臺灣人文及社會科學引文索引資料庫系統

:::

詳目顯示

回上一頁
第 1 筆 / 總合 1 筆   第一頁 上一頁 下一頁 最後一頁
/1頁
題名：工作、照顧與依賴：對福利國家與其當代危機的再省思
作者：洪惠芬 引用關係
作者(外文)：Huifen Hung
校院名稱：國立中正大學
系所名稱：社會福利所
指導教授：張震東
學位類別：博士
出版日期：2005
主題關鍵詞：工作福利；福利國家；福利依賴；新保守主義；照顧；welfare state；welfare dependency；neo-conservatism；workfare；care giving.
原始連結：連回原系統網址new window
相關次數：
  • 被引用次數被引用次數:期刊(5) 博士論文(1) 專書(0) 專書論文(0)
  • 排除自我引用排除自我引用:5
  • 共同引用共同引用:0
  • 點閱點閱:89
「福利國家」是戰後歐美社會普遍採用的社會安排形式。這套社會安排形式最重要的任務是去回應人們的生計困境，確保人們無論在什麼樣情況，生計安全都能獲得基本程度的保障。不過，這項任務的完成並不是只建立在公領域中那套由人們透過稅與保費的繳納而支撐起的福利供給體系的基礎之上。另一個同樣重要的基礎還包括：家庭領域內部男性與女性家庭成員之間對「直接依賴者」扶養與照顧任務的分工合作。
無論是公領域的福利供給體系、或是家庭內部「男性養家，女性照顧」的性別分工安排，人們對生計責任的分配方式都不純粹是個人主義的分配方式：也就是說，一個人的基本生計維持並不單單是他自身的責任，它同時也是其他成員的責任。在福利供給體系當中，一個人的基本生計維持透過稅與保費的形式而被移轉其他跟這個人不相干的「陌生人」身上。在家庭內的性別分工安排當中，一個人的基本生計維持則透過養家與照顧任務的履行、以及兩項任務間的分工合作而被移轉到那些同這個人存有血緣或親屬關係的「家庭成員」身上。我們認為，這種生計責任的移轉必定牽涉到「責任分配公平性」的問題。想想看。如果一個人的基本生計維持不完全是自己的責任，透過家庭成員間養家與照顧任務的分工、及福利供給體系，它還是家人、與陌生人的責任，那麼接下來的問題將是：整個社會要如何分配個體、家人與其他陌生人對個體本身的生計責任？家庭成員完全依照生物上的性別來分派對直接依賴者的扶養與照顧任務，這樣的分派合理嗎？此外，不管是公領域中稅與保費的繳納、或是家庭領域內養家與照顧任務的承擔，任何生計責任的履行都需要成本。整個社會該讓被分派責任的人獨力擔負這些成本嗎？如果不是，其他社會成員又該用什麼樣的方式來分擔這些成本，才符合公義？
我們認為福利國家在處理這些關乎「責任分配公平性」的問題時，有它令人激賞的地方，也有它令人無法茍同之處。就某種程度來說，新保守主義者的福利依賴論述就是一套針對「責任分配公平性」的問題對福利國家進行批判的論述。不過，福利依賴論述在檢視福利國家所涉及的責任分配公平性問題時，只著重福利供給體系當中福利領受者與納稅人間生計責任重分配的問題，而忽略家庭領域內男性家庭成員與女性家庭成員之間關於養家與照顧任務分工的公平性問題。這樣的忽略，讓新保守主義者最後針對福利依賴問題而提出的「工作福利」解方，重蹈了福利國家貶抑照顧任務、疏於回應照顧任務承擔者困境的覆轍。
鑑於此，本文試著從「有酬工作者」、「照顧者」與「直接依賴者」這三個構成家庭依賴關係的角色，依序檢視人們在家庭領域內部如何透過養家與照顧任務的分工合作來完成對直接依賴者的生計責任，並分析這套任務分工方式對福利國家的意涵。這樣的檢視與分析有助於我們對福利國家的運作方式、與這套運作方式的潛在困境，作更深刻的瞭解。
“Welfare state” is the social arrangement that has been taken by many western societies since postwar. Such social arrangement’s main task is to respond people’s difficulty of subsistence, and to make sure that people will always be protected from any threats to their subsistence. However, the way that the social arrangement fulfills this task is not only based upon the welfare benefit system, whose financial source comes from people’s contribution as tax and insurance, but also upon the labor division between male members as breadwinners and female members as caregivers for the “primary dependent” members within the family sphere.
