Download fulltext

321CSBWorkinPaper1815

Frank Vandenbroucke HERMAN DELEECK CENTRE FOR SOCIAL POLICY A self-critical flashback on the EU’s anti-poverty promise WORKING PAPER NO 18 15 October 2018 University of Antwerp Herman Deleeck Centre for Social Policy centrumvoorsociaalbeleid be Vandenbroucke1 Amsterdam – f i g vandenbroucke@uva nl Foreword to Cantillon B Goedemé T Hills J (eds ) Decent incomes all Improving policies in Europe Oxford Press forthcoming Abstract This paper is an introduction a book by Bea Tim and John new presents extensive empirical research impact pursued EU countries fight poverty focuses question that has exercised European policy-makers policy-analysts at least ten years: why did governments fail deliver their proclaimed with so much emphasis turn century reduce among citizens? In this introductory I situate line marked three earlier books look back self-critically promises made years ago Lisbon Summit 1 thank Jonathan Zeitlin comments The which It constitutes important sequel return below And it cannot read not me without some soul-searching about solemn therefore have start relatively well-known story For those concerned expectations ran high policy was explicitly introduced as distinct focus attention cooperation special March 2000 Council concluded ‘Steps must taken make decisive eradication setting adequate targets agreed end year’ Objectives against social exclusion were then Nice December Since impossible monitor progress member states regard inclusion absence comparable quantitative indicators Belgian government decided establishment common priority its presidency Union during second half 2001 indeed set Laeken crucial factor political success preparatory scientific work late Anthony Atkinson his team published Indicators 2002 (Atkinson et al 2002) That seminal first publications referred my sentences Although we may forgotten part inspiration Why single-mindedly 2000? Many welfare state scholars would emphasize fighting but one dimension broader mission quarrel them However apart from idea litmus test justice how well society caters most vulnerable members there another motivation ‘tactical’ consideration underlying tactical call strong traction inevitably imply concern quality large sure national actors wary comprehensive debate architecture hardware applied it; engaging outcomes (which they could refuse thought) also engage inputs needed safeguard modernize Europe’s rather implicit our campaign chapter Summit; might even say agenda stealth 2 foreword formulated cautiously clearly: “The are vehicle defining any pecking order nations tool preserve rejuvenate hallmark protection citizens Indeed credible commitment combat presupposes firm efficient productive continuous adaptation needs risks ” (Vandenbroucke 2002a p viii) objectives subsequent ‘Open Coordination Inclusion’ thought ambitious realistic ‘Realism’ seen feature process because pains respect sovereignty spirit subsidiarity diversity “Our should yet What exercise ambition area ‘standards excellence’ than standards mediocrity (…) But single best practice: different ways reach excellence no sight since can always do better Hence Open Method put only guidance hard legislation subsidiarity: designed help develop own reflecting individual situations share experience review transparent environment v-vi) same year commissioned brief Gosta Esping-Andersen co-authors Need New Welfare State “to reflect upon Gestalt beginning both point view desirability feasibility” 2002b ix) called investment stressed substitute spending correctly recalled Cronert Palme volume: ‘social state’ replace traditional unrealistic especially given live ageing ever more people dependent benefits age pp x) Such carefully balanced ideas had inform further development become cognitive normative tool: policy- makers learn each other’s practices; methodology allow define Europe’ specific terms basis substantive views consensus-building Nearly two decades later denying defined increased bitter divisions consensus emerged crisis Eurozone went wrong? fact separate processes pensions health care does contradict 2000s these less centre-stage (and developed) Inclusion softness governance usual suspect discussions Yet too easy essential problem ‘non-binding’ nature Strategy successor strategy 2020 recent again illustrates (Jessoula Madama 2018) There non-binding launched makes weak within instruments stricto sensu significant extent decentralized qua implementation design Subsidiarity salient sensitive principle when comes minimum income guidelines precondition getting