KaydedilenlerDerginizi ekleyin

Dergiler / Sosyal Güvence / 2017 / Sayı: 12

MARKETIZATION IN PUBLIC EMPLOYMENT SERVICES: LESSONS FROM UK EXPERIENCE FOR TURKEY

Varol Dur0000-0002-6801-3567
Sayfa
89–107
Yayın Tarihi
2017-07-31
🏛️Bu makalenin bibliyografik verileri ve tam metin bağlantısı DergiPark üzerinden sağlanmıştır.
DergiPark Kaydı ↗
✨

Yapay Zeka Hızlı Bakış & Çıkarımlar

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(1 Cümlede Hızlı Çıkarım)

In this scope, the study aims to derive lessons from UK case for Turkish public employment services from objective point of view.

📌 3 Maddede Bu Makale

🎯
Amaç & Hipotez:With its liberal welfare regime and different understanding on social issues, United Kingdom separates from continental European countries.
📊
Temel Bulgular & Veri:These differences create opportunities for UK’s governments to materialize “most advanced” neo-liberal reforms in the fi eld of public employment services.
💡
Sonuç & Katkı:In this scope, the study aims to derive lessons from UK case for Turkish public employment services from objective point of view.
🔬Tür:Araştırma Makalesi
📍Kapsam:Genişletilmiş Akademik Örneklem
⚙️Değişkenler:Public employment services · marketization · work programme

Özet

With its liberal welfare regime and different understanding on social issues, United Kingdom separates from continental European countries. These differences create opportunities for UK’s governments to materialize “most advanced” neo-liberal reforms in the fi eld of public employment services. Not only the current situation of marketized employment services in UK, but also its historical developments provide numbers of positive and negative examples for the countries planning to implement similar reforms.. This study does not reach a conclusion indicating that UK has best or worst practices in this fi eld. However, it suggests that the UK’s example contains very valuable inputs about pros and cons of marketization in public employment services and how this process should manage. In this scope, the study aims to derive lessons from UK case for Turkish public employment services from objective point of view.

Abstract

With its liberal welfare regime and different understanding on social issues, United Kingdom separates from continental European countries. These differences create opportunities for UK’s governments to materialize “most advanced” neo-liberal reforms in the fi eld of public employment services. Not only the current situation of marketized employment services in UK, but also its historical developments provide numbers of positive and negative examples for the countries planning to implement similar reforms.. This study does not reach a conclusion indicating that UK has best or worst practices in this fi eld. However, it suggests that the UK’s example contains very valuable inputs about pros and cons of marketization in public employment services and how this process should manage. In this scope, the study aims to derive lessons from UK case for Turkish public employment services from objective point of view.

🔖

Bu Makaleye Atıf Yap

Dur, V. (2017). MARKETIZATION IN PUBLIC EMPLOYMENT SERVICES: LESSONS FROM UK EXPERIENCE FOR TURKEY. Sosyal Güvence, Sayı: 12, 89–107. https://doi.org/10.21441/sguz.2017.59

📄 Tam Metin PDF Okuyucu

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

Kaynakça (26)

