Institut Professionsforschung und -entwicklung

Dauerhafte URI für die Sammlunghttps://irf.fhnw.ch/handle/11654/34

Listen

Ergebnisse nach Hochschule und Institut

Gerade angezeigt 1 - 8 von 8
  • Publikation
    Sozialhilfe und Gender
    (Seismo, 2020) Nadai, Eva; Bonvin, Jean-Michel; Knöpfel, Carlo; Hugentobler, Valérie; Tecklenburg, Ueli; Maeder, Pascal
    04A - Beitrag Sammelband
  • Vorschaubild
    Publikation
    Investieren, Aktivieren, Profitieren. Berufliche Eingliederung als Frauenförderung
    (2013) Nadai, Eva; Canonica, Alan; Hauss, Gisela
    05 - Forschungs- oder Arbeitsbericht
  • Publikation
    06 - Präsentation
  • Vorschaubild
    Publikation
    Zwischen Anerkennung von Differenz und Geschlechtergleichheit. Normkonflikte und Handlungsdilemmata in der Sozialen Arbeit
    (Hochschule für Soziale Arbeit FHNW, 2016) Nadai, Eva; Käch, Oliver; Hollenstein, Lea
    05 - Forschungs- oder Arbeitsbericht
  • Vorschaubild
    Publikation
    Gleichstellung "ganz unten": Investitionen in erwerbslose Frauen
    (Bundesamt für Sozialversicherungen BSV, 2010) Nadai, Eva
    01B - Beitrag in Magazin oder Zeitung
  • Publikation
    Geschlechterverhältnisse im Post-Wohlfahrtsstaat
    (Beltz Juventa, 2015) Nadai, Eva; Nollert, Michael
    03 - Sammelband
  • Publikation
    Un/Abhängigkeit, Un/Sicherheit, Emanzipation
    (Beltz Juventa, 2015) Nadai, Eva; Nadai, Eva; Nollert, Michael
    04A - Beitrag Sammelband
  • Publikation
    Whose Welfare − Whose Autonomy? Welfare, Work, and Care in Social Investment Practice
    (Barbara Budrich, 2016) Nadai, Eva; Liebig, Brigitte; Gottschall, Karin; Sauer, Birgit
    In much of feminist theory economic independence is regarded as crucial for women’s autonomy and emancipation. However, as critics argue, the model of autonomy based on continuous labour-force participation is androcentric and class biased. For many women it is neither accessible nor desirable. Nevertheless, the productivist turn of social policy since the 1990s has actually reinforced the primacy of labour market participation by framing welfare expenditures as investments in human capital in order to stimulate economic prosperity. In social investment policy women are caught between the “farewell to maternalism” (Ann Orloff) and a “new maternalism” (Jane Jenson). The paper examines the contradictory consequences of social investment policy for women’s autonomy with the example of unemployed women with little “human capital”. For them – especially for (lone) mothers – the promise of autonomy qua labour-force participation seems even more elusive, yet activation strategy demands that they seek a job. How do the women integrate the demands of activation into their “moral economy” of work, care and personal aspirations? Welfare institutions, too, are confronted with the structural conflict between commodification and care: should they invest in the employability of women with poor job prospects or should they invest in their clients’ mothering/caring function with an eye on the development of the children as the future workforce? Given the women’s limited cultural, social and economic capital on the one hand, and institutional restrictions of the welfare system and culture on the other hand – to what extent do social investment practices aiming at labour market integration actually enhance women’s autonomy? The findings are assessed within the theoretical framework of the capability approach: autonomy is understood as genuine opportunity to lead a life according to one’s own values. In the context of compulsory activation the “capability for voice”, i.e. exit options as well as the right and opportunity to have a say in concrete measures, is especially important.
    04A - Beitrag Sammelband