The Dutch Experience with Activation Trudie Knijn Professor of Interdisciplinary Social

1. The Dutch Experience with Activation Trudie Knijn Professor of Interdisciplinary Social Science, Utrecht University

2. Targets of Activation policies • Unemployed (3,5% registered) • Long term disabled and chronically ill people (11% (800.000 registered, among which Wajong (160.000) • Welfare recipients (300.000 of whom 71.000 single parents)

3. Institutional transformations • Centralisation (political governance) of administration and purchasing power in the field of unempoyment insurance. • Decentralisation of financial responsibilities and purchasing power for social assistance to municipalities • Marketisation of reintegration services to non-profit or for profit companies.

4. INSTITUTIONAL CONTEXT Activation purchasers: UWV Administrative agency for social insurance (unemployed and disabled people) MUNICIPALITIES Local social service departments (social assistance and non-insured unemployed people) Activation providers: Reintegration companies

5. Municipal re-integration trajectories

6. How to measure the effects? • Decrease of unemployment:

7. How to measure the effects? 2. Decrease of disability benefits:

8. How to measure the effects?3. Decrease of social assistance benefitsSingle parents 76.600 -> 71.000

9. Activation Policy instruments 1: Reducing number of new beneficiaries • Privatisation of sickness risks by a two year period of employers’ financial responsibility. • Stricter criteria for disability benefits, including stricter assessments for partial diability (30 – 85% disability) • Limited rights for young adults (under 27) to welfare benefits. • Equal treatment for social assistance recipients and unemployed (less mercy)

10. Activation policy instruments 2: Reintegration trajectories • 200.000 people in trajectories • Targets set at 50% of the trajectories resulting in a paid job. However: Only 16% realized (in Rotterdam, see van der Aa and van Berkel in JESP, 2005)

11. Lessons from the Netherlands:A. Limiting ‘free riders behaviour’ works:- municipalities are activated now they have to purchase welfare benefits themselves.- employers put more efforts on rehabilitation of sick employees.- social partners can not use disability benefits for uninented purposes (such as re-organisations) anymore.Either by centralisation or decentralisation

12. Lessons from the Netherlands 2: B. Evidence for results of a privatized reintegration market is lacking. • Targets for reintegration are not realized • National Audits signal no free choice for clients • Taylor made reintegration is lacking; standardized short term and rather superficial trajectories dominate (interview traing etc.) • Quantity dominates quality • Risk of creaming off.

13. For discussion Institutional actors are activated, which helps to avoid new beneficiaries. Once on benefit, clients depend on private companies, whose efforts lack evidence and results.