This article attempts to demonstrate how the community subsidizes a married couple in which the wife stays at home, through the combined effect of tax and social security privileges. Contrary to what might be thought, this system is not even really designed to protect ‘the family’: it operates irrespective of whether there are any children or not. It is in fact intended to reward the couple in which the wife devotes herself to looking after her husband. It is quite likely that women who go out to work (and who also do their housework) bear more than their share of the cost of this, because of the ‘overpayments’ that they are obliged to make in taxation and social security contributions. I propose that the system be abolished, as it corresponds to an out-of-date concept of marriage and has no justification from either the economic or the social standpoint. A housewife receives an income from her marriage and, if she actually does the housework, she improves the couple's standard of living. A number of working hypotheses are put forward in an attempt to see how the housewife could assume the normal responsibilities of a taxpayer and social security contributor.

It is impossible (a) to assess the value of the services provided by the housewife in her sheltered environment and (b) even to know for certain what she really does there (many housewives employ charwomen or au pair girls or even full-time servants). However, when it is a question of granting to a widow an income related to what she had when her husband was alive, she is entitled to a specified fraction – usually half – of what her husband received or would have received. If this principle is valid with respect to benefits, it ought also to be valid with respect to obligations. Thus, the main proposal made here is that the housewife should pay income tax and social security contributions on a fictitious amount equivalent to half of her husband's earnings; this amount would be treated as ‘earned income’, which is the most favourable assumption from her standpoint. At the same time, the husband would pay income tax and his own social security contributions on the whole of his own earned income, as he would if he employed a housekeeper. The above-mentioned fictitious amount would also serve as the basis of calculation of the housewife's entitlement to social security benefits, subject to redistribution so as to assure a minimum subsistence in case of need. Reforms along these lines could only be put into effect gradually, since it would be unjust to penalize people from one day to the next for irresponsible behaviour which they have been deliberately encouraged to adopt up to the present.

Action research has emerged as a particular form of applied social science investigation in attempts to develop useful ways of trying out and evaluating social policy innovations. Despite a variety of contributions to the debate about its methodology, action research remains a term that is employed very vaguely to describe all kinds of design that include some combination of the two elements of action and research. This paper outlines the methods that were adopted in the National Children's Bureau series of action research studies, where the research team attempted to evaluate experiments in which they also actively intervened. The three elements of the field-work setting – programme, process and product – were all important aspects of the research. The inevitable tensions between the demands of evaluation and those of close involvement raise difficult questions of research design. A model of action research is presented as a constructive way of reconciling the search for objectivity and reliability with the advantages of involvement in the definition of objectives and methods.

The concept of Sozialpolitik (social policy) has rarely been considered in the English-language literature thus far. The present article surveys the pertinent English, American and German literature which led to the initiation of the Verein für Sozialpolitik (Social Policy Association) in 1873. All these efforts culminated in Otto von Zwiedineck's classic book, Sozialpolitik (1911). A chapter of this book, now printed in Zwiedineck's collected essays, Mensch und Wirtschaft, is offered in English translation for the first time. The article presents and clarifies the concept of Sozialpolitik in terms of social action directed toward problems affecting society as a whole and the continued attainment of society's goals. However, the definition of these goals remains subject to change. A theoretical foundation for the integration of scientific and normative perspectives in the social sciences is thereby provided.

The authors suggest that the importance of the dissemination of research findings in social policy has been greatly underestimated. The nature of the different agencies involved and the relationship between those who sponsor and those who ‘receive’ research are examined. This shows that the problems of dissemination are of two classes – those of principle and those of practice. Having discussed the principles, the authors suggest changes needed to improve practice so that more effective use may be made of research findings. Most of the examples are chosen from the field of housing but, where relevant, other fields of social policy are compared and contrasted.

News about social security and income maintenance opened with a special insertion on pensions in The Times of 11 May. This consisted of articles on various aspects of the new earnings-related pension scheme which came into force on 6 April. The accounts included funded schemes; private pension schemes; employers' and employees' participation; age flexibility in retirement; insurance funds; the property market and investment; the problem of size; the position of widows; trade unions and pensions; the exclusion of the self-employed and the position after the 1980s. The opening article said that the important achievement of getting the scheme into operation was diminished by the sheer weight of ignorance about it – ‘All the evidence to date indicates that the vast majority of people cannot or will not understand the new State pension scheme.’ This may be regrettable but it is not surprising in view of the scheme's complexity. How far the govermnent's efforts to overcome widespread ignorance will be successful remains to be seen (28 – 7/4 – 1.7). women was raised once again in a discussion document on the role of the elderly in society published on 27 June, A Happier Old Age. The numbers and circumstances of elderly people and public expenditure on services to help them were presented in the document which was concerned not only with pensions but with family life, recreation, mobility and other aspects of later life. Comments were invited by the Secretary of State for the Social Services by the end of October. The publication of a White Paper on the elderly in 1979 was foreshadowed. The problems of retirement age and the difference between men and women were presented and discussed in August 1976 (22 – 6/z – 1.8) and in February 1977 (24 – 6/4 – 1.10).