Chair: Daniel Ziblatt, Government, Harvard University
Nonna Mayer, Directrice de recherche émérite CNRS, Centre d'études européennes de Sciences Po, France
Social exclusion, poverty and politics: The French case
Discussant: Michèle Lamont, Sociology and African American Studies, Harvard University
The paper will show how even very precarious people have political orientations and preferences, quite similar to the rest of the electorate except a higher rejection of mainstream parties, but have much higher rates of abstention, and not much would be necessary to help them express their voice and be heard.
Maria Petmesidou, Professor of Social Policy, Democritus University of Thrace, Greece:
Can the European Union 2020 strategy deliver on social inclusion?
Discussant: Hilary Silver, Visiting Scholar, Kennedy School of Government, Harvard University
The EU Agenda 2020 set a quantified goal of reducing poverty and social exclusion as part of the strategy for “smart, sustainable and inclusive growth.” This paper critically examines how this new strategy has fared so far. It finds increases since 2009 in the three EU measures of the poverty and social exclusion: the at‐risk‐of poverty rate (AROP), i.e. the relative poverty measure based on disposable income; severe material deprivation (SMD); and joblessness (LWI), i.e. people living in households with zero or low work intensity. Reasons for ineffectiveness include unresolved tensions and opposing normative visions of poverty and social exclusion among EU countries that erect serious barriers to social inclusion, as well as flawed European coordination and governance mechanisms.
Axel Cronert, Visiting Student Researcher, MIT & Department of Government, Uppsala University, Sweden
Trends in social investment and poverty in Sweden: The enlightened path or ‘The Third Way’?
Discussant: Peter A. Hall, Government, Harvard University
The paper assesses criticisms of the EU Social Investment package pointing to a lack of complementarity between the program’s multiple goals of increasing employment and decreasing poverty.Arguing that the criticisms apply mainly to the Third Way approach to social investment, it describes an alternative Nordic model and, with data from Eurostat and Swedish governmental agencies, it finds a dilution in the investment quality of policy interventions, especially in active labor market policy, and drifting redistribution policies, making it more difficult to combat old as well as new social divisions.It calls for a more enlightened recasting of the social investment policy package.
A coffee break follows this session from 4:15 to 4:30 p.m.