Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 3 de 3
Filter
Add more filters










Database
Language
Publication year range
1.
J Eur Soc Policy ; 33(5): 570-582, 2023 Dec.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38023770

ABSTRACT

In the twentieth century national social policies stabilized the European state systems, favouring domestic concordance and citizens' support to the nation-building process. Welfare institutions have historically served this key political function also in federal systems, where social citizenship has been used as a tool to foster unity. In contrast, even though the EU devotes a consistent part of its (however limited) budget to social cohesion and inclusion programmes, it takes little credit for such efforts. Building on original survey data on public opinion collected in 2019 across ten EU countries, this article shows that, indeed, only a limited number of citizens are aware of the social role played by the EU in their local community. On the other hand, it demonstrates that citizens' awareness of EU programmes strengthens the individual perception of power resources stemming from euro-social initiatives, the feeling of 'being heard' by the EU and, ultimately, the support for the European integration project as a whole. By implication, increasing the relevance and visibility of euro-social programmes could possibly reinforce the very foundations of the EU.

2.
Qual Quant ; 57(2): 1561-1585, 2023.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-35669164

ABSTRACT

In post-industrial and globalized economies, socio-economic risks have become ubiquitous for workers. Two segments of the labour force seem particularly exposed: namely, outsiders (atypical workers and unemployed individuals) and globalization losers (unskilled workers in offshorable employment sectors), with relevant consequences for party competition in Europe. The coexistence of these two segments of vulnerable workers has brought conceptual ambiguity. Using the original 2019 REScEU Mass Survey on ten European countries, we firstly clarify that outsiders and globalization losers do not constitute the same socio-economic group. Secondly, we look into the micro-foundations of outsiders' and globalization losers' redistributive preferences and political behaviours by showing that outsiderness, rather than exposure to international competition, constitutes a significant driver of income and employment insecurities, and of dependency on social protection and family financial aid. Supplementary Information: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s11135-022-01414-9.

3.
Soc Policy Adm ; 2022 May 13.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-35942433

ABSTRACT

Europe is witnessing a 'double dualisation' process, whereby inequalities have increased both between labour market insiders and outsiders, and between core and peripheral countries. We test the double dualisation hypothesis in the context of the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic. Did the COVID crisis exacerbate income inequalities between insiders and outsiders? Did cross-country territorial divides also increase? Did national governments' emergency measures contribute to containing or widening double dualisation? We deploy a multi-method research design that combines original survey data on seven old EU member states with three case studies on Germany, Italy, and the Netherlands. Results show that, in the short term, the COVID-19 pandemic has been a catalyst of double dualisation: outsiders bore the greatest burden, especially in southern European countries. National emergency measures largely depended on the fiscal leeway available to governments and followed pre-existing welfare trajectories, thus worsening cross-country inequalities, with potentially severe consequences for the European integration process.

SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL
...