The Social Policy Digest is a major online resource providing up-to-date listings of developments across the whole range of social policy issues - including links to source materials and related commentaries. The Digest is published by Cambridge University Press on behalf of the Social Policy Association.

The ‘welfare modelling business’ has been at the heart of comparative social policy analysis but debate has largely proceeded on the basis that coherent national welfare states exist. This assumption was always problematic but globalisation processes have added a further dimension to this debate. In particular, geographers and sociologists have pointed to the increasing power of global cities that act as co-ordinating hubs for the global economy. Though residing in nation states, these cities have a special status flowing from their central role in the global economy. Little attempt has been made to explore the implications of these cities for welfare regimes and welfare regime analysis. This paper addresses this under explored issue and suggests there are strong overlaps between global city types and welfare types.

Since the late 1970s, the developed welfare states of the European Union have been recasting the policy mix on which their systems of social protection were built. They have adopted a new policy orthodoxy that could be summarised as the ‘social investment strategy’. Here we trace its origins and major developments. The shift is characterised by a move away from passive transfers and towards the maximalisation of employability and employment, but there are significant national distinctions and regime specific trajectories. We discuss some caveats, focusing on the question whether the new policy paradigm has been established at the expense of social policies that mitigate poverty and inequality.

This article focuses on the design of frontline work in public agencies involved in the delivery of activation programmes and services. More specifically, it raises the following questions: should we think of activation work as an administrative function or as a form of professional service provision? And does the design of activation work matter in terms of the effectiveness of activation services? In answering these questions, the article provides a meta-analysis of two strands of literature. First, we analyse the available literature reporting on studies of activation frontline work and its organisation and management in public agencies responsible for delivering activation programmes. Secondly, we look at those studies of the effectiveness of activation that focus on the impact of characteristics of frontline work and its organisation and management on activation policy outcomes. We conclude that although the desirability of a professional design of activation work meets relatively wide support among scholars, the feasibility of this professionalisation project is highly contested. In addition, the debate on the nature of the activation profession has only just started. Finally, evaluation studies show that activation work characteristics do affect the outcomes of activation programmes. Against this background, we conclude that a more prominent place of activation work on the research agenda of social policy scholars is recommendable.

The concept of systematic inequalities in social and health outcomes has come to form part of contemporary policy discourse. This rhetoric is deployed even in the face of policy decisions widely viewed as iniquitous. Moreover, there is a widespread view, expressed across the political spectrum, that those in more deprived circumstances are less likely than their more affluent counterparts to be in receipt of optimal public services. Such individuals and communities are variously described as excluded, disadvantaged, underserved or hard to reach. Across countries and policy domains the term ‘hard to reach’ is used to refer to those deemed not to be in optimal receipt of public sector services which are intended to increase some aspect of material, social or physical wellbeing. It is increasingly used in health policy documents which aim to address health inequalities. However, it is an ill-defined and contested term. The purpose of this paper is two-fold. First, it offers a critical commentary on the concept of hard-to-reachness and asks: who are viewed as hard to reach and why? Second, using a case-study of a Scottish health improvement programme that explicitly aims to reach and engage the ‘hard to reach’ in preventive approaches to cardiovascular disease, it tests the policy and practice implications of the concept. It finds that a lack of conceptual clarity leads to ambiguous policy and practice and argues for possible theoretical refinements.

The English NHS is currently organised around a split between the ‘commissioning’ and the ‘providing’ of health care. There has been considerable critical comment about commissioning, focusing upon perceived inadequacies of the regulatory structure and a perceived lack of competence of the managers concerned. In this paper, we use empirical data from two detailed studies of commissioning to propose a third explanation of the difficulties that have been observed in making commissioning work. We apply Scott's institutional analysis to the issue, arguing that far from reflecting managerial incompetence, some of the difficulties experienced are inherent in the normative and cultural/cognitive pillars of the NHS institution, so that there is a lack of ‘fit’ between commissioning and the institutional characteristics of the NHS. We conclude by exploring the potential impact of the latest round of NHS changes on this institution.