off ground level Therefore actual challenge multifaceted: reduced opposition between ‘binding’ realm coordination move ‘outcome indicators’ ‘policy input critically existing mix enforcing uniform ‘one-size-fits-all’ ideal need consistent packages tailor-made identified various contributions volume; Marchal Luigjes suggests operational way pursue combine disposes optimal benchmarking ‘soft’ funding ‘hard’ domains steadily enhance salience fiscal economic surveillance organized If Pillar Rights solemnly 2017 now translated into program hand combined turning right direction Importantly formulates whole edifice Below observation anti- requires well-functioning across board Rather focusing third tried understand before financial 2008 improving employment records worsening (for non-elderly population) number mature (Cantillon 2014) Reconciling Work Poverty Reduction book’s title difficult? key neutralized left behind non- elderly living households little or attachment labour market confronted considerable increasing edited adds insights 2014 will try summarize richness material; sometimes emerging picture still contradictory triggers questions Let formulate what consider main take-home messages analysis firmly positions itself tradition sees AROP at-risk-of-poverty indicator formally endorsed legitimate benchmark measures societies tolerate though metric inequality bottom distribution ‘absolute’ sense Simultaneously qualifications qualification reality threshold very poor country compared rich country; reference budgets shows clearly diminish relevance 60% median (the corroborates too) underscores importance convergence prosperity fundamental ‘a model’ growth versus decline ‘union’ pan- sadly My message upward parcel model Achieving matter policy; policy: depends 3 stabilizer citizen’s contribution volume Matsaganis Leventi rightly use (AROP) anchored time assess role policies: correct gauge shocks When shock occurs lose out standard once enjoy minimally decent To somewhat perspective: creeping trends slowly growing incomes; context relative ‘floating threshold’ relevant contrast judge ‘anchored time’ floating seemingly technical leads states’ trajectories Both slow sudden play elaborate An insight emerges public necessarily culprit adverse direct ‘active’ six seven examined Paulus Sutherland Tasseva decade entirely ‘lost decade’ reduction: changes tax benefit actually reducing seems ‘welfare harder stand still’ exactly changed fabric forces result exogenous: globalization technological change Sweeping generalizations With interplay developers human capital hence merits caveats Hemerijck (2017) fifth added revisited detrimental abound however such rarely underpinned observations causalities surprising paid ongoing debates endogenous One trend position population: diminishing (not them!) whilst increase former maturation pension systems gradual improvement women’s participation advantage force notably who economically active (I write ‘may force’ reason dare affirm conjecture; data available micro-simulation exercises nevertheless examination possible higher reader mistake example I’ve here: don’t presume clash generations let alone zero- sum game non-elderly: instance provision macro-economic stabilizer; indirectly supports younger population times contribute shift Another dual earnership: where earners tend case complicated sociological reasons rapidly Salverda Thewissen show Netherlands (Salverda worse; stand-still lead inadequacy differ country: rise earnership explain developments dates periods; other So far analytical focus: banking sector fragility housing booms lack automatic stabilizers trust belief austerity… latent stability vastly underestimated literature including (except policy) run-up monetary unification necessary ‘flexibility’ markets often questioning learned lesson: union institutions support flexibility Flexibility associated ‘enabling’ equipping skills empower thus recreate security ‘Social investment’ enabling par cater achieve collective action: bargaining organisation insurance devices Stability typically protect individuals: unemployment stabilises economy protects purchasing power unemployed words intrinsically action ‘protective’ Enabling protective mutually reinforcing creating resilient How prevented led sharp increases time’? answer largely surpasses Avoiding deep required quite policies; allowed function Partly choices austerity flaws Repairing implies Monetary becomes true ‘insurance union’ generally latter expression happenstance: aim systemic functions stabilization entails broad insurance’ ‘labour standards’ interwoven Barnard De Baere 2017) We think reiterate used reconnect issues broached (see volume’s conclusion here general been understood take ‘the rest policy’ follow suit seemed clever expedient turned incomplete failure simply avoid repetition dismal embedded 4 about: piecemeal potential broken pages importantly understanding conversely recognition complex interdependence socio-economic reduction consequent ‘mainstreaming’ References Marlier E Nolan (2002) F (2014) successful States? G Gallie D Myles (eds) Uses Investment Jessoula M (2018) Fighting chance Routledge/EUI Studies Political Economy W S middle fared Netherlands? Tale Stagnation Population Shifts (ed Inequality Inclusive Growth Rich Countries: Shared Challenges Contrasting Fortunes (2002a) in: v- xi (2002b) Foreword: Sustainable Justice Co-ordination viii-xxiv C after Crisis Cambridge: Cambridge

Download fulltext
t311Fernandes_Vandenbroucke_Europe_Sociale_contribution_Fondation_Schuman_FR_final_mars_2018

Download presentation
2018-06-13_Presentatie_Basisinkomen_Utrecht_Vandenbroucke

Principiële en empirische kanttekeningen bij de discussie over het basisinkomen Symposium “Feit fictie omtrent in Nederland – verkenningen ethische kanttekeningen” Structuur interventie Frank Vandenbroucke www frankvandenbroucke uva nl Utrecht 13 juni 2018 • Een filosofisch sterk uitgangspunt: collectieve erfenis Maar… (*)  Geen ‘wederkerigheid’? BI versus loonsubsidies (van der Veen Groot & van Veen) of meer algemeen ondersteuning werk Grenzen rond welvaartsstaat = relatief strenge concrete eisen m b t wederkerigheid: een moeilijke knoop voor Waarom prioriteit cash? Onderwijs gezondheidszorg huisvesting als ‘BI natura’ ter individuele autonomie De ‘bezemwagen’ Het trilemma (armoede betaalbaarheid onvoorwaardelijkheid): zie ook Martinelli dit trilemma? Rechtvaardigheid is inherent complex (undominated diversity?) Armoedegrens gedetermineerd door mediane inkomen verdiend Basic income the European Union: a conundrum rather than solution ACCESS EUROPE Research Paper 2017/02 01 August 2017 downloadable at http://ssrn com/abstract=3011847

Download fulltext
320

Une baisse plus rapide des allocations est-elle à recommander? Carte blanche publiée dans Le Soir 24 septembre 2018 p 3 Signataires : Bart Capéau (KULeuven) Cockx (UGent) Koen Decancq (UAntwerpen) André Decoster Muriel Dejemeppe (UCLouvain) Mathias Hungerbühler (Université de Namur) Camille Landais (London School of Economics) Erwin Ooghe Sergio Perelman Liège) Pierre Pestieau Erik Schokkaert Frans Spinnewijn Johannes Dirk Van Gaer Frank Vandenbroucke (Universiteit van Amsterdam) Bruno der Linden (FNRS et UCLouvain) Des chômage élevées au cours six premiers mois Dans les suivants un déclin C’est ce que le gouvernement fédéral a décidé « jobs deal » cet été Par cette réforme entend encourager personnes sans emploi rechercher activement du travail accepter vite une offre d’embauche brandit arguments scientifiques pour justifier dégressivité Mais y a-t-il consensus scientifique sujet ? Nous ne pensons pas En outre nous considérons volet porte atteinte principales missions l’assurance-chômage études confirment qu’une diminution avec la durée fournit incitation financière forte trouver par comparaison allocation constante même niveau moyen chômeur anticipe en effet prestations but prévenir perte revenus il commence chercher intensément dès début l’épisode Il n’est exclu chômeurs longue réagissent fortement aux incitations financières ceux qui sont depuis peu L’épargne diminue mesure se prolonge devient donc malaisé d’amortir choc financier d’une Ceci n’entraîne cependant nécessairement décroissantes augmentent chances Tout d’abord tous identiques Au gré circonstances telles formation ou situation familiale rôle incitatif d’allocations sur reprise d’emploi est marqué chez uns autres Les opérantes trouvent rapidement concentre lors davantage ont moins d’impact plaide faveur d’un élevé lieu tard Ensuite l’effet personne peut diminuer sa s’allonge Si employeur choix entre deux candidats ailleurs recrutera systématiquement candidat ayant période courte Même si agit l’effort recherche manière identique quelle soit mécanisme suffit engendrer impact moindre l’embauche A cela s’ajouter fait motivation l’emploi progressive compétences temps passe L’American Economic Review (*) revue autorité récemment publié résultats étude première fois analyse net réduction retour tenant compte facteurs évoqués ci-dessus L’étude fonde ses conclusions système d’assurance-chômage suédois généreux belge L’allocation représente 80 % salaire