<TITLE: Unemployment and Employment Policy at the Local Level
ACADEMIC DOMAIN: social sciences
DISCIPLINE: social policy
EVENT TYPE: doctoral defence discussion
FILE ID: UDEFD020
NOTES: continued in and continuation of UDEFP020

RECORDING DURATION: 108 min 59 sec

RECORDING DATE: 21.9.2004

NUMBER OF PARTICIPANTS: unknown

NUMBER OF SPEAKERS: 3

S1: NATIVE-SPEAKER STATUS: Finnish; ACADEMIC ROLE: senior staff; GENDER: female; AGE: 51-over

S2: NATIVE-SPEAKER STATUS: German; ACADEMIC ROLE: junior staff; GENDER: male; AGE: 31-50

S3: NATIVE-SPEAKER STATUS: German; ACADEMIC ROLE: senior staff; GENDER: female; AGE: 31-50

SS: several simultaneous speakers>


<S1> as a <FOREIGN> kustos </FOREIGN> appointed from the by the faculty of social sciences i declare the discussion on <NAME S2> academic dissertation open and as opponent we have professor doctor <NAME S3> from university of hamburg welcome </S1>

<PRESENTATION UDEFP020 by S2>

<S3> i would like to briefly outline the position and significance of this subject matter of the dissertation of <NAME S2> , erm the issue of the local level of welfare state policies was for a long time something in the social sciences what we can call the poor relative of national welfare state analyses however in the last years the local level of welfare state policies has gained increasing attention in social sciences and in social policy analyses and one main factor which has influenced this development were the increasing in the the increase in the debate on er globalisation and the whole discourse at the academic level on globalisation erm on one hand also there were the argument that erm in the framework of what sometimes like for example by lesch has been called the glocalisation that in the framework of such development there is an increase in importance of the policy er at the local level and then there was also the argument er as exam- for example by gi- anthony giddens that er at any case erm we will find a lot of change at the local level as a result of globalisation processes which he called processes of erm disembeddedness and re-embeddedness , and in this context erm erm there is the question also how far can at the local level global processes be counterbalanced by forming social networks by local policies in municipalities , and what what is then an important question in this context is (xx) processes at the local level and lead to a kind of conversions they are kind of conversions er of the localities or do we see there a a path-dependent development so that there is a specific profile of of localities of erm local erm areas which does not really change so that the the the change will er goes along such er er particular features of the region , erm and if there is a kind of path-dependent then there is a question which are the main factors which influence this change and which are responsible for such kind of path-dependent development and which hinder er re-conversions of towards kind of uniform type of development , and and i- and and this and this issue is an important starting point of of the dissertation of <NAME S2> erm and what he has asked is what are the main features of a region what are main factors which are influential for the development erm er for the restructuring processes erm at at the policy level <COUGH> and this can only be analysed in a comparative perspective and erm i think what is really important here is that he has er that he has selected two regions from two different countries also so that er this is also a comparison erm of of local policy in the context of two different welfare regimes , and erm er it was a i think in a way also a a a lucky @@ er event that mhm those regions have a- er lot of similarities so that it's even easier to find out erm what is this er what makes er this specific er development of a region erm or what makes this specific in the context of different welfare states . erm and erm the main questions of of <NAME S2>'s work are two questions one is the situation of the unem- long-term unemployed and the consequences of unemployment for the region and the second question is erm h- the question how erm er differences in the in the ways er in the political actors find solutions to the problems of unemployment how these can be explained , and er er it's important i think and innovative that <NAME S2> does not restrict his analyses on economical difference or something like that but that he chooses a complex explanatory approach which include social cultural economical and and er political factors <COUGH> and erm what i think is also important that he did not only include the po- political actors of the the governmental actors into his research but that he also included the non-governmental actors erm and and took a new kind of discussion and development seriously namely that er there's a new development also to a kind of public private mix in local policy making so and that we have a that the government er structures are changing so that different types of actors contribute to the governments of regions and so there is a link to the these new government's approaches which have are prospering er in the last years erm which is also i think very important erm and then when when we come to this explanatory er ex- approach i think what is very interesting and fruitful is erm er to use the social capital approach of putnam erm and what he then then he er comes to the er to the result on page 260 seen as a whole the research results underline the importance of networking and trust for the solution of socio-economic problems , i think that particularly also the actor-centred approach and analyses of the role of social networks and social capi- capital like this turn out to be very useful and can give new impulses for further research in the field of of comparative analyses on regional potentials for the solution of economic and social problems thank you . so now let's sit down and start with the discussion </S3>
<S2> yes </S2>
<GETTING SEATED AND POURING A GLASS OF WATER, P:13>
<S3> thank you <P:05> so i suggest that we proceed with the discussion like that erm that if we follow erm four four different subjects at first that we start erm with the central questions of the of the volume of the book and the structuring of the book then that in the second step we discuss the theoretical framework then in the third step we discuss the methodological approach the methods which have been chosen the way they are er the the main thesis have been operationalised and so on and then we we finish with er part four which is erm a discussion on the findings and the conclusions . so i start with my first question erm , so what my first question is juds- just what was your main interest in the theme in this subject </S3>
<S2> well i got interested er in this subject er already in 95 erm during my studies in giessen university where erm er (mica heise) was offering er a lecture in this field and er we were supposed to write a a course paper afterwards and instead of just looking at the books visited erm an association of unemployed people so i got in in touch er with with the actors and the local actors' side at this point and i found it rather interesting erm er to see and to hear at first hand what kind of problems these long-term unemployed people erm are actually facing and er considering er the fact that that erm that unemployment is connected to so many other issues as well fo- for example there's factor like poverty social exclusion it also might influence birth rate and things like that so it has a very central work and and the functions of work can be very erm central function er in our societies erm both these were er things that motivated me then to write my er diploma thesis in 97 also er on the effects of er long-term erm unemployment and then i just continued erm in this line with my dissertation 'cause i wanted to get more in-depth er into the topic </S2>
<S3> yes so and then why did you choose two relatively different research questions </S3>
<S2> erm with regard to this combination of the the research into the unemployment and employment and the research into the situation of the unemployed people erm i think there are there are strong links between those especially on the local level because if we if we look erm on the higher political level like for example national or the european levels the actors are not directly in touch with the unemployed people and they are not also in in touch for example with with problems connected like the crisis areas and because erm often erm er because of many people many un- unemployed people are moving to the same area where the housing is cheap for example er these crisis area they are on the local level so the local actors have to deal with these problems they are also the ones who duly implement then erm the international policies and then of course the municipalities in germany as well as in erm in finland in germany it might erm it might change in the near future but so far the municipalities have been responsible for paying income support so if there were many long-term unemployed people in a region then the municipalities were responsible for them though i think there are strong links and then of course if you have many long-term unemployed people or unemployed people who are massing in in a certain in a certain region of course it is enormous problem for erm for municipalities like for example erm the health problems <S3> [mhm] </S3> [there's] all kinds of social problems and then the erm housing problems erm so i think there is especially on the local level there is a there is a close link between these fields which (with my thinking) would beginning at first sight that there's always so much visible (xx) there there is really a <S3> [mhm-hm] </S3> [close] a close link [between them] </S2>
<S3> [mhm-hm] yeah there is a close link at the policy level but the question is if there is also a link if we make er a cross-national comparison at the analytical level part of the question is if there are an interrelation is for example the answer to if if i say question one is the the consequences of erm er of unemployment for the region and then the question two is erm the er cross-national er how can we explain cross-national differences erm in the er er political solutions to such problems but then there's a question is there really a link between those questions </S3>
<S2> erm i think there's also erm on the cross-national erm level that there there there is this link because erm for example erm tampere and giessen er because of these similar ethnic (xx) structures for example (xx) responsibility of the of the local level on the other hand it's this similarity of the problems the long-term unemployed people are facing but i think that makes them erm makes it possible to compare these these both levels <S3> mhm </S3> because of these for example there is a capitalist ethic erm er which which is (xx) part of the world which erm which causes same problems to these long-term unemployed people disregarding if they live in finland or (at least) other than germany and also the responsibility then it was the same the municipalities had paid income support here in tampere but also in giessen so there there are these parallels and that may er i think because of that it is erm it is comparable </S2>
