Informed by moral economy theories, this article presents a qualitative study of the normative construction of and contestation over a new in-work benefit in Hong Kong, the Low-income Working Family Allowance (LIFA). Using a policy stakeholder approach to examining the public’s ideas and justifications of LIFA, the findings reveal the eligibility-defined entitlement shared by claimants, scepticism towards long working hours conditionality required by LIFA, complex understanding of deservingness and self-reliance, and dissatisfaction with the closing gap between welfare and wages. This article connects moral economy theories to the normative basis of a social security system, offering insights for capturing the dynamics of consensus and controversies about social welfare. It also extends the research on morality and social welfare from Western countries to an Asian context. The case of Hong Kong evidences how policy stakeholders make moral sense of a new welfare in the absence of social right language.

This article examines the construction of policy problems through the exploration of the theoretical space opened up by the ‘What’s the Problem Represented to be?’ (WPR) approach developed by Bacchi (2009). It proposes a critical analysis of current policies governing teenage pregnancy in France through the deconstruction of the structures that have participated in shaping the ‘problem’ today. Focusing on discursive practices, the analysis unveils the political essence of the knowledge that constitutes the problem of ‘teen pregnancy’, and points to the constant flux characterising it, which is captured and stabilised in policymaking through problematisation. It is argued that these conclusions call for greater self-reflexivity in research and policymaking and prompt critical and feminist researchers to engage with disrupting current policymaking rationality.

The role of ‘best investment’ methodology in shaping priorities in many health policy areas is becoming increasingly prominent. Whilst this has traditionally been seen as a technocratic exercise, the social and political context of such practices and the constructed nature of decisions are now considered significant. In this context, this article reports on a longitudinal case study of such a process that sought to identify ‘best investments’ in public health interventions related to promoting physical activity. Drawing on a series of conceptual resources, we describe and reflect upon the complex and invested elements that contributed to the grounded decision-making process. In conclusion we suggest the need to adopt a multifaceted and nuanced approach to resource investment decision making, including: deploying a range of appraisal assessment resources; maintaining a long-term processual perspective; involving a variety of stakeholders; accepting and embracing fallibility; and accommodating theoretical and empirical evidence-based principles.

Drawing on the neo-republican theory of non-domination and a qualitative case study conducted in three Dutch municipalities, this article explores the extent to which external rules are able to prevent arbitrary power in relationships between welfare officers and work supervisors, on the one hand, and welfare recipients participating in mandatory work programmes, on the other hand. It concludes that external rules were insufficiently implemented in the three municipalities in question. In addition, it found that rules cease to be capable of constraining arbitrary power where institutional contexts themselves are unpredictable and insecure. Under these conditions, welfare recipients may seek to avoid risks and act in accordance with the preferences (or their expectation of the preferences) of the welfare officer or work supervisor by playing the role of the ‘good recipient’ instead of relying on available rules of a protective nature or rules that enable them to have a say in their participation in mandatory work programmes.

Traditional interpretations of homelessness focus on people living on the streets or in shelters. However, homelessness encompasses many more living situations. This article reports on a scoping review of studies on hidden homelessness. A systematic search in scientific databanks was combined with an exploration of Google Scholar. The results of the review reveal a lack of consensus regarding the definition of the concept. Moreover, since most studies focus on a certain subgroup in the population, it is hard to compare profile characteristics of people living in different forms of homelessness. The applied research methods prove to be valuable, although they often underestimate the number and/or character of the phenomena. Very little longitudinal research on hidden homelessness seems to be available. Based on the findings of the scoping review, the article draws up an agenda for further research in order to capture the complex reality of contemporary forms of homelessness.

While there has been much research on welfare exit and entry into employment, less research has looked at return to government assistance. Applying survival analysis on data from a national government assistance programme in Singapore, we found two important factors of welfare return to which activation programmes need to pay greater attention. First, return was more likely if former beneficiaries accumulated a higher number of types of arrears rather than higher dollar values of arrears. This new finding contributes to the emerging literature on bandwidth tax, and suggests the importance of designing programmes that relieve mental accounting due to debt and poverty. Second, return was more likely if respondents had an infant or toddler child. This points to the importance of a range of support policies including affordable and accessible childcare, exemption from work requirement in receipt of welfare, and family leave for low-wage workers.

Since 2000, literature on West (EU15) and East-Central European (EU8) welfare states has focused on a set of ‘new social risks’ including insecure employment and income, population ageing, unsustainable social security systems, and large-scale international immigration. Our State-of-the-Art (SOTA) article brings Russia into the dialogue on ‘new social risks’. We show that broadly similar structural changes in industrial economies, labour markets and demographic patterns ended the post-World-War-Two (WWII) ‘Golden Age’ of welfare expansion in both the EU15 and communist states. Shared new social risks rose to the top of policy agendas. Governments responded mainly, though not exclusively, with liberalising, privatising and exclusionary policies. The SOTA compares their policy responses, specifically pension system reforms, demographic (pro-natalist and family) policies, and integration of immigrants. We find both convergence and divergence based on states’ differing welfare legacies. The conclusion considers path-departing ‘emergency Keynesian’ responses to the COVID-19 crisis, and renewed attention to Beveridge welfare models.

Growing fiscal challenges and ageing populations have made pension reform a pressing issue. Two particularly salient areas of pension reform have been: raising the retirement age; and structural reforms like the adoption and reversal of pension privatisation. The authors compare two very similar cases: Russia and Hungary in the post-communist period. Both countries faced growing demographic and fiscal challenges prompting pension reform, but at the time of reform Hungary was democratic and Russia was authoritarian. Some scholars predicted that authoritarian governments would be better able than democratic ones at enacting unpopular, but arguably necessary, economic reforms. Others argue that democratic governments can more easily enact policy changes because of greater confidence about public opinion. Additionally, authoritarian policymaking can be uniquely slowed by bureaucratic in-fighting. The authors find support for the position that democratic governments can be more flexible: thus offering important insight into how regime type shapes policymaking.

During the early 2000s governments in Russia, Poland and Hungary declared demographic crises and adopted pro-natalist programmes to increase fertility, as well as policies to support families with children. Our article compares their ‘flagship’ pro-natalist programmes: Russia’s Maternity Capital, Poland’s Family 500+, and Hungary’s enhanced earned income tax credit, all framed by governments’ neo-familialist discourses. We confirm these policies had limited impacts on fertility, finding that their most significant and disparate effects were instead on childhood poverty. Provision of preschool public childcare and parental leaves with levels of mothers’ employment across the cases were compared. We find no relationship between coverage of childcare institutions and employment rates of mothers with young children. Data show a weak relationship between length and compensation for parental leaves and maternal employment. We conclude that post-communist governments’ flagship pro-natalist incentives, family policies and traditionalist rhetoric have had limited effects in reversing demographic decline or in re-traditionalising contemporary women’s lives.

The current article provides comparative analysis of policy capabilities in COVID-19 response in Russia and Finland by examining key challenges and impacts of the pandemic, and effects of anti-crisis socio-economic measures. It finds that the two countries adopted diverse policy responses that prioritised different segments of society with corresponding budget allocations. Such policy choice has been underpinned by pre-existing national priorities, while largely leveraging established policy legacy, institutions, and instruments within their welfare models. Russia has focused on supporting households through pro-natalist social assistance in line with its demographic concerns and persistent poverty, whereas Finland concentrated on protecting employment via social insurance and labour market interventions amid declining working-age population and labour supply. It is further suggested that improving policy capabilities via investments in comprehensive social security, welfare systems and gender-responsive policies can contribute to better development outcomes, while addressing gender power imbalances in the post-COVID-19 era.