>HOME >DATABASE

Richards, John and Aidan Vining et al., 1995, Helping the Poor: A Qualified Case for "Workfare", Toronto: C.D. Howe Institute.


Richards, John and Aidan Vining, David M. Brown, Michael Krashinsky, William J. Milne, Ernie S. Lightman, and Shirley Hoy, 1995, Helping the Poor: A Qualified Case for "Workfare"(The Social Policy Challenge; 5), Toronto: C.D. Howe Institute. xxvii+206p ISBN-10: 0888063415 [amazon]



◆Richards, John, 1995, "the Study in Brief," John Richards and Aidan Vining, David M. Brown, Michael Krashinsky, William J. Milne, Ernie S. Lightman, and Shirley Hoy, Helping the Poor: A Qualified Case for "Workfare", Toronto: C.D. Howe Institute, ix-xxvii.

◆Richards, John and Aidan Vining, 1995, "Welfare Reform: What Can We Learn from the Americans?," John Richards and Aidan Vining, David M. Brown, Michael Krashinsky, William J. Milne, Ernie S. Lightman, and Shirley Hoy, Helping the Poor: A Qualified Case for "Workfare", Toronto: C.D. Howe Institute, 1-36.

◆Brown, David M., 1995, "Welfare Caseload Trends in Canada," John Richards and Aidan Vining, David M. Brown, Michael Krashinsky, William J. Milne, Ernie S. Lightman, and Shirley Hoy, Helping the Poor: A Qualified Case for "Workfare", Toronto: C.D. Howe Institute, 37-90.

◆Krashinsky, Michael, 1995, "Putting the Poor to Work: Why "Workfare" Is an Idea Whose Time Has Come," John Richards and Aidan Vining, David M. Brown, Michael Krashinsky, William J. Milne, Ernie S. Lightman, and Shirley Hoy, Helping the Poor: A Qualified Case for "Workfare", Toronto: C.D. Howe Institute, 91-120.

◆Milne, William J., 1995, "Revising Income Assistance Programs in New Brunswick: A Look at the Demonstration Projects," John Richards and Aidan Vining, David M. Brown, Michael Krashinsky, William J. Milne, Ernie S. Lightman, and Shirley Hoy, Helping the Poor: A Qualified Case for "Workfare", Toronto: C.D. Howe Institute, 121-50.

◆Lightman, Ernie S., 1995, "You Can Lead a Horse to Water, but...: The Case against Workfare in Cancada," John Richards and Aidan Vining, David M. Brown, Michael Krashinsky, William J. Milne, Ernie S. Lightman, and Shirley Hoy, Helping the Poor: A Qualified Case for "Workfare", Toronto: C.D. Howe Institute, 151-83.

◆Hoy, Shirley, 1995, "Building Mutual Accountability in Welfare," John Richards and Aidan Vining, David M. Brown, Michael Krashinsky, William J. Milne, Ernie S. Lightman, and Shirley Hoy, Helping the Poor: A Qualified Case for "Workfare", Toronto: C.D. Howe Institute, 184-99.



■Contents

Forword
The Study in Brief

1. Welfare Reform: What Can We Learn from the Americans?

The US Welfare Debate: The Public Half
The US Welfare Debate: The Academic Half
Conclusion
Appendix: A Primer on the Economics of Welfare

2. Welfare Caseload Trends in Canada

Work and Welfare: Changing in Terms of Comparison
The US Experience
The Provincial Experience
Conclusions and Policy Recommendations
Appendix A: In-Kind Benefits - Another Source onf Income for the Poor
Appendix B: Statistical Analysis of Caseloads, Unemployment, Benefits, and time Trend

3. Putting the Poor to Work: Why "Workfare" Is an Idea Whose Time Has Come

The Basic Economic Case for Work Requirements
The Basic Economic Case against Work Requirements
The Case for Work Requirements Revisited
Some Concluding Remarks
Appendix: An Algebraic Model of Taxes and Welfare

4. Revising Income Assistance Programs in New Brunswick: A Look at the Demonstration Projects

The New Brunswick Economy: An Overview
Income Assistance in New Brunswick
Innovations in Social Assisitance Programs
Summary

5. You Can Lead a Horse to Water, but...: The Case against Workfare in Cancada

Defining Workfare
The Canadian Experience in Context
Does Workfare Work?
What Are We Really Doing?
Conclusion

6. Building Mutual Accountability in Welfare

What Is the Problem?
Workfare and Refrom
Implementation Issues
Conclusion


The Contributors
Member onf the C.D. Howe Institute



メモ

・背表紙より
「…。過去20年間で、カナダの福祉受給者の割合は劇的に増加してきた――1970年代半ばの1000人に55人から、1990年代初期の1000人に100人以上へと。大半の識者は、福祉の統計的な傾向には同意する。しかし、議論がそれらの傾向の原因や公共政策の制定を指導する理念に及ぶと、合意に取って代わって紛糾が生じる。/…。著者たちの多数が主に推奨するのは、仮に社会扶助受給者に給付金の見返りに働く、そして/あるいは、再教育される義務を<強化し>て、長期間の制限のない給付金の利用可能性を<減らす>ならば、政府のプログラムは貧困をより効果的に削減することができるだろう、ということだ。」


製作:小林勇人(立命館大学大学院先端総合学術研究科)
UP:20070627 http://www.ritsumei.ac.jp/acd/gr/gsce/db1990/9500rj01.htm
◇ワークフェア本http://www.ritsumei.ac.jp/~ps010988/w01.htm
 

TOP  HOME(http://www.ritsumei.ac.jp/acd/gr/gsce/)