Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-mlc7c Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-10T09:27:31.438Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Creating Citizen-Workers through Civic Integration

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  22 April 2015

SEMIN SUVARIEROL
SEMIN SUVARIEROL*
Affiliation:
Department of Sociology, Erasmus UniversityRotterdam email: seminsuvarierol@gmail.com
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The shift to the workfare state has brought about ways of governing welfare subjects, the practical implementation of which has often been delegated to private state agents and their street-level bureaucrats. In the neoliberal paternalist state, the words and deeds of these street-level agents become even more relevant in order to understand the impact of contemporary social policies. This article focuses on the case of migrants in the Netherlands, who are problematised in particular as (potential) welfare subjects. By analysing the civic integration programme content for migrants, it reveals the responsibilising and disciplining discourses and practices used to promote the ideal of citizen-worker. That the task of inculcating the virtues and skills demanded by neoliberal policies has been transferred to private course providers makes state ideology all-invasive. While the lack of integration and participation is linked to individual failure, the state loses its social face in the process.

Type
Articles
Information
Journal of Social Policy , Volume 44 , Issue 4 , October 2015 , pp. 707 - 727
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2015 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Andriessen, I., Nievers, E. and Dagevos, J. (eds.) (2012), Op achterstand: Discriminatie van niet-westerse migranten op de arbeidsmarkt, Den Haag: Sociaal en Cultureel Planbureau.Google Scholar
Bağcı, L. (2012), ‘Je moet je gewoon aanpassen aan de wet’, Onderzoek naar de overdracht van het wensbeeld van gezins- en sekseverhoudingen in inburgeringscursussen, Master Thesis Sociology, Erasmus Universiteit Rotterdam.Google Scholar
Bjørnson, M. (2007), ‘Speaking of citizenship: language ideologies in Dutch citizenship regimes’, Focaal – European Journal of Anthropology, 49: 65–80.Google Scholar
Brodkin, E. Z. (2011a), ‘Putting street-level organizations first: new directions for social policy and management research’, Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 21: 2, 199–201.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brodkin, E. Z. (2011b), ‘Policy work: street-level organizations under new managerialism’, Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 21: 2, 253–77.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Clarke, J. (2004), ‘Dissolving the public realm? The logics and limits of neo-liberalism’, Journal of Social Policy, 33: 1, 27–48.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dean, M. (2002), ‘Liberal government and authoritarianism’, Economy and Society, 31: 1, 37–61.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dean, M. (2010), Governmentality: Power and Rule in Modern Society, London: Sage Publications.Google Scholar
Dolfing, M. and van Tubergen, F. (2005), ‘Bensaïdi of Veenstra? Een experimenteel onderzoek naar discriminatie van Marokkanen in Nederland’, Sociologie, 1: 407–22.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dunn, A. (2013), ‘Activation workers’ perceptions of their long-term unemployed clients’ attitudes towards employment’, Journal of Social Policy, 42: 4, 799–817.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Entzinger, H. and van der Zwan, A. (1994), Beleidsopvolging minderhedendebat: Advies in opdracht van de Minister van Binnenlandse Zaken. Den Haag.Google Scholar
