LAIKIPIA UNIVERSITY

Bachelor of Arts (Economics/Sociology/Criminoloy/Psychology)

YEAR 3 SEMESTER 1

Ocarl George gocarlus@gmail.com 0736197054 or 0716 216527

SOCI 309: SOCIAL POLICY AND ADMINISTRATION

Course Description
Critical analysis of social policy and administration in selected programme areas. The process of social policy
analysis, current issues in funding and monitoring of social services and strategies for dealing effectively with social
problems.
Course Objectives
By the end of the Course, the Learner should be able to:
i. Describe Social Policy and Administrationand Relationship with other Fields
ii. Discuss the Process of Social Policy Analysis
iii. Demonstrate thorough understanding of current issues in funding and monitoring of Social Services, and
Strategies for dealing effectively with social problems
Course Content
S/N LESSON TOPICS
1 Introduction and Definition of Terms
 Definition of Social Policy and Administration
 Types of Social Policy
 Basic Concepts

2 History of Social Policy and Administration

 Western Europe
 Social welfare Regimes

3 Interelationship between Social Policy and Other Desciplines, Economics,

Political Science, Geography, History, Religion, Philosophy, Medicine,
Statistics, Demography,

4 The Process of Social Policy Making and Analysis

 Policy Making
 Features of good policy making
 Characteristics of good policy making
 Policy cycle
 Policy making process

5 The Policy Issues and Strategies

 The statutory equality duties
 Human Rights

Page 1 of 38
  Sustainable development
 Impact assessments
 Review of Public Administration
 Regional Development Strategy

Comparison between Eastern Asian and European Social Policy Regimes

Page 2 of 38
SOCIAL POLICY AND ADMINISTRATION
Intro: meaning of Social Policy and administration
Can only be understood by consideration of concepts involved and defined.
Social is used in the context of society and has reference to either the whole society/community or a group of
individuals within certain social circumstances.

It could also be used to refer to individual cases requiring social work approaches e.g. case studies of specific
individual circumstances that define one in terms of need of social services e.g. a blind person.

Society has to be analysed in terms of the need situation and in therefore in terms of what social services are
required to fill the need gap.

For social policy, society is seen in terms of vulnerability in the context of how accessible or not social services are
to either a particular community, group of people or an individual e.g. what is the proportion /percentage of illiterate
people in Kenya and what would be the need for provision of education service.

Society can be vulnerable in terms of e.g. security, education, water, resources, material/infant mortality, adult
education, nutritional status, special education, housing, etc.

To what extent does a society have access to these policy. Questions: What is a policy?
It is a statement of principles of broadly defined means of reaching specific objectives and goals and or the overall
strategies formulated by an organization within some specific region.

The organization could be e.g. the government, NGO’s, other voluntary organizations, households, community,
group of individuals e.g. peer counselors.
In a way, a policy refers to a programme of action either at the micro or macro levels of social reality.
The macro level refers – the holistic level/large scale e.g. national levels in which will be focusing on government
policies in provision of services e.g. policy of providing free primary education, providing material and infant
health, job opportunities, reduction of poverty, reduce employment.
Micro-levels – smaller/middle ranged levels of social policies focusing on smaller entities of social situations.
To focus on micro or macro is dictated by differences in the need gaps and will depend on how a need is defined in
society.
If a need requires whole society, then it requires a macroscopic approach e.g. need for primary education.
Need for Secondary-Level education – requires a smaller group of people

Page 3 of 38
Social policy and administration is about the study of the distribution and organisation of welfare and well-being
within societies. Its focus is on the ways in which different societies understand and meet the needs of their
populations. The discipline is characterised by the following principles:
• the rigorous linking of theoretical analysis with empirical enquiry
• the identification and understanding of different value positions
• a willingness to engage with a range of intellectual traditions and social science disciplines
• the belief that students should acquire the skills and qualities which enable them to become active and
informed citizens.