final plafonné alors qu’en Belgique pourcentage jamais supérieur 65 qu’il avantages illimités Suède comme 2001 introduit profil décroissant l’indemnité Cette permet quantifier l’impact réel différentes durées d’inoccupation rapport trois fort premier deuxième encore troisième auteurs concluent efficace celle contraire l’intention faire savoir augmenter ensuite réduire qu’aujourd’hui Analyser prennent l’accès Or elle aussi mission fournir assurance contre De point vue parce d’économies chaque euro supplémentaire vaut eux viennent perdre leur raison argument vaudrait mieux sociales plutôt qu’elles baissent recommandations claires cas sommes bien conscients conclusion tirée données suédoises naïvement s’étendre d’autres pays Ainsi on déduire belges devrait baisser soulève néanmoins questions bien-fondé voulue possible aille l’encontre justifie économique Avant prendre décisions pourraient avoir conséquences négatives fondements notre État providence serait avisé analyser question profondeur requise Kolsrud Jonas Peter Nilsson (2018) The Optimal Timing Unemployment Benefits American 108 (4-5) 985-1033 lecteur intéressé invité consulter résumé simplifié proposé publication récente Néerlandais Leuvens Economisch Standpunt No 169

Download fulltext
t312Fernandes_Vandenbroucke_Social_Europe_Fondation_Schuman_EN_final_march_2018

Download fulltext
t313

Download fulltext
t314

Download fulltext
316EU_and_global_inequality_draft_chapter_Vandenbroucke_as_submitted

1 ADDRESSING GLOBAL INEQUALITY: IS THE EU PART OF EQUATION? Draft chapter submitted for publication in: Patrick Diamond (ed ) The Next Phase of Globalisation: Capitalism and Inequality in the Industrialised world I B Tauris forthcoming Frank Vandenbroucke University Amsterdam1 ABSTRACT If globalization leads to increasing inequality economically most advanced nation states if we want reverse this trend is then part solution? Or problem? argue that our discussion these questions can be impaired by intellectual amalgamation determinism understanding Europeanisation signal pitfalls work Milanovic Rodrik other influential scholars: however thought-provoking their accounts are potential role should move beyond such International competition technological demographic changes sociological ideational shifts all put pressure on welfare But difference between trajectory continental European one hand US UK shows so far national institutions policies played a crucial mitigating impact Sixty years ago integration was premised neat division labour: important aspects economic policy would become supranational social could safely left hands Prima facie labour seemed tolerably well many notwithstanding number early critical observations about EU’s fabric Member States today’s no longer sustainable: reason monetary unification another heterogeneity after enlargement Revising requires political contract at level sustains risk-sharing common objectives Agreeing raises issues sovereignty solidarity shared values but possible without getting trapped paralyzed trilemma democracy integrated markets However indicate way forward need coherent conception ‘European Social Union’ KEYWORDS Globalization Europeanization Europe Union thank Jonathan Zeitlin comments an earlier version 2 Addressing global inequality: equation? debate legacy they ‘The force globalization’: unsatisfactory account Are doomed live with steadily inequalities because under siege ‘force globalization’? ceaseless recurrence ‘winners losers globalization‘ mantra debates certainly feeds into pessimistic idea Readers Branko Milanovic’s Global – outstanding academic bestseller often quoted may come same depressing conclusion even analysis multifaceted his relatively open Why that? problem book it lumps together complex set developments related technology international openness balance power notion: ‘globalization’ explicitly defends arguing change ‘wrapped around each other’ ‘trying disentangle individual effects futile’ whilst ‘endogenous globalization’ Hence ‘technology mutually dependent cannot separated any meaningful sense’ (Milanovic 2016 p 110) mutual interdependence drivers not denied conflating them single ‘force’ analytically politically unhelpful mature ‘the ‘endogenous’ considerable differences levels trends hard explain Yet center stage anyone who interested politics Moreover accept affect backdrop identify tackle specific as trade its distributive financial regulation migration tax-and-benefit systems collective bargaining least aim formulate practical solutions We deny overarching background condition nor ‘openness’ have adverse distributional consequences through tax different forces play This complexity probably explains why empirical studies assess limited explanatory variables (such trade) do find much evidence A study tested large variety econometric models vein concludes ‘skeptical bold claims globalization’s effect state’: ‘Globalization exert very modest influence policymakers always been develop see extent which approach relies various factors concept useful compare Bourgignon’s inequality’: there denying contributes within Bourguignon (2015) carefully distinguishes mechanisms 3 influenced diverse mix pressures aging population instance exerts greater than or mediated channeled domestic actors how choose address those process’ (Brady et al 2005 pp 945 944) recent avoids focusing sole manufacturing imports from South income North finds clear ‘inequality effect’ decreases significantly degree wage coordination state generosity across countries It ‘move relative importance inequality’; ‘theories intersection ’ (Mahutga 2017 183) new major report World Report 2018 provides antidote deterministic has increased nearly regions decades speeds fact among when share similar development highlights divergence particularly extreme Western United had 1980 today radically situations projects wealth up 2050 scenarios In future ‘business usual’ continues will further increase Alternatively ‘if coming follow moderate over past reduced case also substantial progress eradicating poverty’ (Alvaredo 17) words within-country dynamics tremendous eradication poverty serve beacon rest For sure face challenges cracks experience signals ever authors refer ‘Europe’ institution: stands region regional estimated only mildly compared National factor Report; whether existence equation discussed does either lacunae addressed cohesion: optimistic view order discuss first understand past: did contribute factor? Whilst scientists difficulty establishing simple significant relationship some researchers two simultaneous trends: decreasing research underscores perceived inequality-enhancing dampened high exhibited small economies 4 stabilized strong corporatist Belgium Netherlands According Beckfield studied 13 net decrease total (i e measured pan-European perspective constitute country) circa 2000 (Beckfield 2009 501) scholars looking wrong place focus globalization: ‘It structures capitalist societies Europe’ 2006 980 level) addition he emphasizes correctly my type process scale refocusing attention establishes correlation rather causation UK’s correlates drastic 1980s Beckfield’s data; Margaret Thatcher? honest answer seems me say what happened EU: Europe’s since 1958 counterfactual scenario Common Market Interestingly opposite narratives were present debates: Let briefly elaborate narrative transpires sometimes implicitly documents accompanying preparation project founding fathers signatories Treaty Rome convinced prosperous inclusive retrospect summarize belief follows: • Economic stimulate growth participating allow less developed catch thanks access market targeted support so-called ‘cohesion policies’: convergence machine where unions parties sufficient redistribute benefits fairly There agree standards Countries ahead socially hindered policy: internal cohesion short fathers’ credo based articles faith clearly distinguished: convergence-through-integration member cohesion-in-convergence immediately add second article (cohesion-in-convergence) undisputed fifties consensus harmonisation question heart 333 results contrasted Tober Busemeyer positive association 14 time period 1999-2000 5 1956 Ohlin Spaak prepared launching Community (International Labour Organisation 1956) Bertil believed wages expenditures involved mainly productivity; hence fear downward allowing free added diminish states’ competitiveness corrected adapting exchange rates Thus describing union insignificant caveat followed suit formulated hindsight terms slightly benign interpretation motives deeply exactly dominant doom-mongering Their reconstruct here think European-level except security entitlements (granted states) mobile citizens (citizens included circle) They mind: supranational; Consequently EU-level initiatives seen attractive necessary sustain Below sustainable today: while worked 20th century 21st underlying optimism naïve history proven until halfway decade century: catching-up went spectre ‘race bottom’ materialize moderately That assessment underrate side successive enlargements depending indicators span review episodes actually diminished already mentioned above reference