Abstract
AbstractThis article examines the contested impact of financial sanctions on Australian employment services, with government evaluation relying on job‐search theory to justify sanctions while research from sociological and psychological perspectives suggests they exacerbate labour market disadvantages and poverty. The division in perspectives reflects both methodological differences and ethical stances within scholarship. Welfare conditionality scholars propose value pluralism as an approach to reach consensus on shared policy goals across disciplines. This article engages in a simulation of the value plural approach to identify evidence gaps in the research and evaluation of sanctions and conditionality in employment services. The article identifies a research and evaluation agenda for conditionality policy, emphasising the importance of reaching a consensus to advance ethically robust policy.
Reference65 articles.
1. Alexander M. Baxter J. Renda J.&Hughes J.(2006)Australians working together: evaluation of the impact of activity requirements for parenting payment customers on their children aged 13–15 years.
2. Blaxland M.(2009)Everyday negotiations for care and autonomy in the world of welfare‐to‐work: the policy experience of Australian mothers 2003–2006. University of Sydney.
3. Does ‘Work for the Dole’ work?: An Australian perspective on work experience programmes;Borland J.;Applied Economics,2011
4. Does a Minimum Job Search Requirement Reduce Time on Unemployment Payments? Evidence from the Jobseeker Diary in Australia