From a ‘welfare state’ to a ‘welfare society’? HÅKAN JOHANSSON (prof.), school of social work, lund university, sweden

Background and outline of presentation Coordinates research group on civil society and voluntary social work The aim with this presentation is to explore voluntary organizations’ (VOs) role in the Swedish welfare state: current changes and state-of-the-art Part 1. Key features of the Swedish/Nordic social model Part 2. Changes in government and governance Part 3. Employment and service provision Part 4. Conclusion

The Swedish welfare model: key features A heuristic device with many names: A Social Democratic Welfare state regime; ‘a Nordic social model’, ‘a Nordic Social Market Economy’ or ‘an Institutional-redistributive model’ Extensive public (state) involvement in transfer and service delivery (social security and social welfare services) Public welfare systems based on principles of universalism and social rights Welfare policies colored by ideals of redistribution, egalitarian values, and the ambition to secure universal access to income maintenance and services within health, care and education. Close link between welfare policies and active labour market policies; wide ranging institutionalized collaboration between the social partners (at all levels); High level of social trust between citizens and between citizens and public authorities Voluntary organizations (VO) – a footnote in Esping-Andersen’s classic work from 1990!

The Swedish welfare model: what about voluntary organizations Sweden in international comparisons …. Tradition of popular movement organizations, extensive membership based associations and school of democracy (labour movement, temperance movement, women’s movement etcetera) Provision of voice and leisure activities are central, not welfare service production Funding comes from membership fees and government subsidies, not so much philantrophy, private donations or government contracts Interconnectedness with the political sphere, partners in corporativist arrangements VO, historically a forerunner, the avantgarde and a cornerstone in welfare production

Civil society organizations The Swedish welfare model: welfare state regime models vs. welfare mix models Market State Civil society organizations Family

VO’s and the Swedish welfare model: an institutionalized role under change? Scholars have detected a series of ongoing changes over the last decades Funding regimes – more contract and less public subsidies Membership profile – more organizations with less members More professional organizations and business like organizations More volunteers and donors, and even charity oriented organizations More public contracts and less critical advocacy …. from ’voice to service’? Issue that have become politically salient with change in government, Centre- Conservative Government from 2006 and onwards

Changes in government and governance: main elements Rhetorical and conceptual changes: from popular movement organizations to ’idea-based organizations’ and ’civil society’ Emphasis on dialogue and consultation with VO’s in a wide array of policy sectors Partnership forum. Wide coverage of CSOs and key politicians. Public authorities responsibility to cooperate with CSOs Compacts/Agreements in social welfare; integration, culture and human rights policies New Acts and systems to promote diversification of service providers, public, private for-profit and voluntary non-profit organizations

Changes in government and governance: new ambitions and ideological critique? Government Declaration (October 2006) The basis for security [trygghet] and community [gemenskap] are based upon a strong civil society such as associations, sports movements, churches, corporations, and nonprofit organizations. The solidarity of the public welfare system is a complement to a society which is increasingly characterized by compassion, responsibility and idealism Key articles by Ministers in charge (June 2007) There has for long been an ideological blindness in Sweden to what the nonprofit sector is contributing and could help with. The public has not been willing or able to see and relate to the nonprofit sector as the actor in society it is - and could be. Instead of a respectful close relationship - but with a clear division between nonprofits and the public - the nonprofit sector have sometimes been neglected, sometimes institutionalized in the State's narrow templates

Changes in government and governance: national agreements A national agreement with VOs in social welfare policies UK Compact served as a role model Government: strengthen voluntary organizations voice function and to encourage diversification of service providers Mixed positions among VOs A total of 80 national VOs participated in deliberation and discussion Formal document completed in october 2008 Now signed by approx 50 organizations An agreement with six principles 1) Autonomy and independence; 2) Dialogue: 3) Quality; 4) Continuity; 5) Transparency and 6) Diversity From political salience to oblivion? Agreements in several policy areas, but lost salience nationally Few agreements locally, but in major cities/regions (Stockholm, Gothenburg and the Region of Skåne)

Changes in government and governance: models for diversification of providers? Aims to encourage citizen- consumership Status ’freedom of choice systems’ at local level Background: different efforts to foster public procurement/contracting out New Act on ’freedom of choice systems’ – foster diversity of providers and consumer choice (2008) Policy fields: elderly care and disability care, health- and medical care and active labour market services. Voluntary for municipalities, not for PES Public control of providers: if following general standards (no price competition), all providers treated equally VO not the drivers of change Local elderly and disability care services: A majority of Swedish municipalities implemented and/or are about implement freedom of chocie systems. Only 15 per cent decided NOT to implement. Clear connection between political majority at local level and decision to implement But limited knowledge on what implications for VOs

No. of persons employed in welfare service sectors, all spheres (1) 2002 2003 2010 Non-profit organizations 24434 26035 35510 For-profit companies 38467 44500 94364 Public organizations 505777 604689 614450 Public companies (AB) 267 553 2537 Total 568945 675777 744861 Share non-public 11,1 % 10,4 % 17,2 % Source: Statistics Sweden, Företagsregistret (Hartmann 2011). Including service sectors elderly care, disability care, IOF, childcare service and education. Definition based on judicial form in Företagsregister.

No. of persons employed in welfare service sectors, voluntary sector (2) Definition Year No. employed Of total work force (%) Non-profit sector 1992 101,118 2,4 Social economy 1995 199,187 5,3 1997 170,224 4,3 Voluntary sector 2002 145,000 3,3 Voluntary sector (social welfare services) 2004 35,000 0,8 147,235 3,9 Voluntary sector (in general) 2008 91,335 2,0 Source: Westlund 2003; Wijkström & Einarsson 2006; Trydegård 2001; SCB 2006; Westlund 2007; Prop. 2009/10:55; SCB 2010

No. of persons employed in elderly care and disability care in for-profit and non-profit organizations (3) Source: Szehebely 2011. Share of all employed within elderly care and disability care services. Database: SCB Företagsdatabasen Note: Lightgrey = for profit and darkgrey= not-for profit.

Conclusions A changing role for VOs in the Swedish welfare state: what about ’from voice to service’ If we aim to understand a changing welfare state – do address the right actors and relations? What kind of model is emerging: a welfare state or a welfare mix model? Invitation to an international and comparative debate on the role of VOs in changing welfare states: in the backdrop of the crisis

Contact details Håkan Johansson (Dr. Professor); School of Social Work; Lund University; Box 23; SE-221 00 LUND, Sweden. E-mail: Hakan.Johansson@soch.lu.se Telephone: +46 (0)46 2220988.