  1. Aydoganoglu, Erkan., (2016, 9 Mart). Özel İstihdam Büroları ve Kiralik Işçilik: Amaç Işçilerin Tüm Yaşamini Denetim Altina Almak [Private Employment Agencies and Renting Workers: The Aim is to Control All Life of Workers], Evrensel Newspaper.
  2. Berkel, Rik Van., & Vando, Borghi (2008), Introduction: The Governance of Activation Social Policy and Society, 7(3).
  3. Berkel, Rik Van., Sager, Fritz., & Ehrler, Franziska (2012). The Diversity of Activation Markets in Europe, International Journal of Sociology and Social Policy, 32 (5/6).
  4. Colin, Lindsay., Mcquaid Ronald W., & Dutton Matthew (2007). New Approaches to Employability in the UK: Combining ‘Human Capital Development’ and ‘Work First’ Strategies?, Journal of Social Policy, 36.
  5. Esping-Andersen, Gøsta, 1990. Three Worlds of Welfare Capitalism, Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
  6. Flemming, Larsen., & Wright Sharon (2014). Interpreting the Marketization of Employment Services in Great Britain and Denmark, Journal of European Social Policy, 1 –15.
  7. General National Assembly of Turkey (2002). Türkiye İş Kurumu Kanunu Gerekçesi ve Komisyon Tutanakları [Turkish Employment Agency Act’s Preamble and Related Commission Minutes].
  8. Guler, Mehmet Atilla., (2015). Ulusal İstihdam Stratejisi Bağlamında Türkiye’de Güvencesiz Çalışma [Unsecure Working in Turkey in the Scope of National Employment Strategy], Çalışma ve Toplum Dergisi, 2015/3.
  9. Heidenreich, Martin., & Aurich-Beerheide, Patrizia., (2014). European Worlds of Inclusive Activation: The Organisational Challenges of Coordinated Service Provision, International Journal of Social Welfare, 23.
  10. Meyers, M., Glaser, B. & Mac Donald, K. (1998). On the Front Lines of Welfare Delivery: Are Workers Implementing Policy Reforms?, Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, 17(1).
  11. Pascual A. Serrano (2016, Mart 4). Reshaping Welfare States: Activation Regimes in Europe, http://www.peterlang.com/PDF/Buecher/Intro/21048_Intro.pdf adresinden ulaşılmıştır.
  12. Public Accounts Committee (PAC) (2013). Department for Work and Pensions: Work Programme Outcome Statistics, Thirty-third report of session 2012–13, London: The Stationery Offi ce.
  13. Prime Ministry of Turkey (2016, Mart 15), Justifi cation of Amendments on Labour Law and Turkish Employment Agency Act, http://www2.tbmm.gov.tr/d26/1/1-0597. pdf adresinden ulaşılmıştır.
  14. Rees, James,. Taylor, Rebecca,. & Damm, Chris (2013). Does Sector Matter? Understanding the Experiences of Providers in the Work Programme, Third Sector Research Centre, Working Paper, 92.
  15. Rees, James,. Whitworthb, Adam,. & Carterb, Elle (2014). Support for All in the UK Work Programme? Differential Payments, Same Old Problem, Social Policy & Administration, 48 (2).
  16. Schram, Sanford F. (2000), In the Clinic: The Medicalization of Welfare, Social Text, 18 (1) 62.
  17. Jantz, Bastian., Klenk Tanja., Larsen, Flemming., & Wiggan Jay (2015). Marketization and Varieties of Accountability Relationships in Employment Services: Comparing Denmark, Germany, and Great Britain, Administration & Society, 1 –25.
  18. Taylor-Gooby, Peter., Larsen, Trine., & Kananen, Johannes (2004), Market Means and Welfare Ends: The UK Welfare State Experiment, Journal of Social Policy, 33 (4).
  19. Taylor-Gooby, Peter (2012). Root and Branch Restructuring to Achieve Major Cuts: The Social Policy Programme of the 2010 UK Coalition Government, Social Policy & Administration, 46 (1).
  20. Taylor, Rebecca., Rees, James., & Damm, Christopher (2015). UK Employment Services: Understanding Provider Strategies in a Dynamic Strategic Action Field, Policy and Politics, 10.1332/030557314X14079275800414.
  21. Toerien, Merran., Sainsbury, Roy., Drew, Paul., & Irvine, Annie., (2012). Putting Personalisation into Practice: Work Focused Interviews in Jobcentre Plus, Journal of Social Policy, 42 (2),309 - 327.
  22. Vando, Borghi,. & van Berkel Rik (2007). Individualised Service Provision in an Era of Activation and New Governance, International Journal of Sociology and Social Policy, 27 (9/10).
  23. Zimmermann, Katharina., Aurichb, Patrizia., Grazianoc, Paolo R., & Fuertes, Vanesa (2014). Local Worlds of Marketization – Employment Policies in Germany, Italy and the UK Compared, Social Policy & Administration,48(2).
  24. Zimmermann, Katharina., Aurich, Patrizia., Graziano, Paolo R., & Fuertes, Vanesa (2016, Mart 20). Marketization and Activation Policies Germany, Italy and the United Kingdom Compared. http://researchrepository.napier.ac.uk/7469/ adresinden ulaşılmıştır.
  25. Zimmermann, Katharina., & Fuertes, Venesa (2014). Employment Policy Implementation Mechanisms in the European Union, The United Kingdom and Germany, Employment Policy Department, Employment Working Paper, No. 160.
  26. Berkel, Rik Van., & Vando, Borghi (2008), Introduction: The Governance of Activation Social Policy and Society, 7(3).