<S3> erm however i think a an an after the analytical level it put you into or it brought you into some difficulties in your work because you had you needed two different explanatory frameworks for the two different questions the one question is how can similarities in in erm in the er consequences of a long-term unemployment for the locality be explained and then you would cho- choose the explanatory framework of the er capitalist ethic erm but it it was a bit difficult because it would have been easier if there ha- would have been differences then because there in the unemployment re- er when you came to the second question the differences in relation to unemployment policies and the solutions there you find really distinctive differences and then you develop a an explanatory framework you have erm er a look at a lot of regions and the main (er factors) and then you found four er par- particular factors which were influential in this case er but on the er you couldn't erm argue with such different factors in relation to long-term unemployment </S3>
<S2> this is true <S3> [mhm-hm] </S3> [erm] the problem there was simply er (xx) research of (xx) so <S3> [yeah yeah] </S3> [i i i] i didn't know <S3> [yeah] </S3> [that i would] find these similarities between er (xx) concerning the the social psychological erm effect (xx) one could expect that from (xx) but otherwise you can never you can never be sure <S3> [no] </S3> [for that] so erm it was er it was an inductive approach so i did my research (filed) the result and then i tried to get the frame erm for it and well there were these distinctive er differences on behalf of the er (control) concerning the local employment policy <S3> [mhm] </S3> [but there] were of course these similarities with regard to the public </S2>
<S3> okay mhm-hm <COUGH> and i think erm i will comment it so that i think that even if this was a really demanding erm er er a task to integrate both questions i think it was a kind of inheritage of the history of your own dissertation because you started with one question and ended with <S2> [yeah yeah] </S2> [another which you] thought is even more interesting </S3>
<S2> how (do people) [(view that) then @@] </S2>
<S3> [yeah and but] i think that it wa- that you erm you managed to deal with this problem and to build bridges between both both questions however it was not so easy i think </S3>
<S2> mhm it caused some trouble yes </S2>
<S3> yes mhm erm so then erm the next question is what was really in relation to the employment policies what was really erm the comparative question </S3>
<S2> with regard to the employment policy er well i the the question was i wanted to no after i found these differences i wished to know why are these differences erm well why are there differences erm with regard to the employment policy especially knowing that the problems erm as we just discussed the problems of the long-term unemployed people they were they were similar so one could expect well there should also be similar policy (appointments that deal with this) <S3> [mhm] </S3> [erm] with these problems then but which was erm obviously not the case in tampere and giessen then my question was er what makes what is the reason for these differences [in tampere] </S2>
<S3> [mhm-hm] er if we go a bit more in depth then the question is or er then the question is what did you expect because erm there can be different levels of explanation as you also have written in the book that it can be an explanation from the european policy level or from the national welfare state level or from the local level erm what did you expect given the situation that you only had one region in each country </S3>
<S2> erm first of all i would like to point out that i that i didn't try to find some patterns of explanation erm which would suit the whole country because i mean knowing the situation in germany it is so different between east and west germany but also in finland between southern finland and northern or or eastern finland so i was just focusing erm focusing on these two regions and then erm erm , with with regard to these erm to the differences there erm i ex- i expected actually erm i expected some differences knowing the different er concerning the the er local labour market policy knowing the different developments of the unemployment i i saw it when i made first this draft that i showed you earlier and i saw it in the beginning that this probably has a significant influence and it turned out to to be the case because this shock this shock experience in finland and this and the fact that the unemployment in germany was hovering just around this ten per cent level in the case of giessen erm all the time erm by the way this is the er one point i should mention this is just the unemployed erm unemployment level for giessen region there is because of statistical reasons the reason there is no erm no figure available for giessen city so in giessen city there is actually assumed to be around 17 per cent erm just to keep that in mind but nevertheless it has been on a on a similar on a similar level so i expected rather different approaches also of course knowing erm the finnish welfare state system and the differences there and erm as you said correctly there are of course all these different levels which play which influence the policy erm the policy on the local level so there are in there very many factors which play erm which play into the into the decisions or the action then which is taken at the local level </S2>
<S3> erm mhm , here now the other question what erm er or i think that the the regions in your approach and in also the the way er you have erm developed your question and then the together with the approach it what you could find out was more restricted i think to erm to the differences at the national welfare state level because erm when you have one region in one country you do not know you do not know much about the variations of regions within the country so and you did not control certain factors or vary them systematically like prosperity or or other factors you kind of come later to such possible influential factors between regions inside a country so i think what is important in a way and but i think it's also what what you mainly did is to to take the region as a kind of representant of the national welfare state then you said er er er a policy can be successful like in tampere if the actors er take up what are there on the left from the welfare state as possibilities if they really erm er use the space that is er a set for their action by the welfare state you said there are some conditions they should not be lazy @@ they have to organise themselves and (so it implies) for EU money and so but erm this is some some additional condition so to say but the main factors that that you could find out and to which your question could ought to mainly be directed was er were were mainly i think related to the national welfare state level </S3>
<S2> mhm i was actually not particularly not focusing on on the national [level but it of course] </S2>
<S3> [no you no you didn't] </S3>
<S2> it i mean of course the the regions are acting in a certain framework <S3> [yes] </S3> [and] part of this framework is the national level they cannot get out of that erm however erm there there is no guarantee that even even erm for example there is funding available for er for the regional level if there are territorial employment (pact is on) there is no guarantee that this region would really make such a pact it is really up to the to the local actors even how far they use erm this additional space that they have and er of course er the you can also go beyond then what is given from the national level for example (E-C division) <S3> [mhm] </S3> [could] help i mean also the german government is is not promoting territorial employment pact and they are not funding anything in in this in this field but nevertheless they could have gone further there was no restriction er by law or any means er to that er (because i think it is) it depends very much on the on the regional situation and taking an completely different city er or different region in in germany could've le- let to completely different result because there are different regional factors then at work for example if you have a region where you have one big employer which got er which got bankrupt or er so there there might also be a similar shock effect erm with regard to <S3> [mhm] </S3> [suddenly] in all this or sharply increasing unemployment er figure so in this region the actors might have cooperated more because it was might have been perceived as some kind of regional problem </S2>
<S3> yes but let's take er for example bremen i have done lots of research in the region of bremen in germany and this i think erm it it er it can be shown that there is much more co-ordination cooperation and social capital in that <S2> mhm-hm </S2> area erm however if you only would have concentrated on the region of bremen you couldn't have concluded that it's er to you couldn't have explained or er cou- couldn't have identified erm the factors if they come from the regional level or or from the national level if you only would have if you would have compared bremen with tampere then maybe you would have concluded erm or and if it has would have been the other way around in tampere no er no er social networks and in bremen lots of you would have er made and and not only you but i think everybody would have concluded because we know the what is mainly different it's not so much the structuring of the of these regions but what we know (there's a there are) different welfare state and they would have expected as esping-andersen has written that this is in- the german the typical german erm er a factor which comes through the organisation and the civic society which is the strong usually in germany and in finland there's this er publicly organised welfare state where people do not so much organise themselves we c- i i talk about this question so that what we can then identify as explanatory factors and it's it's it's difficult that we only have one region and we have distinctly different welfare state because first explanations what we would er s- search for is in these differences in these really d- big differences of the of the welfare states i think </S3>
<S2> well first of all er so you basically suggest i should've taken maybe more than one region </S2>
<S3> no <S2> [but but it but but er] </S2> [(xx) or it would have] been too much </S3>
