Anneli Anttonen

European Social Care Services: Is It Possible To Identify Models ?

The purpose of this article is to bring social care services into the domain of comparative social policy research. The reason why it is important for social care services to be incor porated into the debate is that they represent an expanding component of the welfare state; that they are important for women; and that there are major differences between different countries in social care services. We have defined social care services as a specific way of increasing the autonomy of both care pro viders and care receivers.

Welfare State, Universalism and Diversity

Contents: 1. Universalism and the Challenge of Diversity Anneli Anttonen, Liisa Haikio, Kolbeinn Stefansson and Jorma Sipila 2. Universalism in the British and Scandinavian Social Policy Debates Anneli Anttonen and Jorma Sipila 3. What is in a Word? Universalism, Ideology and Practice Kolbeinn Stefansson 4. Finding the Way between Universalism and Diversity: A Challenge to the Nordic Model Liisa Haikio and Bjorn Hvinden 5. Brave New World? Anglo-American Challenges to Universalism John Clarke and Janet Newman 6. Reassessing Woman-friendliness and the Gender System: Feminist Theorizing About the Nordic Welfare Model Anette Borchorst 7. A Caring State for all Older People? Mia Vabo and Marta Szebehely 8. The Pension Puzzle: Pension Security for all Without Universal Schemes? Mikko Kautto 9. Universalization and De-universalization of Unemployment Protection in Denmark and Sweden Jorgen Goul Andersen 10. The Future of Welfare State: Rethinking Universalism Anneli Anttonen, Liisa Haikio and Kolbeinn Stefansson

Convergent care regimes? Childcare arrangements in Australia, Canada, Finland and Sweden

This article is about the transnational movement of policy discourses on childcare. It considers whether the spread of neoliberal ideas with their emphasis on marketisation, on the one hand, and a social investment discourse on the other, are leading to convergence in childcare arrangements in Nordic countries (Finland and Sweden) and liberal Anglo-Saxon countries (Australia and Canada). We find points of convergence around both themes at the level of policy discourse and continued diversity in the way these ideas are translated into actual policies. In other words, convergence is mediated by institutions and political realignments.

Vocabularies of citizenship and gender: Finland

Citizenship has not been among the most popular objects of social and political theory in Finland during the last decades. However, historically it has been a central concept. It was only during the post-war welfare state development that debates on citizenship started to lose their earlier importance. One might assume that the Nordic welfare state model succeeded in solving some of the struggles around citizenship, both those based on class conflicts and those based on gender conflicts. To understand the present-day situation and the new debates emerging on citizenship in the 1990s it is important to look at the history of the formation of Finnish citizenship. My argument is that there is a Finnish- Nordic language of citizenship that does not stem directly either from liberalism or from civic-republicanism.

Eldercare Service Redesign in Finland: Deinstitutionalization of Long-Term Care

ABSTRACT Deinstitutionalization is an important trend in the redesign of long-term eldercare in Finland. It refers to a process where traditional institutional care is partly replaced by home care services and the creation of homelike housing units. The first part of this article provides an overview of eldercare service redesign by using national statistics. The second part consists of qualitative analysis of the deinstitutionalization of eldercare. The data consist of 27 interviews conducted among municipal care administrators and is analyzed using thematic and discourse analysis. Main findings show a deep policy change taking place in eldercare deinstitutionalization discourse lying at its center. A distinction between explicit and implicit deinstitutionalization discourse is made. The former clearly states that institutional care needs to be cut back making it possible for all older people to live at home or in homelike housing facilities. Implicit deinstitutionalization discourse is underpinned by comments of a different type, more critical and problem-centered. Within intensive service housing, for instance, fee policy is reformed. The main results include the observation that explicit deinstitutionalization discourse is in line with the national policy aims of putting home first, while implicit discourse deals with hidden or unexpected consequences. The article discusses future research in the conclusion.

Facing the Challenges in the Development of Long-Term Care for Older People in Europe in the Context of an Economic Crisis

Deinstitutionalization and privatization are framing and shaping long-term care (LTC) in Western societies. Most countries in the world are facing the challenge of aging societies while at the same time financial resources are becoming scarcer. As a result, there is an urgent need to evaluate how LTC for older people is being developed and organized in different countries. How are deinstitutionalization processes in European countries being implemented? Furthermore, what have been the consequences of the 2008 economic and financial crisis on LTC policies and its effects at the local and household levels? In this special issue, incorporating eight articles, the authors evaluate recent changes and developments in LTC for older people in European countries, most particularly from the perspective of restructuring taking place in the LTC for older people. The economic and state financial crises are the most important drivers behind widespread overall restructuring processes. The tsunami of the 2008 economic crisis hit particularly hard most of the southern European countries, which at a certain point had been making efforts to catch up by providing more services and resources addressed to old age welfare, looking toward the more successful northern and central European welfare states as reference points in their own LTC policies. The processes of deinstitutionalization and privatization, often accompanied by marketization trends, have been strongly present in northern and central European countries and have been introduced in the eastern and southern European countries as well, with their diverse models of welfare states (Anttonen & Meagher, 2013; Bode, Gardin, & Nyssens, 2011; B€onker, Hill, & Marzanati, 2010; Brennan, Cass, Himmelweit, & Szebehely, 2012; Karsio & Anttonen, 2013; Ranci & Pavolini, 2013; Salamon, 1993; Yeandle, Kr€oger, & Cass, 2012). Marketization refers to different, and often parallel, processes such as outsourcing, use of vouchers, or also competitive tendering. There are similarities when evaluating the processes of marketization, as well as disparities in the ways services are provided and how restructuring and retrenchments take place (Kr€oger, 2001; Lehmann & Havl ıkov a, 2015; Rostgaard, Timonen, & Glendinning, 2012). All these processes will be addressed in this special issue. The earlier common trend toward a fuller universalism of LTC in Europe, beginning in the 1990s, is clearly shifting toward increasing differentiation due to the growth and importance of the market-oriented sector since the 2008 economic crisis (Le on, 2014; Le on, Pavolini, & Rostgaard, 2014); this being also reflected in the set of articles included in this special issue. The importance of taking into account social and cultural systems, welfare production diversity, and the variety of care regimes in the provision and implementation of LTC (Anttonen & Sipil€a, 1996; PfauEffinger, 2005) can also be evident in household or individual strategies responding to individual needs; for example, in a context of socioeconomic crisis. Its manifestations range from a macro level of policy analysis and structure to a micro level of household or family strategies and their capacity of agency. There is a reluctance for different generations to live under the same roof and yet, at the same time, a preference for care, not only due to traditional values but also because family care is considered to be of better quality (Da Roit, Le Bihan, & € Osterle, 2007; Eichler & Pfau-Effinger, 2009; Jensen & Møberg, 2011; Pfau-Effinger, 2005).

