With this in mind, the paper s referral to aspects of the actual problematique of current societal developments is important:

Transcription

1 A specific comment on the Communication from the European Commission on: Opportunities, access and solidarity: towards a new social vision for the 21 st century Europe (Brussels 20 th November 2007). By Peter Herrmann and Laurent J.G. van der Maesen, European Foundation on Social Quality, 10 February Introduction The European Commission has invited scientists, policy makers as well as representatives of the NGO s in the European Union to comment on a communication entitled Opportunities, access and solidarity: towards a new social vision for the 21 st century Europe (Brussels 20 th November 2007). The claimed objective of this communication (in this text mentioned as the paper ) has a lot of affinity with the rational of the European Foundation on Social Quality. The Foundation s aim is based on the understanding that Europe will only be valuable by developing and maintaining the vision of a strong social quality, to be conceived as a grounded theoretical concept and not as a metaphor for a good society (see the Foundation s first study published in 1997, its second study in 2001, its third study, forthcoming in 2008, its reports financed by the European Commission as part of the project, and a manifold of articles in its European Journal of Social Quality: 2. The need for a conceptual framework In this comment we would like to limit ourselves to a specific issue, namely the paper s theoretical perspective. It concerns an elaborated hypothesis. We hope this hypothesis will be instrumental for the debate on the new social vision for the 21 st century Europe. Our comments are based on the Foundation s own current priority, namely to pave the way for a new conceptual framework to analyse the mechanisms which cause the current transformations of the Member States of the European Union and the European Union in a global context. A central question is and we would like to refer here to two Asian conferences on social quality, in Japan, March 2006 and in Taiwan, March 2007 if this (evolving) conceptual framework may contribute to a new form of global sustainability, guaranteed by the democratically based state in a phase of globalisation. In other words, will it contribute to the development of sustainable welfare societies? Therefore, the social quality approach aims to be not only analytical but equally a valuable approach for developing sound policies in Europe and Asia (as well in other Continents). 1 With this in mind, the paper s referral to aspects of the actual problematique of current societal developments is important: These developments [demographic changes, consequences of globalisation, the change of the EU itself] offer unprecedented opportunities in terms of free choice, healthier and longer lives, better living conditions and more innovative and open societies. But they also create new social risks that may reduce life chances and fuel a perception of insecurity, isolation, inequity and inequality. And there are widespread expectations that Europe should play a more prominent role in advancing the well-being of its citizens in this context of globalisation, helping them anticipate and foster change, as well as promoting European values on the global scene. (page-3) The paper is based on a discussion paper from its Bureau of European Policy Advisers (BEPA) about Social Realities (Brussels, March 2007). The main chapter of that discussion paper concerned and see the title of this chapter the Social Quality of Europe. 2 Therefore we are highly motivated to contribute to the debate about the new vision, stimulated by the EC. 1 For this reason the journal will be transformed into the International Journal of Social Quality, see 7th Newsletter, December In the BEPA paper Social Quality seems to be a metaphor for the good society and is equalized with the concept of quality of life.

2 2 We feel the current European discourse and also in this paper (as well as in the discussion paper by the BEPA) lacks a conceptual framework to logically connect all concepts used to analyse the mechanisms which transform daily circumstances, the recognition of the hereupon based social realities, and the exploration of the outcomes for people as citizens. This is also the case in the essential United Nation s discourse on human development and human security. In other words, priority has been given in the paper to the world of the phenomena and to organize these phenomena efficiently, however in a rather eclectic way. Although we recognize the need to discuss European values on the global scene (see paper), references to this UN debate or comparable debates are completely lacking. However, this is understandable. The reason is that for analysing European circumstances in a global context we need concepts applicable for circumstances in all continents, in order to compare daily circumstances internationally. These concepts have not been elaborated sufficiently. For example, Japanese concepts referring to Western notions as public, or social, or state are not based on the same frame of interpretation (ontologically and epistemologically) and are, therefore, not directly compatible to the European understanding. Therefore we feel a need to make new steps for an understanding of the global scene. 3. The social quality approach as a global oriented conceptual framework? The challenge of the new social quality approach is to build such a global oriented conceptual framework, to analyse the mechanisms and their outcomes by applying its architecture, namely: (i) by defining the concept of the social, (ii) a recognition of the ontologically related conditional factors, constitutional factors and normative factors, (iii) exploring the interaction of these three factors, (iv) elaborating the measurement instruments of these factors in an epistemological acceptable way. These factors and their domains are: CONDITIONAL FACTORS CONSTITUTIONAL FACTORS NORMATIVE FACTORS socio-economic security social cohesion social inclusion social empowerment personal security social recognition social responsiveness personal capacity social justice (equity) solidarity Democratic based citizenship human dignity The determination of these twelve domains have been based on the definition (and related propositions) of the concept of the social. Therefore, all these domains are intrinsically related to each other. This is new compared to the European mainstream discourse. As well known, the names of all these domains are being used in a manifold of EC documents, often without any definition and without systematically reflecting the interrelationship developed by a sound theoretical approach. In this respect, the EC s paper does not differ from other EC s documents. This essential point is not addressed in the EC s paper. But for understanding the adjective social see for example social cohesion, social security or social exclusion the determination of the concept of the social is a condition for its understanding. Without any definition we may ask correctly - as Friedrich Hayek did in his lecture for the University of Heidelberg in what do we mean with social justice, social market, or social democracy? According to him, the adjective and therefore the connected noun - is without any meaning. We may ask now what do we mean with social model, social inclusion, social cohesion, social investment, social capital and so on in the context of the absence of a well-founded concept of the social? In the social quality theory the social is defined as the outcome of the interaction and dialectic between people (constituted as actors) and their constructed and natural environment. Focusing on the social in the way of the social quality approach suggests that its subject matter refers to people s productive and reproductive relationships 3. Subsequently social quality is defined as: 3 This theme has been presented in the Foundation s second book: Social Quality : A Vision for Europe, Kluwer Law International It will be further elaborated in a forthcoming study.