Frost, L. and Hoggett, P. (2008), ‘Human agency and social suffering’, Critical Social Policy, 28: 4, 438–60.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ghorashi, H. and van Tilburg, M. (2006), ‘When is my Dutch good enough? Experience of refugee woman in Dutch labour organizations’, Journal of International Migration and Integration, 7: 1, 51–70.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hagelund, A. (2005), ‘Why it is bad to be kind – educating refugees to life in the welfare state: a case study from Norway’, Social Policy and Administration, 39: 6, 669–83.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hagelund, A. (2009), ‘Dealing with the dilemmas: integration at the street-level in Norway’, International Migration, 48: 2, 79–102.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hagelund, A. and Kavli, H. (2009), ‘If work is out of sight: activation and citizenship for new refugees’, Journal of European Social Policy, 19: 3, 259–70.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Handler, J. F. (2005), ‘Myth and ceremony in workfare: rights, contracts, and client satisfaction’, The Journal of Socio-Economics, 34: 101–24.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hemerijck, A., Entenmann, E., van Hooren, F. J. and Palm, T. (2013), Changing European Welfare States and the Evolution of Migrant Incorporation Regimes, IMPACIM Work Package 1: Commissioned Welfare Report.Google Scholar
Hindess, B. (2001), ‘The liberal government of unfreedom’, Alternatives: Global, Local, Political, 26: 2, 93–111.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hindess, B. (2002), ‘Neo-liberal citizenship’, Citizenship Studies, 6: 2, 127–43.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ivanescu, C. and Suvarierol, S. (2013), Mapping the Conditions of Stay and Rationale for Entitlements and Restrictions in the Netherlands, IMPACIM Working Paper, Oxford: Centre on Migration, Policy & Society.Google Scholar
Kirk, K. M. and Suvarierol, S. (2014), ‘Emancipating migrant women? Gendered civic integration in the Netherlands’, Social Politics, 21: 2, 241–60.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lipsky, M. (1980), Street-Level Bureaucracy: The Dilemmas of Individuals in Public Services, New York: Russell Sage Foundation.Google Scholar
Marston, G. (2013), ‘On activation workers’ perceptions’: a reply to Dunn (1)’, Journal of Social Policy, 42: 4, 819–27.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mascini, P., Soentken, M. and van der Veen, R. (2012), ‘From welfare to workfare: the implementation of workfare policies’, in van der Veen, R., Yerkes, M. and Achterberg, P. (eds.), The Transformation of Solidarity: Changing Risks and the Future of the Welfare State, Amsterdam: Amsterdam University Press, pp. 165–89.Google Scholar
McDonald, C. and Marston, G. (2005), ‘Workfare as welfare: governing unemployment in the advanced liberal state’, Critical Social Policy, 25: 3, 374–401.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Oliver, C. (2013), The Impact of Restrictions and Entitlements on the Integration of Family Migrants: A Comparative Report, IMPACIM Final Report, Oxford: Centre on Migration, Policy & Society.Google Scholar
Ossewaarde, M. R. R. (2007), ‘The new social contract and the struggle for sovereignty in the Netherlands’, Government and Opposition, 42: 2, 491–512.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rose, N. (1999), Powers of Freedom: Reframing Political Thought, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schinkel, W. (2007), Denken in een tijd van sociale hypochondrie: Aanzet tot een theorie voorbij de maatschappij, Kampen: Klement.Google Scholar
Shutes, I. (2011), ‘Welfare-to-work and the responsiveness of employment providers to the needs of refugees’, Journal of Social Policy, 40: 3, 557–74.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Soss, J., Fording, R. and Schram, S. F. (2011), ‘The organization of discipline: from performance management to perversity and punishment’, Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 21: 2, 203–32.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Suvarierol, S. (2012), ‘Nation-freezing: images of the nation and the migrant in citizenship packages’, Nations and Nationalism, 18: 2, 210–229.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tonkens, E. (2008), ‘Les van een val’, De Volkskrant, 19 November 2008, p. 1.Google Scholar
Van Berkel, R. (2010), ‘The provision of income protection and activation services for the unemployed in “active” welfare states: an international comparison’, Journal of Social Policy, 39: 1, 17–34.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Van Houdt, F., Suvarierol, S. and Schinkel, W. (2011), ‘Neoliberal communitarian citizenship: current trends towards “earned citizenship” in the United Kingdom, France, and the Netherlands’, International Sociology, 26: 3, 408–32.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wright, S. (2012), ‘Welfare-to-work, agency and personal responsibility’, Journal of Social Policy, 41: 2, 309–28.CrossRefGoogle Scholar