IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/cog/socinc/v2y2014i3p005-017.html

Policing Norwegian Welfare: Disciplining and Differentiating within the Bottom Rungs

Author

Listed:
  • Erika K. Gubrium

    (Institute for Social Work, Child Welfare and Social Policy, Oslo and Akershus University College, Norway)

  • Ariana Fernandes Guilherme

    (Institute for Social Work, Child Welfare and Social Policy, Oslo and Akershus University College, Norway)

Abstract

Policing is a disciplining means for using welfare services to govern welfare recipients towards a desired behaviour or goal. We apply Foucault’s (1977) definition of institutional discipline as a means for exploring how the distinctions made by state and local welfare authorities in Norway when policing recipients may take shape according to normative perceptions of ethnicity and deservingness. More particularly, we explore the regulating understandings and activities linked to the inclusion and exclusion of eligibility to welfare benefits and services and the form of the services offered. Our focus lies at the point of entry from the lowest tier of Norwegian welfare benefits (social assistance) into two semi-parallel and higher tiers promising more (higher benefits, better services). The tiers are represented by programmes that share aims, yet differ in reach: the 2004 Introduction Programme and the 2007 Qualification Programme. The Introduction Programme is an activation programme targeted at immigrants and refugees newly arrived to Norway. Its aim is to strengthen opportunities to participate in society and labour market, as well as to promote economic independence. The Qualification Programme is an activation programme that was explicitly modelled after the Introduction Programme, yet whose target group reaches more broadly to include long-term recipients of social assistance and those whose work ability is severely lowered. While both programmes have been premised on the need to transform participants from a status of passive welfare benefit recipients to active participants in qualifying measures and society, the target groups vary and it is this contrast that is our point of focus. We contrast the two policies at two ‘moments’ in the policy cycle: (1) policy framing (public and policymaker understandings/assumptions concerning the target group, the location of accountability for the marginal position of the policy recipient and the policy’s political/social goals); and (2) the shaping and formative structure of these policies (how the relevant policies came into existence and what they look like).

