The Second Wave of the Social Economy in Poland and the Concept of Active Social Policy
4. Problems with Disseminating the Concept of Active Social Policy
In my view, the problems, which can be resolved only after deeper analysis and empirical studies, include: (1) unclear institutional boundaries of active social policy, and (2) confl ict over measuring the effectiveness of ASP programmes. Among the existing documented and 28 See: G. Esping-Andersen, The Three Worlds of Welfare Capitalism, Cambridge, Cambridge University Press 1990.
29 See: L.M. Mead, et al., From Welfare to Work. Lessons from America, IEA Health and Welfare Unit, London 1997.
analysed criticisms, I would mention: (3) the counter-effects of certain forms of social activation and (4) the partial delegitimisation of the state’s social function through ASP.
The unclear institutional boundaries of ASP programmes
It is not clear where the boundary between social activation programmes of social policy and active labour market policy (ALMP) programmes lies. This is not just a theoretical debate, especially not in Poland. On the central level, these boundaries are hazy, which translates into an unclear division of responsibilities between ministries and their departments in Poland. For example, when for unclear reasons the departments responsible for social policy issues for a short time were separated from the departments responsible for labour issues (traditionally most Cabinets in Poland have a Minister for Labour and Social Policy), the issue of social integration remained in the competences of the Ministry of Social Policy and not of the Ministry of Economy and Labour although it was precisely under this term that the idea of subsidised (social) employment was being promoted.
On the local level, however, these boundaries are strict and nearly unchangeable: social services and labour offi ces’ services function alongside each other in Poland, although both are charged with the responsibility of activating the same social group of the long-term unemployed. There is a lack of institutional cooperation and for years we have witnessed a “transferring” of the most diffi cult benefi ciaries between the labour offi ces and the social welfare centres.
The confl ict over the effi ciency of the concept of ASP
This confl ict can be in a large part reduced to the question of whether activating the unemployed through the social economy sector contributes to raising the level of productive employment. If we a priori reject the two extreme sides of the debate: (i) that the social economy by its nature distorts the market (that the level of employment does not rise, but “normal” employment is replaced with subsidised employment), and (ii) that the redistribution of work is fair and just regardless of the economic results, than we must acknowledge the need to carry out extensive empirical research. It would appear that the results can vary between different local labour markets. Instead of taking a dogmatic position, it is worthwhile to search for the conditions that can increase the possibility of “positive sum games” and “zero sum games”.
The second aspect of this confl ict involves the question of whether ASP is an “economic” concept or “social” one. The answer to this question is not easy and largely depends on whether we consider the effi ciency of ASP in a long- or a short-term perspective (short-term ASP means increasing expenditures and for this reason it is promoted in Poland through the use of the structural funds of the European Social Fund). We can note a signifi cant difference between social activation programmes in Europe and in the United States. In the United States, workfare fosters the development of social entrepreneurship, not subsidised employment. The priorities of European Union policies, however, are different: subsidised employment is a means of institutionalising activation policies.
Criticism of the effectiveness of activation programmes
Some critics suggest that participation in activation programmes can produce a side-effect of stigmatising participants31. This phenomenon appears in two ways. The fi rst is through the different treatment of programme participants by employers on the open labour market: people who have completed activation training programmes are often employed only in positions that are subsidised by the state and only for the duration of the subsidy or other benefi t. The second is the “ghettoising” of the disabled through social cooperatives or sheltered employment. In both cases, full social reintegration is not achieved by the socially marginalised, which is the fundamental goal of both the ASP concept and the social economy.
A theoretical description of this state of affairs is provided by the theory of dual labour markets, which indicates that the impact of an increasing rate of transition from unemployment to employment is the segmentation of the labour market: the weaker work in one segment of the labour market or through more fl exible and less secure arrangements32. Thus, the division between the economically active and inactive is replaced by a division between the fi rst and second-class employed. Speaking metaphorically, by destroying one kind of wall, which maintained the social marginalisation of the weaker, we built a new one.
31 See: J.L. Laville, M. Nyssens, Solidarity-Based Sector Organizations in the Proximity Services Field: A European Francophone Perspective, “Voluntas” 2000, Vol. 11, No. 1.
32 See: E. Giermanowska, Analiza upowszechniania nietypowych form zatrudnienia –na przykładzie przeciwdziałania bezrobociu mlodzieży, in: M. Rymsza (ed.), Elastyczny rynek pracy i bezpieczeństwo socjalne. Flexicurity po polsku?, Institute of Public Affairs, Warsaw 2005.
It should nevertheless be noted, that the concept of fl exicurity, which is currently developing in Europe, assumes that fl exible employment does not have to be “worse”: with the proper legislation and management policies in fi rms these new forms of employment can and should be benefi cial to employees, including those who have limited employment capacity33.
Criticism of the partial delegitimisation of social protection programmes
The concept of ASP focuses on work with the unemployed who have the capacity to take up employment. We “lose sight” of the need to expand the scale of social welfare initiatives (and fi nancial resources) targeted toward members of society who have permanent problems with being economically active (because of age, disability, etc.). This criticism becomes still more signifi cant when we realise that it is particularly relevant to rapidly aging societies (such as in almost all European countries). In an extreme scenario, this kind of reductionism perceives people who are not economically active or those who cannot regain their “employment capacity” (employability) as “superfl uous”. This view is dangerous.
Nevertheless, it should be noted that ASP is also developing to include activation methods for the elderly (the concept of active aging), which promote life-long learning or volunteer work alongside salaried employment34. In this perspective, intermediary solutions between care and activation are being designed which do not entrench the division between the economically active and the inactive.