<S2> mhm mhm yes and @there that would have been my point@ (i agree that kind) of <S3> [mhm-hm] </S3> [in-depth study] er in in more in er two or three regions (would have) would have been beyond my @financial and@ <S3> [yes] </S3> [@time@] @limits@ erm but er for ex- for example what was er was regard to you mentioned civil society erm for example i did not expect erm knowing esping-andersen's er welfare state <S3> [mhm-hm] </S3> [er] model i didn't expect that there would be so much activities from the on behalf of civil society <S3> [mhm-hm] </S3> [in the field] of the labour market and er policy in the case of tampere because one could have expected that in the case of germany <S3> mhm-hm </S3> so er but the situation was was different so er there er there was not much networking and cooperation (xx) the actors were variable they were so strong (xx) this traditional this strong german third sector actor but they didn't even see a need erm to cooperate whereas in the case of er giessen they were all they they were (used) they were following these er traditions of cooperatism and erm social dialogues so there there was much more networking and and it was it was with somehow then this (xx) state model got this this surplus or got plus from this er civil society er com- component of course in the case of tampere i don't know <S3> [yes] </S3> [it might] be a completely different situation in turku or in helsinki and then er of course er with regard to the other influence factors er that is that is a general problem i would say it was regard to these analyses of of of labour market policies it is er i think it is not possible to er to to say if we if we have certain measures put in place and the unemployment goes down does the unemployment go down because there were all these measures for the unemployed er people or er would it have been gone down anyway because if the economic framework on the national level or european or global level is improving so it is very hard to evaluate there erm the the influence the influence factors but of course what one could say that is that these measures for example they help to improve the social psychological situation of the people who took part in those measures and sometimes often these measures erm have positive effect er for the region as such erm just to give you one example in the case of giessen there was one er in giessen in in germany it's not usual to have er to have meals er in kindergartens erm because kindergartens usually finish er at 12 o'clock but in giessen there is er one of these er local actors they set up erm er a kind of catering service with unemployed and long-term unemployed people which provided then er meals for all kindergartens in the region so it was possible then for the children not er not to go home to eat but to stay there erm and and eat at the kindergarten er it was of course er which helped the families at home because the mothers or the father who was at home didn't need to cook and be at home at 12 o'clock so there is a clear surplus for the region from this measure or so that at the end we don't know if these people who take part er part in this catering pros- er project if they erm well of course one can check if they get a job later or not but in general people (employed) in this project or others will help to er cut down the unemployment <S3> mhm </S3> in the long run </S2>
<S3> mhm still i think that the cross-national comparison and this approach erm is in this case only more possible or it's not really possible to identify the what is local and what is national and i think that the way you dealt with it is what i i i agree with the foreign (component) then in the explanation part of the differences you found four main factors and all four are factors that could then explain with the welfare state with the welfare regime mainly i give you er the one is the historical role of municipalities in finland and and germany in difference <S2> yeah </S2> it has nothing to do with this specific region it's a very general policy the second is er the degree of cooperatism and consensus as a cau- political (causer) in the different welfare er these regimes the third is the perception of unemployment as social crisis like you also did explicitly de- refer to the national level because unemployment was a shock for the whole of finland was it in in germany is used to it since the beginning of the 80s and latest and then erm the la- le- the last one it's a general and economical development in the country all four main factors that you have er used for the explanation are not er they do not at all refer to some specific erm element of the region of tampere you could have perhaps analysed it but and i'd agree with you because we would not know there is something s- special also in tampere what is different in in joensuu or turku or wherever because you didn't analyse this and therefore i think you are re- really right to to restrict it more to this level but i think what i wanted only is to point out that one should be aware from the beginning on what is the real level here of the comparison that is in the boo- in this er volume and this is mainly to in a way in a way not not totally but in a way to use the region as a representant of the national welfare state even if you have more it's richer at any case it's richer what you have analysed but in the end the way then you you've explained the differences and this is important this is more on that level @@ this is erm </S3>
<S2> i agree er maybe with the perception of the unemployment that is er i think that is really a region i mean of course unemployment has been high in in (xx) <S3> [mhm-hm] </S3> [but er] for example i think er in the case of tampere it was i don't remember exactly the year but i think it was eight nine per cent higher than the national level so the crisis was because of the economic restructuring that was going on the crisis was much se- more severe in the case mhm of tampere than in many other places in finland </S2>
<S3> but it well the first time such as as as er <S2> yes </S2> mass unemployment level we do not know if it was strong perception of unemployment we know <S2> [the the (great)] </S2> [that the] unemployment rates were <S2> [yeah] </S2> [higher] but they were also high in some other regions but we do not know if the pers- perception er was higher @@ @or was stronger@ </S3>
<S2> that i know say [yeah yeah yeah yeah] </S2>
<S3> [it was a shock anyway in in] germany the first mass unemployment there we had about six per cent or something and it was a complete shock in the beginning of the 80s </S3>
<S2> which is a nice example that this is rather relative <S3> [yeah yes] </S3> [that then the the] the what is high unemployment <S3> [yes] </S3> [i mean] any government which would have four million official unemployed as we as there are right now in germany would ha- in the in the 80s although would have been politically (better) i mean [there is er] <S3> [mhm] mhm </S3> but this tolerance level is is growing and and growing and that's one thing that i mentioned in the beginning they have the feeling that also in general this tolerance level <S3> mhm </S3> has <S3> [yeah] </S3> [considerably] increased and there is (xx) </S2>
<S3> yes erm i think this is in part in connection to your other question the nature of the findings mhm-hm and so then er erm coming to the structuring in this context of the main questions and so the structuring of your of your work can you say something erm or explain why you st- have structured it as you did </S3>
<S2> as i did @@ well erm i have this er this approach from the from the the different from the different (xx) study mhm-hm <LOOKING FOR A TRANSPARENCY, P:13> this one erm i have been er i'm sure you can't you can't see that erm </S2>
<S3> that's better thank you </S3>
<S2> that is erm starting er ther- they have (drawn) together these two fields of er the research er concerning the unemployment and research concerning er the unemployed and that is these different levels which all influence european level influences the national level in the case of the germany and the national level the latter level of course also directly partly and then erm the local level and i have followed this er approach in er concerning er the introduction erm to my books er first i i'm getting from the from the wider er from the wider area and then to the to the more national and the policies and the the then to regional policies and then finally erm to the problems of the individuals so i followed this approach erm with regard erm to er the introduction and which is basically then the the first part erm of of my book , and erm then after i have discussed the the background for all these erm all these four levels then i come erm in the second part to the to the labour market crises and their effects on the local level there i take then erm first of all i look at the at the situation in tampere and giessen the development of the unemployment the region before the unemployment the questions who are the unemployed which is followed then erm er by er by an analysis and assessment of the local er employment policy and then er the coping strategies of the unemployed and then finally then in the third part of the book er i'm discussing then what are the reasons erm what are the reasons what are the differences and the similarities and in chapter nine erm i discuss the lessons that can be drawn erm from the er cases er of tampere and giessen once again starting then the other way around starting with this er with the local with a with a local level er and then also what can other regions learn then erm what are the lessons for the national erm and the european level <S3> [mhm-hm] </S3> [so i'm] following these these different levels basically i'm going down in the first part from top down and then er looking analysing the regional level then going up again at the end </S2>
<S3> mhm-hm yes i think that the the structuring is very clear in your book and and plausible and also i liked very much the graphs that you have er er put inside so and they are very they <SIC> visiblelise </SIC> very nicely your arguments , so then let's come to the next point that of the theoretical framework erm , what was a reason why you have erm chosen putnam's approach and would we really say it in the end what concerns the conclusions that er we had social network here we already before putnam @@ in sociology and did he did the social capital approach bring some additional er gain into the whole theoretical framework co- con- compared with only er social network analysis </S3>
<S2> i think er this social capital approach is er is is one interesting because it is er in in basically it refers to this collective character of community and er it is er if you just look it er look at it as such it is it is completely neutral concept it is not a positive concept nor is it a negative concept because it refers to this er for example level of trust the the erm the ability to form coalitions erm the dialogue the shared values and things like that and i think that goes that goes beyond just networking for example with the trust with an er with the values erm and things like that and that is an s- an value (xx) i would say and but to come back to this point that it is a it is a neutral concept so there is for example it it can of course help to overcome erm labour market crisis i would say it but then at the same time er if you have a community with really strong social capital close ties it might be a really closed community so if there are some outsiders some some people erm who are not part of this community they might get erm they they might be excluded they might not get access to this community that's just as one example erm about the negative effect and then i've just been recently at a @at a@ conference in in jyväskylä and there was italian erm er teacher she was er she was giving example and it was a negative example she said the the italian mafia is a perfect example erm for erm for s- high level of social capital because they have they have this <S3> [yeah] </S3> [shared] trust they have these good connections between also with this the institution to the state partly erm they have shared values and things like that so it is it is a neutral concept and er can in the case of the (xx) crisis i think it is a value added to this to this network <S3> mhm-hm </S3> because it goes beyond these [values] </S2>
