While ‘social investment’ is today one of the most influential approaches for framing welfare reform among social policy scholars, the concept of investment is not usually discussed in this literature. Filling this gap, Fred Block has recently proposed a new definition of investment, grounding it on the social investment approach to welfare reform and on feminist theories of social reproduction. Highlighting the economic value of caregiving and social policy, Block’s conceptualization has clear progressive implications. Yet this new definition is also problematic – especially once ecological limits and issues of global justice are considered – because it fails to question the purpose of production, that is, its social-ecological ‘utility’. Building on a critique of Block’s proposal, I offer an alternative conceptualization of investment. While I retain Block’s emphasis on social reproduction, I suggest looking at both social policies and the economy through the prism of care. In terms of spatial logics, this conception of investment rejects the paradigm of competitiveness that informs social investment – whereby states/regions/cities compete to attract mobile capital – for focusing on the improvement of habitation. I argue that this conceptualization – which demands a democratic debate on the purpose of investments, rather than letting (global) markets determine their value – is not only better suited to promote social-ecological justice but also more in line with Block’s own scientific and political aims.
Francesco Laruffa (Mon,) studied this question.