The Social Policy Digest is a major online resource providing up-to-date listings of developments across the whole range of UK and pan-European social policy issues - including links to source materials and commentary. The Digest is published by Cambridge University Press on behalf of the Social Policy Association.

One of the consequences of the post-2008 global economic crisis is that it has thrust into the public spotlight the issue of state provision for corporations, putting paid to the myth that capitalism and businesses could ultimately be more profitable, more efficient and more competitive without state interference and direct support. The reality is that corporations of every size and within every sector depend on government support in some way. Hence, while the measures taken by governments in response to the global crisis have been exceptional in their scale, they are not exceptional by design. Rather, direct and indirect state support to corporations – referred to here as corporate welfare – is commonplace and is deeply embedded within the state's operations with various forms of assistance being delivered through social policies. In such an environment, the fact that social policy has very little to say about ‘corporate welfare’ is a serious omission. Bringing corporate welfare into social policy analysis reinforces the potential defence of the welfare state and, at the same time, increases our understanding of how best to balance the needs of private businesses with those of citizens on the one hand, and the burden of paying for welfare on the other. To this end, this paper argues for a deeper recognition, understanding, consideration and embedding of corporate welfare in social policy analysis. The first half of the paper advances conceptually the analysis of corporate welfare, mapping corporate and social welfare along a continuum. The second half provides some empirical evidence of the relative size of corporate and social welfare provision in a number of OECD countries.

Kevin Farnsworth (this volume) exhorts us to recognise that corporations (by which he means any private company regardless of its ownership structure) are recipients of welfare provision in various forms: financial and in-kind, direct and indirect. He argues that a recognition of this by businesses, governments and the social policy community can foster greater complementarity in corporate and individual welfare measures and also potentially legitimise a greater tax contribution from these businesses towards public expenditure.

Kevin Farnsworth deserves congratulations and thanks for expanding the analysis of the distribution of public resources. In scrutinising the limited data on public subsidies and other support to business, he opens up important issues highly relevant to the study of welfare, both nationally and comparatively. I want to take advantage of this opportunity to reflect on his paper and pose some questions that I hope he and others will pursue as this area is developed.

In The Pinch, David Willetts (2010: xv) attracted attention by asking whether ‘the boomers have been guilty of a monumental failure to protect the interest of future generations’. This was just the latest contribution to a long running concern of social policy analysts about horizontal equity and generational fairness. Using OECD data from 1980–2007, in the first part of this paper we show that there is no evidence that social expenditure has been shifting in favour of the retired at the expense of children, except perhaps recently in some Nordic countries. For the UK, we have created a time-series using the published articles since 1977 and the micro data sets since 1994/5 from the annual Office for National Statistics analyses of the Effect of Taxes and Benefits on Household Incomes and used it to analyse trends in the redistributive impact of cash benefits, direct and indirect taxes and services on the retired and households with children and across the income distribution. The analysis shows how the relative support for the retired versus children has changed over time, which elements have contributed to the changes and for which part of the income distribution. There has been a small shift in final income in favour of the retired but it was not the result of changes in taxes, benefits or services in kind but rather a change in the original income distribution in favour of the retired.

Is public support for redistribution affected by the number of people experiencing economic strain in a country? This question is investigated by comparing twenty-eight countries in the fourth round of the European Social Survey 2008–09 using two-level linear regression models. The results show that individuals reporting economic strain support redistribution more strongly than those who do not experience economic strain. Further, individuals living in countries where many other people report economic strain also support redistribution more strongly than individuals living in countries with less economic strain. The latter correlation is not explained by objective measures of the economic situation such as household income or the income dispersal of the country. The country-level effect of economic strain holds for all income levels. It is largely driven by a tendency to strongly believe in redistribution when living in countries of widespread economic strain. The results indicate that governments would receive more rather than less public support for redistributive policies during periods of economic strain.

