Neoliberal Modes of Governance and Social Policy

Social policy changes rooted in neoliberalism during recent decades rely on different, and sometimes differing, rationalities as individuals execute them. This chapter critically examines how neoliberal modes of governance and their policy rationales affect individual practice and raise new moral challenges. Neoliberal governance embodies contrasting policy rationales that merge in individual service provision to promote empowerment and responsibility through stipulating discretionary rights and obligations for potentially vulnerable populations. Employing a Foucauldian governmentality perspective, this chapter investigates the interrelations between such neoliberal policy objectives and social work practices. As a novel methodological approach, governmentality theory can illuminate how different, and potentially divergent, rationalities inherent in changing social policies interact in social programs and call into question the power relations neoliberal social policy changes entail. To demonstrate this approach, the chapter draws upon contrasting cases from a social policy scheme for the unemployed in a developed Scandinavian welfare state using case files and interviews with professionals. The analysis indicates that the complexities of exerting both empowering and disciplinary practices require explicit rationales of governance that should be subject to the same professional, ethical considerations as other forms of professional authority directed at vulnerable populations.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Similar content being viewed by others

A Double Helix: The Intertwined History of the Marginalisation of Welfare Clients and Their Activist Lawyers and Advisers in the Transformation of the Welfare State in England and Wales

The New Statutory Civil Service in the Maldives: Towards a Decentralized Human Resource Management Model?

