英國工作福利的變遷與現況

Development of Workfare in the UK

陳怡如(Yi-Ju Chen)

指導教授 ： 施世駿

國立臺灣大學/社會科學院/國家發展研究所/碩士(2013年)

https://doi.org/10.6342/NTU.2013.10133

摘要

英國是歷史上最早出現近代意義上的失業、貧窮等現象的國家，其社會福利制度建立與變遷，具有歷史經驗及歷史教訓。本研究透過「歷史方法」回顧英國「工作福利」變遷與轉折，從工業革命前後時期的濟貧制度出發，福利國家興起為轉折，最後以經濟全球化衝擊下的「工作福利」政策論述與變遷為落腳。
　　工業革命前後時期的濟貧制度以「工作倫理」為核心，區分「值得幫助的窮人」與「不值得幫助的窮人」及鑲嵌「勞役所試煉」等與工作有關的措施。二戰後，英國建立資本主義世界堪稱典型的「福利國家」「危險共擔」原則的社會共識，強調「資產調查」的「殘補式」社會救助政策大幅萎縮，「工作福利」淪為邊際角色。經濟全球化衝擊下「福利國家」出現危機，基於財政危機而關注的「福利依賴」現象，及貧窮問題而產生之「社會排除」議題，英國於社會福利政策設計時重新納入「工作倫理」精神、「工作要求」及「劣等待遇原則」，使得「工作福利」政策論述興起。
　　研究發現英國貧窮面貌的變遷，社會福利制度從「福利國家」走向「工作福利國家」的趨勢，及「工作福利」有其侷限性，政策效果是充滿迷思、弔詭與兩難，非全盤接受或否定「工作福利」。
　　研究結果認為臺灣屬於發展型國家，政府常以「經濟優先」為口號，以避免社會福利產生「福利依賴」現象，根本未曾經歷過英國「福利國家」般擴張時期，如果要學習英國支解福利國家，恐怕是要先學習英國建立福利國家的基本架構；另我國社會救助體制及就業促進方案引進「工作福利」時，應注意工作福利策略所衍生新的社會問題與風險，特別是工作福利在消弭貧窮和貧富差距的效果有限，以致隱藏高昂的社會成本，及對緩解貧窮的作用有限等侷限，顯示工作福利政策仍需調整和改進。
　　社會福利的發展呈現出整體變遷的階段性特徵，制度模仿並無法真正有效地解決社會問題，臺灣不應盲目隨著歐美國家福利制度起舞，要充分瞭解人民的需要，及政治、經濟、文化與福利等制度的脈絡，方能建立屬於臺灣本土化的福利國家制度。

關鍵字

工作福利 ； 工作倫理 ； 福利國家 ； 新右派 ； 第三條路 ； 福利依賴

並列摘要

The United Kingdom is the first country to have experienced the problems of poverty and unemployment in their modern definition. The establishment and evolution of its social welfare system are significant in terms of historical experience and lessons. Using the Historical Method, this dissertation provides a review of the development and changes in Workfare in the United Kingdom. The research begins with the poverty relief system prevailing before and after the Industrial Revolution, the transition period and the emergence of the Welfare States, and finally probes the policies, theories, and development of the Workfare system in the trend of economic globalization.
Centered on “work ethics,” the poverty relief system of the Industrial Revolution distinguished the “deserving poor” from the “undeserving poor” and implemented various work-related measures including the “workhouse test.” After World War II, the United Kingdom evolved into a Welfare State and considered a role model among capitalist countries. A social consensus for “risk sharing” was established which saw a sharp decline in the “residual” welfare system which emphasized the “means test,” pushing Workfare to the sidelines. Influenced by trends in economic globalization, the Welfare States began to face challenges, including “welfare dependency” problems caused by the financial crisis and “social exclusion” issues stemming from poverty. The United Kingdom therefore once again incorporated work ethics, work requirements, and less eligibility principles into its social welfare system, rekindling Workfare policies and theories.
The research results show that during the process of coping with poverty, the United Kingdom moved from a Welfare State to a Workfare State. The research also suggest that Workfare has its limitations; policy effectiveness is shrouded in myths,peculiarities, and dilemmas. It is therefore inappropriate to absolutely accept or abandon the system.
As a Developmental State, the Taiwanese government has been advocating “the economy comes first” to evade welfare dependency. Taiwan has not shared the UK’s experience of an expanding from a Welfare State. If Taiwan wishes to learn from the UK on how to deconstruct a Welfare State, it should the first learn how to construct the Welfare State framework. When introducing Workfare into social assistance and employment improvement programs, the Taiwanese government should pay special attention to new social problems and risks arising from Workfare strategies, in particular the limited contribution to the mitigation of poverty and the wealth gap and possibleconsiderable hidden social costs. There is still the need for changes and improvements.
The evolution of a social welfare system is characterized by different stages; simply imitating one system will not effectively solve all societal problems. Instead of blindly following European and American countries, Taiwan should develop a tailored welfare system to meet local requirements, based on an in-depth understanding of the needs ofthe people, as well as its existing political, economic, cultural, and welfare systems.

並列關鍵字

workfare ； work ethics ； welfare state ； the new right ； the third way ； welfare dependency

參考文獻

李易駿(2011)。《社會福利概論》。臺北市：洪葉文化事業有限公司。

林幸誼(2010)。《社會救助中強制工作條款之合憲性檢驗》。臺南市：國立成功大學法律學系碩士論文。

呂建德(2001)。〈從福利國家到競爭式國家？：全球化與福利國家的危機〉。《台灣社會學》，2，263-313。

簡守邦(2008)。〈Workfare：贊成與反對〉。《政治與社會哲學評析》，25，143-203。

郭俊巖(2009)。〈美國工作福利政策的形成與轉化：以AFDC改革為例〉。《臺灣社會福利學刊》，8(3)，117-159。