<S3> [yeah] yes i agree mhm my my question is it sounds somehow a bit surprising that suddenly as a reaction to the crisis in tampere there is such civil society prospering or such social capital and social networks and when i read your book it it s- seemed to come out out of the nothing @@ so but erm isn't there maybe a a long tradition of civil society where <S2> [yeah] </S2> [this] was connected to so that there are only some forms have cha- changed or something </S3>
<S2> erm i think there are in these er for example this trust and and things like that they are embedded into cooperatism and in this consensus orientation or there is this cultural <S3> [mhm-hm] </S3> [erm] there are there are these cultural parallels which we have this (xx) also the situation in finland where it was rather erm easy then for this civil society er present civil society could es- to establish itself because there was erm they they they could draw back on their cultural heritage basically <S3> mhm-hm </S3> and er therefore er i wouldn't say it comes out it out of nothing it it well it started basically at at (xx) and there was i mean there were some activities also in the 1980s or early 90s but they were just a small er (xx) or so but then then in the 1990s i mean the the approach was completely in line i would say with the finnish traditions of (welfare state) <S3> mhm-hm </S3> so there was a good starting point so this trust and and things this cooperation idea didn't need to be created <S3> it was [yeah] </S3> [or invented] but it was it was there </S2>
<S3> mhm-hm maybe that on the other hand if we take giessen erm just to speculate a bit i think it's a bit unusual giessen first at at at least some areas within germany maybe we we we have there this high as you have described high proportion of US er soldiers military </S3>
<S2> we had yeah </S2>
<S3> yes had but er just as [(xx) it has] </S3>
<S2> [one one of the reason for the crisis] was this withdrawal [of the army] </S2>
<S3> [yes but] it wa- er there was this high proportion of US military and a high proportion of students both are social groups which are outside of the core <S2> [yeah] </S2> [establishment] of a of area maybe just to speculate that this giessen just has rather ba- ba- badly with er in with respect to social networks and so because there are so many outsiders and they are even dominant in in in a way in within the er the locality </S3>
<S2> i would agree with that erm but then on the other hand one could also think that in in giessen as it's much smaller than tampere for example the it should've been easier also to establish these networks simply because of the of the smaller smaller size of the community </S2>
<S3> i don't <S2> [so] </S2> [think] that the size is important there is this very nice study of (xx) indians and and scotsmen do you <S2> [no i don't] </S2> [know that] it er er established an outsiders i love it @@ and this is a a place in a small er village in the UK near london it's a really small village and he showed the mechanisms how those who are already there the established how they erm develop processes of er mechanisms of social closure against the newcomers who are in in in other respects have the same er erm er characteristics what concern social status income and things like that they even work together in a factory in the (xx) factory but er how these establishment how they produce such erm er strategies against the outsiders and this is a very small er and rather socially very deeply split <S2> [yeah yeah] </S2> [vi- village] and i it may be that in giessen this was not possible for such a core group core inhabitant group to form such a strong erm er community with soc- strong social networks and for because the other groups are too dominant and there's a high fluctuation among military and the and the students </S3>
<S2> but er giessen does (xx) the local actors they also existed in in giessen <S3> mhm-hm </S3> though there weren't actors who were active in the field of er er employment policy <S3> mhm-hm </S3> but the question is and i i don't think that military or students i mean for a society on a whole yes but in the in the field of the employment policy i think that doesn't explain why the one actor A doesn't talk with actor B although they are in the sa- working in the same field for example youth (unemployment) or something </S2>
<S3> but their habits are to be </S3>
<S2> their their habits [might be yeah yeah] </S2>
<S3> [to form social networks] maybe </S3>
<S2> there there is or at least <S3> [mhm-hm] </S3> [it seemed] to me that there was an old tradition in in <S3> [yeah] </S3> [that] case er in the case in the case of [giessen] </S2>
<S3> [yeah] yeah okay but it seems that any case that this this er putnam approach is very fruitful just for this er research on the level of er local er policies erm and i myself i'm just doing a research project one of my research projects is a comparison between east and west german regions erm in relation to the way er private households organise erm the the elderly care and what we found is that erm this er er this er household level er mhm has mhm in the way it it it functions at the household level has much to do with the social capital which is inside the region the cooperation of ac- of main actors in this field and how the er any people of who are doing the elderly care how they organise in social networks and those in those regions where there's much social capital in that sense in al- er networks erm er people are have a much better situation when they are responsible in their households for the elderly than in those regions which are more east german where there is nothing like that and i think it's a really promising approach this er social capital approach </S3>
<S2> but there we also have the the these (multi-) (xx) traditions <S3> yeah </S3> as in east germany <S3>  yeah </S3> it was usual that the state would take care of these matters and everybody was suppose to work whereas in in west germany there is this this tradition that the family and most likely the women erm take care of the the children and and the older generation er so i think once again regions reflects its traditions </S2>
<S3> yes we but we have different regions and it showed that in an old university city in east germany erm in that case it's it's opposite to your e- er experience it's a there is much more social capital in jena than in the other one er ordinary east germany city </S3>
<S2> how do you explain </S2>
<S3> erm <SS> [@@] </SS> <S2> [@@ (xx)] </S2> [@@ (xx)] okay erm yes so back to the @theoretical framework@ and erm i think that goes that your different approaches on the theoretical level are really fruitful and you actually turn out that it it's very er promising also to continue with using such such approaches like on one hand this putnam approach and on the other this er approach then for the other questions with the consequences of unemployment with the capitalist ethic i have one question concerning this capit- alist ethic erm because you did not find er consider all the differences between the regions you just used this approach for the explanation of the commonalities between those er regions the question would be is it possible that there may also variations so that we find erm er differences in relation to that factor so how unemployment is perceived and how its is er how er problematic it is for the individuals and if it leads to social exclusion or net not or not is it thinkable that there are variations in relation to the degree of er this capitalist ethic and that this has an impact so that there are countries with a lower degree of erm er addiction to to work ethics than others and that the unemployed feel better in such a situation </S3>
<S2> erm there are we don't even need to go to to other countries even erm er in for example in the case of giessen the local actors told me that erm in certain areas er of giessen where there is a high level of unemployment erm unemployment was the norm so there is nobody picked at er nobody was picking at someone there because he or she didn't have a job because it was it was the norm er whereas in they had some er they were focusing on on er juveniles and er they told me that (some juveniles) actually managed to find erm an occasional training place who who tried to erm mhm who who managed to find a job they were the most the people who were pointing their finger and they they because they were not they were not normal in in this framework so i think it depends very much on er also on the erm on the of course on the development then of the unemployment if the erm if the unemployment is low and there's a person who can't find a job then everybody would consider immediately this person has a problem it's it's of course his fault whereas when the unemployment is rather high and every forth fifth person is unemployed then everybody knows someone who is unemployed in the family or among friends then it is a completely different situation there will be more understanding there but of course erm i would say yes er there are some [(xx)] <S3> [mhm] mhm okay </S3> and for example in the case of tampere i i compared to giessen i would say in the case of giessen there was er this thesis of self and responsibility which er which i explain also in the book erm there is er there was er much more or a stronger blaming of on the individual because er in the in the case of tampere there was this crisis of unemployment er er it went sky high and it was obvious that there were economic problem that this was a task for society and then it would not be the fault of the individual that he or she had lost a job (xx) in giessen it was more there was more this tendency to blame the erm to blame the individual for er for not having work </S2>
<S3> yes there's also the example of the closing down of shifya- shipyards <S2> mhm-hm </S2> like in <S2> [yeah yeah] </S2> [bremen] er we have found in my research institute there that this when this was perceived as a co- kind of collective fate <S2> yeah </S2> and people were not blamed for being unemployed and this was a very different situation even if it was it took place in a certain er blue worker er blue collar workers' er er er housing area where people were living together and er mhm were very strong er had very strong networks among each other yes i think this is important to to further develop <S2> [yeah] </S2> [such] a kind of factors erm , okay i think we can stop with the theoretical part and then i would suggest to come to the next part it is the methodo- methodological approach and the methods that were chosen and so erm so could you perhaps , yeah there you could you would have if if if you had this question erm let's take the second question the co- er explanation why different erm er local in different local er municipalities erm the solutions to long-term unemploy- -ployment were different erm u- you would have different er alternatives for method that you choose to to er study this you could choose this what you did a comparative case study in the sense of ragin or you could er choose a quantitative analysis choose many regions erm and and then er er make a causal er er and then analyse of causal interrelations by qua- quantitative methods could you explain erm why you have chosen your approach and if and if we would see or if it would make sense in the next step to choose the other one </S3>