BASIC CONCEPTS
1. Social Services
Services – those things required to fill a need gap.
They could be in terms of tangibles and intangibles.
In medical services – tangibles – drugs, intangibles – consultation.
Services are provided to alleviate a need gap and the assumptions is to improve the welfare of society –
achieve happiness for society.
Services all state/government provided services and goods e.g. roads, railways, electrification, street
lighting, police force, parks, education, medical services, security, nationhood.
Services and goods provided at personal level consumption i.e. at case work level e.g. those needed for the
elderly – homes for the aged, children homes, physically and mentally handicapped.
The work of social services department in any state/government/local authority
2. Social Welfare
Is a relative term that refers to an attempt to achieve goodness of society, to maximize on happiness of
society at a future period – presently and in the future.
There’s need for welfare services by either the government, NGO’s, voluntary organizations,
households/communities.
Programmes on enhancing income levels, improving health conditions, housing education, electrification
programmes, human equality (participation in democratic processes).
Are provided to alleviate need in society and improve the general standards of lining.
Is designed to achieve a designed end state of humanity that is better than the present – purely freely, cost-
sharing, some people pay for them.
3. Social work
Is used to refer to the advice of counseling provided by social workers of probation services in all areas of
social welfare e.g. family unit, prisons, schools, colleges, churches.
Could also refer to the theories, methods, models and practical ways of working used by social workers.
4. Client
Is a person in need and therefore a recipient of a social service from social workers.

Page 4 of 38
 Not all recipients are needy – some recipients can pay while others obtain the services for free.
The needy – a person unable to afford the service on his own therefore the person experience social
deprivation (all channels used to access or blocked by some situational circumstances.

Statutory agencies and services

Are those that come into existence by acts of parliament and therefore they are public organizations run and
financed by government resources.
They can be either under direct control of central government or local governments.

Voluntary agencies and services

Voluntary organizations are run and financed by charitable or non-profit making organizations.
Are also independent of state control and financing and policy making.
Are controlled by the existing government loans and legal system – are subjects to the law of the land.
Not all members in voluntary organizations pr ovide voluntary services – the organization could be
providing voluntary services but workers are paid salaries and therefore not providing voluntary services.
Students counseling, children homes, organizations e.g. anti-rape, alcoholic, environmental friendly groups
that clean environment, associations e.g. Kenya Society for the Blind, the disabled, helpage KE, Church
Sponsored Education and Health.

Free Market Situation

Is where there is bilateral exchange of goods and services guided by the situation of demand and supply – it
assumes that clients have ability to pay for the services needed to fill their need gaps. Exchange is
determined by cash nexus and which governs the form of interaction between economically rational men.
In social policy, its not everybody who is able to procure services from the free market situation – FMS is a
limiting factor in social policy and services provision and that’s why it should only exist as a
complimentary to other channels of service provision are e.g. the social market.
Situation – def. as comprising socially rational men who are guided by the principles of social exchange in
the provision of social services i.e. social interaction is based on compassion, caring, co-operation, atheistic
motives (need for good/welfare of society).
It does not involve necessarily the focus of supply and demand guided by the cash nexus.
Supply is not necessary influenced by demand. Some assumptions – some goods and services can’t be
found in the F.H.S but only from society (Kenyan Society) – family services have no market value. To
what extent should people pay for everything they want, should social market control. Some services e.g
mental health, electricity, roads
Social policies: those designed to provide social services in specific social circumstances.

Page 5 of 38
Those social circumstances will be defined by the macro or micro level – are they requiring whole society or small
group/level of society e.g. material services not required by larger group – not men and some women below 18
above 35.

Epidemics/national catastrophies e.g. bids – macro level. One can also narrow down to Africa – microscopically
analysed, in KE – the difference comms. Become the micro level.
Social policies must clearly defined the nature of the social circumstances in terms of the social problem/social
issues – poverty can be a social problem and issue, illiteracy may not be a social problem but an issue if few people
or few – which requires a specific(s) to alleviate, ameliorate or reduce the levels of that problem.

It also involves stating clear objectives and goals that would be involved in changing the social circumstances of that
society.
It also involves the required resources as inputs towards solving those social situations, what resolves, required etc.

It also involves the process of planning and implementation e.g. plan to have free primary education between year
2000 & 2007, plan to have free medical services, free secondary education have to be implemented and documented.
Policies involve the expected change i.e. what is the output that a particular programme is designed to bring about
e.g. from primary education – reduce no. of illiterate, increase the number of those attending primary education.
Involves feedback (information flow from the society/group of people who are provided a services back to the
organization or agent that initiated the process of change.

