ABSTRACT
However, there are also significant cross-national differences in what welfare to work means in practice. At least three key differences can be noted for these countries. First, there are differences in the way that the target groups are defined. In the USA, it is single mothers (lone parents) who are the key target group. In the other countries, the focus is more on long-term unemployed people or on unemployed youth, and lone mothers are usually included in welfare to work policies but are not the most important target group. Secondly, there are differences in the extent to which compulsion is embedded in these policies. Again, the USA is different, with a mandatory system in which work has indeed replaced welfare for most potential recipients, such that some engagement with work is a condition of welfare receipt and sanctions are applied to those who do not comply. In the other countries the extent of compulsion varies for different groups of people; generally, the highest degree of compulsion is applied to those who are unemployed, especially the long-term unemployed, and other groups-such as disabled people, lone mothers, etc.-are usually included on a voluntary basis. Thirdly, there are significant differences in the "welfare mix" in terms of public, private and voluntary sector involvement in both the funding and delivery of these services. For example, in Hong Kong the private sector has provided funding for pilot programs, while in Australia the delivery of the labor market assistance is entirely contracted out to the private and voluntary sectors.
