How European welfare states will develop is hard to predict. People?s current aspirations, ideas and assumptions will be important drivers of change and persistence and of the extent to which conflict and solidarity surround change. This project uses innovative methods (deliberative democratic forums, a qualitative cross-national focus group survey) to develop understanding of people?s aspirations for the Europe their children will inhabit. The interactive and discursive methods proposed deal directly with people?s ideas, but are rarely used in comparative welfare studies. The project is essentially forward-looking. It will contribute to theoretical work on the main cleavages and solidarities driving social policy in different European welfare states and to more practical consideration of the parameters of acceptable policy change. It will supply new findings relevant to the politics and sociology of welfare and provide data for reanalysis and as a base-line in future studies. The team have led major cross-national projects and will press home findings in national and EU-level policy debate. The applicant will co-ordinate the work with partners and an Advisory Board in three stages: - European-level literature review (co-ordination team); national reviews of attitudes to welfare and welfare politics (all partners); - Data gathering: Deliberative Forums and Focus Group studies (all partners); - Analysis, dissemination and engagement of research users (co-co-ordinating team/national partners). Co-ordination will be facilitated by setting clear objectives at each stage and will be pursued through conferences to assess progress, plan work, integrate findings and agree publication, dissemination and engagement strategies.

TransJudFare deals with two challenges for welfare states in the European Union (EU): the transnationalization of citizenship and welfare rights and the judicialization of politics. European case law significantly broadens the eligibility of non-economically active EU nationals to non-contributory welfare services. Yet while these rights and their potential are widely discussed, there has been no systematic study of their actual impact on member states? welfare states, the gap that this project aims to fill. TransJudFare focuses on social assistance measures and study grants and asks how member states respond to European case law at the level of lower courts, the administration, and the legislature. Teams of political scientists and lawyers in four member states will map changes in five western EU member states according to a unified approach, joining forces in the analyses along different dimensions. Austria, Denmark, Germany, the Netherlands and the UK are chosen as they are all targeted by migration flows but differ in important respects such as welfare state type and judicial system. By mapping and explaining reactions to case law, TransJudFare will enrich the political science literature on Europeanization, and law scholars? analyses of the workings of the integrated European court system. It will give a systematic account of the relevance of judicialization and EU citizenship rights for member states? welfare state reforms. TransJudFare cuts across several core themes outlined in the ?Welfare State Futures? call, addressing the question of social citizenship, increased heterogeneity among EU member states, the new politics of the welfare state, and potential shifts of welfare responsibility to the European level.

How European welfare states will develop is hard to predict. Peoples current aspirations, ideas and assumptions will be important drivers of change and persistence and of the extent to which conflict and solidarity surround change. This project uses innovative methods (deliberative democratic forums, a qualitative cross-national focus group survey) to develop understanding of peoples aspirations for the Europe their children will inhabit. The interactive and discursive methods proposed deal directly with peoples ideas, but are rarely used in comparative welfare studies. The project is essentially forward-looking. It will contribute to theoretical work on the main cleavages and solidarities driving social policy in different European welfare states and to more practical consideration of the parameters of acceptable policy change. It will supply new findings relevant to the politics and sociology of welfare and provide data for reanalysis and as a base-line in future studies. The team has led major cross-national projects and will press home findings in national and EU-level policy debate.

This project will reconceptualise welfare theory through responding to the question of how all residents living in two contrasting superdiverse neighbourhoods access healthcare. Such a focus is pertinent given increasing population complexity, heterogeneity and pace of change under globalisation, and the subsequent need to rethink welfare design, alongside issues of engagement, approachability and effectiveness. Using innovative techniques including street- mapping, community research, a mobile phone "app" alongside a neighbourhood survey, we explore the multiple approaches that residents living in superdiverse neighbourhoods use to meet their health needs, encompassing the perspectives of service users and providers. We will generate new theoretical and practical insights through the development of models of welfare bricolage: the practice by which individuals combine formal, informal and virtual (online, social media) health services across public, private and third sectors in an attempt to meet need. We use a comparative/sequential approach to interrogate local welfare states across a deprived and an upwardly mobile superdiverse neighbourhood in Bremen/Germany and compare this with three other national welfare states (UK, Portugal, Sweden) each with different welfare, health and migration regimes. By focussing on key features of superdiverse neighbourhoods where residents are differentiated according to faith, income (including socio-economic status), age, gender and legal status, we bring new insights with societal, practical and policy relevance. The study will illuminate inequalities and diversity in respect of individuals? relationship with healthcare, different modes of provision, and responsibilities for welfare allocation. Lay summary This project asks how people in highly diverse urban neighbourhoods put together the support and healthcare they need on a daily basis in times of health crisis. By mapping how people combine official health services by the state with support and knowledge from concerned groups, friends, family, neighbours, NGOs, churches or other religious groups, including online and social media sources, we build up a picture of the range of what people do to support their own wellbeing and that of their families, friends and house mates. This information, generated through interviews, participation, observations and collaboration in urban neighbourhoods, will be turned into an app that can be viewed and updated. The mapping of health services in two different, but both diverse, neighbourhoods in Bremen/Germany (Neustadt and Gröpelingen) will be compared with neighbourhoods in the UK, Portugal and Sweden. This work is important because as neighbourhoods get more diverse, old ways of providing healthcare are not work equally well for different people. Looking at healthcare from a user?s perspective, a provider?s perspective and from how they interact will offer new solutions where services are not working.

This project will reconceptualise welfare theory through responding to the question of how all residents living in superdiverse neighbourhoods access healthcare. Such a focus is pertinent given increasing population complexity, heterogeneity and pace of change under globalisation, and the subsequent need to rethink welfare design, alongside issues of engagement, approachability and effectiveness. Using innovative techniques including street-mapping, community research and a mobile phone "app" alongside a neighbourhood survey, we explore the multiple approaches that residents living in superdiverse neighbourhoods use to meet their health needs, encompassing the perspectives of service users and providers. We will generate new theoretical and practical insights through the development of models of welfare bricolage: the practice by which individuals combine formal, informal and virtual health services across public, private and third sectors in an attempt to meet need. We use a comparative/sequential approach to interrogate local welfare states across eight deprived and upwardly mobile superdiverse neighbourhoods in four different national welfare states (UK, Portugal, Germany and Sweden) each with different welfare, health and migration regimes. By focussing on key features of superdiverse neighbourhoods where residents are differentiated according to faith, income (including socio-economic status), age, gender and legal status, we bring new insights with societal, practical and policy relevance. The study will illuminate inequalities and diversity in respect of individuals? relationship with healthcare, different modes of provision, and responsibilities for welfare allocation.