Revisioning comparative welfare state studies: An 'indigenous' dimension

Although welfare states have been categorised according to a wide but never conclusive range of dimensions, little attention has been paid to the specific forms of recognitive justice that influence the development of the welfare state, particularly in countries where internally colonised indigenous...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Published in:Policy Studies
Main Author: Humpage, LV
Format: Article in Journal/Newspaper
Language:unknown
Published: Routledge 2010
Subjects:
Online Access:http://hdl.handle.net/2292/12230
https://doi.org/10.1080/01442872.2010.495902
id ftunivauckland:oai:researchspace.auckland.ac.nz:2292/12230
record_format openpolar
spelling ftunivauckland:oai:researchspace.auckland.ac.nz:2292/12230 2023-05-15T18:12:27+02:00 Revisioning comparative welfare state studies: An 'indigenous' dimension Humpage, LV 2010 http://hdl.handle.net/2292/12230 https://doi.org/10.1080/01442872.2010.495902 unknown Routledge Policy Studies Items in ResearchSpace are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated. Previously published items are made available in accordance with the copyright policy of the publisher. Details obtained from http://www.sherpa.ac.uk/romeo/issn/0144-2872/ https://researchspace.auckland.ac.nz/docs/uoa-docs/rights.htm Copyright: Routledge http://purl.org/eprint/accessRights/RestrictedAccess http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/01442872.2010.495902 Journal Article 2010 ftunivauckland https://doi.org/10.1080/01442872.2010.495902 2013-12-07T09:26:58Z Although welfare states have been categorised according to a wide but never conclusive range of dimensions, little attention has been paid to the specific forms of recognitive justice that influence the development of the welfare state, particularly in countries where internally colonised indigenous peoples not only constitute a disproportionate number of welfare recipients, but also hold additional rights to those associated with citizenship. Socio-economic disparities between indigenous and non-indigenous peoples are considerable in 'liberal' welfare states where significant recognition of indigenous rights has been made and where indigenous peoples now play a significant role in delivering social provision. Such disparities are narrower in the 'social democratic' welfare states, such as Norway, Sweden and Finland (where Sami people live), which have focused largely on the application of more universalistic social rights but have provided little space for indigenous-focused social provision. Uncertainty thus remains about the best mix of recognition and redistribution needed to produce good outcomes for indigenous peoples in terms of both welfare and greater indigenous autonomy and control. Drawing on the cases of New Zealand and Australia, this article proposes a framework for examining different welfare states that aims to shed some light on this critical issue. Article in Journal/Newspaper sami University of Auckland Research Repository - ResearchSpace New Zealand Norway Policy Studies 31 5 539 557
institution Open Polar
collection University of Auckland Research Repository - ResearchSpace
op_collection_id ftunivauckland
language unknown
description Although welfare states have been categorised according to a wide but never conclusive range of dimensions, little attention has been paid to the specific forms of recognitive justice that influence the development of the welfare state, particularly in countries where internally colonised indigenous peoples not only constitute a disproportionate number of welfare recipients, but also hold additional rights to those associated with citizenship. Socio-economic disparities between indigenous and non-indigenous peoples are considerable in 'liberal' welfare states where significant recognition of indigenous rights has been made and where indigenous peoples now play a significant role in delivering social provision. Such disparities are narrower in the 'social democratic' welfare states, such as Norway, Sweden and Finland (where Sami people live), which have focused largely on the application of more universalistic social rights but have provided little space for indigenous-focused social provision. Uncertainty thus remains about the best mix of recognition and redistribution needed to produce good outcomes for indigenous peoples in terms of both welfare and greater indigenous autonomy and control. Drawing on the cases of New Zealand and Australia, this article proposes a framework for examining different welfare states that aims to shed some light on this critical issue.
format Article in Journal/Newspaper
author Humpage, LV
spellingShingle Humpage, LV
Revisioning comparative welfare state studies: An 'indigenous' dimension
author_facet Humpage, LV
author_sort Humpage, LV
title Revisioning comparative welfare state studies: An 'indigenous' dimension
title_short Revisioning comparative welfare state studies: An 'indigenous' dimension
title_full Revisioning comparative welfare state studies: An 'indigenous' dimension
title_fullStr Revisioning comparative welfare state studies: An 'indigenous' dimension
title_full_unstemmed Revisioning comparative welfare state studies: An 'indigenous' dimension
title_sort revisioning comparative welfare state studies: an 'indigenous' dimension
publisher Routledge
publishDate 2010
url http://hdl.handle.net/2292/12230
https://doi.org/10.1080/01442872.2010.495902
geographic New Zealand
Norway
geographic_facet New Zealand
Norway
genre sami
genre_facet sami
op_source http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/01442872.2010.495902
op_relation Policy Studies
op_rights Items in ResearchSpace are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated. Previously published items are made available in accordance with the copyright policy of the publisher. Details obtained from http://www.sherpa.ac.uk/romeo/issn/0144-2872/
https://researchspace.auckland.ac.nz/docs/uoa-docs/rights.htm
Copyright: Routledge
http://purl.org/eprint/accessRights/RestrictedAccess
op_doi https://doi.org/10.1080/01442872.2010.495902
container_title Policy Studies
container_volume 31
container_issue 5
container_start_page 539
op_container_end_page 557
_version_ 1766184980386414592