Both in the welfare benefit system, and the sexual division of labor between “male breadwinners and female caregivers”, people perform their responsibilities for subsistence not in the pure individualist form: that is, not only the individual takes the responsibilities for his own subsistence; the other social members also share the responsibilities for it. Under the welfare benefit system, the “strangers” share the responsibilities for individual’s subsistence, through playing the role of taxpayer, or insurance contributor. In the sexual division of labor within the family sphere, the “family members” share the responsibilities for individual’s subsistence, by performing the tasks of breadwinning and care giving, as well as the cooperation between the two tasks. We believe that the sharing of the responsibilities for individual’s subsistence should be involved in the problems of “ the justice of responsibility sharing”. Come to think of it. If the individual doesn’t need to take all the responsibilities for his own subsistence, and if his family members as the breadwinner, or the caregiver, and the strangers as the taxpayers, or the insurance contributors also share the responsibilities for it, all the persons involved will face the problems such as: How should the whole society assign the responsibilities for individual’s subsistence among the individual, his family members and the strangers? How is about the fact that the family members assign the tasks of breadwinning and care giving according to the biological sex? Besides, both in the welfare benefit system, and the labor division between breadwinner and caregiver within the family sphere, it may cost much to fulfill the assigned responsibilities for individual’s subsistence. Should the whole society let the person assigned to the responsibilities to pay the cost alone? If not, how should the other social members share the cost justly?
The way that welfare state deals with the problems about “the justice of responsibility sharing” includes the parts that we appreciate, and also the ones that we disagree with. To some extent, neo-conservatives’ discourse on welfare dependency is the critique about welfare state in terms of the problem of “the justice of responsibility sharing”. Nevertheless, when their discourse on welfare dependency examines such problems implicated in welfare state, it pays all the attentions to the sharing of the responsibilities for individual’s subsistence between welfare beneficiaries and taxpayers, and ignores the problems about the justice of the labor division between breadwinner and caregiver. Such ignorance traps neo-conservatives’ “workfare” solution for welfare dependency phenomenon into the difficulties that welfare state has ever confronted: the devaluation of the task of care giving, and the failure to respond the vulnerability of people assigned to this task.
Thus, by means of “paid worker”, “caregiver,” and “primary dependent”, all the three social roles, which form the dependency relation within the family sphere, we try to examine the arrangement in which the family members perform the assigned responsibilities for the primary dependent’s subsistence through the labor division and the cooperation between breadwinner and caregiver, and also attempt to analyze such arrangement’s implication for welfare state. By the examination and analysis, we will capture more knowledge about how welfare state operates, and the possible limitations of its operation.
林志鴻與呂建德
2001 〈全球化與社會福利〉，收於《第二現代：風險社會的出路？》，顧忠華編。台北：巨流。
呂建德
2001 〈從福利國家到競爭式國家：全球化與福利國家的危機〉，《台灣社會學》2: 263-313。
曾薔霓
2003 〈以家庭中心的就地照顧政策成本：長期照顧費用動態推估之研究〉，國立中正大學社會福利研究所博士論文。
Abramovitz, M.
1996 Under Attack, Fighting Back: Women and Welfare in the United States. New York: Monthly Review Press.
Arneson, R. J.
1990 “Is Work Special? Justice and the Distribution of Employment,” The American Political Science Review 84(4): 1127-1147.
Atkinson, A. B.
1996 “The Case for a Participation Income,” Political Quarterly 67(1): 67-70.
Barry, N.
1987 The New Right. London, New York and Sydney: Croom Helm.
1999 Welfare, 2nd edition. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.
Baumol, W. J.
1967 “Macroeconomics of Unbalanced Growth: the Anatomy of Urban Crisis,” The American Economic Rewiew 57(3): 415-425.
Benhabib, S.
1987 “The Generalized and the Concrete Other: The Kohlberg-Gilligan Controversy and Feminist Theory.” in S. Behabib and D. Cornell (ed.), Feminism as Critique: Essays on the Politics of Gender in Late-Capitalist Society. Cambridge: Polity Press.
Benner, M. and T. B. Vad
2000 “Sweden and Denmark: Defending the Welfare State,” in F. Sharpf and V. A. Schmidt (eds.), Welfare and Work in the Open Economy Vol. II: Diverse Responses to Common Challenges. New York: Oxford University.
Benston, M.
1969 “The Political Economy of Women’s Liberation,” Monthly Review 21(4): 13-27.