Neoliberalism and Radical Rights: On the Work and Theory of Law and Organising

References

• Andersen, N. Å. (2007). Creating the client who can create himself and his own fate – The tragedy of the citizens’ contract. Qualitative Sociology Review, 3(2), 119–143. ArticleGoogle Scholar
• Baikady, R., Cheng, S.-L., & Channaveer, R. (2020). Eight decades of existence and search for an identity: Educators’ perspectives on social work education in contemporary India. Social Work Education. https://doi.org/10.1080/02615479.2020.1773780
• Baikady, R., Shengli, C., & Jianguo, G. (2021). Serving the state or serving the people? The dilemma of social work graduates in mainland China. Critical and Radical Social Work. https://doi.org/10.1332/204986021X16114103358825
• Belda-Miquel, S., Boni Aristizábal, A., & Sañudo Pazos, M. (2016). Informal learning for citizenship building in shared struggles for rights: Cases of political solidarity between Colombian and Spanish organisations. Voluntas: International Journal of Voluntary & Nonprofit Organizations, 27(1), 249–272. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11266-015-9598-7ArticleGoogle Scholar
• Betzelt, S., & Bothfeld, S. (2011). Activation and labour market reforms in Europe: Challenges to social citizenship. Springer. BookGoogle Scholar
• Born, A. W., & Jensen, P. H. (2010). Dialogued-based activation – A new “dispositif”? International Journal of Sociology and Social Policy, 30(5/6), 326–336. ArticleGoogle Scholar
• Carter, E., & Whitworth, A. (2015). Creaming and parking in quasi-marketised welfare-to-work schemes: Designed out of or designed in to the UK work programme? Journal of Social Policy, 44(2), 277–296. ArticleGoogle Scholar
• Cruikshank, B. (1999). The will to empower democratic citizens and other subjects. Cornell University Press. BookGoogle Scholar
• Deacon, A. (2005). An ethic of mutual responsibility? towards a fuller justification for conditionality in welfare. In L. M. Mead & C. Beem (Eds.), Welfare reform and political theory (pp. 127–150). Russel Sage Foundation. Google Scholar
• Dean, M. (2010). Governmentality: Power and rule in modern society. Sage Publications. Google Scholar
• Dean, H., & Taylor-Gooby, P. (2014). Dependency culture. Routledge. BookGoogle Scholar
• Ervik, R., Kildal, N., & Nilssen, E. (2015). New contractualism in European welfare state policies. Ashgate Publishing. Google Scholar
• Esping-Andersen, G. (1990). The three worlds of welfare capitalism (Vol. 6). Polity Press. Google Scholar
• Eversberg, D. (2016). Beyond individualisation: The German “activation toolbox”. Critical Social Policy, 36(2), 167–186. https://doi.org/10.1177/0261018315620868ArticleGoogle Scholar
• Fletcher, D. R. (2011). Welfare reform, jobcentre plus and the street-level bureaucracy: Towards inconsistent and discriminatory welfare for severely disadvantaged groups? Social Policy and Society, 10, 445–458. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1474746411000200ArticleGoogle Scholar
• Fording, R. C., Soss, J., & Schram, S. F. (2007). Devolution, discretion, and the effect of local political values on TANF sanctioning. Social Service Review, 81(2), 285–316. Retrieved from http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=aph&AN=25378516&site=ehost-liveArticleGoogle Scholar
• Foucault, M. (1978). The history of sexuality: An introduction (Vol. 1). Vintage. Google Scholar
• Foucault, M., & Faubion, J. D. (2002). Essential works of Foucault 1954–1984 (Vol. 3, 3rd ed.): Power). Penguin Books. Google Scholar
• Foucault, M., Senellart, M., Ewald, F., & Fontana, A. (2007). Security, territory, population: Lectures at the collège de France, 1977–78. Palgrave Macmillan. Google Scholar
• Foucault, M., Davidson, A. I., & Burchell, G. (2008). The birth of biopolitics: Lectures at the collège de France, 1978–1979. Springer. Google Scholar
• Freire, A. M. A., & Macedo, D. (1998). The Paulo Freire reader. ERIC. Google Scholar
• Giddens, A. (1998). The third way: The renewal of social democracy. Polity Press. Google Scholar
• Hall, P. A., & Lamont, M. (2013). Social resilience in the neoliberal era. Cambridge University Press. BookGoogle Scholar
• Handler, J. F. (2005). Myth and ceremony in workfare: Rights, contracts, and client satisfaction. Journal of Socio-Economics, 34, 101–124. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.socec.2004.09.056ArticleGoogle Scholar
• Hjörne, E., Juhila, K., & Van Nijnatten, C. (2010). Negotiating dilemmas in the practices of street-level welfare work. International Journal of Social Welfare, 19, 303–309. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2397.2010.00721ArticleGoogle Scholar
• Hyslop, I. (2012). Social work as a practice of freedom. Journal of Social Work, 12(4), 404–422. ArticleGoogle Scholar
• International Federation of Social Workers (IFSW), & International Association of Schools of Social Work (IASSW). (2014). Global definition of social work. http://ifsw.org/get-involved/global-definition-of-social-work
• Jones, C., Burström, B., Marttila, A., Canvin, K., & Whitehead, M. (2006). Studying social policy and resilience to adversity in different welfare states: Britain and Sweden. International Journal of Health Services, 36(3), 425–442. ArticleGoogle Scholar
• Kail, B., Pardasani, M., & Chazin, R. (2020). The Better Future International’s family care model in Tanzania: Creating social capital as a means to empowerment in social work practice. International Social Work. https://doi.org/10.1177/0020872819884986
• Karlsen, M. P., & Villadsen, K. (2008). Who should do the talking? The proliferation of dialogue as governmental technology. Culture and Organization, 14(4), 345–363. ArticleGoogle Scholar
• Kluve, J. (2010). The effectiveness of European active labor market programs. Labour Economics, 17, 904–918. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.labeco.2010.02.004ArticleGoogle Scholar
• Levi-Faur, D. (2014). The welfare state: A regulatory perspective. Public Administration, 92(3), 599–614. Google Scholar
• Lødemel, I., & Moreira, A. (Eds.). (2014). Activation or workfare? Governance and neoliberal convergence. Oxford University Press. Google Scholar
• Lorenzini, D. (2018). Governmentality, subjectivity, and the neoliberal form of life. Journal for Cultural Research, 22(2), 154–166. ArticleGoogle Scholar
• Mead, L. M. (1986). Beyond entitlement: The social obligations of citizenship. The Free Press. Google Scholar
• Netting, F. E., Kettner, P. M., McMurtry, S. L., & Thomas, M. L. (2016). Social work macro practice. Pearson. Google Scholar
• Newman, J., Glendinning, C., & Hughes, M. (2008). Beyond modernisation? Social care and the transformation of welfare governance. Journal of Social Policy, 37(4), 531–557. ArticleGoogle Scholar
• Norwegian Act on Social Services in Labor and Welfare Administration. (2009). Lov om sosiale tjenester i Arbeids- og velferdsforvaltningen, 2009-12-18-131 C.F.R. Google Scholar
• Norwegian Department of Work and Inclusion. (2006). Work, welfare and social inclusion (White Paper No. 9 2006–2007). Google Scholar
• Nybom, J. (2013). Activation and ‘coercion’ among Swedish social assistance claimants with different work barriers and socio-demographic characteristics: What is the logic? International Journal of Social Welfare, 22(1), 45–57. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2397.2011.00858.xArticleGoogle Scholar
• Puttick, K. (2019). From mini to maxi jobs? Low pay,‘progression’, and the duty to work (harder). Industrial Law Journal, 48(2), 143–179. ArticleGoogle Scholar
• Pyykkönen, M. (2007). Integrating governmentality: Administrative expectations for immigrant associations in Finland. Alternatives: Global, Local, Political, 32(2), 197–224. ArticleGoogle Scholar
• Pyykkonen, M. (2011). Becoming Europeans: cultural identity and cultural policies. International Journal of Cultural Policy, 17(3), 358–360. https://doi.org/10.1080/10286632.2010.542240ArticleGoogle Scholar
• Rose, N. (1996). Governing “advanced” liberal democracies. In A. Sharma & A. Gupta (Eds.), The anthropology of the state: A reader (Vol. 9). Blackwell. Google Scholar
• Rose, N. (2001). The politics of life itself. Theory, Culture & Society, 18(6), 1–30. https://doi.org/10.1177/02632760122052020ArticleGoogle Scholar
• Rose, N., O’Malley, P., & Valverde, M. (2006). Governmentality. Annual Review of Law and Social Science, 2, 83–104. ArticleGoogle Scholar
• Turner, S. G., & Maschi, T. M. (2015). Feminist and empowerment theory and social work practice. Journal of Social Work Practice, 29(2), 151–162. https://doi.org/10.1080/02650533.2014.941282ArticleGoogle Scholar
• Vesterberg, V. (2013). Ethnicized un/employability: Problematized others and the shaping of advanced liberal subjects. Ephemera, 13(4), 737. Google Scholar
• Vesterberg, V. (2015). Learning to be Swedish: Governing migrants in labour-market projects. Studies in Continuing Education, 37(3), 302–316. ArticleGoogle Scholar
• Whitworth, A. (2016). Neoliberal paternalism and paradoxical subjects: Confusion and contradiction in UK activation policy. Critical Social Policy, 36(3), 412–431. https://doi.org/10.1177/0261018315624442ArticleGoogle Scholar
• Whyte, J. (2019). The morals of the market: Human rights and the rise of neoliberalism. Verso Books. Google Scholar

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

1. Department of Social Work, Child Welfare and Social Policy, Oslo Metropolitan University, Oslo, Norway Ida Solvang
2. Institute of Nursing and Health Science, Faculty of Health and Social Sciences, University of South-Eastern Norway (USN), Drammen, Norway Truls I. Juritzen

1. Ida Solvang