One Hundred Years of Social Protection
Latest articles in this journal
One Hundred Years of Social Protection pp 207-230; doi:10.1007/978-3-030-65439-9_9
Disability as a global social policy issue has gained increasing importance during recent decades, partly due to a shift in conceptualization from a medical to a social perspective on disability. This new relevance has led to the emergence of a global organizational field around the topic, with a high involvement of International Organizations (IOs). In order to investigate the population of IOs in the field, this chapter identifies influential actors, relates them to the main discourses, and maps their relations. It can be seen that agencies of the United Nations have become the key actors in promoting the rights-based social perspective and the monitoring of the implementation of disability rights. In contrast, the World Health Organization is still the leading organization in the provision of medical classification systems. Overall, it can be noted that the organizational field leaves space for IOs to influence the direction of global and national disability policy.
One Hundred Years of Social Protection pp 255-273; doi:10.1007/978-3-030-65439-9_11
In the twenty-first century, climate change poses a major challenge to the work of IOs. This chapter contextualizes the historical shift from more compartmentalized understandings of climate change at the IO level, toward the current understanding of climate change as a pervasive threat to social policy across various issue areas. Fueled by ongoing discourse surrounding the Sustainable Development Agenda at the United Nations, a multiplicity of IOs are framing social policy issues in relation to climate change that may have traditionally been viewed as largely separate. The cross-cutting nature of the issue for IOs is highlighted, and as illustrated via an exploration of climate insurance as a social policy tool, climate change has led to compelling developments regarding the archetypal roles of IOs as actors of soft governance, raising questions for the future of IOs in the context of climate change and social policy engagement.
One Hundred Years of Social Protection pp 57-81; doi:10.1007/978-3-030-65439-9_3
This chapter compares how three International and two regional Organizations, namely the ILO, the WTO, and the World Bank, as well as ASEAN and Mercosur, approach the global governance of labor standards. Defining ‘labor standards’ is notoriously difficult. We therefore use Freedom of Association and Collective Bargaining (FACB) rights as a benchmark to assess the positions taken by the five regional organizations. We argue that two main discourses have been pursued in the global debate, a ‘social’ discourse, and a ‘neoliberal’ discourse. We find that organizations whose intrinsic features allow for an institutionalized representation of workers’ interests pursue variations of the social discourse, whereas a neoliberal position predominates in organizations where this representation is lacking. This is true both at the international and regional level. Moreover, we show that the coexistence of these two conflicting discourses has led to contestation, but also to exchange and cooperation. We furthermore outline to what extent the two discourses have changed over time. We conclude the chapter with a discussion of future challenges for the global governance of labor standards.
One Hundred Years of Social Protection pp 163-186; doi:10.1007/978-3-030-65439-9_7
Education is commonly heralded as one of the key policies for fostering future progress and well-being. Hence, education policy can be conceptualized as a social policy as it enables individuals to acquire skills for living an independent and fulfilled life while also providing states with a toolkit to stimulate economic growth and social cohesion. In this chapter, we first map the population of education International Organizations (IOs) to describe the organizational field in which the social policy discourse in the sub-area of education takes place. The assessment of what types of IOs deal with education is summarized in a typology to identify different clusters of IOs and provide accounts of both their characteristics and the different niches they have populated in the organizational field of education policy. Second, the ideas IOs hold regarding education are analyzed and it is shown how the discourse on education has developed over time within the population of IOs.
One Hundred Years of Social Protection pp 325-339; doi:10.1007/978-3-030-65439-9_14
The concluding chapter resumes the arguments made in the introduction to this volume. It summarizes the empirical findings of the individual contributions and highlights prevailing cross-cutting issues and themes. It also depicts further and future avenues of research resulting from this volume. Overall, it becomes evident that International organizations (IOs) have been part of the architecture of arguments in global social governance for a long time. They have been populating diverse social fields in which they more often cooperate or coexist in issue-related or individual regional niches than contest each other. However, they often share a field with other actors, too. IOs have also proven strong in exercising soft governance as the broadcasters of new ideas. Thus, they have cognitive authority over their specific field. However, birth characteristics, such as membership rules or the design of decision-taking, as well as path-dependencies influence IO activities and discourses.
