Collective Protection for New Social Risks: Childcare and the Dutch Welfare State

    Research output: Contribution to journalArticleAcademicpeer-review

    Abstract

    Issues such as caring and family policy have received increased attention within the sociological literature on the welfare state during the past decades. At the same time, there has been much debate about the protection of social risks. In particular, scholars have questioned the ability of welfare states to respond to so-called new social risks, such as reconciling work and care. The literature on new social risks assumes welfare states will have difficulty addressing these risks due to pressures for reform and assumed individual responsibility for new social risks. In contrast, the Dutch welfare state has been successful in re-orienting existing institutions to develop a semi-collectivised yet market-driven form of childcare policy. Using qualitative interview data and document analysis, this article analyses the development of Dutch childcare policy from 1995 to 2009. The development of childcare policy is attributed to three social mechanisms: a common perception among actors viewing childcare as a solution to improve women's employment; a party politics mechanism, which creates a distinct Dutch approach to childcare; and a corporatist mechanism, referring to the interaction between the state and industrial relations, which failed in the area of childcare policy. The development of childcare policy has not been wholly unproblematic, however, and therefore a critical discussion of these developments is offered. Also, an update of policy developments through to 2013 is provided.

    Original languageEnglish
    Pages (from-to)811-828
    Number of pages18
    JournalJournal of Social Policy
    Volume43
    Issue number4
    DOIs
    Publication statusPublished - 16 Jun 2014

    Fingerprint

    Dive into the research topics of 'Collective Protection for New Social Risks: Childcare and the Dutch Welfare State'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

    Cite this