Search

This paper seeks to disentangle analytically the trends towards the subsidiarization of social policies in Europe addressing how the social policy reforms changed actors' governance arrangements and altered the government scales involved over the last few decades. Following an introductory analysis of the main causes of the subsidiarization of social policies (sections 1 and 2), attention is devoted to the differences between welfare systems in Europe (section 3) and the way they influence the directions of change. The hypothesis is that, despite the fact that the subsidiarization of social policies is a converging rhetoric in most European countries' social policy reforms, the impact of the process varies according to the specificities of the respective regulatory frames at the national or sub-national scales. This is exemplified in the final part of the paper (section 4) which considers the Italian case and the main critical dimensions that emerge through these processes. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Is Europe converging on a single dominant model of the family and women's role which provides the basis for convergence on a single set of social policies? This paper concludes that the European Commission is wrong to expect a single dominant trend. On the contrary, recent research shows that three quite different, even conflicting, models of the family, and of women's role, continue to attract roughly equal support across the European Union as a whole, and within all EU countries. Two revolutions have occurred: the contraceptive revolution and the equal opportunities revolution, which have given women genuine choices for the first time in history. In the new scenario, women make divergent choices, producing at least three family models. In the future, social policy and employment policy need to recognize, and support, all three models of the family and of women's role. This makes EU policy-making more difficult, and sheds new light on national differences. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]