Can mandatory work in activation programmes be meaningful work?

Abstract

Quantitative well-being studies have shown that welfare recipients performing work activities in activation programmes report relatively high levels of well-being. This article asks how these findings can be explained, given welfare recipients’ constrained autonomy. To answer this question a qualitative study was conducted in the Netherlands to explore the interaction between welfare recipients’ constrained autonomy and how they experience work in Mandatory Work Programmes. This article uses concepts from critical theoretical approaches to meaningful work and autonomy to analyze the data. The findings show how the restrained autonomy of programme impacted the participants’ work experiences in various, sometimes contradictory ways. It is concluded, among other things, that quantitative well-being research does not seem to fully capture people's experiences as having the status of a welfare recipient and, related to that, what it means for them when their autonomy is constrained in one or more dimensions. It is also recommended that future quantitative well-being studies clearly distinguish between types of activation programmes, particularly regarding their mandatory nature, their goals and their target groups.