Weiss et al, 2005; Banting and Kymlicka, 2006; Lister, 2008; Yuval-Davis, 2011; Faist, 2015). All of this is forcing scholars to reconsider the ‘social’ and the possibilities of politics and social policy for sustaining the social in an increasingly complicated, globalized and challenging world.
The chapters in this book approach the social from multiple angles, rooted in history and culture studies, economics and political science, social politics, sociology and social epidemiology, written by scholars working within and across these different disciplines. The volume as a whole helps us to think more critically about important moral and political aspects of the ‘social’ and especially of the notion of ‘social policy’, increasingly conceived in global forms, ‘global social policy’, signified by international agreements, and the global goals and targets now directed towards the sustainability challenges facing humankind.18
This is important work for sure, revealing many different ideas and conceptions of ‘the social’ (that is, ‘the socials’: ‘social cohesion’, ‘social justice’, ‘social wellbeing’, ‘social sustainability’, ‘social progress’ and so on) in the arguments of international institutions, epistemic communities and domestic policy makers. Often these concepts, or quasi-concepts, are not clearly defined in policy documents, this volume is testament to that. As such they appear fuzzy, lacking in precision, but in many ways this is precisely what makes quasi-concepts particularly useful for policy-making purposes, in practical policy terms across space and time, as Jenson (2018) argues.
The volume then engages with the contested conceptions of ‘the social’ focusing on ideas about ‘social justice’, ‘social cohesion’ and ‘social progress’ in a global context. It is the critical engagement with these key social science concepts, or quasi-concepts, along with the pressing ‘social questions’ (to do changing world population, ageing societies, mass migration, and so on) and the global challenges of the 21st century (to do with social inequality, social wellbeing, social sustainability) that are of profound interest to the contributors and readers of this volume alike. Each contribution draws our attention to the inherent complexity of thinking about ‘the social’, not only the varying conceptions or dimensions of the ‘social’, but also in terms of thinking about scale and multiscalar approaches (that is, global, world-regional, national, local or interpersonal scales). In summary, each chapter forces us to think very carefully about the meaning of the ‘social’, and the different conceptualizations of the ‘social’ of social policy.
Outline of the volume
Neoliberalism, in many variants, involved a sustained attack on ideas, institutions and formations of the ‘social’, as John Clarke contends in Chapter 2. Indeed, the neoliberal period closing out the 20th century was often considered to mark the ‘death of the social’. There is some obvious truth in this, evident in the ideologies of Thatcherism and Reaganism for example, and in the attack on social rights and the social sphere (‘there is no such thing as society. There are individual men and women and there are families’, claimed Margaret Thatcher in 1987), and in the neoliberal policy prescriptions of the World Bank and IMF during the dominant ‘Washington Consensus’ era. Yet political and cultural formations of the social continued to exist alongside the dominant neoliberal tendency of global capitalism. While some commentators are now suggesting that we are moving beyond neoliberalism, or that global social policy is being reframed as ideas and discourse evolve (Deeming and Smyth, 2018), Clarke cautions us to be wary. We are living in and against a neoliberal global order. Dominant neoliberal ideas and legacies persist. John Clarke helps us to navigate the complex terrain, going beyond simple binaries, dichotomies and periodization. The important point here is to recognize the shape-shifting processes of neoliberalization on the one hand, but also alternative ways of thinking and organizing the social on the other.
Economics, it seems, often in the pursuit of a market society, has never really had an easy relationship or a happy coexistence with the ‘social’. Nevertheless, economists have sought to embed the economy in society, as Bradley Bateman reminds us in Chapter 3. The enduring relevance of key economic ideas is the subject of Bateman’s chapter, as he considers how the pressing social and economic questions of the day (the social questions, concerning rights and representation, diversity and difference) have been cast and recast, and the responses to these questions from the discipline of economics. Ultimately, economics is used to argue for and against social policies. Two clear nexuses between economic theory and social policy thus arise. The libertarian focus of much mainstream economic theory does not often lend itself to recommending solutions to social policy questions, whereas Keynesian economic theory does. The nexus between the social and economic is particularly intuitive when it comes to the issue of climate change, the question of sustainable development now facing humanity. If societies are to successfully address climate change, it will require immense levels of investment. New infrastructure is required to generate clean energy (SDG 7), while green energy is not the only industry where the fight against climate change can create jobs. Nor do investments have to be made to help fight climate change in order to be effective at providing more and better paid jobs; that is, investment in infrastructure, housing and homes, schools and hospitals creates jobs, and can help mitigate inequality, increase inclusion and cohesion. The possibility for the state to improve people’s lives by creating more sustainable, resilient and inclusive societies is as relevant today as it was in the ‘heyday’ of Keynesian economics.
The question and limits of neoliberalism theme continues in Chapter 4. Here Jean-Michel Bonvin and Francesco Laruffa consider the ‘social’ investment perspective (focused on human capital formation) taking hold in global social policy discourses and the policy proposals advocated by international institutions like the OECD, the World Bank and the IMF, as well as regional actors like the EU and the European Commission (EC) and UN Regional Commissions like the Economic Commission for Latin America and the Caribbean (ECLAC). With this growing worldwide development they also sense the growing economization and de-politicization of the social. That is the loss of the social, with the focus on maximizing gross domestic product (GDP) and the employment rate, for example. Amartya Sen’s Capability Approach, however, may provide a way out of such neoliberalizing policy processes. Given the central importance of democratic deliberation in this approach, Bonvin and Laruffa argue that social policy should be framed as an enabling factor of democracy in order to better promote equality in terms of both processes and outcomes. After all, the ‘good society’ will require flourishing democratic debates and public action to successfully promote inclusive societies for sustainable development, to challenge and undo established patterns of social inequality within and among nations.
The issue of the ‘social’ in ‘sustainable development’ is the subject of Chapter 5 by Iris Borowy. Much neglected in academic and policy-making circles, the ‘social’ dimension was certainly considered to be a central component of sustainable development at the UN from the 1980s, inextricably linked to economic and environmental concerns. If sustainable development is about meeting the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs, then this poses a number of major challenges. Leaving aside the vexing issue of predicting future ‘needs’, there are clear tensions here in the social dimensions of sustainable development and related policy instruments, the SDGs. There are, on the one hand, clear tensions and trade-offs between the present pro-growth bias being promoted by the international institutions in an effort to end poverty (SDG 1) and reduce inequality within and between countries (SDG 10), while on the other hand the pursuit of endless economic growth is clearly incompatible with an environmentally sustainable world (represented by SDG 12, ensure responsible consumption and production patterns, for example, in order to tackle climate change). Economic growth is, of course, represented and promoted by SDG 8, ‘decent