The European Semester and EU Social Policy

Abstract

Europe 2020 and the European Semester signal a major change of direction in EU social policy with new governance arrangements, policy orientations and politics. This paper analyses 290 Country Specific Recommendations and 29 interviews to answer two questions: 1) What type of social policy is being advanced by the EU at present? 2) How are EU social actors able to advance EU social policy under current conditions? It argues that the degree of progress in EU social policy in the European Semester (2011–15) has been conditional and contingent. EU social policy is more oriented to supporting market development than it is to correcting for market failures. We explain these developments by a combination of factors including the strong agency exerted by some social actors in a context of constraint, the moderation of expectations and the adoption of strategic practices by key actors, and political divisions among the Member States.

New Tensions over Social Europe? The European Pillar of Social Rights and the Debate within the European Parliament

“…'market-correcting' measures, mainly rests on the contingent political willingness to act in this direction (see also Copeland and Daly, 2018).…”

“…This article represents, therefore, a first contribution to filling the gap in empirical research on the Social Pillar. 3 Moreover, by investigating the EPSR from the perspective of the European Parliament's role, it adds insights to the literature on EU social policy which usually focuses on the European Commission and the Council (Copeland and Daly, 2018;Crespy and Menz, 2015;Mailand, 2010;Nedergaard, 2007;Wendon, 1998).…”

European Social Policy: Financial Pressure, Societal Differences, and Multi‐level Policy‐Making in Comparative Perspective

“…欧洲社会政策至少可以在两个层面上进行诠释: 第一层面, 欧盟社会政策和为提高由欧盟驱动的社会政策所做的共同努力 (Copeland & Daly, );第二层面,欧盟国家区分——但也可能转移或扩散——各国在社会政策制定上的战略, 在一定程度上应对各自福利状态的多层次结构 (Bonoli, Natili & Trein, )。近期出版的《欧洲社会政策手册》(Kennett & Lendvai‐Bainton, )强调了欧洲社会政策在这两个层面上的时效性, 手册特别聚焦于社会政策的理论视角、比较视角、和未来视角。此外, 《欧洲社会政策分析网络》(European Network for Social Policy Analysis,ESPAnet)提出了一条学科轨迹, 用于对社会政策领域发展进行智力讨论和反思。本期《欧洲政策分析》( European Policy Analysis , EPA )收录了研究不同社会政策方面的文章, 其中一些源自于2017年由José Pereirinha共同组织的ESPAnet会议。José Pereirinha是 EPA 编委会成员, 同时也是本期的客座联合编辑。源自该会议的好几篇投稿文章中, 有3篇最终通过了评审过程, 收录入此次特刊。除去这些文章, EPA 在过去几个月里收到越来越多的关于社会政策的投稿, 它们都在很大程度上与该领域的最新知识有关。在撰写这篇社论时, 特刊编辑将本期文章联系在一起, 并将其置于欧洲社会政策研究的国际论述之中。…”

“…欧洲社会政策至少可以在两个层面上进行诠释: 第一层面, 欧盟社会政策和为提 高由欧盟驱动的社会政策所做的共同努力 (Copeland & Daly, 2018);第二层面,欧盟 国家区分--但也可能转移或扩散--各国在社会政策制定上的战略, 在一定程度上 应对各自福利状态的多层次结构 (Bonoli, Natili & Trein, 2018 Ongaro, Ferr e & Fattore, 2015;Bandelow et al 2017 Se puede hablar de pol ıtica social europea en al menos a dos dimensiones: europea en el sentido de pol ıtica social de la UE y lucha asociada para avanzar en la pol ıtica social impulsada por la UE (Copeland y Daly 2018), y europea con respecto a estrategias nacionales separadas, pero posiblemente transferidas y difundidas, para la formulaci on de pol ıticas sociales, en parte para hacer frente a las estructuras de m ultiples niveles de sus respectivos estados de bienestar (Bonoli, Natili y Trein 2018). El recientemente publicado Manual de Pol ıtica Social Europea (Kennett y Lendvai-Bainton 2017) enfatiza la actualidad de la pol ıtica social europea en ambas dimensiones, con un enfoque adicional en las perspectivas te oricas, comparativas y futuras de la pol ıtica social.…”

“…European social policy can be referred to on at least two dimensions: European in the sense of EU social policy and associated striving toward advancing EU‐driven social policy (Copeland & Daly, ), and European with regard to separate—but possibly transferred and diffused—national strategies in social policy‐making, partly coping with the multi‐tiered structures of their respective welfare states (Bonoli, Natili & Trein, ). The recently published Handbook of European Social Policy (Kennett & Lendvai‐Bainton, ) emphasizes the topicality of European social policy on both dimensions, with an additional focus on theoretical, comparative, and future perspectives of social policy.…”