How the principle of "less eligibility" to explain the variations in social and penal policy

Author/s François Bonnet
Publishing Year 2022 Issue 2022/163 Language Italian
Pages 19 P. 7-25 File size 223 KB
DOI 10.3280/SL2022-163001
DOI is like a bar code for intellectual property: to have more infomation click here

Below, you can see the article first page

If you want to buy this article in PDF format, you can do it, following the instructions to buy download credits

Article preview

FrancoAngeli is member of Publishers International Linking Association, Inc (PILA), a not-for-profit association which run the CrossRef service enabling links to and from online scholarly content.

Welfare (social policy) and punishment (penal policy) vary wildly across time and space, with social policy being more or less generous, and punishment more or less barbaric. What determines the generosity of social policies, and the humanity of penal policies? The principle of less eligibility holds that in every society, assistance will be made less attractive than lower wage work, and punishment will make crime less attractive than assistance. I argue that the principle of less eligibility determines the mix of welfare and punishment which is implemented to govern and manage poverty in a given society.

Keywords: Welfare, Punishment, Low-wage work, Living standards, Less eligibil-ity

  1. Alexander M. (2010). The new Jim Crow: Mass incarceration in the age of colorblindness. New York: The New Press.
  2. Bargain O., Orsini K., Peichl A. (2012). Comparing Labor Supply Elasticities in Europe and the US: New Results. IZA Discussion Papers. 6735. Bonn: Institute for the Study of Labor.
  3. Beckett K., Western B. (2001). Governing Social Marginality: Welfare, Incarceration, and the Transformation of State Policy. Punishment & Society, 3(1): 43-59.
  4. Block F., Somers M. (2003). In the shadow of Speenhamland: social policy and the old poor law. Politics & Society, 31(2): 283-323.
  5. Bonnet F. (2019), The Upper Limit. How Low-Wage Work Defines Punishment and Welfare. Oakland: University of California Press.
  6. Brandariz J.A. (2021). Beyond the austerity-driven hypothesis: Political economic theses on penality and the recent prison population decline. European Journal of Criminology, 19(3): 349-367. DOI: 10.1177/1477370821100064
  7. Cantillon B., Parolin Z., Collado, D. (2020). A glass ceiling on poverty reduction? An empirical investigation into the structural constraints on minimum income protections. Journal of European Social Policy, 30(2): 129-143.
  8. Card D. (1996). The effect of unions on the structure of wages: A longitudinal analysis. Econometrica: Journal of the Econometric Society, 64(4): 957-979.
  9. Carré J. (2016). La prison des pauvres. L’expérience des workhouses en Angleterre. Paris: Vendémiaire.
  10. Castel R. (1995). Les métamorphoses de la question sociale. Une chronique du salariat. Paris: Fayard
  11. Cavadino M., Dignan, J. (2006). Penal policy and political economy. Criminology and Criminal Justice, 6(4): 435-456.
  12. Clark G., Page M.E. (2019). Welfare reform, 1834: Did the New Poor Law in England produce significant economic gains?. Cliometrica, 13(2): 221-244.
  13. Currie J. (2004). The Take Up of Social Benefits. Cambridge, MA: National Bureau of Economic Research.
  14. Downes D., Hansen K. (2006). Welfare and Punishment in Comparative Perspective. In: Armstrong S., McAra L., edited by, Perspectives on Punishment: The Contours of Control. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
  15. Ekunwe I.O., Jones R.S. (2012). Finnish Criminal Policy: From Hard Time to Gentle Justice. Journal of Prisoners on Prisons, 21(1/2): 173-189.
  16. Esping-Andersen G. (1990). The three worlds of welfare capitalism. Oxford: Princeton University Press.
  17. Garland D. (1985). Punishment and welfare. A history of penal strategies. Aldershot: Gower.
  18. Garland D. (2001). The culture of control. Crime and social order in contemporary society. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
  19. Geremek B. (1978). Litość i szubienica, English translation Poverty: A History. Blackwell, 1994.
  20. Hall P.A., Soskice D.W. (2001). An introduction to varieties of capitalism. In: Hall P.A., Soskice D.W., edited by, Varieties of capitalism: The institutional foundations of comparative advantage. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
  21. Heathcote J., Perri F., Violante G.L. (2010). Unequal we stand: An empirical analysis of economic inequality in the United States, 1967-2006. Review of Economic dynamics, 13(1): 15-51.