<S2> well er i have i've chosen this approach because erm i think this on the regional level it's it's such a complex erm field and there is so many factors which which play in there and i wa- i really wanted to get this erm this in-depth look and erm talk to the to the people i think that was very important er for me to to get the information on these local actors not just some figures 'cause in if we if we just have these figures for for many regions you don't really know what is actually behind these figures at the local level because there are so many differences erm between the situation in in on the local level just as you said with bremen with giessen and and many other place so i wanted to to find out what are actually the reasons on the local level behind this kind of policy or behi- behind this kind of erm <DISC CHANGE> on the research questions if i want to study the the regional level (xx) in depth then i think this approach that i've chosen is is is suitable one but if you want to get an overview of the situation in germany in more in general or in finland or other countries then of course erm i wouldn't it would have been impossible er i would say to erm have that kind of approach that i choose for myself <S3> mhm </S3> but i think it it really depends on the focus of the study what kind of er what kind of a message you're you're [after] </S2>
<S3> [mhm] . oh do you think that the factors that you found as explanatory factors that you could erm test this with u- by using a much broader number of regions and check [if these vary systematically] </S3>
<S2> [er knowing knowing speci-] knowing specifically the factors <S3> [yes now i mean now mhm-hm] </S3> [now i think it yeah i think it] would be possible that <S3> yeah [mhm] </S3> [to erm] [to yeah] </S2>
<S3> [yes i think so] (xx) one could <S2> [to yes] </S2> [use this as] test maybe (even) some factors would be w- w- we had we have to (brought) them <S2> [yeah] </S2> [because] in a broad variety odd modify <S2> [yeah yeah] </S2> [or something] this is would be another step to kind more of <SIC> explara- -ratory </SIC> analysis if you did to find out what may play a role mhm erm yes and i think for continuation to the question that you had er and in relation to the the knowledge that we have about the field that it was er er the the wer- it was er the right thing to do to choose this instrument of a comparative case studies and not to start with such quantitative analysis that it it's much riche- richer so what you found and then you could take the decision what is in this (xx) which er impressions and phenomena what are the main factors erm and then the next step step could be like that <COUGH> erm tha- then i come to the er to the indicators erm so you have in a way you have yes you have a formed a dependent variable what you want to explain that is what is you call in a way the the success of the employment policy i only relate to that question i- i- it's what you what is the de- dependent variable and then you see the success in both er regions is different there's what much higher success er in relation to this in tampere than in giessen mhm i had a bit of difficulty to find out how did you operationalise the success of the policy but then i found it erm on page 246 out of where you report on the results i could i think it is erm , er it's it's in four factors and i ask you if you agree that this is right what i perceived here it's er it's four elements that how you have operationalised this dependent variable namely the success of of employment policies it's first in the capacity erm to attract erm EU support financial EU support the second is the ability to promote local cooperation erm , the third is erm the development erm of employment erm the increase of employment and the fourth is erm economic restructuring so these are your if i understood this correctly you're er the the indicators for your dependent variable and then to start with the explanation and these are then your explanatory variables and there i s- think there is m- one erm problem which i would like to ask you to in one respect there could might appear kind of tautolo- tautology namely in the dependent variable one factor is one indicator the the ability to promote local cooperation and then on the other hand also the explanatory variables there is the ability to mo- promote local cooperation erm by forming social networks and so on what could you perhaps explain a bit more what is the dependent part and what is the explanatory part in relation to this </S3>
<S2> that is difficult @@ </S2>
<S3> did you un- understand [the (xx)] </S3>
<S2> [yes yes and i understood] the erm , i understood the question <PREPARING POWERPOINT, P:12> well with the , first of all i have to say i didn't i didn't notice that the in in that way as er as you put it er put it right now er . it it depends also then i think on the , on we well we have this this cultural influence part the the the part which you refer i think <S3> mhm-hm </S3> the cultural context erm . it is well the the cooperate erm this cooperatism and its consensus orientation in erm in the finnish case erm . they , well they they enabled this er this networking on the erm on the local level and of course there are also <S3> mhm  </S3> once again er there's of course also the link to this capacity to attract and absorb erm new supporters you need this networking as a precondition in order to get the support <S3> [mhm mhm] </S3> [because this new support is] partly tied to the erm in the erm to thi- to this networking <S3> [yeah] </S3> [so] er that was also reason why giessen did not get any support (within before that) so erm it i- it is interlinked by a <S3> mhm-hm </S3> just cannot agree with that er i didn't i didn't see it er er the way that er that you just er put it before </S2>
<S3> mhm-hm so it could be a problem if you explain the ability to form social networks by the ability to form social @networks@ but [i think it @@] </S3>
<S2> [that is a that's a @(xx) my mistake@] </S2>
<S3> but i think @@ to do justice to your work that <S2> [i haven't (xx)] </S2> [you didn't do that] because in the dependent variable what you found was just a difference and in between the regions in relation to that in in in giessen they did not found just on the formal level they did not build such networks which they needed to get money from the EU in tampere they did this is the this phenomenon what you find and what you just what you take as one indicator for the dependent variable to describe the differences and then it was start to explain but then you are more richer and go more behind that and we are this is a civil society it's organised much more and so and they develop this capacity to form such networks and so er perhaps it's one (xx) yes it's it's more or even not the the term social networks would not be adequate and i think you didn't use it at the level of the <S2> [okay] </S2> [description] but then behind there's all these social interrelations and networking and capital and so and i think this is the explanation </S3>
<S2> [yeah there is] </S2>
<S3> [it's n- only] not so so erm clearly pronounced but er from the meaning i think this is er understandable erm er yes and then you will have different types of terms how you how you characterise the differences you have here somewhere in the book more in in the first er section you have a er a graph where you where different three type different types of employment policy are distinguished <FLIPPING THROUGH PAGES> i just saw it i did don't find the the pa- [here] </S3>
<S2> [yeah] i'm looking yeah </S2>
<S3> yeah do you do you know what i mean </S3>
<S2> yeah i think i [know] </S2>
<S3> [and] you have three charts but then they vanish somehow i didn't i didn't find them again i was looking for them erm and then you used two other terms it's a erm a holistic approach in finland and er the problem centred approach in germany but it seems a bit to be the kind of ad hoc characteristic or do you is there a tradition of characterising such employment policies with these terms </S3>
<S2> erm er no i these are these are my these are my terms but </S2>
<S3> [these are yours mhm-hm] </S3>
<S2> [yeah erm] . well these these er these three approaches <S3> [mhm-hm] </S3> [that er] (lukin) er pointed out there erm i think i say somewhere in the when when i come to the point where the erm er the the traditions of the municipalities to er to er to heal this labour market crisis it seems that german municipalities they were much more in this in this first column which was the erm i can't [remember] </S2>
<S3> [you have] it o- one on page 109 you talk about a passive approach <S2>  yes </S2> an ordinary active approach and a proactive approach </S3>
<S2> so this proactive approach <S3> mhm-hm </S3> that is more er the approach of er of er of tampere that was more the approach of <S3> [mhm-hm] </S3> [of tampere] whereas the german municipalities though they in general they were more in the 1990s in the beginning of 1990s they were more in this passive approach they just did what they had to do but <S3> [mhm] </S3> [they] didn't go beyond that or in some times if they went beyond they they had some erm they had some voluntary <S3> [mhm-hm] </S3> [(xx) input] but to develop really (xx) er some strategies (xx) that was more in the case er the case in tampere with these networks where they define their goal where they said it how they want [to get there (xx)] </S2>
<S3> [mhm-hm and this] but this vanishes in nature this ki- er and but then you develop your own concept did you prefer this to the three and how are they related </S3>
<S2> erm i think i point out er in my conclusion that the finnish er that the tampere is in the line of the finnish erm er of the finnish [approach] <S3> [mhm] mhm </S3> and which which is this and that i explained earlier that's the reason why i didn't get back to that which is this more proactive approach whereas er <S3> mhm </S3> giessen is rather in the line of this erm er more this this ordinary approach with the german municipalities at the beginning of 1990s that they just tried to establish some (grants subsi- subsidiaries) er of companies and er and would er would just hope that the situation would get better but there was not these developmental strategies in in many (xx) communities i would say and er but i didn't get to the you er i agree with that i didn't get back to that point then at the end because er <S3> [mhm-hm] </S3> [probably] it was clear then tampere is in <S3> mhm-hm </S3> this going this way and giessen is following this approach and er i'm at fault </S2>
<S3> uh-huh okay erm , yes so then we come to the actor that you have interviewed you have interviewed two groups of actors governmental and non-governmental actors erm do you think that this strategy was successful </S3>