3 3 the extent to which people are able to participate in the social and economic life under conditions which enhance their well-being, capacity and individual potential. This architecture paves the way for methodologies to elaborate the measurement instruments of these factors, namely: (i) indicators concerning the conditional factors, (ii) profiles concerning the constitutional factors, and (iii) criteria concerning the normative factors. In this approach subjective indicators do not exist. Indicators concern the objective conditions. Profiles concern the cognitive/emotional aspects and criteria the ethical aspects. In other words, these instruments pave the way for the disentanglement of the objective, subjective and ethical dimensions of daily circumstances. The EC s paper does not reflect the consequences of the usual entanglement of these dimensions. 4. The European discourse In the European discourse as well as in the paper many concepts are used as: social realities, social model, quality of life, social cohesion, society etc, but some central questions are not looked at and even asked: How can the social be assessed without falling back on voluntarist, eclectic and purely moral interpretations? Which conceptual framework is applied for relating these concepts in a consistent way in order to use the same language everywhere? How to relate aspects of the conceptual framework to analyse mechanisms and their outcomes, How to use the new understanding for contributing to new public policies to address the outcomes? This implies that we consider it as important that any social policy has to be understood as part of public policies in the sense of constantly establishing, maintaining and enhancing social spaces. To illustrate the lack of a clear conceptualisation, there are as many interpretations of quality of life as the related institutions developing the related indicators of quality of life. Another example would be the concept of sustainability. There is a specific economic discourse, an environmental discourse and a political discourse about sustainability without a theoretical based understanding of the interrelationship. Each of them refers to different schemes of interpretation. Therefore we may ask ourselves, how do we understand different notions as, for example, ecological or social sustainability? A theoretical understanding of the interrelationship in order to pave the way for orchestrated public policies for developing new societal sustainability implies a meta-concept of sustainability. This is lacking which causes a Babylonian confusion of tongues. With this in mind we may also conclude, that the concept of social capital refers to propositions related with specific economic thinking and is applied dimensions of human existence that are not related. This will make a clear and unambiguous conceptualisation impossible. 5. Anticipating fragmentation The European Commission s paper presents a series of problems of the current societies, well articulated on the basis of a wide range of empirical research in Europe. It concerns crucial policy areas as employment, health care, gender, migrants, education etc. With this in mind three central questions are relevant. The first is how to approach aspects of these different policy areas in an interconnected and at the same time comprehensive way, as citizens always experience in their daily life? Second, how to create the intellectual conditions for interdisciplinary research for elaborating a comprehensive understanding of the various dimensions of daily circumstances? Third, how to connect this exploration with our understanding of the urban space? According to the EC, this is a real challenge because 80% of European citizens are living in urban spaces. And here we notice a fundamental paradox. Large cities are places for international and local oriented companies, advanced technology and international competition. They are the sources of the global economy, knowledge and concentration of communication systems. According to the EC, at the same time they are places for

