When analyzing „old” and „new” social risks many authors claim countries differ in terms of efficiency in addressing those risks. Scandinavian countries (representing social democratic model according to Gosta Esping Andersen typology) are generally considered, more than others, efficient in this respect. However they still face social risks and their social institutions are not perfect. To this end new concept of “new new” social risks has been introduced. Finland is one example of countries trying to address those risks. Among others, new technics of distribution of social benefits in this country may be considered as creating “new new” social risks.
This article is an introduction to the concept of the „new social risks”. Whereas this concept is well known in the Western countries debate it is almost absent in discussions on social policy in transition countries like Poland. “New social risks” were identified after the so called welfare state crisis following economic crisis of the mid 70-ties. While the old social risks did not diminish the new ones emerged. The developments that led to this emergence are presented in the article as well as the new paradigm of social policy that address the new social risks. Some examples of social policy in the context of new social risks are also shown.
Housing wealth has been viewed as the main route to asset-based welfare. Accumulated wealth is supposed to provide more in the way of welfare services than just shelter, services such as a net pension and the financing of long-term care. This paper challenges this view and highlights the new risks attached to acquiring and managing housing wealth. Although assets may provide a nest egg in old age, earlier on in the life cycle they leave mortgagers disproportionately exposed to financial and housing market risks and amplify susceptibility to existing social risks such as unemployment or sickness. In contrast to social insurance schemes, assets individualise social risks and leave it to the individual to smooth housing consumption over their life. This lack of risk pooling constitutes a new and hidden social risk that should be considered in the discussion around homeownership.
The purpose of this study was to identify the main ways to provide social assistance to restore the resource potential of victims of emergencies (military conflicts, the effects of the COVID-19 pandemic, etc.), as well as to highlight the features of training future specialists in the social sphere to deal with new social risks. The study used methods of scientific analysis and generalization, as well as comparing the experience of domestic and foreign researchers and social practitioners who worked with vulnerable contingents in overcoming the consequences of emergencies. The focus is on generalizing the results of the experience of training future specialists in the social sphere to work within an environment of new social risks. Based on the conducted research, it was concluded that for the professional activity of social sector specialists in resource provision in the conditions of new social risks, it is important to direct social assistance to restore the physical, mental and social health of people at all six levels of health, taking into account the peculiarities of their age, social status, as well as ethnic features and the context of the social problem. The main directions of relevant social work with victims of emergency situations have been defined: work on strengthening the family’s potential, establishment of useful social connections in a new environment, the use of art therapy practices to normalize the psychosomatic state of clients, the use of ethnocultural means to increase the possibilities of social adaptation in new conditions. Very important in the preparation of future specialists for the relevant work is the practice-oriented training on the basis of specialized social institutions working with victims in emergency situations, as well as mastering special techniques of self-development and professional self-improvement to increase one’s own resource potential.
Celem opracowania jest przedstawienie nowego paradygmatu inwestycji socjalnych w polityce społecznej w kontekście perspektywy cyklu życia. Nowy paradygmat zmienia, w porównaniu z „paradygmatem kompensacji”, podejście do poszczególnych etapów cyklu życia; wskazuje, że dla skuteczności polityki społecznej kluczowe znaczenie ma to, w jakim momencie życia są podejmowane jej działania, i że powinna ona być nastawiona na osią- ganie celów ex post. Za egzemplifikację jego zastosowania posłużą wybrane zmiany polityki społecznej wobec rodziny i dzieci oraz wobec osób starszych w Polsce — przedstawione na tle wybra- nego kraju (Szwecji) oraz dokumentów Unii Europejskiej. W ramach tego opracowania przeprowadzono analizę wybranych instytucji polityki społecznej, a także dokumentów programowych oraz danych statystycznych.
Pod koniec XX w. dokonały się radykalne zmiany zarówno w sferze stosunków międzynarodowych, jak i obszarze rozwoju społecznego, które stały się źródłem wyzwań dla bezpieczeństwa politycznego, militarnego, ekonomicznego i społecznego. Co więcej, zachodzące obecnie przemiany społeczno-ekonomiczne wywołane funkcjonowaniem wolnego rynku dają realne podstawy do zakwestionowania tezy, że demokracja przedstawicielska jest przyszłością świata nawet w odniesieniu do demokratycznych państw wysokorozwiniętych. Dodatkowo obnażyły one słabość nieprzystających do obecnych warunków rozwiązań instytucjonalnych mających zapewnić ład i rozwój społeczny.
EN
This article analyzes the rise and diffusion of the radical changes in the fields of international relations and social security that pose a challenge for capitalist representative democracy. This concept reflects the simple idea that the era characterized by strong global economic influences, worldwide aging population, longevity and longer life expectancy, changing labor markets, migration, technological and communications developments, mobility and transportation gives no reason to believe in representative democracy as the future of the world. This article suggests a new point of view on the discussion of the factors that mostly influence social order, social security, labor markets and democracy.
JavaScript is turned off in your web browser. Turn it on to take full advantage of this site, then refresh the page.