<p>Between 1990 and 1992/1993 there was a dramatic change in the Swedish labor market, resulting in an increased number of unemployed and social assistance recipients. As a response to this situation, many municipalities developed local activation programs. One of these programs, the “Uppsala model” – practiced in the City of Uppsala and characterized by a “paternalistic discourse” with sharp means tests, control and sanctions – was quite controversial. The general purpose of this dissertation is to study<b> </b>the effects of this activation method on the claimants and to study these effects with regard to the intentions underlying the method. The central questions are whether this method contributed to a greater number of claimants leaving the system for work or education, after a shorter period of time and on a more permanent basis compared to an alternative and more “traditional” method characterized by a “redistributive discourse”. Another central question is whether the method was effective under different economic conditions. The data used in the analyses were taken from two social welfare offices and included 509 able-bodied individuals who applied for allowances in either 1990 or 1992, reporting unemployment as the main reason. The main results indicated no systematic differences between the two methods with respect to outcome variables such as length of time on social assistance, probability of obtaining a regular job or an education. There were some indications (non-significant) of an increased probability of returning with claims for social assistance and after a shorter period of time, associated with the paternalist Uppsala model. The great importance of the labor market to recipients` possibilities to leave the social assistance system for work, irrespective of working method, was also shown in the study.</p>

Between 1990 and 1992/1993 there was a dramatic change in the Swedish labor market, resulting in an increased number of unemployed and social assistance recipients. As a response to this situation, many municipalities developed local activation programs. One of these programs, the “Uppsala model” – practiced in the City of Uppsala and characterized by a “paternalistic discourse” with sharp means tests, control and sanctions – was quite controversial. The general purpose of this dissertation is to study<b> </b>the effects of this activation method on the claimants and to study these effects with regard to the intentions underlying the method. The central questions are whether this method contributed to a greater number of claimants leaving the system for work or education, after a shorter period of time and on a more permanent basis compared to an alternative and more “traditional” method characterized by a “redistributive discourse”. Another central question is whether the method was effective under different economic conditions. The data used in the analyses were taken from two social welfare offices and included 509 able-bodied individuals who applied for allowances in either 1990 or 1992, reporting unemployment as the main reason. The main results indicated no systematic differences between the two methods with respect to outcome variables such as length of time on social assistance, probability of obtaining a regular job or an education. There were some indications (non-significant) of an increased probability of returning with claims for social assistance and after a shorter period of time, associated with the paternalist Uppsala model. The great importance of the labor market to recipients` possibilities to leave the social assistance system for work, irrespective of working method, was also shown in the study.