Regimes of exclusion : A comparison of the plural provision of social housing in Hamburg and Southampton
Regimes of exclusion : A comparison of the plural provision of social housing in Hamburg and Southampton
The aim of this thesis is to contrast the evolution of welfare pluralism, in the context of social housing provision in Britain and Germany, paying particular attention to case studies of Southampton and Hamburg. Following the pioneering work of Esping-Andersen, it is argued that one can not explain economic and social change purely by interpreting the 'needs of capitalism'. Public policies are shaped by political discourses of various types, leading to different outcomes in different nations. These policy differences are seen to reflect differing ideologies of welfare, which are translated into legislation, institutions and administrative procedures. In the context of social housing provision, the concepts of citizenship and associated notions of social exclusion are also essential to understand recent changes. The original contribution of this thesis therefore, lies in relating four interrelated notions: welfare pluralism, welfare regimes, citizenship and exclusion to detailed evidence of recent changes in housing.
A wide variety of influences need to be taken into account when explaining the evolution of welfare pluralism: economic problems, critiques of the welfare state from all sides of the political spectrum and a changing intellectual climate characterised by postmodernity. Not only are the influences upon the welfare pluralism complex, the concept itself is diverse in character and highly contested in different contexts. This can be appreciated more fully through the comparative approach used in this thesis which reveals the extent of social policy embeddedness within the historical and cultural traditions of each state and thereby the continuing relevance of Esping-Andersen's regime theory.
Welfare pluralism has the potential to reduce exclusionary forces but the empirical evidence demonstrates how in both societies exclusion is increasing, with plural provision exacerbating the situation.
University of Southampton
Bulpett, Carol Anne
380bc057-faa3-4759-9aba-414c7b691496
2000
Bulpett, Carol Anne
380bc057-faa3-4759-9aba-414c7b691496
Bulpett, Carol Anne
(2000)
Regimes of exclusion : A comparison of the plural provision of social housing in Hamburg and Southampton.
University of Southampton, Doctoral Thesis.
Record type:
Thesis
(Doctoral)
Abstract
The aim of this thesis is to contrast the evolution of welfare pluralism, in the context of social housing provision in Britain and Germany, paying particular attention to case studies of Southampton and Hamburg. Following the pioneering work of Esping-Andersen, it is argued that one can not explain economic and social change purely by interpreting the 'needs of capitalism'. Public policies are shaped by political discourses of various types, leading to different outcomes in different nations. These policy differences are seen to reflect differing ideologies of welfare, which are translated into legislation, institutions and administrative procedures. In the context of social housing provision, the concepts of citizenship and associated notions of social exclusion are also essential to understand recent changes. The original contribution of this thesis therefore, lies in relating four interrelated notions: welfare pluralism, welfare regimes, citizenship and exclusion to detailed evidence of recent changes in housing.
A wide variety of influences need to be taken into account when explaining the evolution of welfare pluralism: economic problems, critiques of the welfare state from all sides of the political spectrum and a changing intellectual climate characterised by postmodernity. Not only are the influences upon the welfare pluralism complex, the concept itself is diverse in character and highly contested in different contexts. This can be appreciated more fully through the comparative approach used in this thesis which reveals the extent of social policy embeddedness within the historical and cultural traditions of each state and thereby the continuing relevance of Esping-Andersen's regime theory.
Welfare pluralism has the potential to reduce exclusionary forces but the empirical evidence demonstrates how in both societies exclusion is increasing, with plural provision exacerbating the situation.
Text
729603.pdf
- Version of Record
More information
Published date: 2000
Identifiers
Local EPrints ID: 466967
URI: http://eprints.soton.ac.uk/id/eprint/466967
PURE UUID: 9f6e043a-4fae-47c7-80b8-1412e19964cc
Catalogue record
Date deposited: 05 Jul 2022 08:04
Last modified: 16 Mar 2024 20:54
Export record
Contributors
Author:
Carol Anne Bulpett
Download statistics
Downloads from ePrints over the past year. Other digital versions may also be available to download e.g. from the publisher's website.
View more statistics