamps programme funded by loans from the Asian Development Bank, which targets aid according to proxy means testing, has been introduced as part of the bank’s aim to push Mongolia towards a fiscally sustainable welfare model. The food stamps programme is presented as efficient and responsible in contrast to Mongolia’s universal child money programme. Based on long-term participant observation research in the ger districts of Ulaanbaatar, areas inhabited by many rural-urban migrants living in poverty, this paper compares the two programmes, interweaving street-level accounts of the experiences of residents and bureaucrats alike with the respective histories and funding sources of the two programmes. Doing so provides a multi-level analysis of the emergent welfare state in Mongolia, unpicking the ‘system’ that ger district residents encounter, linking the relative influence of international financial institutions to democratic and economic cycles, and offering a critique of the supposed efficiency of targeted welfare programmes.
{"title":"Child Money and Food Stamps: A comparative analysis of Mongolian welfare programmes in the Ger Districts of Ulaanbaatar","authors":"Elizabeth Fox","doi":"10.1515/zsr-2020-0021","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1515/zsr-2020-0021","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract Until recently, the Mongolian welfare system was entirely category based. However, a new food stamps programme funded by loans from the Asian Development Bank, which targets aid according to proxy means testing, has been introduced as part of the bank’s aim to push Mongolia towards a fiscally sustainable welfare model. The food stamps programme is presented as efficient and responsible in contrast to Mongolia’s universal child money programme. Based on long-term participant observation research in the ger districts of Ulaanbaatar, areas inhabited by many rural-urban migrants living in poverty, this paper compares the two programmes, interweaving street-level accounts of the experiences of residents and bureaucrats alike with the respective histories and funding sources of the two programmes. Doing so provides a multi-level analysis of the emergent welfare state in Mongolia, unpicking the ‘system’ that ger district residents encounter, linking the relative influence of international financial institutions to democratic and economic cycles, and offering a critique of the supposed efficiency of targeted welfare programmes.","PeriodicalId":83585,"journal":{"name":"Zeitschrift fur Sozialreform","volume":"66 1","pages":"499 - 524"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2020-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1515/zsr-2020-0021","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"49323638","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Abstract In contrast to the nexus between welfare and migration control, the link between migration and poverty (or rather the perception of poverty), has not received the same amount of political interest, but also public and scholarly attention. Yet, there are multiple ways in which migrants are rendered or perceived as poor in receiving states after having migrated. Hence, this special issue addresses the intersection of migration and poverty. The contributions cover various socio-legal, political and discursive aspects of how state institutions and non-state agencies address, and how poor citizens and migrant individuals in the broadest sense deal with, precariousness and discrimination in the states where they have settled or within which they have moved. In public and political discourse, migrant individuals are often portrayed as underserving, needy and dependent on the ‘receiving states’. Yet, what is often overlooked is how this assumed dependency is constructed by policies and laws, encouraged by media practices and everyday street-level implementation, to the degree that it demonises the foreign ‘other’, accused of misusing welfare assistance. At the same time, we find similar framings regarding marginalised citizens, such as welfare recipients, which discloses the moral character of social policies and a hierarchy of deservingness-recognition. Within the special issue, we critically discuss how such representations and policy mechanisms allow for the discriminatory circumscription of rights and services of the ‘poor’ and migrants that are deeply embedded in welfare chauvinist attitudes, causing significant control and surveillance by the state.
{"title":"Editorial: Governing the Poor – Migration and Poverty","authors":"L. Borrelli, Yann Bochsler","doi":"10.1515/zsr-2020-0016","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1515/zsr-2020-0016","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract In contrast to the nexus between welfare and migration control, the link between migration and poverty (or rather the perception of poverty), has not received the same amount of political interest, but also public and scholarly attention. Yet, there are multiple ways in which migrants are rendered or perceived as poor in receiving states after having migrated. Hence, this special issue addresses the intersection of migration and poverty. The contributions cover various socio-legal, political and discursive aspects of how state institutions and non-state agencies address, and how poor citizens and migrant individuals in the broadest sense deal with, precariousness and discrimination in the states where they have settled or within which they have moved. In public and political discourse, migrant individuals are often portrayed as underserving, needy and dependent on the ‘receiving states’. Yet, what is often overlooked is how this assumed dependency is constructed by policies and laws, encouraged by media practices and everyday street-level implementation, to the degree that it demonises the foreign ‘other’, accused of misusing welfare assistance. At the same time, we find similar framings regarding marginalised citizens, such as welfare recipients, which discloses the moral character of social policies and a hierarchy of deservingness-recognition. Within the special issue, we critically discuss how such representations and policy mechanisms allow for the discriminatory circumscription of rights and services of the ‘poor’ and migrants that are deeply embedded in welfare chauvinist attitudes, causing significant control and surveillance by the state.","PeriodicalId":83585,"journal":{"name":"Zeitschrift fur Sozialreform","volume":"66 1","pages":"363 - 385"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2020-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1515/zsr-2020-0016","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"48607583","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：