Bhalla, A. S. and F. Lapeyre
2004 Poverty and Exclusion in a Global World, 2nd edition. New York: Macmillan.
Burrows, R. and B. Loader eds.
1994 Towards a Post-Fordist Welfare State?. London and New York: Routledge.
Carlson, A.
1987 “Facing Realities,” The Public Interest 89: 33-35.
Commissions of European Communities
1994 European Social Policy: a Way forward for the Union(A White Paper). Brussels: Commissions of European Commuinities.
Ellwood, D. T. and M. J. Bane
1994 “Understatnding Welfare Dynamics,” in Bane, M. J. and D. T. Ellwood, Welfare Realities: from Rhetoric to Reform. London: Harvard University Press.
Elster, J.
1988 “Is There (or Should There Be) a Right to Work?,” in Democracy and the Welfare State, A. Gutmann (ed.). New Jersey: Princeton University Press.
Frye, M.
1983 The Politics of Reality. Trumansburg, New York: The Crossing Press.
Esping-Anderson, G.
1985 “Government Responses to Budget Scarcity: Denmark,” Political Studies Journal 13(2): 534-546.
1990 The Three Worlds of Welfare Capitalism. Cambridge: Polity Press.
1999 Social Foundations of Postindustrial Economics. New York: Oxford University Press.
2000 “Multi-dimensional Decommodification: a Reply to Graham Room,” Policy and Politics 28(3): 353-359.
Dasgupta, P.
1993 An Inquiry into Well-being and Destitution. Oxford: Clarendon Press.
Duncan, G. J., M. S. Hill and S. D. Hoffman
1988 “Welfare Dependence within and across Generations,” Science 239: 4839: 467-471.
Fraser, N.
1993 “Clintonism, Welfare, and the Antisocial Wage: the Emergence of a Neoliberal Political Imaginary,” Rethinking Marxism 6(1): 9-23.
1997 “After the Family Wage: a Postindustrial Thought Experiment,” in Justice Interruptus: Critical Reflections on the “Postsocialist” Conception. New York and London: Routledge.
Genschel, P.
2001 “Globalization, Tax Competition, and the Fisical Viability of the Welfare State,” MPIG Working Paper 01/1.
Gilder, G.
1987 “The Collapse of the American Family,” The Public Interest 89: 20-25.
1993 Wealth and Poverty, 2nd edition. San Francisco, California: Institute for Contemporary Studies.
Glenn, E. N.
2000 “Creating a caring society,” Contemporary Sociology 29(1):84-94
Gough, I.
1979 The Political Economy of the Welfare State. London: Macmillan Education.
Goodin, R.
1985 Protecting the Vulnerable: a Reanalysis of Our Social Responsibilities. Chicago and London: the University of Chicago Press.
1998 “Social Welfare as a Collective Social Responsibility,” in D. Schmidtz and R. E. Goodin, Social Welfare and Individual Responsibility. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press
2001 “Work and Welfare: towards a Post-productivist Welfare Regime,” British Journal of Political Science 31: 13-39.
2002 “Structures of Mutual Obligation”, Journal of Social Policy 31(4): 579-596.
Goodin, R. E., B. Heady, R. Muffels and H. Driven
1999 The Real World of Welfare Capitalism. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Gordon, L.
1988 “What Does Welfare Regulate?,” Social Research 55(4): 609-630.
Gordon, S.
1991 The History and Philosophy of Social Science. London and New York: Routledge.
Granovetter, M.
1985 “Economic Action and Social Structure: the Problem of Embededness,” American Journal of Sociology 91:481-510.
Hooten, A.
2002 “From Welfare Recipient to Childcare Worker: Balancing Work and Family under TANF,” Texas Journal of Women and the Law 12(1): 121-165.
Jessop, B.
1993 “Towards a Schumpeterian Workfare State? Preliminary Remarks on Post-Fordist Political Economy,” Studies in Political Economy 40: 7-39.
1999 “The Changing Governance of Welfare: Recent Trends in its Primary Functions, Scale, and Modes of Goordination,” Social Policy and Administration 33(4): 348-359.
Katz, M. B.
1989 The Undeserving Poor: from the War on Poverty to the War on Welfare. New York: Pantheon Books.
Katzenstein, P. J.
1985 Small States in World Markets: Industrial Policy in Europe. Ithaca and London: Cornell University Press.
Kaus, M.
1986 “The Work Ethic State: the Only Way to Break the Culture of Poverty,” The New Republic 195(1): 22-33.