<S2> yes [@@] <S3> [@@] mhm-hm </S3> , well it er , i i said in the beginning why why i chose this er this actor centred approach was i i wanted to avoid this mine- if if i would have just analysed policies i there is this minefield of of party policy er which i which i tried to avoid i wanted to know from these people who are actively doing something in the region erm what is their approach what kind of strategies do they have and of course in this framework i also interviewed the municipalities and the di- districts erm and the the employment offices because they were active in the region but i just treated that as one of many actors <S3> mhm </S3> although they didn't get any special status as they have in in some other erm in some other stu- er studies where the focus is just on them but i think the the other actors they are as important <S3> [mhm-hm] </S3> [as] these governmental policies and that's the reason why i chose this wider approach than (xx) <S3> mhm-hm </S3> it makes the thing much more richer to to (view) from them where the problems are and er because you you might get a completely different picture than these official erm official pictures that is erm represented often by by the officials of a these governmental [actors] </S2>
<S3> [mhm-hm] yes and i think it's a strength also of your approach that you er choose these different types of actors and erm also as i mentioned it er it your approach is related to even if you do not use this concept of governments which is up to date now just in in in the last years erm i and i do not think that you would needed it and that i think it's a there are very interesting interrelations with this concept also and er when the in this er theoretical framework it is argued that there are new types of govern- governance structures and so it's very interesting because you took it into consideration that there are and that there has there was change <S2> yeah </S2> mhm-hm okay then erm , then let's come to the question of generalisation of if how far it's clear that a comparative case studies that there is a very limited possibility only for generalisation of the findings erm but i i think this is mainly true for your question one where the different er for the comparison in the consequences of long-term unemployment because you have these similarities and in a way you did not develop such er you developed a much deeper and and complexer explanatory framework there where you found the differences you did in question two but in question one erm it's more only to explain the communalities er but i think here because there may be differences if we include more countries and more regions that is a really a bit erm er er er problem to generalise what you found because erm let's take some some er variables which may have an influence but which only by chance did not appear in your two regions as for example erm if we would for example take a region in denmark and the UK we would have a a huge difference in relation to the size of unemployment benefits in denmark it's 90 per cent of former income in in britain <SIGH> sometimes nothing or even very low level so this might have an influence on the wellbeing and and on the consequences also for the region because in in UK we can have a strong increase of poverty of social exclusion and marginalisation whereas in denmark it may be that we don't have it erm in that in that degree or erm this what you this factor which you have already mentioned and which is not the same like with capitalist ethic but the question is it erm seen as a collective fate or or individual erm erm er er (thought) and then maybe something like the availability of alternative roles outside of the labour market in in germany for a long time er high unemployment was not such a problem because women had the still had the er the the alternative role of being for a couple of years at home and staying er at home as a housewife and this was socially really as- accepted role so erm this has changed today it's no longer really accepted but but it was a it has a s- s- smoothed the impact of of long-term unemployment to high degree </S3>
<S2> but not necessarily on the individual level because as i point out then there there are some erm feminist erm approaches to that they say well women have this er socially accepted <S3> [mhm] </S3> [possibility] to go home and play housewife erm but this er this is er against their will of self-determination of having your own career and things like that so erm they they play sub- er what is the term this sub- er well they accept these role models that are given to them from society so they cannot decide for themselves so and there is this argument that er i don't know exactly the page number where where <S3> [yes] </S3> [it could be] erm but this is this might be for <S3> mhm-hm </S3> total national view erm this of course reduces the the number of unemployed as a whole but it doesn't reduce the unemployment for the for the individual erm this might nevertheless have serious social or psychological erm some serious (xx) impact </S2>
<S3> yes but in in some it can be very different in the consequences for the region and the individuals if there are er alternative roles available or in italy you can join the mafia @or@ or you can join the (xx) sector of (xx) work which is nearly the same size estime- size estimated like the er er mst- the former (xx) former employment sector or something so erm er i think there are many there are different other factors which might then be explained differences which you did not find and therefore you did not need this explanatory framework but we cannot conclude from your findings to other countries or regions i think <S2> no no </S2> [no] </S3>
<S2> [there] i i think i made not very clear in this part where i er discuss the social and psychological problems <S3> [uh-huh] </S3> [er] of long-term unemployment that it depends also it depends really on the individual on the age on the family status erm er on on these individual factors and then of course on if it if there are these er other roles er available for this person what the height of the unemployment is in the region i i i discuss that er in in this context (xx) <S3> [yeah yeah] </S3> [it is] of course these er problems i found <S3> mhm-hm </S3> they were just and then you you have to keep in mind i had this erm er citizen expert an <S3> [mhm-hm] </S3> [approach] so i had just a few er er short er small number erm of long-term unemployed who answered the questionnaire so their answers are not erm representative at all erm or so of course their answers and their problems which they er which they describe er by answering the questionnaire they correspond er correspond largely to the erm experiences of the of the local actors <S3> [mhm-hm] </S3> [and that] once again corresponds largely to the general descriptions i found in the literature so there it is possible to make some more general statements because of <S3> [mhm] </S3> [these] er different er different sources (xx) but er nevertheless i wouldn't say that this is a this problem will appear in all <S3> mhm </S3> i mean as er (as denmark) this danish (xx) example is er is quite good as far as a financial er situation is concerned and the financial situation is one of the key erm is one of the key er influence factors as regarded <S3> [mhm-hm] </S3> [by] many other social psychological problems <S3> [mhm] </S3> [(xx)] you can still well go out in the evening go to theatre or or meet some friends in the in in the pub or er if you just stay at home because you cannot finance it anymore <S3> mhm </S3> so there's there are things (still connected to that) </S2>
<S3> and what is very interesting i think there was a study by (william roschard) on the question of erm if there are cross national differences in europe in the degree to which er people in the population blame unemployed for being individually responsible for their unemployment and the assumption was erm in the start that there are differences in the different welfare regimes so that in er in the social democratic welfare regime of sweden people have much more erm understanding for for er for the unemployed and so but what what was interesting it turned out that there are very little differences across europe there's a relatively high proportion in the population in all countries who blame the unemployed er for being responsible for their unemployment but then what i then i ap- nevertheless would conclude er the swedish for example erm er er have a higher acceptance that erm that the unemployed are supported by the welfare state they do not think even if they would be responsible but nevertheless they are erm human beings who are worth to to be erm to to get financial transfer by and to be supported by the state whereas in other countries in the UK also one one would er er pe- people think that erm that it's their own decision and then they should not be supported by welfare state i think there are more differences then <S2> yeah </S2> in in <S2> yeah </S2> this attitude </S3>
<S2> but then er in this blaming the unemployed it's the can be found the in in (xx) well this is once again related to the capitalist ethic and the meaning of a functional working society that there is this certain status also in just in the people who work so this certain value <S3> mhm </S3> that people er person gets just because if he's employed or not </S2>
<S3> mhm-hm , okay then comes let's come to the last point erm conclusions erm , so one question would be when we look at the local level and at the national level erm concerning that we do not know how much there is a specific impact of the local level on the o- could one say that the actors at the local level are prisoners of policies at the national and supranational level </S3>
<S2> no i wouldn't i wouldn't agree with that <S3> mhm </S3> erm with that statement because er as as i pointed out earlier already er we we do not know exactly er if if the unemployment goes down if that is because of the local policies er ba- er because of local (xx) the er it's simply because of the erm erm improvement of the economy erm but there are and of course if er all these people who are in in er in the (xx) set up by erm certain framework erm or you have certain network which which attracts money but there is money (well for local) projects well this improves the social psychological situation of the people who participate in it er it might not have the long lasting effect er it might not even lead to a re-integration to the labour market erm but nevertheless while there's a point why the people are in these matters erm they are in they are they are better off than than being unemployed and then of course also what i what i this kindergarten example that i that i gave earlier erm for example that there are er of- positive there can be positive effects er for the region as such so it is not just only the do we get the person back into the er er into the first labour market but there are also other er other effects and these other effects for example they can be er they can be influenced of course by the local actors and then also if you do some social work in some areas in some crisis areas where you have very high unemployment of course you can erm you can you can er improve the the living quality of the city there for example <S3> [mhm-hm] </S3> [so] the the local actors they really have the possibility to change things or they are not just dependent but they are dependent of course on on financial backup these days they don't have any own resources erm and they don't get any support on any other levels and it is rather difficult and they can have nice networks and everything but if they don't have any financing for their work then it's a problem and the problems will (realise that) </S2>