The experience of homelessness not only affects physical health, but can also constrain access to required health care. In a number of European countries, national strategies to tackle homelessness have sought to deliver integrated solutions across housing, health and other social policy areas. This article examines approaches to meeting the health care needs of homeless people in relation to such strategies, drawing upon recent research in Norway and Scotland. The article presents a comparative analysis of approaches to service provision in relation to welfare models and the concepts of universal and specialist provision. The analysis suggests a cross-national shift in the conceptualisation of appropriate responses to the health care needs of those who experience homelessness. The provision of some specialist health services, while reflecting a selective model of welfare, need not be solely interpreted as conflicting with a more universal model of ensuring access to mainstream services. Rather, the challenge is to recognise the need for a process approach which supports an effective transition from the (sometimes necessary) use of specialist services for this group, towards (the ideal of) full integration into mainstream health care.

The impacts of government contracting on third sector organisations (TSOs) have attracted much discussion; however, the diversity of the organisations that comprise the third sector means that these impacts in fact vary considerably between TSOs. In order to better understand this complexity and to analyse and articulate TSOs’ experiences more effectively, it is useful to think about different response types. Based on empirical evidence from a study of homelessness TSOs in two South East England local authorities, this paper presents a typology of organisational responses to contracting. The four types identified are: Comfortable Contractors, Compliant Contractors, Cautious Contractors, and Community-Based Non-Contractors. The varied experiences of these different types of organisation with regard to contracting are described in the paper and point to the need for greater precision and differentiation within academic debates, and in the formulation of social policy relating to the third sector.

Previous studies have highlighted the paucity of knowledge possessed by people in a number of jurisdictions with regard to specific legal issues and processes, yet what has not been fully understood is the practical impact of this lack of knowledge. This paper looks at how knowledge of rights affects the resolution of civil justice problems. Data were extracted from a large-scale survey of adults’ experience of rights problems throughout England and Wales (10,537 adult respondents). The results demonstrated that most individuals were not aware of their rights at the time the problem occurred (64.8 per cent). Knowledge was shown to be poorest amongst those with mental illness, those without higher qualifications and those renting their homes. Problems where knowledge was poor included clinical negligence, welfare benefits and neighbours issues. Knowledge did not appear to be related to a particular problem-solving strategy but had an impact on the fulfilment of objectives and the obtaining of advice. Our findings depart from existing literature by indicating that knowledge of rights alone is not associated with legal self-sufficiency in terms of a reduced dependence upon legal advice services. We find, however, that individuals, with knowledge of rights, experience better outcomes when they opt to handle their problem alone. Accordingly, the presence or absence of knowledge of rights may be a useful proxy measure of legal advice need and relevant to the process of legal aid rationing. Our findings highlight the role that Public Legal Education (PLE) (both ‘rights-based education’ and ‘just-in-time/self-help’) may play in disposing of less complex problems, while presenting a strong case for the continued availability of free legal advice services. The research is discussed in the context of the recently announced legal aid reforms in England and Wales and their anticipated impact.

This article reappraises the distinction upon which Robert Pinker has insisted since the 1970s between the heuristic and the normative dimensions of concepts and theories associated with ‘welfare’ in social policy studies, a distinction prompted by, for instance, the writings of Richard Titmuss. It discusses Pinker's differentiation of forms of study which seek to account for the likenesses and unlikenesses within and between the welfare systems of different countries from forms of study aiming to establish moral criteria by which one system of welfare can be deemed superior to another. In particular, it highlights his emphasis on the need for social policy as a subject to attend to: (a) the reality of everyday ideas of social welfare and ‘faring well’ in general; (b) how everyday ideas of ‘faring well’ are exhibited in what he has called ‘conditional altruism’, whether exercised within families, towards strangers or across nations; (c) the practices undertaken by individuals and families to attain freedom and security as well as to meet those of their needs commonly taken within social policy studies to be the components of ‘welfare’; (d) the difficulties, moral, political, social and economic, associated with Titmussian welfare unitarism, in contrast to welfare pluralism. The article thus provides a review of aspects of Pinker's many published papers as well as his influential Social Theory and Social Policy and The Idea of Welfare.