This article charts the rise of one of the UK's most high profile forms of food banks: the Trussell Trust Foodbank franchise. Employing empirical data it seeks to embed the phenomenon of the growth of Foodbanks within a social policy research context. In the first instance, the role of recent and on-going shifts in the social policy context are examined, notably the importance of welfare diversification under previous Labour governments (1997–2010) and the current public spending cuts, welfare restructuring and Big Society rhetoric of the Conservative−Liberal Democrat Coalition government. The paper goes on to explore the nature of Foodbanks as emergency initiatives, providing relief and alleviation for the ‘symptoms’ of food insecurity and poverty. Data are presented which demonstrate some of the ways in which the Foodbank model and those who run the projects navigate the tension between addressing symptoms rather than ‘root causes’ of poverty and food insecurity. In the face of the simultaneous growth in emergency food initiatives and significant upheavals in social policy and welfare provision, the article culminates with an argument for social policy research and practice to harness and prioritise the human rights-based approach to food experiences.

Intergroup conflict, whether manifest as the absence of community cohesion or as the presence of antisocial behaviour, is an issue of international concern. In the UK, confronting the reality or perceived threat of intergroup conflict is a core feature of community cohesion and antisocial behaviour policies. To varying degrees, the frameworks underpinning these policies see the absence or breakdown of community relations as a cause of social disharmony. A key challenge for policy is therefore improvement of the quality of community relations. In this paper, we consider how government has approached this challenge. We filter our analysis through the lens of civility, which proposes that the peaceful coexistence of diverse social groups rests on the existence and maintenance of intergroup empathy and mutual respect. This proposal is supported by international research evidence on the outcomes of meaningful interactions, where these are predicated on equal group status, leading to changes in group and intergroup perceptions and behaviours (the contact hypothesis). We consider the extent to which community cohesion and anti-social behaviour policies in the UK demonstrate a coherent conception of the problem of community relations, the quality of community relations to which these policies aspire and whether the strategies deployed to address community relations seek to support civility through meaningful interaction. We find that the policy debates start from different presumptions concerning the roots of social disharmony, and this is reflected in the nature of the interventions which the community cohesion and antisocial behaviour policy frameworks support. In particular, we find that the social interaction promoted through policies in the UK is not necessarily aimed at achieving social harmony through meaningful interaction based on recognition of equal group status. We also show that these policies are based on little in the way of evidence and prior knowledge.

The paper explores the evolution of rehabilitative, rights and economic discourses, and their effect on the development of juvenile justice policies in Israel during the last two decades. Israel has adopted the main features of a neo-liberal regime and severe cuts were made to major social welfare programmes, including those dealing with juvenile offenders. However, the neo-liberal ideas of individualisation and responsibilisation did not penetrate the area of juvenile delinquency. A renewed welfarist discourse in Israel was created instead. This strongly relied on traditional beliefs in rehabilitation and treatment based on a child-centred culture, incorporating concepts of rights and embedded in practical economic considerations.

This study applies critical discourse analysis to the public discourse in Israel regarding the battle of single mothers against extensive welfare cuts. Using the protest of July 2003 as a case study, the article points to parallels between Israel's neo-liberal welfare discourse and that in the US, but also reveals a competing discourse in Israel that incorporated several basic cultural motifs: motherhood, militarism, Zionism and nationalism. While the latter discourse stresses the importance of motherhood and its contribution to society, the former presents single mothers as dependents living off the country's welfare resources. The discourse analysis shows that despite the seeming legitimacy of motherhood in Israel, especially of the Zionist mother who gives birth to soldiers, the negative imagery applied by the neo-liberal ideology to single mothers who receive allowances succeeded in eroding this legitimacy.

The socially perceived necessities or ‘consensual’ approach to defining and measuring poverty is based on an assumption that it is possible to obtain a collective view from society on the necessities for an acceptable standard of living. The enforced lack of the necessities due – typically – to lack of resources can be regarded as poverty. The validity of the approach has been questioned on a number of grounds including the argument that people's socio-economic circumstances may influence what they define as a necessity. Widespread lack of material possessions and access to services could result in these items being regarded as ‘less necessary’, which in turn could artificially deflate the definition of poverty using this approach. Informed by the adaptive preferences literature and drawing on a nationally representative South African Socially Attitudes Survey this paper explores whether there is evidence in South Africa of an association between people's patterns of possession and their definition of items as essential. Notwithstanding the fact that possession of an item is strongly associated with people's preferences, the evidence on balance suggests that widespread lack does not undermine the validity of the approach.