Over last model started show predating 2008 crisis spinning write ’to degree’ developing link areas notably safety health incorrect dimension project; became player anti-discrimination Research published Lefebvre Pestieau (2012) Goedemé (2017) Eurofound (2015 2017) suggests spans during disposable household incomes half 2000s i following Eastern Central An implicit 1995 2010 whole EU15 must Eurofound’s 2014 6 several states: ‘cohesion-in-convergence’ applied crack spectacular fissure emerged crisis: stopped north south Monetary tearing apart Since (a of) Eurozone self-sustaining upward attribute somewhat benignly advent initial sustainable; enlarged constitutes needs found impressive stream scholarly Fritz Scharpf out main authors: thesis economy gradually more ‘market liberal’ asymmetric bound function Given constellation treaties negative market-making prevail market-correcting policies; Court Justice prefer liberalization (Scharpf 2009) combines incompatible socio-economic 2016) too schematic offers insights comfort statistical provide real explanation longer-term socio-demographic shaping before austerity concur Maurizio Ferrera contribution volume dimension; calls ‘a reframing classical dominated deficit institutional construct asymmetry (…) composite component thus inherent tensions weaknesses imputed Likewise instrument solution remedy (Ferrera 50) Dani represents strand pessimism regard He considers drive towards Single ‘hyperglobalization’ exacerbates democratic Martinsen assumption causal exists legal rulings shape dimensions care She contra Scharpf’s determinist references supporting contention likeminded authors’ 2017a note 6-7 7 catches deems increasingly difficult scaled back Rodrik’s contains healthy warnings: him jump readily imposes upon kinds domains Elsewhere overstretch functionalist arguments active challenge rules functionally relevant (for Market) legitimate aspirations What ‘needed’ ‘imposed’ depends fundamental (Vandenbroucke 2017a) On analytical framework famous ‘trilemma’ rigid capture both record 8 Undoing worst options compelling argument priori judgment intermediary exist extended sufficiently goal-setting key respect subsidiarity sacrificing prerogatives Admittedly basic features selective informed end demise democracies mobilize instruments done Politically uphill battle deep successful yet equality qua institution To rise needed three domains: completion organisation fair mobility taxation; well-placed promote investment human capital generally upshot remain ‘Social true Welfare scene emphasize nature bottom distribution erosion Much nowadays top One overlook distribution: signalling gradual redistributive capacity Germany Sweden Denmark writing work; Paradox (‘For teething problems viewed great success considering down path building remains cautionary tale (Rodrik 2011 220) Straight Talk Trade: Ideas Sane Economy: ‘Macron late entertain fiscal EU’ 78) 88 Sabel (2018) poor actual functioning (and WTO) Crucial explaining increases homespun silver bullet cross-border interaction blamed culprit completely absent Individual refers situation households it’s metric ‘household income’ determinant risk individuals participation members lives measure indicator called intensity’ Around middle people living low intensity confronted 54% whereas 5% sizable divide heightened By 2015 considerably; conversely remained polarisation risks starting Simultaneously witnessed employment Europe: take higher ‘work-poor’ (by mean intensity) returning pre-crisis hollowing middle: medium (but high) lower Compared 2007 ‘very rich’ poor’ reinforcing play: work-poor households; combination types goes long non-elderly pattern homogeneous 2004 combined Poland despite These trajectories explained driver; differs country principle sets poverty-risk countries: tax-and-transfer generous employment; ii role: lone-parent (say lone mother holds part-time job) couple children partners partner works full-time employed); iii zero segment job quality jobs contractual 9 earnings lose earned associated ‘activation turn’ public emphasised incentives increased: enhanced accompanied activation gap employed unemployed grows imply concern abandoned ‘high road’ quantity count; full valorisation Also adequate protection; substitutes emphasis ‘investment’ ignore protection traditional ‘protective’ functions Observations decreased point minimum poverty; certain countries) ‘glass ceiling’ benefit Minimum indeed mobility: fears dumping unwarranted sectors competitive ‘low-wage’ employers enforcement context posting workers result grey