Concept Of Social Rights Research Articles

Introduction: Marshall in Brussels? A new perspective on social citizenship and the European Union

This introductory article to the Special Issue Marshall in Brussels? A new perspective on social citizenship and the European Union first argues that there is a need for a novel systematic framework that captures the increasingly complex web of relationships between the European level and the national and local levels in the creation and implementation of social rights. It then summarizes the contributions of the articles included in the Special Issue, starting with the first article that provides such a novel framework, a power resource-based and multi-layered conception of social rights which looks at social rights as bundles of three key power resources: normative, enforcement and instrumental resources. It then shows how the other articles apply this framework when analysing a variety of issues related to European social citizenship. Finally, it sums up the main contributions of the Special Issue: its contribution to the further development of power resource theory; to the theory of social citizenship; and to capturing how social rights in the EU increasingly result from the creative assemblage of different resources provided by different actors and levels of government, resulting in a ‘marble cake’ pattern akin to that existing in historical federations like the US or Switzerland.

Reconstructing the Concept of Social Rights in Constitutional Law

Reconstructing the Concept of Social Rights in Constitutional Law

Social rights and duties in Babeuf and the neo-Babouvists (1786–1848)

Abstract This article examines the conception of social rights found in the writings of François-Noël Babeuf in the late eighteenth century and those of his followers, the neo-Babouvists, in the first half of the nineteenth. Both believed that social rights were to be based on natural needs, which they categorized as physical and moral: while physical needs necessitated the right to subsistence, moral needs encompassed the right to education. Babeuf and the neo-Babouvists also believed that social rights were inseparable from principles of equality and the reciprocity of rights and duties among society’s members. The neo-Babouvists developed this notion of reciprocity into the view that labour laws and the right to work constituted the legitimate and reciprocal counterparts of the property rights of employers. This balancing of property rights and workers’ rights was to be provisional, however, pending the transformation of society towards a community of goods.

DIREITO ADMINISTRATIVO E JUSTIÇA SOCIAL

O presente estudo realiza o exame do conceito de “justiça social” no âmbito das organizações internacionais e revela sua importância para o Direito Administrativo. Em seguida, é analisado o conceito de direitos sociais e sua exigibilidade no contexto do sistema de proteção social no Uruguai. Por fim, este artigo conclui que o direito à educação trata-se de um “direito habilitante” para a obtenção de uma verdadeira justiça social.

Reforma constitucional y derechos sociales: la necesidad de un nuevo paradigma en el derecho público español

The economic, social and political crisis has created the idea that we need a reform of the Spanish Constitution. Given the traditional jurisprudence and the case law of the Constitutional Court, according to which social rights are not directly enforceable rights but mere political mandates, some other opinions consider that we need to strengthen their character of subjective rights. Considering that the dominant conception of social rights and the constitutional case law have created the current situation, a simple change in the letter of the Spanish constitution could not be enough. This article proposes the main lines for a new language of social rights that assures the protection of social rights, following international standards and foreign experiences.

Social and Political Citizenship in European Public Opinion: An Empirical Analysis of T.H. Marshall’s Concept of Social Rights

Normative democratic theory assumes that political systems should ensure civil, political and social rights, and this claim has become more salient since the economic crisis that began in 2008. This conception of citizenship was developed most prominently by T.H. Marshall (1950), and it has been further elaborated by numerous other authors, resulting in a clear division between procedural/electoral democracy concepts and authors emphasizing egalitarian concepts of democracy. We use latent class analysis to assess democratic ideals among European citizens as reported in the 2012 European Social Survey. The findings demonstrate that a majority of Europeans consider political and social rights as equally important, while some citizens predominantly emphasize either political or social rights. Furthermore, the focus on social rights is not limited to those with left-leaning ideologies. Considering current manifestations of discontent about the politics of austerity, we discuss the implications of social citizenship concepts for democratic legitimacy in Europe.

Sosyal Hakların Ekonomik Açıdan İrdelenmesi

Social are among the second generation rights in the general framework of Human While commodification of labor in the capitalist process has intensified class conflicts, policies have been developed to put barriers in front of commodification of labor over time in order to be able to meet the market needs of the capitalists and to take the lead in socialist movements developing in the world. The Declaration of the European Convention on Human Rights was published in December 1948 in order to protect the system against socialism. This declaration, along with being created as a measure against the absolute enslavement of labor, was unfortunately maintained in the right of property, the chief responsible of the enslavement of labor. In the welfare state model, which was based on Keynes' theory after the World War II, the concept of the limitation of commodification of labor was developed and given some social rights at the expense. In this context, the concept of social rights and the phenomenon are treated as second category rights in the general human rights table as Social, Economic and Cultural Rights. For this reason, defending the concept of social rights and the concept in the capitalist system means denying the capital's power and engaging in an inconclusive struggle. In the short term, it is absolutely necessary to defend social rights and to create policies in order to expand this field. In the long term, it is necessary to use the field of social rights and to aim at the real and longterm struggle. It is inevitable that the long-term struggle is aimed at the system despite the fact that the short-term struggle is within the system.