4 4 unacceptable poverty, crime, traffic problems and pollution. The inequality between the rich and the poor is growing in cities. This concerns the most urgent question of recent times (EC on The Europe of the Cities (Brussels, 2003). The social quality approach will enable a contribution to an understanding of the urban space as a comprehensive totality. Its architecture will deliver the conditions for interdisciplinary research of interrelated aspects of different policy areas as manifestations of the urban space. Instead of discussing this issue, the paper accentuates the different fragments and is not oriented on a comprehensive understanding, leading to new forms of fragmentation. 6. To contribute to the EC s plea for a new European vision Our proposal to contribute to the EC s plea for developing a new European vision is to prioritise the elaboration of a logically based conceptual framework for analysing mechanisms, which are transforming daily circumstances in Europe, as well as in other Continents. In other words, a framework, as point of departure for research to compare societal processes in European and Asian countries, the United States of America etc. A well-founded vision for the European Union implies intellectual and policy instruments which transcend the eclecticism as point of departure for a voluntarist understanding of the social. It is as well of utmost importance to define a clear role within the process of globalisation. In the report by the European Commission ( The European Interest Succeeding in the Age of Globalisation,Brussels, 2007), to pave the way for a European debate about a vision for the European Union in a global context we read: The ongoing stocktaking of Europe's social realities is looking at the big changes under way in employment patterns, family structures, lifestyles and in traditional support structures, reflecting increasing pressures from demography in an ageing society. This will require a new approach to the social agenda with implications for both national and European level: we will need more effective means of ensuring citizens' existing rights of access to employment, education, social services, health care and other forms of social protection across Europe. Globalisation is central to these new realities: in areas where the EU has a direct role, it must better adapt its existing instruments and policies, but also build on new policy responses such as the Globalisation Adjustment Fund and continue to respond to the legitimate concerns of people adversely affected by changes in trade patterns and by economic and social change. It must also be alive to the need to respond to new forms of poverty in our Member States (page-4). In this quotation, many important points are mentioned, not least the role of the EU to shape the process of globalisation rather than seeing it as something that happens. Reflecting the EC s document seems to be important for debating the recent EC s paper. Three issues may be noticed. The first issue is, that it is conceived as an external event and the need of securing socially beneficial outcomes rather than seeing the process solely as matter of economic growth in its own right. However, looking at the quote we can see fundamental shortcomings. There is a lack of explanatory power: causes and effects are confused, and factors have become segmented and disjoined. Furthermore, it sees globalisation still as a fundamentally external factor. Moreover, the task seems again to be to compete in the world, to be the successor rather than accepting the vision of a oneworld-strategy. The second issue concerns the need of developing an activation strategy concerned with citizens rather than with employees or consumers. This may sound abstract, however it is very concrete when it comes to matters of policy-making. Are benefits linked to employment and especially to standardemployment? Is taking up voluntary work a barrier when it comes to claiming benefits? Is participation in the labour market highly standardised, flexible with regard to employers or with respect to employees? Is there an opening towards a concept of socially useful/meaningful activities rather than an ongoing orientation on a traditional concept of employment? Are any mechanisms of unconditional

5 5 basic security in place? These and other questions are of immediate importance when concrete measures are at stake. The third issue implies that all this can only be implemented in a way of overcoming asymmetries. Decisions have to be taken where they are relevant and in any case they should be taken as decisions of living spaces. This entails a consideration of practice; and equally it means to have informed decisions. However, informed means dealing with the challenge of completely involving citizens as such. A difficulty to deal with this challenge is to re-translate rights into truly social rights rather than accepting their perversion into social rights of individuals. 6. Conclusions In our opinion the paper is important for delivering points of departure for the collaboration of scientists, policy makers and representatives of NGO s. The ambition to overcome the uncertainties, caused by global processes is clearly recognized. However, we would like to make a strong plea for the elaboration of an acceptable conceptual framework as starting point for this collaboration. We suppose, the endeavours of the advocates of the social quality theory deliver a well-founded proposal for such a conceptual framework. In the EU-report on Social Sciences and Humanities concerning the point of departure for the EC s 7 th Framework Program (Brussels, October 2005) we may find arguments for our plea: social sciences and humanities can make a relevant contribution to the construction of Europe by identifying possible answers to some of its main challenges (.)cross-country research should encompass comparative qualitative research (e.g. institutional and cultural analyses) as well as quantitative studies (Necessitating the development and maintenance of cross-section and time series date infrastructures). European societies are undergoing a complex of transformations on all levels and in all spheres of social life. The ongoing changes of EU internal and external relations and responsibilities call for multidisciplinary theoretical and empirical research in the investigation and analysis. If we will collaborate for developing a reasonable vision for the European Union and its Member States in a global context we need multidisciplinary theoretical and empirical research. This implies the elaboration of a consistent and coherent conceptual framework, applicable on a global scale. In other words, the development of a vision supposes a real foundation. Our comments concern the absence of this foundation. The development regards a challenge for the European Union. Pragmatically this means as well to start a debate by turning some arguments of the paper around: as it stands now it starts with a phenomenological view and moves from there to the concrete. However, it largely fails as it remains in the realm of dealing with individual problems, pursuing eclectic political concepts. Instead, we have to start from the concrete, from there being able to develop a classified perspective on burning issues of contemporary social realities and visions for Europe.

6 6 7. The arguments underlined in a schematic way a regularization of debate, research & action Social quality Conceptual framework Disciplines interdiscipli- policy areas categories nary fields technic.facil. health care youth pol.science α education elderly applicationeconomy β employment handicapped sq-architecture Social law γ work lower income on areas and Quality sociology µ water/energy groups categories and architec- ecology cult.facilities women their interconture pub.admin. safety migrants nectedness medicine sport housing policies (public, private, commercial and based on the citizens perspective) [ new forms of local governance] Understanding Urban space as Comprehensive Totality as point Of departure for social realities