Bureaucratic encounters "after neoliberalism": Examining the supportive turn in social housing governance. (5th February 2020)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Clarke, Andrew; Cheshire, Lynda; Parsell, Cameron
• Is Part Of: British journal of sociology. Volume 71:Number 2(2020)
• Page Start: 253
• Page End: 268
• Publication Date: 2020-02-05
• Subjects: bureaucracy -- neoliberalism -- social housing -- street‐level bureaucracy -- welfare conditionality; Sociology -- Periodicals; 301.05
• DOI: 10.1111/1468-4446.12740
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 0007-1315

Abstract

Abstract: It is well established that encounters between welfare bureaucracies and their clients have been reconfigured under neoliberalism to address the problem of "welfare dependency." Contemporary bureaucratic encounters therefore entail measures to activate clients' entrepreneurial/self‐governing capacities, and conditionality/sanctioning practices to deal with clients who behave "irresponsibly." Despite the dominance of the neoliberal model, recent research has identified a counter‐trend in the practices of housing services away from entrepreneurializing and punitive strategies and towards a more supportive approach. This paper examines this counter‐trend and its implications for neoliberal welfare governance. To do this, it presents findings from research into social housing governance in Queensland, Australia, where the neoliberal focus on welfare independence, conditionality and sanctioning has been tempered by a new supportive approach focused on assisting vulnerable clients to maintain and benefit from access to welfare/housing support. Following Larner, we argue that this shift signals the emergence of an "after neoliberal" governmental formation, wherein key features of neoliberal governmentality are replaced by, or redeployed in the service of, progressive initiatives that address neoliberalism's failings at the street level, but leave broader neoliberal policy settings undisturbed. We also challenge recent sociological accounts that construe supportive welfare practices as a function of an all‐encompassing neoliberal project, arguing instead for appreciation of the contingency of these developments and the progressive political affordances that they entail.