Conclusion: A New Analytics



The last chapter brings it all together and answers the key question of the book: Which kinds of struggles can we identify? The map of elderly care is outlined with its multilevel governmentality, two different kinds of struggles as major rallying points on the map: silencing and regulation, and with a new vocabulary. The chapter also considers whether and if so, a framework developed in the context of elderly care in a Nordic welfare state can be extended into other welfare contexts and other forms of care. Finally, there is a short introduction to some challenges to the current forms of regulation and whether they may be moving beyond neo-liberalizing.


Generalizing theoretically Beyond neo-liberalizing 


  1. Clarke, J., & Newman, J. (1997). The managerial state. London: SAGE.Google Scholar
  2. Dahl, H. M. (2012). Neo-liberalism meets the Nordic welfare state—Gaps and silences. NORA, 20(4), 283–288.Google Scholar
  3. Dahl, H. M., Eurich, J., Fahnøe, K., Hawker, C., Krlev, G., Langer, A., Mildenberger, G., & Pieper, M. (2014). Promoting innovation in the social services—An agenda for future research and development. Heidelberg: Baier digitaldruck.Google Scholar
  4. Deleuze, G., & Guattari, F. (1988). A thousand plateaus: Capitalism and schizophrenia. London: The Athlone Press.Google Scholar
  5. Flyvbjerg, B. (2006). Five misunderstanding of case-study research. Qualitative Inquiry, 12(2), 219–245.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Fraser, N. (2008). Scales of Justice – Reimagining political space in a globalizing world. Malden: Polity Press.Google Scholar
  7. Hansen, A. M., & Kamp, A. (2016). From carers to trainers: Professional identity and body work in rehabilitative eldercare. Gender, Work & Organization (e-publication ahead of print). Accessed 21 Dec 2016.
  8. Hoppania, H., & Vaittinen, T. (2015). A household full of bodies: Neoliberalism, care and ‘the political’. Global Society, 29(1), 70–88.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Isaksen, L. W. (2011). Gendering the stranger: Nomadic care workers in Europe—A Polish-Italian example. In H. M. Dahl, M. Keränen, & A. Kovalainen (Eds.), Europeanization, care and gender: Global complexities (pp. 141–151). Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Jones, I. R., & Higgs, P. F. (2010). The natural, the normal and the normative: Contested terrains in ageing and old age. Social Science and Medicine, 71(8), 1513–1519.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Lund, C. (2014). Of what is this a case? Analytical movements in qualitative social science research. Human Organization, 73(3), 224–234.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Lutz, H. (2011). The new maids: Transnational women and the care economy. London: ZED Books.Google Scholar
  13. Mol, A. (2008). The logic of care: Health and the problem of patient choice. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  14. Newman, J., & Tonkens, E. (2011). Introduction. In J. Newman & E. Tonkens (Eds.), Participation, responsibility and choice: Summoning the active citizen in Western European welfare states (pp. 9–28). Amsterdam: Amsterdam University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Ranci, C., & Pavolini, E. (2013). Reforms in long-term care policies in Europe: An introduction. In C. Ranci & E. Pavolini (Eds.), Reforms in long-term care policies in Europe: Investigating institutional change and social impacts (pp. 3–22). Heidelberg: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Sarvasy, W., & Longo, P. (2004). The globalization of care. International Feminist Journal of Politics, 6(3), 392–415.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Schulman, K., Gasior, K., Fuchs, M., & Leichsenring, K. (2016). The view from within: ‘Good’ care from the perspective of the care professionals—from an exploratory study, European Centre for Social Welfare Policy and Research. Vienna: Policy Brief.Google Scholar
  18. Szebehely, M., & Meagher, G. (2013). Four Nordic countries—Four responses to the international trend of marketization. In G. Meagher & M. Szebehely (Eds.), Marketisation in Nordic elderly care: A research report on legislation, oversight, extent and consequences (pp. 241–283). Stockholm: Department of Social Work.Google Scholar
  19. Thelen, T. (2015). Care as a social organization: Creating, maintaining and dissolving significant relation. Anthropological Theory, 15(4), 497–515.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Toulmin, S. (1952). The philosophy of science. London: Hutchinson.Google Scholar
  21. Venogopal, R. (2015). Neoliberalism as a concept. Economy and Society, 22(2), 165–187.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Weber, M. (1949). The methodology of the social sciences. New York: The Free Press.Google Scholar
  23. Whyte, W. F. (1993 [1943]). Street corner society. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  24. Yuval-Davis, N. (2011). The politics of belonging: Intersectional contestations. London: SAGE.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© The Author(s) 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Social Sciences and BusinessRoskilde UniversityRoskildeDenmark

Personalised recommendations