One Hundred Years of Social Protection pp 139-162; doi:10.1007/978-3-030-65439-9_6
This chapter locates children’s rights in the context of global social governance. Social policy literature has hitherto neglected the centrality of child protection and children’s rights to many key areas of social governance such as education and healthcare. The chapter traces the history of children’s rights as a distinct sphere in international law from the first recognition of the special status of children, to the adoption of the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child (UNCRC), to the growth of the contemporary complex International Organization (IO) landscape. Children’s rights enjoy growing visibility and relevance and continue to be a cross-cutting issue in international organizations of all kinds, making them a central dimension of global social governance. Nonetheless, the chapter highlights that the growth of the children’s rights agenda has not been without conflict. International norms and measures surrounding children’s rights continue to be challenged and questioned by scholars and practitioners alike. Furthermore, the analysis of children’s rights provides opportunities to reconsider traditional approaches to global social policy.
One Hundred Years of Social Protection pp 113-135; doi:10.1007/978-3-030-65439-9_5
The chapter on international organizations (IOs) and the global social governance of pensions analyzes the way in which IOs have competed to shape the pensions discourse. It shows how the organizational field has been shaped by the dominant economic paradigm, which has created space for IOs to operate in the policy area. A paradigmatic change creates the environmental conditions for new IOs to enter the field and compete or cooperate with the existing IOs to shape the discourse. The intrinsic features of each IO operating in the pension reform arena will be shown to determine their approach to influencing the pensions discourse and how they respond to rivals entering the field.
One Hundred Years of Social Protection pp 83-111; doi:10.1007/978-3-030-65439-9_4
Nicola Yeates and Jane Pillinger offer a much-needed summary of the historical development of health care worker migration as a global social policy field in which distinct fields of care and migration overlap. Focusing on international governmental and non-governmental organizations, the chapter draws attention to shifting constellations of ideas, actors and institutions in this field since the end of WWII to the present day. It emphasizes the necessity of a pluralistic and dynamic understanding of the field, and the role of contestation, cooperation and coordination in the unfolding of global policy, in order to better comprehend the origins of this field and its key characteristics. Emphasizing a multi-sectoral perspective and lateral connections in the construction of this global social policy field, Yeates and Pillinger explore the methodological and analytical implications of this for the study of IOs in global social policy more generally.
One Hundred Years of Social Protection pp 233-253; doi:10.1007/978-3-030-65439-9_10
The focus of this chapter is on global social policy actors and their ideas on health care systems. The specific position and constellation of key IOs are illustrated by a mapping and characterization of four central IOs (WHO, World Bank, ILO, OECD). The main ideas on health care systems of these four IOs are presented in relation to each other, taking into account discourses between them. That is then taken further to characterize the global health governance architecture based on contestational and collaborative relationships between IOs. Based on that, the chapter discusses the (preliminary) implications of the COVID-19 pandemic for altering that architecture.
One Hundred Years of Social Protection pp 187-206; doi:10.1007/978-3-030-65439-9_8
This chapter focuses on family policy as an object of global social governance. From the 1990s to 2008, the family policy field was bifurcated. One part, focused on family norms in the North, followed the shift from the male breadwinner to the adult earner family with its work-family tensions. Here the main IOs were the ILO and the OECD. The second part focused on the South and policies targeting children in poor families. Although UNICEF clearly played an important role on the ground here, it was the World Bank that took the lead in elaborating and disseminating the core ideas. Since the 2008 crisis, the field has come together through the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) which simultaneously address both North and South. The dominant discourse is ‘inclusive growth’, challenged by the more critical discourse on the ‘care economy’.