UBS is better at promoting an ethic of care and community participation compared to an employment-based paradigm of a jobs guarantee

2. The Role of Social Policy at the Individual Level: Expanding Agency Beyond and Through Employment

Like the employment-focused paradigm, a capability-enhancing social policy is concerned with life chances rather than only with access to commodities. For example, a capability-enhancing social policy for unemployed people cannot consist simply in offering them welfare benefits since unemployment has negative non-monetary consequences, such as not having a fulfilling occupation (Sen Citation1997, 156). However, with its focus on people’s substantive freedom to choose among various beings and doings, a capability-informed social policy is both broader and more demanding than the employment-focused paradigm. First, a capability-enhancing social policy is broader than the employment-focused paradigm because it allows the expression of human agency in forms beyond paid work, including care work and political participation (Bonvin and Laruffa Citation2018a). Second, it is more demanding not only because if a person decides to engage in paid work, this choice in order to be a free choice should be more than simply determined by the lack of alternatives for obtaining the means of survival but also because employment itself should be a capability-enhancing activity. I now analyse these two arguments in further details.

2.1. Agency Beyond Employment

The first argument is that a capability-enhancing social policy cannot focus exclusively on promoting paid employment because the notion of capability involves a broad understanding of freedom that cannot be reduced to economic self-sufficiency as acquired through paid work. This does not equate to argue that employment is irrelevant in expanding capability. Participation in paid work may have important monetary as well non-monetary benefits, including social status and recognition, opportunity for social interactions and the possibility to use and improve one’s skills (Sen Citation1997). Yet, the notion of capability involves the freedom to lead one type of life or another, i.e. the freedom to choose among valuable “functionings,” which are “beings and doings” or “possible livings” (Sen Citation1992, 40). Thus, capability is not directly or necessarily linked with employment. Indeed, human beings can flourish in a plurality of ways beyond work, including play, relationships with others and artistic activities (Nussbaum Citation2000, 79–80; Giovanola Citation2005). In particular, two crucial activities are largely neglected in the employment-focused paradigm: care work and political participation.

Care work is considered in a capability perspective as an activity potentially promoting human flourishing. While care work is a difficult and often exhausting activity and should thus not be idealized, it can “bring positive emotional and relational rewards” (Lewis and Giullari Citation2005, 87; see also Anderson Citation2003, 258). Thus, care work is valuable and enjoyable if done out of choice (Robeyns Citation2003, 80) and may be preferred in respect to paid work—above all if the latter is (socially and economically) unrewarding. For example, it may “be preferable to look after one’s own children rather than taking a job looking after other people’s” (Lewis and Giullari Citation2005, 87). Moreover, acknowledging the value of care work is essential for gender equality: redistributing a certain amount of care work from women to men becomes the opportunity to increase the possibilities for human flourishing implying “a wider set of capabilities for both sexes” (Gasper and Van Staveren Citation2003, 155; see also: Anderson Citation2003, 257; Hobson Citation2014). Properly valuing care work also allows addressing the concerns of feminist theorists who interpret the focus on employment in social policy as an inevitable extension of androcentric values (e.g. Fraser Citation1997, 41–66; Saraceno Citation2015).

A similar argument applies to political participation—broadly understood and including for example participation in a political party, a trade union or a NGO, but also volunteering for an association, etc. As care work, also actively participating in the life of the community should not be idealized since it may be frustrating and tiring. However, political participation is potentially a valuable functioning and a source of human flourishing. “Being able to participate effectively in political choices that govern one’s life” and “having the right of political participation” are central capabilities (Nussbaum Citation2000, 80). As Fukuda-Parr (Citation2003, 309) argues, the CA involves not only expanding the “agency for material production” but also increasing the “rights in decision-making.” Indeed, individuals’ relevant freedoms “include the liberty of acting as citizens who matter and whose voices count, rather than living as well-fed, well-clothed and well-entertained vassals” (Sen Citation1999, 288). Hence, not only employment but also political participation and active citizenship should be included among the valuable activities supported by a capability-oriented social policy. This is a way to address the worries of republican theorists, who are anxious that people's excessive engagement with paid employment may crowd out “the time and energy needed to develop, maintain and exercise the capacities of competent democratic citizenship” (White Citation2008, 125).

Importantly, care work and political participation represent not only individual functionings but also valuable contributions to society. In this context, two points appear important. First, care work and political activities are potentially connected areas of social life. The “ethics of care” can enhance the quality of democracy: through care work people can learn moral qualities that are also indispensable civic virtues, such as attentiveness and responsiveness towards others’ needs, responsibility, tolerance, trust and acceptance of diversity (Tronto Citation1993, Citation2013). Second, care work and grassroots political advocacy (e.g. in the disability movement) remain unrecognized contributions fulfilled by the less powerful and more marginalized people, such as poor minority women (Dósa Citation2018, 51). From this perspective, recognizing—also monetarily—caregiving and political activities is essential for both strengthening democratic citizenship and promoting the capabilities of most disadvantaged social groups.