Abstract

ABSTRACT โ€˜Social welfare lawโ€™ is suffering from a longstanding identity crisis. The fieldโ€™s development in the UK is tied closely to that of this journal โ€“ its foundation in the 1970s as the โ€˜Journal of Social Welfare Lawโ€™ reflected a burgeoning area of research and practice. However, many of the concerns raised at the time about the meaning, scope and future direction of โ€˜Social welfare lawโ€™ as an area of research, teaching and practice remain unresolved. As Martin asked, is there โ€˜really something here which deserves recognition as a distinct field of law?โ€™ In revisiting social welfare lawโ€™s problem of definition, this article does two things. First, drawing on prior work on โ€˜Social welfare lawโ€™, we provide a typology of approaches to defining the field of inquiry. We argue that there are five approaches reflected in writing on social welfare law: โ€˜statutes specifyโ€™, โ€˜law for the poorโ€™, the โ€˜dustbinโ€™, the โ€˜case studyโ€™ and โ€˜common denominator riskโ€™. Second, we draw two reflections about how future social welfare law research can expand its boundaries. We argue for: (i) a โ€˜globalโ€™ social welfare law scholarship, and (ii) analysis that accounts for non-state actors.

Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call