Olivier Pintelon

The Social Stratification of Social Risks: Class and Responsibility in the 'New' Welfare State

Welfare states are said to have evolved over the course of the past twenty years towards a ‘social investment’ model of welfare, characterised by a focus on equality of opportunity and upward social mobility combined with greater emphasis on individual responsibility. More or less concurrently, under the mantra of ‘individualisation’, scepticism has grown with regard to the relevance of traditional stratification schemes. This paper sets out to ascertain whether social class, i.e. intergenerational background, (still) affects the occurrence of ‘social risks’. Using SILC 2005 data, it considers the impact of social class (of origin) on a relevant selection of social risks: unemployment, ill-health, living in a jobless household, single parenthood, temporary employment, and low-paid employment. The results provide clear evidence of a continuing influence of social class. On this basis, we argue that a one-sided focus on individual responsibility could open the door to new forms of marginalisation. Key words: social risks, social stratification, social class, social investment state, individualisation thesis Word count: 9964 wordsOver the course of the past 20 years, welfare states are said to have evolved towards a ‘social investment’ model of welfare – characterized by a focus on equality of opportunity and upward social mobility along with a greater emphasis on individual responsibility. In view of these policy changes, it is necessary to assess whether traditional stratification cleavages (still) affect the occurrence of ‘social risks’. Using data from the 2005 EU-SILC intergenerational module, we consider the impact of social class (of origin) on a relevant selection of risks: unemployment, ill-health, living in a jobless household, single parenthood and low-paid employment. The results provide clear evidence of a substantial influence of social class. On this basis, we argue that social investment strategies need to take stock of the persistence of traditional stratification cleavages. Otherwise, a one-sided approach may create new forms of exclusion and give way to ‘Matthew effects’.