Suggested Citation

  • Erika K. Gubrium & Ariana Fernandes Guilherme, 2014. "Policing Norwegian Welfare: Disciplining and Differentiating within the Bottom Rungs," Social Inclusion, Cogitatio Press, vol. 2(3), pages 005-017.
    • Handle: RePEc:cog:socinc:v2:y:2014:i:3:p:005-017
    DOI: 10.17645/si.v2i3.35
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.cogitatiopress.com/socialinclusion/article/view/35
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.17645/si.v2i3.35?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Schneider, Anne & Ingram, Helen, 1993. "Social Construction of Target Populations: Implications for Politics and Policy," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 87(2), pages 334-347, June.
    2. Sainsbury, Diane, 2012. "Welfare States and Immigrant Rights: The Politics of Inclusion and Exclusion," OUP Catalogue, Oxford University Press, number 9780199654789.
    3. Joakim Palme & Walter Korpi, 1998. "The Paradox of Redistribution and Strategies of Equality: Welfare State Institutions, Inequality and Poverty in the Western Countries," LIS Working papers 174, LIS Cross-National Data Center in Luxembourg.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Erika K. Gubrium & Ariana Fernandes Guilherme, 2014. "Policing Norwegian Welfare: Disciplining and Differentiating within the Bottom Rungs," Social Inclusion, Cogitatio Press, vol. 2(3), pages 005-017.
    2. Bruch, Sarah K. & van der Naald, Joseph & Gornick, Janet C., 2022. "Poverty Reduction through Federal and State Policy Mechanisms: Variation Over Time and Across the U.S. States," SocArXiv jz5xp, Center for Open Science.
    3. repec:osf:osfxxx:my64b_v1 is not listed on IDEAS
    4. repec:osf:socarx:jz5xp_v1 is not listed on IDEAS
    5. Laurie C. Maldonado & Rense Nieuwenhuis, 2014. "Family Policies and Single Parent Poverty in 18 OECD Countries, 1978-2008," LIS Working papers 622, LIS Cross-National Data Center in Luxembourg.
    6. Afonso, Alexandre & Negash, Samir & Wolff, Emily Anne, 2022. "Migration and Welfare States," OSF Preprints my64b, Center for Open Science.
    7. Maddison, Jonathan & Watts, Richard, 2011. "The technological fix as a frame in media debates about tailpipe emissions," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 33(3), pages 294-303.
    8. Fritz Sager & Yvan Rielle, 2013. "Sorting through the garbage can: under what conditions do governments adopt policy programs?," Policy Sciences, Springer;Society of Policy Sciences, vol. 46(1), pages 1-21, March.
    9. Brady, David, 2023. "Poverty, not the poor," EconStor Open Access Articles and Book Chapters, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics, vol. 9(34), pages 1-17.
    10. Mona Sandbæk, 2017. "European Policies to Promote Children’s Rights and Combat Child Poverty," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 14(8), pages 1-13, July.
    11. Jin Wook Kim & Young Jun Choi, 2008. "Private Transfers and Emerging Welfare States in East Asia: Comparative Perspectives," LIS Working papers 507, LIS Cross-National Data Center in Luxembourg.
    12. Leena Eklund Karlsson & Anne Leena Ikonen & Kothar Mohammed Alqahtani & Pernille Tanggaard Andersen & Subash Thapa, 2020. "Health Equity Lens Embedded in the Public Health Policies of Saudi Arabia: A Qualitative Document Analysis," SAGE Open, , vol. 10(4), pages 21582440209, October.
    13. Frank R. Baumgartner & Christine Mahoney, 2008. "Forum Section: The Two Faces of Framing," European Union Politics, , vol. 9(3), pages 435-449, September.
    14. Yao Zhu & Shousheng Chai & Jieqi Chen & Ian Phau, 2024. "How was rural tourism developed in China? Examining the impact of China’s evolving rural tourism policies," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 26(11), pages 28945-28969, November.
    15. Sarah K. Bruch & Janet C. Gornick & Joseph van der Naald, 2020. "Geographic Inequality in Social Provision: Variation across the US States," NBER Chapters, in: Measuring Distribution and Mobility of Income and Wealth, pages 499-527, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    16. Moshe Maor, 2025. "Towards a theory of policy bubbles," Policy Sciences, Springer;Society of Policy Sciences, vol. 58(2), pages 403-424, June.
    17. Giliberto Capano & Andrea Lippi, 2017. "How policy instruments are chosen: patterns of decision makers’ choices," Policy Sciences, Springer;Society of Policy Sciences, vol. 50(2), pages 269-293, June.
    18. Kainat Hussain, 2024. "Empowering Children through Smartphone Use: A Scoping Review in Social Construction Theory Perspective," Magna Carta: Contemporary Social Science, 50sea, vol. 3(2), pages 83-99, April.
    19. Malte Luebker, 2019. "Can the Structure of Inequality Explain Fiscal Redistribution? Revisiting the Social Affinity Hypothesis," LIS Working papers 762, LIS Cross-National Data Center in Luxembourg.
    20. Thu T. Nguyen & Weijun Yu & Junaid S. Merchant & Shaniece Criss & Chris J. Kennedy & Heran Mane & Krishik N. Gowda & Melanie Kim & Ritu Belani & Caitlin F. Blanco & Manvitha Kalachagari & Xiaohe Yue &, 2023. "Examining Exposure to Messaging, Content, and Hate Speech from Partisan News Social Media Posts on Racial and Ethnic Health Disparities," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 20(4), pages 1-13, February.
    21. Wim Van Lancker & Joris Ghysels, 2013. "Great expectations, but how to achieve them? Explaining patterns of inequality in childcare use across 31 developed countries," Working Papers 1305, Herman Deleeck Centre for Social Policy, University of Antwerp.
    22. Koen Caminada & Kees Goudswaard & Chen Wang & Jinxian Wang, 2019. "Income Inequality and Fiscal Redistribution in 31 Countries After the Crisis," Comparative Economic Studies, Palgrave Macmillan;Association for Comparative Economic Studies, vol. 61(1), pages 119-148, March.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:cog:socinc:v2:y:2014:i:3:p:005-017. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: António Vieira or IT Department (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.cogitatiopress.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.