Different welfare regimes, similar outcomes? : the impact of social policy on homeless people's life courses and exit chances in Berlin and Los Angeles

The objective of this thesis is to explain why the prevalence and characteristics of homeless people in German cities largely resemble those of U.S. cities and furthermore why the durations of homelessness are even longer in Germany despite Germany’s more comprehensive and interventionist welfare state. Specifically, this theses draws upon original research to examine how public policy affects homeless people’s exit chances in Berlin in comparison to existing research on homelessness in Los Angeles. Using ethnographic research methods, this study devises a life course typology based on similarities in the respondents’ biographies to provide a nuanced analysis of homeless people’s strategies to find employment and housing in Berlin and the ways in which public policy intervention affects such exit strategies. This research indicates that the inability of many homeless people in Berlin to exit homelessness as well as the long durations experienced by successful respondents are primarily due to welfare state deficiencies at the local scale which largely offset many of the comprehensive and interventionist policies at the federal level. Specifically, the local welfare state in Berlin is unable to accommodate life course specific needs and problems in order to assist homeless people in surmounting formidable market barriers which are more pronounced than in Los Angeles’ more flexible, less regulated, and more exploitative markets. While the latter finding confirms existing assumptions underlying welfare regime theory about differences between the country’s welfare regimes, the study also suggests that &quot;successful&quot; welfare state performance is not only a function of the nature and extent of the corresponding welfare system but rather its ability to flexibly address individual needs and expectations.</p

Complexity not collapse: recasting the geographies of homelessness in a ‘punitive’ age

Over the past decade there has been a proliferation of work on homelessness by geographers.Much of this has been framed by the desire to connect discussions of homelessness to wider debates around gentrifi cation, urban restructuring and the politics of public space. Though such work has been helpful in shifting discussions of homelessness into the mainstream geographical literature, too much of it remains narrowly framed within a US metric of knowledge and too closely focused upon the recent punitive turn in urban social policy. Here we advance instead a framework that recognizes the growing multiplicy of homeless geographies in recent years under policies that are better understood as multifaceted and ambivalent rather than only punitive