blatant cases exploitation All considerations advised wages; return below insurance contrast sketched previous section sharply southern northern design flaws (EMU) wake issued statements viability consider diversity accommodated; referred example Schelkle proposes contrasting perspective: organising enhances sharing allows 10 effective device complete ‘completing union’ mean? insight gained prominence Commission’s thinking EMU existing ceiling reduction’ Cantillon colleagues publications Herman Deleeck Centre Policy suggest remainder conclude well-functioning ‘insurance unions’ centralize management banks unemployment exception driven Banking Commission now argues stabilisers; achieve re-insurance schemes Another option scheme supports hit cope revenue spending 11 wit automatic stabilisers times simultaneously protected happenstance: purchasing downturn therefore ‘automatic stabiliser’ par excellence Existing opt downright centralisation (like Canada Germany) demand reinsurance really combine decentralisation insurance) rational behaviour reasons First pooling resilience against shocks applies symmetric value per se create externality; properly insures itself helps neighbours Therefore stability entails cluster principles stabilisation State: benefits; coverage schemes; segmentation leaves poorly insured unemployment; proliferation relations insurance; individuals; constitution budgetary buffers good bad fortiori imperative quid pro quo equipped systems; implementation ‘stability-related’ implies States’ necessarily flat denial Schelkle’s valorizes diversity; ‘convergence’ (not: uniformity) ‘some’ (in domains) corollary Already 1990s reform justified 1997 Employment Strategy emphasized supply-side flexibility: agenda flexible interwoven opportunities ‘enabling’ See (2017a) 25-26 (2017b) 13-16 ‘flexicurity’ nutshell adds ‘stability’ desideratum ‘flexibility’: avoidance stable coordinated (space forbids latter here; flexibility focused equipping skills action: devices Stability typically protect vulnerable individuals: stabilises protects intrinsically action Enabling protective creating resilient tackling becomes positively Investment Both education fighting expand (higher) make rightly tune Report: ‘[If] Harvard purposes rich returns four exceed manifold college nothing changed apparent endowments attain equalize schools produce better and/or fiat impossible dictate firms give equal pay regardless remaining sensible educational best parental importantly 222) fits tradition assurance aims putting bar opportunity accepted goal complacency: affected Rinaldi 2015) faced double challenge: boost competence addressing issue bring competences broader egalitarian conditions society OECD illustrates convincingly transmission mechanism according human-capital (OECD While outcomes backgrounds widens high-inequality disadvantaged struggle overall investing starts life cycle reducing families 12 child long-term EU-wide Obviously just money; reforms system recognise huge comprehensive training excellent recommendations modernisation carry weight highest decision-making setting budget priorities During suffered highly (Bouget 2015; Hemerijck counter evolutions priority afforded perceptible tangible Commission’s own country-specific (CSR’s Semester’) surveillance procedure With reinforce ‘human capital’ Juncker Plan Fernandes currently suffer insufficient promotion visibility amongst actors; financing loans post-2020 third pillar Fund Strategic Investments (EFSI) devoted pillars infrastructures innovation SMEs evaluation projects’ (using like acquisition inclusion) use CSR’s insist measures And ensure Europe’s consistent governments accommodate adopted respond structural (particularly consideration margin budgets doing so) Finally ready offer commit themselves strategies tight constraints : ‘reform commitment packages’ (as proposed 2017b) Fair immigration practices Gulf (welcoming foreign en masse discriminating respects harshly) reduction generalized nevertheless shift direction differentiating citizen status: ‘Allow legally defined mild treatment local labour’ 154) departure organized 60 intra-EU right movement EU; moreover non-active below) non-discriminatory reside congenial outside regulates (which non-Europeans residents) controversial witness British finally triggered Brexit pause wants maintain defend believe merit Milanovic; albeit distinction drawn citizens; guarantee basis ideal citizenship contingent (see 2017b 2017c argument) freedom logical goods services freely borders restricting questioned grounds fairness Second Polish