Local welfare governance structuring informal carers' dual position

Purpose – Local welfare governance is approached from the vantage point of informal carers caring for older people. A bottom‐up perspective is used to construct a critical view on welfare provision and governance practices at the local level. The paper aims to discuss the issues.Design/methodology/approach – The data consist of 23 in‐depth interviews with informal carers. Universal access to services and equal treatment of citizens is discussed.Findings – The analysis illustrates how informal carers share care responsibilities with the municipality and gain access to services both as service providers and service users. Informal care comprises a complex mixture of public and private responsibilities that poses a challenge to universalism. There are new inequalities emerging among informal carers, while access to public resources is easier for resource‐rich carers positioned as service providers. Resource‐poor carers identify themselves often as service users in relation to municipality.Originality/value –...

Care Capital, Stress and Satisfaction

Our aim in this chapter is to study the family-related stress and satisfaction that women and men experience in their home lives, using data collected in Finland and Norway for the International Social Survey Programme (ISSP, 2002). The study will focus on families with children under 18, because our aim is to evaluate the usefulness of the concept of care capital in the context of work-life balance research.

The horizontal ‘re-mix’ in social care: trends and implications for service provision: Changes, Challenges and Policy Implications for Europe in Times of Austerity

This chapter re-conceptualises the notion of ‘welfare mixes’ in social care and addresses the main changes taking place in European countries. First, we provide a typology of care provision modes that refines the so-called ‘welfare diamond’ (Jenson, 2013) and we discuss the theoretical implications of welfare mixes, which originally set out to promote equality and partnership among different providers, striving for user-centred and universal social services. However, reviewing the changes that have been introduced over the past few decades, we detect a tendency whereby re-mixes accentuate social inequalities between lower and higher income groups due to increased fragmentation and marketisation, which threatens equality among service providers and universal provision. We take a look at the main trajectories that frame and shape welfare mixes in social care. The latter are described in terms of the relative share of public, for-profit, non-for-profit or family-based providers. Our aim is to construct a conceptual map of the way responsibilities are shifting among care providers and producing re-mixes. First, we outline a framework for conceptualising welfare mixes. We then contrast this with changes that lead to re-mixes, and we develop a new typology of care provision modes. Next, we present a few illustrative examples drawn from the empirical material shared within the COST Action IS1102 SO.S. COHESION – Social services, welfare states and places to highlight such shifts in re-mixes. Finally, we attempt to discern the main social impacts that may result from different types of shifts, paying particular attention to the consequences for equality among users and partnership among providers.

How marketisation is changing the Nordic model of care for older people: Changes, Challenges and Policy Implications for Europe in Times of Austerity

The last thirty years have witnessed significant changes in the ethos and organisation of public services. There has been a profound market shift not only in the liberal welfare states but recently also in the Northern European countries representing the social democratic model. The Nordic countries were well known for their extensive care service delivery for both children and older people. Services were financed by general tax revenues, produced by municipalities, and provided to all the people who needed these services. The Nordic model of care reflected the capability of social democratic states to extend social rights to cover the care needs of adults and to recognise women’s right to employment and independence by providing high-quality care services. This model, among other things, contributed to move unpaid female care work from the sphere of the private household economy to the publicly funded care labour market with high professional opportunities. This is a major reason to look more closely at the avenues and mechanisms through which an increasing proportion of publicly funded care services for older people are recently being removed from the entirely public sphere of state and municipal provision towards a greater involvement of the private household, the formal economy of the market, and the voluntary or third sectors. The Nordic care model thus reflects current welfare re-mixes as discussed in this book (see Martinelli, Chapter 1, in this volume; Leibetseder et al., in this volume). Clear signs of intensified marketisation are emerging most particularly in Finland and Sweden (Karsio and Anttonen, 2013; Meagher and Szebehely, 2013). Here, care services for older people are, among publicly funded services, the most extensively outsourced to private for-profit providers; and, among these services, residential care is proving to be a lucrative opportunity for large international companies.