Kittay, E. F.
1995 “Taking Dependency Seriously: the Family and Medical Leave Act Considered in Light of the Social Organization of Dependency Work and Gender Equality,” Hypatia 10(1): 8-29.
1999 Love’s Labor: Essays on Women, Equality, and Dependency. New York and London: Routledge.
2001 “A Feminist Public Ethic of Care Meets the New Communitarian Family Policy,” Ethics 111: 523-547.
Klein, R.
1999[1984] 〈愛德恩．恰維克〉，見P. Barker(編)，洪惠芬、簡守邦(譯)，《福利國家的創建者：十六個英國社會改革先驅的故事》，頁13-28。台北：唐山出版社。
Kleinig, J.
1976 “Good Samaritanism,” Philosophy and Public Affairs 5(4): 382-407.
Kosters, M.
1996 “Looking for Jobs in All the Wrong Places,” The Public Interest 125: 125-131.
Land , H.
1999 “Families and the Law,” in J. Muncie, M. Wetherell, M. Langan, R. Dallos, and A. Cochrane (eds.), Understanding the Family. London, Thousand Oaks, and New Delhi: Sage Publications.
MacIntyre, A.
1984 After Virtue, 2nd edition. Notre Dame, Indiana: University of Notre Dame University.
Mead, L.
1986 Beyond Entitlement: the Social Obligations of Citizenship. New York: the Free Press.
1988 “The Hidden Jobs Debate,” The Public Interest 91: 40-58.
1991 “The New Politics of the New Poverty,” The Public Interest 103: 3-20.
1998 “Telling the Poor What to Do,” The Public Interest 132: 97-112.
Miller, K. E.
1991 Denmark: A Troubled Welfare State. Boulder, San Francisco and Oxford: Westview Press.
Murray, C.
1984 Losing Ground: American Social Policy, 1950-1980. New York: Basic Books.
1990 The Emerging British Underclass. London: IEA.
1995 “The Partial Restoration of Traditional Society,” The Public Interest 121: 122-134.
Novak, M. et al
1987 The New Consensus on Family and Welfare. Milwaukee, Wisconsin: Marquette University.
Nussbaum, M. C.
2000 “The Future of Feminist Liberalism,” Proceedings and Addresses of American Philosophical Association 74: 47-79.
O’Connor, J.
1973 The Fiscal Crisis of the State. New York: St. Martin’s Press.
OECD(Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development)
1992 OECD Economic Outlook: Historical Statistics 1960-1990. Paris: OECD.
2003 “Benefits and Employment, Friend or Foe?: Interactions between Passive and Active Social Programmes,” in OECD Employment Outlook: 2003. Paris: OECD.
Offe, C.
1984 Contradictions of the Welfare State. London: Hutchinson.
1987 “Democracy against the Welfare State?: Structural Foundations of Neoconservative Political Opportunities,” Political Theory 15(4): 501-537.
van Oorschot, W. & K. Boos
1999 Disability Policies in Europe: The Netherlands. Paper Written for the Third Workshop of the VOCREHAB Network on Vocational Rehabilitation of Unemployed Disabled People [On-line]. http://greywww.kub.nl:2080/greyfiles/worc/1999/doc/18.pdf
Orloff, A.
1993 “Gender and the Social Rights of Citizenship,” American Sociological Review 58: 303-328.
Parrenas, R. S.
2001 Servants of Globalization: Women, Migration and Domestic Work. Stanford, California: Stanford University Press.
Paugam
1996 “Poverty and Social Disqualification: A Comparative Analysis of Cumulative Social Disadvantage in Europe,” Journal of European Social Policy 6(4): 287-303.
Peck, J.
2001 Workfare States. New York and London: the Guilford Press.
Piachaud, D.
1982 “Patterns of Income and Expenditure within Families,” Journal of Social Policy 2(4): 469-482.
2002 “ Capital and the Determinants of Poverty and Social Exclusion,” Centre for Analysis of Social Exclusion Discussion Paper[On-line].
http://sticerd.lse.ac.uk/dps/case/cp/CASEpaper60.pdf
Piven, F. F.
1998 “Welfare and Work,” in G. Mink (ed.), Whose Welfare?. Ithaca and London: Cornell University Press.
Room, G.
2000 “Commodification and Decommodification: a Developmental Critique,” Policy and Politics 28(3): 331-351.
Rawls, J.
1993 Political Liberalism. New York: Columbia University Press.
Sainsbury, D.