worker enjoys rights Belgian working justifies generates contributions government non-discrimination tolerate unbridled taxation territory Such form ‘posting’ creates (since employer posted employee working); delineated notion reciprocity sense: states; including circle host circles justification attached allowed area abuse thorough undesirable (notably regulated markets) supply) reforming demanding vis-à-vis realm provision prime Different traditions wages: authorities exclusive domain determined covered regulation: decent apply universally exceptions protection: don’t precarious hyper-flexible limits precariousness board municipalities immigration: safeguard universal non-mobile Pillar Rights turning realities Europe; alternative reconciled coexistence made ‘earned citizenship’ Historically tension bounded granting dependents) exclusion inactive regime assistance dichotomy tenable granted residence throughout ‘as unreasonable burden State’ Dion Kramer sketches continuity evolution situates “neoliberal communitarianism” ‘combines communitarian neo-liberal individual’s responsibility membership community’ labels ‘neo-liberal’ ‘it expressed ‘earning’ convert community cultural values’ (Kramer 277 272) sees dangers current expanding pushed confines taking notes reading Europeans oblige restrictive means avoided possibility exclude non-nationals compassion dominate assistance) duty vulnerability 15 complementary logics legitimately conjointly: 1) Economically depend ‘earn’ involuntary inactivity (unemployment illness) regulations fully 2) simply rely (or her) choice: nationality determines foremost responsible Under bond citizen’s ‘unreasonable burden’ ‘unreasonable’ whatever causes dependence complimentary consistently: ‘fair mobility’ taken My concerns non-EU (‘third country’) nationals residents sits uneasily aspiration ‘second-class’ migrants enjoy natives intra-European exhaust organize external happenstance subjecting second-class difficulties Conclusion: undergo links pursue agreements opted extension third-country 16 exact moot doubt objectives; agreeing w 2017d) coincidence historical legacies entities primary purpose organise interpersonal redistribution borders; States; Solidarity necessitates More practice removed top-down one-size-fits-all policy-making core summarised systemic guide substantive via general leaving ways operational definition Model’ resist captured definitely Sweeping analyses helpful respect: mobilizing creativity paralyze ‘systemic support’ Coordination corporate prominently sceptic redress inequalities: Kuznets wave taxes transfers Here solid regressive surge placed 17 References Alvaredo F Chancel L Piketty Th Saez E G Zucman (coordinators) Lab J (2006) Integration Income American Sociological Review Vol 71 No December 964-985 (2009) Remapping Net Effect Regional Total Journal Comparative Sociology 50 (5-6) 486-509 Bouget D H Frazer Marlier S Sabato Vanhercke Study Policies Network (ESPN) Brussels: Princeton Oxford: Press Brady Seeleib-Kaiser M (2005) State Affluent Democracies 1975-2001 70 921-948 R T Politics 16(4) 536-557 Converging diverging societies? Upward Dublin Recent Publications Office Luxembourg Reflection Paper Deepening 31 May (COM(2017) 291) New Euro Area Communication Parliament Council Bank 822 final) Jacques Delors Institute July Union: Missing Necessary ‘Political Good’ Barnard C De Baere (eds Crisis Cambridge: Cambridge 47-67 Zardo Trindade low-income CSB Working 17/03 Antwerp: (University Antwerp) Uses Oxford 18 Organization (1956) Aspects Co-operation Group Experts (summary) 74 (2) 99-123 (2016) Earning Citizenship Free Movement Access Assistance Benefits Reconstructed Yearbook Legal Studies 270-301 P L’Etat-Providence Performance Dumping Editions Rue d’Ulm Collection CEPREMAP Mahutga Roberts Kwon Production Rich Forces 96 (1) September 181-214 Ever Powerful Court? Political Constraints Approach Age Massachusetts Together: Less Paris (2011) Markets Democracy Can’t Coexist Trade Economy Ch Sovereignty Complex Interdependence: Some Surprising Indications Compatibility Lever Satz (eds) Matter: Asymmetry KFG W Costs Non-Disintegration: Case In: Chalmers Jachtenfuchs & Joerges End Eurocrats’ Dream: Adjusting Diversity (pp 29-49) solidarity: euro experiment Vision Summit Consortium ): Redesigning Ways Gütersloh 38-77 Gütersloh; Structural versus competition: ECFIN paper 065 Directorate-General Financial Affairs Brussels 20 19 speak Rainer Bauböck Should free? EUI Papers RSCAS 2017/60 9-12 (2017c) Basic conundrum ACCESS EUROPE 2017/02 01 August (2017d)

Download fulltext
t318