The financialisation of eldercare has become an internationally widespread phenomenon with significant implications. Previous literature has shown how finance-controlled providers (FCPs) initially launch their eldercare services throughout urban areas, but we know little about the ways that these providers subsequently expand their services. Focusing on nursing homes in Swedish eldercare, our aim with this paper is to develop new knowledge about the expansion strategies guiding FCPs. Deploying a Bourdieusian field perspective to analyse rich document data from Sweden’s three largest FCPs, we found that they sensed ‘booming opportunities’ following demographic trends among older citizens and economic difficulties within municipalities. However, we also find that FCPs perceived ‘looming challenges’ deriving from labour shortages and profit debates in the public sector, indicating demographic trends and economic difficulties were tough to leverage as opportunities. FCPs attempted to overcome such challenges through expansion strategies centred on acquiring eldercare providers and – most notably – building nursing homes. Our findings advance the literature on eldercare financialisation by highlighting how FCPs, in devising expansion strategies, not only adopt financial tools but also incorporate field perceptions. These strategies are ultimately utilised by FCPs to expand their positions as policy actors throughout welfare states that have undergone market-inspired reforms.

The involvement of private actors in global policymaking has received significant scholarly attention in IR. Existing accounts have shown how entities such as corporations, businesses, and philanthropies build their authority to become legitimate actors and shape global politics. This paper argues that contemporary global dynamics, such as the financialisation of development and the rise of multistakeholderism, have ushered in a trend where private actors are not only seen as legitimate delegated authorities but also embraced as fully fledged political equals indispensable for addressing societal problems. To understand this shift, it is necessary to move beyond an examination of legitimation strategies to interrogate, instead, how private actors shape what are seen as ‘apt’ or ‘deviant’ ways of knowing and acting upon problems. Through an examination of what I call ‘political normalisation’ in the field of global food governance, I show how through concrete practices – individualising social problems, defining institutional aptness, and cultivating the landscape – private actors not only cultivate a perception of themselves as rightful global governors but also shape the parameters of what rightful governing ought to be. More broadly, this shift invites us to further complicate the public–private divide and assess the novel ways through which private actors ‘do’ politics.

Falling membership numbers and declining union density are issues of concern for many Australian unions. Australian Bureau of Statistics figures show that between 2005 and 2008, trade union membership declined from 22.4% to 18.9% of the workforce. Studies and statistics consistently show that union membership and density are lowest in Western Australia, despite trend reversals elsewhere. Using the Western Australian branches of two ‘blue-collar’ unions – the Australian Rail, Tram and Bus Industry Union, Western Australian Branch and the Australian Manufacturing Workers’ Union, covering a range of transport, metal working, printing and manufacturing trades – as examples, this article examines whether privatisation has contributed significantly to falling trade union density and membership in this state. These unions represented large public sector workforces. In order to test the hypothesis that privatisation has adversely affected union membership and density, the article examines three areas: changing policies in the Australian Labor Party, the breaking down of union culture and changes in trade training, and concludes that privatisation is a significant factor in the recent decline of these two unions.

This article examines the impact of the neoliberal restructuring of health services on female nurses in Turkey. It provides a qualitative analysis of work–family conflict, establishing that not only work but also family life has become more precarious. The contours of precariousness of both work and family are analysed through interviews with 50 female nurses working full time in different areas of health service provision. The findings suggest that the neoliberal restructuring of health services has led to staffing deficits along with workload intensification, unpredictable work schedules and poor organisational support. This has increased work–family conflict, defined as a form of precariousness because it heightens the difficulties, risks and insecurities entailed in balancing family-related expectations with increasing work demands for female nurses. This precariousness makes spousal support critical if nurses are to be able to address work–family conflict and leads to nurses’ compliance with unfavourable working conditions as a way to resolve the mutual interference of family and work. The increased subordination of life to work has resulted from the neoliberal managerialisation of health services, creating precarisation in the lives of female nurses.

Australia has one of the most ‘liberalised’ electricity sectors in the world. The sale of government-owned electricity companies has contributed to that liberalisation and a quarter of the proceeds of one of the world’s largest privatisation programmes. In 2014, the state governments of New South Wales and Queensland announced further electricity privatisations if re-elected. Advocates claim private ownership will mean more productive investment, lower costs leading to more efficient operations, lower prices for all consumers and better market functioning without government interference. Opponents contend that the true value of government businesses is not being realised at sale, retention can achieve returns greater than those from a sale, and that follow sale, prices will rise and jobs will be lost. This article demonstrates that the claims of either lower or higher prices, of job losses and of more efficient operations are tantamount to being myths of privatisation not borne out by reality.

The Government in England contributes an estimated £3.9 billion funding to support childcare and education for three- and four-year olds and for some two-year olds. A significant proportion of this money is spent on private sector childcare. However, little is known about how the money paid to companies providing private sector childcare is used. Through a cross-case analysis, the financial accounts of a sample of medium-to large private ‘for-profit’ childcare groups were compared with some ‘not-for-profit’ childcare providers. We found that for the for-profit companies, a considerable amount of money is being extracted for debt repayment and relatively little goes into staff wages. We found that large private for-profit nursery groups predominately use ‘private equity’ models which are characterised by borrowings and debt, with a focus on short-term financial returns. This ‘for-profit’ financial operating model arguably risks the sustainability of provision in the sector. Reformed regulation and transparency in the accounting of such providers and a consideration of alternative ‘not-for-profit’ financial models could provide greater stability and resilience.

Many south-east European states made the transition from socialist to market economies. All described here had to reform their pension systems to match the new context in which these operated. The experiences of 10 countries are reviewed – seven of which were once part of Yugoslavia. Some countries’ reforms were more radical than others. Five of them merely adapted the Bismarckian systems they had inherited; four others adopted the “three pillar” model that the World Bank had been propagating. One went further than that. The four who followed World Bank model were often forced to backtrack. Whatever the longer-term benefits, they generated their own shorter-term fiscal problems. Nonetheless, the most radical reformer gives some indications of possible ways forward. The south-eastern European states do not have financial markets that can support capitalised/funded pension systems. Nor do they have the resources to pay proportional pensions that, at the same time, keep retired people out of poverty. The article suggests that their governments should concentrate upon improving economic performance to satisfy longer term aspirations and on ensuring that pensioners are able to live properly if not luxuriously by using tax-financed transfer measures. Provision above this level can be secured through savings plans, but it must be accepted that the investments to secure those savings will have to be made abroad.