  22. Hinton E. (2016). From the War on Poverty to the War on Crime: The Making of Mass Incarceration in America. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
  23. Hirschman A.O. (1991). The rhetoric of reaction. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
  24. Jessop B. (1993). Towards a Schumpeterian workfare state? Preliminary remarks on post-Fordist political economy. Studies in political economy, 40(1): 7-39. DOI: 10.1080/19187033.1993.11675409
  25. Keane M., Rogerson R. (2012). Micro and Macro Labor Supply Elasticities: A Reassessment of Conventional Wisdom. Journal of Economic Literature, 50(2): 464-476.
  26. Kenworthy L. (1999). Do Social-Welfare Policies Reduce Poverty? A Cross-National Assessment. Social Forces, 77 (3): 1119-1139.
  27. Lacey N. (2008). The prisoners’ dilemma: political economy and punishment in contemporary democracies. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
  28. Lacey N., Soskice D., Hope, D. (2018). Understanding the determinants of penal policy: crime, culture, and comparative political economy. Annual Review of Criminology, 1:195-217.
  29. Lappi-Seppälä T., Tonry M. (2011). Crime, criminal justice, and criminology in the Nordic countries. Crime and Justice, 40(1): 1-32.
  30. Lappi-Seppälä T. (2011). Explaining Imprisonment in Europe. European Journal of Criminology, 8(4): 303-328.
  31. Mannheim H. (1939). The dilemma of penal reform. London: George Allen and Irwin.
  32. Moffitt R. (1992). Incentive Effects of the U.S. Welfare System: A Review. Journal of Economic Literature, 30(1): 1-61.
  33. Murakawa N. (2014). The first civil right: How liberals built prison America. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
  34. Pettit B., Sykes B., Western B. (2009). Technical report on revised population estimates and NLSY 79 analysis tables for the Pew Public Safety and Mobility Project. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University.
  35. Procacci G. (1993). Gouverner la misère. Paris: Seuil.
  36. Ravallion M. (2013). The idea of antipoverty policy. No. w19210. National Bureau of Economic Research.
  37. Rodríguez-Menés J., López-Riba J.M. (2020). The Impact of the 2008 Economic Crisis on Imprisonment in Europe. European Journal of Criminology, 17(6): 845-876.
  38. Rusche G., Kirchheimer O. (1939). Punishment and social structure. Oxford: Columbia University Press.
  39. Stanziani A. (2008). Serfs, slaves, or wage earners? The legal status of labour in Russia from a comparative perspective, from the sixteenth to the nineteenth century. Journal of Global History, 3(2): 183-202.
  40. Stanziani A. (2009). The Traveling Panopticon: Labor Institutions and Labor Practices in Russia and Britain in the Eighteenth and Nineteenth Centuries. Comparative Studies in Society and History, 51(4): 715-741.
  41. Sugie N.F. (2012). Punishment and Welfare: Paternal Incarceration and Families’ Receipt of Public Assistance. Social Forces, 90(4):1403-1427.
  42. Sutton, John R. 2013. “The Transformation of Prison Regimes in Late Capitalist Societies.” American Journal of Sociology 119(3):715-746.
  43. tenBroek J. (1964). California’s dual system of family law: Its origin, development, and present status. Stanford Law Review, 17: 257-317.
  44. van Leeuwen M.H.D. (1994). Logic of charity: poor relief in preindustrial Europe. Journal of interdisciplinary history, 24(4): 589-613. DOI: 10.2307/20562
  45. Van Parijs P., Vanderborght, Y. (2017). Basic income. Oxford: Harvard University Press.
  46. Wacquant L. (2001). The penalisation of poverty and the rise of neo-liberalism. European Journal on Criminal Policy and Research, 9(4): 401-412.
  47. Wacquant, L. (2009). Punishing the poor: The neoliberal government of social insecurity. Durham: Duke University Press.
  48. Warin P. (2016). Le non-recours aux politiques sociales. Grenoble: Presses Universitaires de Grenoble
  49. Wenzelburger G. (2018). Political Economy or Political Systems? How Welfare Capitalism and Political Systems Affect Law and Order Policies in Twenty Western Industrialised Nations. Social Policy and Society, 17(2): 209-226.
  50. Western B., Beckett K. (1999). How unregulated is the US labor market? The penal system as a labor market institution. American Journal of Sociology, 104(4): 1030-1060.
  51. Western B., Rosenfeld J. (2011). Unions, norms, and the rise in US wage inequality. American Sociological Review, 76(4), 513-537.

François Bonnet, Spiegare le variazioni della politica sociale e penale con il principio di less eligibility in "SOCIOLOGIA DEL LAVORO " 163/2022, pp 7-25, DOI: 10.3280/SL2022-163001