СОЦІАЛЬНІ ПРАВА ЛЮДИНИ: ЗАГАЛЬНОТЕОРЕТИЧНА ХАРАКТЕРИСТИКА

In the article, within the framework of the general exploration of human rights was made an attempt to substantiate the importance of social rights as a separate category of rights that belongs to the «second generation» of human rights and needs analysis within the state and legal reality. Attention was paid to the historical aspect of the development of social rights. The events, that inevitably influenced the emergence, development and ideological justification of the need for recognition of social rights are analyzed, the causal links involved in their formation are also indicated. In publication the connection of social rights with the concept of the welfare state is revealed, the main purpose of this state is to promote the realization of these rights. The fundamental features of this form of organization of government and society make it possible to evaluate the great dependence of the realization of social rights on socially oriented policy and economy of the country. For a deep understanding of the essence and ideas embedded in the content of social rights, the features and characteristics of this category of rights are studied. Attention is also paid to the different approaches to the concept of social rights expressed by researchers in this issue. The sources in which social human rights are legally fixed are considered (the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, the European Social Charter, the Constitution of Ukraine, the German Social Code). Also there is a comparative analysis of the enshrinement of these rights in courses mentioned above. Particular attention is paid to the characteristics of social rights listed in the German Social Code, as well as to the content of the agreement between Ukraine and Germany about cooperation in the social sphere. Great attention in the publication is paid to the studying of events in Ukraine that hinder the realization of social rights. The coronavirus pandemic and military events in the East of the country have negative impact on the implementation of social rights. The statistical data confirming the violation of the housing rights and medical care at present are given. Conclusion is formulated about the need of analyzing social rights as a specialized group of human rights, which have passed a significant historical path of formation and have unique characteristics and features.

On Social Rights from an Analytical and Philosophical Perspective

The paper examines the concept of social rights from both the analytical and philosophical perspective. In the first part of the paper a distinction is made between social rights in the strict sense (called in the paper “Type 1 social rights”), which can be decomposed into the Hohfeldian incidents, and social rights which resemble norm-goals and therefore cannot be decomposed into the Hohfeldian incidents (these rights are called in the paper “Type 2 social rights”). It is argued that even though Type 1 social rights are rights in the strict sense, they exhibit certain idiosyncrasies distinguishing them from “classical” rights, among which the most striking idiosyncrasy is their double correlation to duties. The second, philosophical part presents various ways in which social rights can be justified. A special emphasis is laid on the justification appealing to the concept of autonomy. Some standard criticisms of social rights are also evaluated.

La exigibilidad de los derechos sociales a partir de su estructura

Este documento explora brevemente el fundamento y concepción de los derechos sociales y la manera en que están estructurados, ya que, a pesar de que la gran mayoría de las constituciones del mundo incluyen estos derechos, del esfuerzo de los tribunales por hacerlos cumplir y de la gran cantidad de estudios sobre ellos, estamos aún lejos de hacerlos plenamente efectivos. De ahí que el entendimiento de la manera en que estos derechos son concebidos y la determinación de su estructura, sean clave para mejorar su justiciabilidad.

After Cameron: the New New Right and the unchaining of Britannia

This article looks at an emerging and ideologically influential grouping within the Conservative Party that presents a challenge to the dominant contemporary Cameronite interpretation of Conservatism. This grouping is fashioned as the ‘New New Right’ composed of an identifiable number of the ‘2010 generation’ of Conservative politicians. The most prominent among these are the five authors of After the Coalition and Britannia Unchained: Kwasi Kwarteng, Priti Patel, Dominic Raab, Chris Skidmore and Elizabeth Truss. Employing Michael Freeden's ‘morphological approach’ to ideology, in addition to utilising interviews with key members of this group, this article situates and interrogates the explicitly post-Cameronite thinking of the New New Right drawing on three central features of its thinking: the rejection of the rhetorical ‘de-neoliberalisation’ of British society after the financial crisis of 2007–08, a resistance to ‘anti-market socialisation’ and the promotion of a ‘thin’ conception of social rights. The difference between ‘Cameronite’ Conservatism and the New New Right is more quantitative than qualitative, as, while they occupy the same semantic field, the latter poses a threat to the former's commitment to civic conservatism. This ideological innovation is not a revival of Thatcherism; it is more conservative fiscally and largely anti-statist on a gamut of social issues. The New New Right potentially provides the ideological template for the next generation of Conservatism after Cameronism.

