Individual need and societal claims: Challenging the understanding of universalism versus selectivism in social policy

Abstract

AbstractIn this article, we argue that basic social policy concepts can fertilise the discussion on active labour market policy (ALMP). During the last decades, research on ALMP has become a flourishing field. This is an overall positive development. However, the development tends to fractionate the wider picture of social policy and distance the discussion from social policy seen as a multifold set of government measures that have a direct impact on the welfare of the citizens, by providing services and/or income. We analyse a local ALMP programme in the light of three classical social policy concepts: universalism, selectivism and need. To understand what is going on in ALMP programmes, we argue that it is as important to uncover claims made by the state as it is to satisfy the human needs most often presented as the objectives of ALMP programmes. We propose that the programme under study be characterised as a hybrid, combining elements frequently perceived as dichotomies in social policy literature. Selectivism and universalism are both present as principles and the programme consists of benefits in cash and in kind.