<S3> yes i agree and i think it's er fashionable in er political sciences to talk about multilevel policies but what i think what you did and what is what we need much more is a multilevel an- or a multilevel analysis of policies and how they are interrelated and interact and it's also interesting i think how you show that this EU policy is nothing from erm top down but that the different regions in the different regions the actor are to a very dif- different different er degree able to get the money from the EU even if those are have er entitlements to do so , mhm and this is er this is a very nice piece of work that you did just to show these interrelations between the levels <COUGH> erm yes then i would like also to what concerns the conclusions at the theoretical level and like to erm er er talk about this the the concept of path dependence erm er you er er this is also a concept which is now more common also in in historical institutionalised er institutionalism erm and it is er common to use it for cross national comparison if we compare developments and if we find that there's no convergence however the concept is rather limited in the way it has been developed for the social sciences for example by paul pierson who erm who talks in a very narrow sense in the s- er er about inte- about this economical concept of increasing new chance so that it's er erm increasing need more expenses for the actors and the institutions er to to get away from the old path and so that they that is more rational for them to keep the old path so how would you think could one er use this concept in your er in in the relationship to your work </S3>
<S2> erm after you sent me that er interesting paper of yours erm i've been thinking i've been thinking a lot about this er this path approach in first er of all er especially this wider path approach that that you were using in in you paper erm which also takes historical and the cultural dimension er into account and i think that that fits very well with with my approach <S3> mhm </S3> er also study because i also look at the historical and the cultural er factors besides pure erm besides pure erm policy making and i started then to to to wonder has there been a path change in the case of tampere and in the case of giessen and in the case of tampere i would say er there has been a critical juncture as er as this (ca- carrut) and (ca- carnout) or how do you pronounce them as they suggest that there there is this critical juncture and then there is erm a (xx) uplift and er in the in the case of tampere this the enormous er increase in the er in the unemployment figure that would have been a critical juncture i think but then er you you introduced these these four levels where you have these erm these or er actually hall introduces three and you introduce the fourth one the the lowest level would be a change of er a change of needs then a change of level and third would would be a change of erm <S3> goal </S3> the change of goal then you had added fourth one the change of values and you you said somewhere that only er the- these first two the change of needs and change of erm levels that would be a change within system that wouldn't be a real path change and all these change of goals and the change of values would be a path change and er i think in the case of tampere er we we have seen a change of needs well which would once again be the the finnish level then er there for example a change of laws that er local actors can employ er long-term unemployed people or whatever new laws put in place and then i think there's also change of level because there was more responsibility passed along from the national level to the municipalities but then also there was more er responsibility and tasking to the to er third sector actors though a change of the level er at wealth but i wouldn't so one could say that there was a change from welfare er state somewhat to welfare society er but er on the other hand i wouldn't i wouldn't speak of a path change here because the values and the <S3> [mhm] </S3> [goals] they remained the same life without this commitment for employment er commitment to social inclusion and there also this er the er this (xx) consensus orientation or social social dialogue erm they they remind the same because they were already part of the finnish tradition and i think there hasn't been a path change also because of the fact that er erm the european employment strategies rather similar to this 'cause these were also values and and goals for the european employment strategy er er this this fostering or promoting and er so therefore despite the crisis and and this er critical juncture which there was there hasn't been a path change <S3> mhm  </S3> er in the case of giessen on the other hand i would say that a path change would've been necessary in order then to create such like this (xx) by for example these local networks erm er in order to overcome er the unemployment but in the case of giessen there has there has been no real er no critical juncture in this case and on the other hand also when you were talking about the cost er in the in the opinion of the of the local actors in giessen the- these costs er they they were too high and a cost shouldn't be understood in in the sense of economic terms but rather cost in meaning of overcoming their political and whatever animosities they have with er with the other actors and i think that only a (re-operation) of these costs will take place if er there if the unemployment is further increasing so if there will be some critical juncture in the in in the future maybe more social exclusions and social unrest or er whatsoever er and i have to say i found it also rather interesting with regard to these erm labour market reforms that are er currently hea- heatedly debated in in in germany's highest court erm because well er er there is general agreement in germany that there should be reforms but everybody says no no no as soon as their own interests are er concerned by these reforms and er interestingly the the german government is currently running a policy in this field against the interest of their own voters and er first there is there is a slight majority of people supporting these labour market reforms er but they are not the the traditional voters erm of the of the social democrats er so this shows somehow that even in the field of social politics it is possible to have these top down approaches <S3> [mhm-hm] </S3> [then] the question in what p- what price are you willing to pay for that then because you said in somewhere in the paper that there should be this er er they should probably you should the politicians should act in a way that they of course get re-elected erm but in in at the moment it seems to that german government is is willing to pay a very high price and if we think about the radicalisation we have seen that er on sunday er it is two er state elections and there's also the risk that the erm that the government will lose er power in the next er in the next er national elections but we should also keep it in mind that social policy is not isolated erm it is we we have to see all the other policies as well though there might be at the end of the day there might be some kind of trade off so they the- nobody might want this policy that (xx) erm but then they do a brilliant policy with regard to taxation if they cannot do something completely new or they (xx) excellent foreign policy there's also middle east crisis or was erm so in that case the the voters might see (xx) they they might (xx) they might think well okay this was bad but there are other there are more good things than bad and then it's also possible that the er opposition for example erm is is not offering a real alternative and then at the end of the day they might succeed with er with this er with this approach er with or with these labour market reforms we'll see er but i think that in in that case with regard to (hartz four) er i'm not sure if you agree with that but er i think they can there is some kind of path change erm <S3> [mhm] </S3> [(xx)] as the values are changing the value erm i read somewhere there is this change from welfare to workfare so i think this is this is clearly a path change and then there's also path change with regard to the to the policy making that er because i think it's not so common er that the the er that government is making so clearly a policy against interest of their own voters i think it is er there aren't so many erm examples erm in this case </S2>
<S3> yes i agree and i think it's important to dif- distinguish between different levels i think there is i agree there is a path change in the government policy and the underlying values to which this policy refers <S2> [it is the] </S2> [i- of the] govern- of the government <S2> yeah [it is] </S2> [elite] </S3>
<S2> yeah it is simply er if we think about this er (xx) debate <S3> [yeah] </S3> [this] this er lazy people debate or something like that and then also er what we had just er three days before this this state elections er schröder's er comment er concerning erm that people are abusing <S3> [yeah yeah] </S3> [the social] erm system well [that is of] </S2>
<S3> [it is yes] it's a t- kind of strategy on value level <S2> yeah </S2> to justify social exclusion and to blame those who are <S2> [yeah] </S2> [excluded] and to to find solidarity among the so- middle classes er in this concerning this value but i think the problem is the government has implemented this change and has also changed it causes and the values behind their policy but the if the middle classes did not really follow them even those new middle classes whom they wanted to address </S3>
<S2> i think one problem there is that er it's connected to the fact that er this this hard core which means that well currently there are three levels with regard to the social net er in germany as far as er unemployment support is concerned but first of all it's earning related erm which is about 63 per cent for a single person then we have the second level which is unemployment er the first was unemployment benefits then we have unemployment support which was also earning related and then we [have] </S2>
<S3> [and] so so also insurance based still [(xx)] </S3>
<S2> [yeah but still insurance based] and then we have the income support er which is then er paid by the municipalities and this third level er this second level in the middle which is er which used to be earnings related that will simply merge with with the income support so people drop from this earnings related level </S2>
<S3> into social [assistance] </S3>
<S2> [into] social er erm social assistance yeah </S2>
<S3> means [tested] </S3>