The Production of Last Resort Support: A Comparison of Social Assistance Schemes in Europe Using the Notion of Welfare Production and the Concept of Social Rights

This article aims to assess present social assistance schemes using the notion of welfare production and the concept of social rights. The focus is on how different stages of social assistance schemes are linked, and how well schemes succeed using a number of different indicators. The data are from the year 2000. The six countries that are included in the study represent different welfare state models. The findings show that there are a number of relationships between inputs, outputs and outcomes. Countries with more extensive social security schemes have less extensive social assistance schemes. The results also indicate that countries with less extensive social assistance schemes provide more generous levels of support; and simultaneously, that more generous schemes are associated with a lower prevalence of poverty. In the two Scandinavian countries that are included in the study (Finland and Sweden), social assistance schemes were the most generous from a social rights point of view.

Three Pillars of Welfare State Theory

Current social and political theory is sceptical of the future of welfare states in the face of global markets. Their moral claims, too, have been challenged by the neo-liberal association of market capitalism and individual freedom and by an implicit acceptance of that critique - of the welfare state as bureaucratic - by left-wing commentators. This article offers a defence of the national welfare state as the guarantor of `complex freedom'. This defence is derived from the theoretical contributions of Marshall, Polanyi and Myrdal and offers a reconsideration of the debate immediately after the second world war over the welfare state and its relevance today. Marshall's concept of social rights has become a familiar part of our own debate, but it is argued that Polanyi provides the rigorous critique of market relationships which is missing, and Myrdal locates gender issues as central to the understanding of welfare state development and women's rights as integral to social rights.

Beyond the Nation State: Social Policy in an Age of Globalization

The paper proceeds from the assumption that globalization has placed significant constraints on the autonomy of nation states in the making of social policy. It argues that the post‐World War II welfare state represented a social system highly successful in combining economic efficiency and dynamism with equity and solidarity. This historic achievement at the nation‐state level is being undermined by economic globalization. It is both necessary and feasible to recreate and institutionalize this mixed system globally. The paper argues that the concept of social rights, which has served as the basic underpinning of the welfare state, has many weaknesses—logical as well as empirical. While the principles of civil and political rights are being consolidated and extended worldwide the principle of social rights is in decay. The paper presents the case for replacing social rights by social standards as the major concept for buttressing systems of social protection. To be applicable globally a social standard must be conceptualized as a level of social development which corresponds to an appropriate level of economic development. Finally, the paper considers the problems and prospects of developing social standards transnationally. It reviews, briefly, the nature and extent of transnational social policy‐making by inter‐governmental organizations and concludes that despite difficulties of global action advances towards global social standards remain possible.

The Consequences of Welfare Reform: How Conceptions of Social Rights are Changing

The idea of the welfare state is commonly grounded in the principles of social rights, universality and solidarity. Over the past twenty years, welfare reforms have challenged the salience of this conceptualisation. This article argues that changes such as austerity measures, pension reform, administrative decentralisation and efforts to revive the obligation of citizenship have fostered a more discursive conception of social rights. When rights are discursive, the relative power of various clientele interests plays a greater role in the distribution of benefits than objective conditions of need. Also, such notions as universality and solidarity are giving way to selectivity and individual responsibility as the paramount principles of the welfare state.

A Response to Emerson and Van Buren

We applaud the effort by Emerson and Van Buren (1992) to replicate our model using LISREL techniques and we concede that their approach is more thorough in assessing measurement error. Emerson and Van Buren's analysis strategy offers the advantage of estimating the strength of effects after allowing for the impact of measurement error (Andrews, Abbey & Halman 1991; J6reskog & Sorbom 1989). One weakness of their presentation is that they do not provide measures of the overall goodness of fit of the models. Substantively, we take exception to their conclusion that our model is more adequate at explaining the concept of social rights than welfare support. Emerson and Van Buren contend that the reason that our model is not supported is because we have incorrectly operationalized government intervention and welfare support. They question the distinction between our concepts of government intervention and social rights on the basis of two empirical findings: a high beta for government intervention in predicting social rights and a principal components analysis of the items that comprise these two measures. While we may not have the best indicators of government intervention or social rights, we maintain that a theoretical argument can be made for making a distinction between the principle that government has a responsibility to intervene on an aggregate level to rectify social inequalities vs. the principle that individuals have a right to a basic standard of living. Moreover, we constructed our model with a hierarchy in mind. The endogenous variables are increasingly more specific. Work ethic and government intervention represent general principles, social rights bring the principles to an individual level, and finally welfare support represents fiscal support for implementing some of these principles. One cannot a priori conclude that there is necessarily a consistency among these principles at varying levels of specificity. For example, one can agree to a particular principle but not be willing to endorse a policy that seeks to implement the principle. Much of the literature on racial attitudes points to the gap between willingness to endorse positive racial attitudes and a commitment to specific affirmative action policies (e.g., Schuman, Steeh & Bobo 1985).