A basic function of welfare states is guaranteeing social protection to all citizens. European citizenship aims to create a level playing field for citizens of all Member States. In the process, some categories of citizens tend to be overlooked, or even deprived of previous rights. In this chapter, we focus on young adults as a vulnerable category of citizens. They appear to suffer the most from high unemployment rates, and are encouraged in the Europe 2020 strategy to be mobile to explore opportunities outside their country. However, the rights of young, mobile Europeans are not per se guaranteed if they migrate. A critical analysis of the Youth on the Move program, and recent National Reform Programmes of Member States identifies key discrepancies between EU goals for young adults’ mobility and their social, political, legal and economic position.
Trudie Knijn and Mara A. Yerkes
Leydi Johana van den Braken, Dorota Lepianka and Trudie Knijn
This chapter analyses why intra-European migration remains rather low. Traditional migration models based on ‘push–pull’ factors attempt to explain migration from an economic perspective while relying on strict assumptions of individuals’ rationality and perfect information. The chapter integrates ‘push–pull’ factors that stimulate migration with ‘stay–stay away’ factors, which discourage migration. It suggests that migration decision is based on an evaluation of ‘push–pull’ incentives with regard to ‘stay–stay away’ incentives. The results confirm that ‘stay–-stay away’ factors contribute to the explanation of migration intentions. Individuals who score higher on the ’stay–stay away’ index are less likely to envisage migrating at some point in the future. Including both ‘push–pull’ and ‘stay–stay away’ factors in a single model confirms our supposition as to the complementary nature of both groups of predictors and points to the usefulness of a comprehensive ‘push–pull’-’stay–stay away’ framework. Furthermore, our results show that young Europeans are more likely to consider migration for non-economic reasons, while at the same time signalling reluctance to give up their economic security at home.
This chapter discusses the emerging theories of social justice, broadly starting with Rawls’ key text A Theory of Justice. The author argues that Rawls’ book, more than any other, and despite a mass of philosophical work from the period of the ancient Greeks onwards, which discussed the nature of justice, set the template for analytic normative theorising about social justice within the ‘Western’ world. The developing critiques of Rawls’ work, particularly from the theories of Nussbaum, Fraser, Young and others are reviewed and, using two ‘real-life’ vignettes, contemporary discussion of the dimensions of redistribution, resources, and inequality is analysed.
This chapter reviews the meaning of social justice in the context of the post-apartheid struggle for peace, reconciliation, transformation and development in South Africa. It offers a view on how social justice can be pursued in South Africa, given its historical development and present struggles. It is clear that South Africa’s fight for freedom recognised that democratic change was necessary for improvement in the overall quality of life for all in the country, especially the historically disenfranchised majority. Political and social struggles prior to 1994 mobilised for a process of wide-scale transformation of state institutions, policies and legislation to dismantle the apartheid state and create change that would embed constitutional democracy and social justice. Two decades after coming to power, the democratically elected governments still face the need to address the shadow of apartheid’s racial history and monopoly capitalism, which continue to influence policy outcomes for the majority of citizens.
W. Thomas Duncanson
The context for discussion of social justice in the United States is its remarkable national wealth, equating to a comparatively generous average individual income across the country. From this perspective, the accusation that the United States is a socially unjust nation, unwilling or unable seriously to address the fair expectations of its people is surprising but true. If, as the author argues, a fundamental material generosity and permissive inclusiveness should come easily to any people, it should be the Americans; sadly, it does not. He supports this assertion with a detailed analysis of key factors such as poverty, inequality, and difference, reminding us that access to life chances are highly racialized. Americans are trapped by myths, for example about their own and their country’s generosity. These inequalities, unsolved matters of racial and sexual justice, the unfinished question of violence, mean that the United States enters the future with an enormous agenda of social justice issues.
This chapter discusses the nature of social justice in Australia through the lens of a detailed investigation into the treatment of aboriginal/Indigenous people and, in particular, their children. In the twentieth century, many of these children were ‘stolen’ by the white-dominated Australian federal and state governments and given to settlers to adopt and bring up in western traditions. A significant number of the children were abused. The author reviews the campaigns of the past 30 years that have sought to stop this practice, return the children to their natural families and assert their traditional identities in the context of wider struggles, particularly over land rights and economic exploitation. The chapter examines the failure of Australian governments to address policy recommendations, and dissects the varied causes of the rapid rise in the number of Indigenous children entering the out-of-home care system.
The focus of this chapter is distributional justice for children. Although it starts with some observations on the concept of social justice applied to children, it will mainly be concerned with how one might explore social justice for children in empirical study. The approach is comparative, drawing mainly on data from European Union countries. The chapter ends by posing a question that has not yet been resolved. What is the appropriate balance between the market and the state in supporting children out of poverty? What is the right balance between the family, the market and the state in seeking social justice for children? This is an important issue at a time when it appears that the combination of neo-liberal policies and austerity which have been pursued more or less aggressively in many so-called ‘developed’ countries have resulted in a situation where the numbers of children in poverty have reached record levels in living memory.
How do we can we change a discourse using visual storytelling? How can visual storying be used as a tool for a call to action? This chapter will discuss the link between visual media and social justice. How can we use the visual media taken usually as part of an assignment and strategically transform it into an advocacy tool? What is visual storytelling? And what is Visual truth? Julianne Newton (2008:8) calls visual truth “authentic knowledge derived from seeing.” Photographers have been documenting wars and conflicts since the camera was invented. Roger Fenton's Crimean War photographs represent one of the earliest systematic attempts to document a war through the medium of photography, but he showed only the landscape of war without depicting actual human suffering.
This chapter explores the linkages between social justice and social welfare, broadly defined. Welfare regimes have been classified by a number of commentators and here, the author asks if some of these models of welfare come closer than others to meeting the ideals of social justice articulated in key philosophical works. He briefly reviews key themes from the ‘welfare modelling’ debate before attempting to develop a series of index measures that are used to compare and rank OECD countries on the basis of how well they meet the ideals of different social justice perspectives. In so doing, the chapter relates these analyses to the established welfare state ideal types in order to address the question: How just are the different worlds of welfare capitalism?
Human rights were originally conceived of as an instrument, not of domestic, but of foreign policy – ‘the export theory of human rights’. Human rights were for foreigners, who did not enjoy them. Allied to this, of course, was the invincible belief of the ‘establishment’ that Britain was the home of freedom. In Britain, everything which was not prohibited is permitted. This can be seen as positive feature – some joke that in Germany everything is forbidden which is not permitted (and in Austria everything is permitted which is forbidden). But it can be seen as negative – freedom consists only in what is left over after ‘this and that’ has been made illegal. Written laws showed that parliament, too, was the guardian of our rights. Both parliament and the courts were there to safeguard our liberties from over-weaning officialdom and the abuse of executive power. Many rights are still not protected by conventions.