<S2> [erm] the means tested and not er not er income er dependent anymore and in germany a support is usually paid only for six months er between six and 12 months depend on how old you are and how long you have worked so there is er and i think especially in the the middle class or the lower middle class they are afraid that they are dropping because the the difference then between their former income and the income support is much bigger than for example people at the the lower end erm of the the income ladder and i think there is er there is <S3> [mhm-hm] </S3> [specif-] er specifically in the middle with the middle class and they are much more afraid er of these reforms and what that might mean for them than er other groups </S2>
<S3> yes but this argument more close to their interest <S2> yes [of course] </S2> [but i think] it's also the value of if we have a welfare state who offers everybody at least er er minimum net social net erm and er to be to s- er to a limited degree generous at that level i think this is also some kind of of idea about this er good social net that is also their er value about that it's not only the interest not i dun- don't think that everybody feels threatened by this but there are also parts of the population who do not want that this net s- is so should de- be destroyed what is there i read the the letters that people write in in <FOREIGN> der spiegel </FOREIGN> and so on <S2> yeah </S2> this middle class academics and so and often it's such a more general idea about solidarity and justice and so thi- this pla- plays a role here still <S2> mhm </S2> and i also s- think in that the example of giessen erm for a real change of a path i think also this would mean do i have described the the people erm that the actors are more seeing themselves as competing with the others it would really mean a value change towards a idea of we are all together we are sitting in the same boat erm and and so to to have a value of solidarity and cooperation in that region and to describe it in the more er as a cultural er er policy culture of the er finnish welfare state <S2> yeah </S2> , so what erm what then can other regions learn from your from from from your findings </S3>
<S2> erm i would say er first of all networking methods so you can erm whi- which also suppor- er brings me back then then to putnam putnam if you have if you use your social capital you establish networks you (rear) a much bigger er ability to attract this financial support you have a you you can represent your region outside on the european level or in the national level completely differently when you speak there with one voice and you say i represent about er 20 er or all the regional er actors in in this and that field so er they can they can really make er the difference i think if they if they cooperate but of course it is very important that to keep in mind that these local actors there are there are enormous differences between them for example if you think about power in the in the municipalities involved they they have political power erm the association of er unemployed people have only limited er limited power if you think about financial resources erm if there are some private actors involved they might have completely different financial resources than what they get in this er association of unemployed people also knowledge erm if you are in some certain circles you might have much broader knowledge concerning erm what's going on eco- economically in the region than than actor which is which is outside these circles so you we have to treat them fairly and and and equally and and try to really promote er promote this er networking because otherwise you you you can easily establish a network by everybody there everybody's having some lateral intent but then at the end there aren't any result but if you want a result you have to really put a lot of work erm into this </S2>
<S3> erm what do you think or would you agree that there are tendencies in the at the EU level in the EU policies just to support such networking on the local level so by black for example the ma- the gender mainstreaming was such a strategy of the erm the the since lisbon the the whose strategy is more to er to motivate the actors to er er build networks and so so so and would you agree and would you also think that this might be er successful and might have an impact for example in giessen or <S2> [erm] </S2> [do you] find sceptical </S3>
<S2> i totally agree with the first first part it is clearly it is an EU strategy to promote erm regional networking er the the question then is how receptive are these regions to to this for example of course the EU offers a (xx) some money or er (xx) says well this is a precondition if you want to er get some money the actors in giessen they were rather critical er the the the finns were really open towards all these EU supports it said er one of the actors said to me that er well now that we are member (of the EU if i ever think to) get a few euros from there and even if we have to put our own money in there in the er nevertheless we can get something back whereas the actors in giessen they were so sceptical about these long proc- er application procedures and everything and so i think that it is not enough then simply and there was some money on the table as well erm but some actors they didn't have the the for example the the own resources to keep track with this long lasting er application procedures so er in in that case er i think it is also important that you change the attitude of the of the local local actors and not just offer money it it might be there but they might not take it because they are only get it on the certain conditions <S3> mhm </S3> so it is er they they usually change people's or or the actor's er attitude and that is difficult i [would say] <S3> [yeah] yeah </S3> it might work very well in some regions <S3> [mhm-hm] </S3> [and in others] er for certain certain political reasons or on separate level but </S2>
<S3> that problem of top down approach to attitude change is <S2> [yes yeah] </S2> [very very typical] mhm-hm , okay erm , erm er we have gone through all my four points , erm and i you have written to me which revisions you have done in your work er compared with the first version on which i had written an erm a a review and i saw these changes and erm i read the book there are these changes erm visible so i would like to come i would like now to behold my final summary . <READING ALOUD> <NAME S2> structured the work around two different central questions the first is related to the situation of unemployed people and the consequences of unemployment for a region the second is related to the political solutions to unemployment which are developed by the central actors of the region both questions are plausible and important both are not always very closely related to each other but i think that the author succeeds in establishing plausible links between both arguments particularly in this regional study , erm what concerns the discussion of theories and the research field i think that the main theories which are important in relation to the field of research are discussed in the dissertation , </READING ALOUD> then er the next is theoretical approach of the study <READING ALOUD> the author uses two theoretical concepts which are very interesting and seem to me to fit very well to the aims of the study this is on one hand the social capital approach erm as putnam has developed it it turns out to be very fruitful for the study of regional employment policies and leads to new insights into regional conditions which are favourable for finding adequate solutions to unemployment moreover i think that also the use of an actor centred approach is very useful in order to analyse the potentials of regions to solve the problems of unemployment , particularly also because <NAME S2> does not restrict this approach to political actors of the municipality but also includes other types of actors here is one of many strengths also of the dissertation </READING ALOUD> i come to my next point use of methods of empirical research <READING ALOUD> it should be considered that regional case studies in the field of employment policies and the situation of unemployment erm are rather difficult to do for in part data are missing and the field of relevant actors is often not clearly defined i think that <NAME S2> found adequate ways to deal with such problems he used what he calls a methodological approach of data triangulation which allow to approach the field from different perspectives and different in methodological ways i think however that some problems in relation to the cross national comparison erm might have been reflected a bit more than is this erm the the question of erm what can we find when we analyse one region in one country er what is reflected here in the factors that we find </READING ALOUD> <COUGH> and then i come to the next point erm development of the argument and findings <READING ALOUD> the findings are presented in an elaborated way which takes the complexity of the issues of the study into account with a considerable degree of expertise in the field particularly the findings in relation to the empirical study on the two regions are very interesting comprehensive and innovative they pre- provide new insight into the reasons for cross regional differences in the success of employment policies in particular i- also the role of social networks of a positive development for positive development within the region is very interesting this is also true for the role of the EU policies for the explanation of the differences </READING ALOUD> six er then the next point then is the use of literature <READING ALOUD> the author uses a broad spectrum of literature of diverse fields of discourses and research in social sciences which is re- relevant in the field of research of his dissertation  </READING ALOUD> and i come , to my last point <READING ALOUD> the contribution to a further development of knowledge in in the field of research , erm the dissertation does definitely contribute to a further development of knowledge in the field of research on regional employment policies it is innovative and gives new insight into the factors which are relevant for the possibilities of regions to deal with problems of unemployment in contrast to approaches which restrict the analysis to economical factors <NAME S2> offers a more comprehensive approach which includes political and social factors particularly also the actor centred approach of the study and the inclusion of the role of social networks turn out to be very useful and can can give new impulses for further research in the field of comparative analysis erm on on regional potentials for the sol- solution of economical and social problems </READING ALOUD> okay thank you </S3>
<S2> professor <NAME S3> i thank you very much er for your comments as well as the interesting debate <READING ALOUD> if anyone here has any comments to make on my dissertation he or she is requested to ask the <FOREIGN> kustos </FOREIGN> for the floor </READING ALOUD> </S2>
<S1> please . (xx) , are there anybody (xx) @@ okay so (xx) in this case i declare , this discussion closed thank you very much </S1>
<S3> thank you </S3>