1996 Gender, Equality, and Welfare States. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Schmidtz, D.
1998 “Taking Responsibility, “ in D. Schmidtz and R. E. Goodin, Social Welfare and Individual Responsibility. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Schulte, B.
2002 “Social Long-term Care Insurance Act in Germany,” Journal of Population and Social Security: Social Security Study 1(2): S11-S23.
Sen, A.
1985 “Well-bing, Agency and Freedom,” Journal of Philosophy 82: 195-202.
1990 “Gender and Cooperative Conflicts,” in I. Tinker (ed.), Persistent Inequalities: Women and World Development. New York and Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Shue, H.
1981 “Exporting Hazards,” in P. G. Brown and H. Shue (eds.), Boundaries: National Autonomy and Its Limits. Totowa, N. J.: Rowman & Littlefield.
Silvers, A.
1998 “Formal Justice,” in A. Silvers, D. Wasserman, and M. B. Mahowald, Dsiability, Difference, Discrimination: Perspectives on Justice in Bioethics and Public Policy. Lonahm, Boulder, New York and Oxford: Rowman and Littlefield Publishers.
Simon, H. A.
1976 Administrative Behavior: a Study of Decision-making Process in Administrative Organization, 3rd edition with new introduction. New York: the Free Press.
Singleman, J.
1978 The Transformation of Industry: from Agriculture to Service Employment. Beverly Hills: Sage.
SSA(Social Security Administration)
2002 Social Security Programs throughout the World- Europe, 2002. http://www.ssa.gov.
Stone, D.
1984 The Disabled State. London and Hampshire: Macmillan.
Swank, D.
1998 “Funding the Welfare State: Globalization and the Taxation of Business in Advanced Market Economies,” Political Studies 64: 671-692.
Tanner, M.
1994 “Ending Welfare as We Know It,” Policy Analysis 212. Washington, DC: Cato Institute[On-line].http://www.cato.org
Tong, R.
1989 [1996] 《女性主義思潮》，刁筱華譯，台北：遠流。
Tronto, J. C.
1993 Moral Boundaries: A Political Argument for an Ethic of Care. London and New York: Routledge.
Visser, J.
2002 “The First Part-time Economy in the World: a Model to Be Followed?,” Journal of European Social Policy 12(1): 23-42.
Wasserman, D.
1998 “Distributive Justice,” in A. Silvers, D. Wasserman, and M. B. Mahowald, Dsiability, Difference, Discrimination: Perspectives on Justice in Bioethics and Public Policy. Lonahm, Boulder, New York and Oxford: Rowman and Littlefield Publishers.
2001 “Philosophical Issues in the Definition and Social Response to Disability,” in G. L. Albrecht, K. D. Seelman and M. Bury (eds.), Handbook of Disability Studies. Thousand Oaks, London and New Delhi: Sage Publications.
Weber, M.
1920[1987] 《新教倫理與資本主義精神》，于曉與陳維綱等(譯)。北京：三聯書店。
Wiederholt, M, C. Bendixen, L. Dybkjær and I. S. Bonfils eds.
2002 Danish Disability Policy[On-line].
http://www.clh.dk/pjecer/danskhandicappolitik/engnetversion.htm
Wilson, W. J.
1987 The Truly Disadvantaged: the Inner City, the Underclass and Public Policy. Chicago and London: the University of Chicago Press.
1996 When Work Disappears : The World of the New Urban Poor. New York: Alfred A. Knof. Inc.
Wrong, D.
1961 “The Oversocialized Conception of Man in Modern Sociology,” American Sociological Review 26(2): 183-193.
Zola, I. K.
1982 Missing Pieces: a Chronicle of Living with a Disability. Philadelphia: Temple University Press.
Zollner, D.
1982 “Germany,” in P. A. Kohler and H. F. Zacher (eds.), The Evolution of Social Insurance: 1881-1981. New York: St Martin’s Press.
 
 
 
 
第一頁 上一頁 下一頁 最後一頁 top
:::
無相關著作
 
QR Code
QRCODE

臺灣人文及社會科學引文索引資料庫

目前上線人數：1161（臺灣：1136，外國：25） ／ 本年度總使用人次：2133566 ／ 訪客人次（自102年09月）：67935728
國家圖書館著作權聲明 Copyright © 2013 All rights reserved.
本館地址: 100201臺北市中山南路20號． 本館地圖及交通資訊．
總機：(02)23619132．最佳瀏覽解析度為1024x768以上