Regulating Inflow or Outflow: A Comparison of the Work Capability Assessments in the UK and Norway

Abstract

In the era of activation policies, several OECD countries have introduced work capability assessments to measure the employability of sick and disabled people. In essence, such assessments concern how sick and disabled people get access to incapacity benefits and services. This paper investigates how the Work Capability Assessment (WCA) is designed and implemented within the different institutional contexts of the UK and Norway. The paper concludes that introducing WCAs represents a challenge to the bureaucratic and legal models of administrative justice by emphasising a managerial model (in the UK) and a professional model (in Norway). In the UK, the WCA tool seems to be primarily aimed at reducing theinflowof new recipients, while in Norway it seeks to increase theoutflowof recipients. Consequently, the paper argues that the introduction of the WCAs as activation policy instruments has intensified the country-specific characteristics within which the instruments are implemented.

Assessing work disability for social security benefits: international models for the direct assessment of work capacity

“…It is worth noting that our typology partly builds on previous reviews by de Boer [3] divided impairment-and functioning-based assessments (above) from rehabilitation-based assessments, which overlaps with our model of "demonstrated assessment" (below)and they themselves based this partly on Deborah Stone's classic historical analysis. Gjersøe [25] contrasts the discretionary approach of Norwegian assessors with the standardised approach of British assessors. Both Mabbett et al [10] and Wright & de Boer [5] further discuss the possibility of linking functional capacity profiles to labour market requirements (discussed below under "structured assessment"), although they go into little detail.…”

“…This is partly because the claimants' relationship with the assessor may be one of distrust when being evaluated for benefits (the assessors' goal being to appropriately restrict access) but more trusting when their rehabilitation needs are being evaluated. It is also because there are pressures for benefit eligibility to be standardised, but for rehabilitation assessment to be personalised [25]. Yet even if these tensions can be overcomewhich they seem to have been in Denmarkthere is only a partial overlap in the information about work capacity that is required.…”

Reclaiming Responsibility: The Case of Welfare-to-Work Policy

“…Work capability assessments aim to determine the claimant's disability and fitness for work. A recent comparison of the implementation of work capability assessments in the UK and Norway brought out some key considerations (Gjersøe, 2016). It is argued that the UK's mode of conducting assessments adheres to a 'managerial logic'.…”

Getting Sick and Disabled People off Temporary Benefit Receipt: Strategies and Dilemmas in the Welfare State’s Frontline

“…Studies suggest that frontline workers tend to adapt to activation policies, and that this is often done in a 'positive' way in the sense that they develop their own interpretations and reasoning according to the new activation norms (Møller and Stone 2013;van der Aa and van Berkel 2015). Within the Norwegian context, the WCA and one-stop shops are presented by policymakers as a way of increasing staff autonomy (Gjersøe 2016;Ministry of Labour and Social Inclusion 2006). For instance, the WCA is less standardized and more open to the discretion of street-level bureaucrats compared with similar assessment instruments in other countries (Baumberg et al 2015;Gjersøe 2016).…”

“…Within the Norwegian context, the WCA and one-stop shops are presented by policymakers as a way of increasing staff autonomy (Gjersøe 2016;Ministry of Labour and Social Inclusion 2006). For instance, the WCA is less standardized and more open to the discretion of street-level bureaucrats compared with similar assessment instruments in other countries (Baumberg et al 2015;Gjersøe 2016).…”