Introduction

Welfare policies in Western countries are increasingly based on notions of reciprocity and activating the supposedly passive recipients of social assistance (Serrano Pascual, 2007). Citizens receiving welfare benefits are prodded to give back to society by doing volunteer work, by participating in welfare to work (WTW) programmes, or by showing their willingness to work by applying for jobs. Policy makers often frame these imperatives as necessary and fair (Kampen, 2014).

Policies to ‘activate’ the unemployed are hardly new. Welfare to work has been with us since the beginning of the 1990s and was adopted as a key part of the European Employment Strategy in 1998 (Triantafillou, 2011, p 4). What is new, at least in the Netherlands, is the shifting of the other end of the reciprocal relationship, i.e. from improving one's own labour market position to contributing to society. This means that policies that once aimed to improve individual employability are being replaced by quid pro quo measures that ensure people are meeting their obligations towards society (Kampen, 2014).

Previously known for its generous benefits, the Netherlands has developed into one of the more conditional welfare states (Becker, 2000; Nannestad, 2007). Broad public support for policies that emphasize the duties of social assistance recipients (Veldheer et al, 2012) has over the years produced policies similar to those found in the UK (Wiggan, 2015; Whitworth, 2016) and Australia (Warburton and Smith, 2003). The Wet Werk en Bijstand (Work and Assistance Act) of 2004 paved the way for ‘workfare volunteerism’ (Kampen et al, 2013), allowing local authorities to demand unremunerated work from social assistance recipients. This ‘volunteer’ work is often considered the best alternative to – but also route towards – paid employment. In line with the policy rationale presenting welfare as a two-way street, popular views have also been changing. The idea of social assistance recipients giving back to society is increasingly popular among the Dutch general public (Veldheer et al, 2012) as is, more generally, the idea of balancing rights with responsibilities (Van der Veen et al, 2012).