Search Reviews Become a Reviewer Suggest a book for review About Political ReviewNet Go back to Home Page

Review of:

The New Social Question: rethinking the welfare state by Pierre Rosanvallon and Nathan Glazer
Princeton University Press, Princeton NJ, 2000

Click here to see all the reviews for this journal
  Reviewed by: Stuart White,
Jesus College, Oxford
 
  Reviewed in: Political Studies  
  Date accepted online: 09/01/2003 Published in print: Volume 50, Issue 5, Pages 988-1060  

Political Theory

Although now a little dated in its policy detail, this book, published by Princeton University Press in its New French Thought series, retains interest as one of the first and influential efforts to articulate what we would now call a third way philosophy of the welfare state, particularly because it was written in a French, rather than Anglo-American, context. Rosanvallon argues that the French welfare state is rooted in an ‘insurance paradigm’ in which welfare is targeted at equally shared and unpredictable risks. However, this paradigm is increasingly problematic for a variety of reasons: increasing knowledge of risk factors at the individual level, and, not least, the labour market problems caused by social insurance charges on low-wage work and the related phenomenon of entrenched social exclusion. Rosanvallon argues that the welfare state must be refounded on the model of ‘solidarity’: as a purposefully, explicitly redistributive institution. The appeal to solidarity must be based on the idea of inclusion for mutual utility. This, he argues, points in the direction of programmes that seek to activate the marginalized using measures and supports suited to each individual case – the French Revenue Minimum d’Insertion and US-style workfare programmes are analysed as moves in this direction.

At both the empirical and philosophical levels, the argument is at times somewhat loose and impressionistic, and some serious objections to the ‘individualization’ of welfare – notably, the danger of the arbitrary exercise of power by those crafting interventions to suit the individual case – are not adequately dealt with. But, in common with contractualist welfare thinkers in Britain and the USA, Rosanvallon’s work poses an interesting question: can solidarity be constructed and maintained under modern conditions without explicit attention to, and insistence on, productive participation as an expression of civic reciprocity?

Search Reviews Become a Reviewer Suggest a book for review About Political ReviewNet Go back to Home Page