Information flow can be measured by direct/indirect means e.g happiness before 2002 in regards to primary
education.
Some comms. Have not taken their children to free primary education.

TYPES OF SOCIAL POLICIES

1. Explicit social policies
Are social policies that are direct and over in terms of their intentions of plan of actions for provision of
social services.
Focus directly on a specific need group of specify particular needs e.g. primary education, material health,
provision of water, rural electrification.

- These are also those that are directly felt in terms of consequences or planned for change arising from
the social service.
2. Implicit
Are indirect/ overt or hidden in terms of their intentions and consequences.
They arise as spill over or thru’ the process of the multiplier effect.

Page 6 of 38
Women bread winners – majority of those who benefit for free primary education hence knowledge .
Material health – more survive hence more population spill over.
Agricultural policies – provide food all over – a healthy population will not be dependent – determine their
own requirements, no improvement of agriculture.
Civic education – create awareness to people – many politicians rejected by awareness.
Sometimes explicit policies may turn out to be implicit depending on government policity e.g. FPE was
implicit before 2002 but is now explicit – can interchange.
Development of access roads to rural areas – spill over opening up rural areas, can’t sieve what goes to
rural areas.
Rift valley Fever – government never had vaccination before implicit, now explicit.

Administration
Refers to the organizational arrangement and structure of operation through which social services are
provided to the needy people. Assumption – services must be provided through a medium of some
organization – either public organization (government) or NGO’s, voluntary organizations, households,
communities/groups.
Administration is charged with the role of planning and implementation of social policies and programmes.
These policies have to be specific to the particular needs of the people that are to be targeted.
Is concerned with policy formulation i.e in terms of the conception of the need situation of a particular
society, conception of which service has to fit in that need situation/fill the gap, the resources that would be
required for that.

It involves formulation of goals and objectives e.g. millennium development goals, what is the best way to
development society by 2000 – access to water to all households, provide public health to a larger
proportion, material health by 2030.

Is charged with implementation of policies and programmes. To implement – to actualize or put into action
the theoretical idea into practice e.g. what is needed in improving maternal health – construction of health
centres close to the people, training of both medical and parcimedical, rural outreach/outreach programmes
medical people to go to the people.

Is involved with monitoring and analysis of policies and program implementation.

Assumption – programmes are undertaken in phases/stages and this could be in terms of specific time
periods.
Monitor – make sure what was planned for at a specific time period is undertaken, whether programme is
on target, succeeding.
Kibera slum upgrading programme – 1st year awareness, then programme starts.

Page 7 of 38
Is charged with evaluation and follow up process of social policies and programmes.
Evaluation follows directly from monitoring and has to do with whether the targets/set goals are being
achieved e.g. if a community had to be given civic awareness/education within 12 months at the end of the
period, ¾ are reached, find out what was the problem.

Social policies must meet the target required – shortage of teachers, F. P. education.
Follow up – restrategizing
Religion/culture – FGM Rested values
Social policy administration is analysed as either formal/informal organization.
Formal organizations – those clearly designed with a specific structure, policies, goals and objectives of
operation.
They have specific rules and regulations that guide them.
Have a hierarchy of power – positions are achieved and not ascribed e.g. public organization – government.
Other organizations e.g. MYW wanawake – has clear spelt out structure.
Informal organization – opposite of formal organization.
Have no clear rules and regulations, no clear structure, policies tend to operate in an amorphous situation
like a vigilante group to provide security.
Sometimes informal organizations form themselves within formal organizations.
There’s informality of activities within formal organizations.
Ministry of special programmes – provide relief food – may be taken to places not in need. Parastatal
organizations – used to provide goods and services to the people.

HISTORY OF SOCIAL POLICY AND ADMINISTRATION

Western Europe
Social policy as a discipline has its roots in Western European situation just like the general sociological
discipline and many of the factors that led to development of social as a general discipline also associated
with those of social policy.
Are e.g. the process and development of industrialization in Western Europe and its maturation to post
industrialism.
For Social Policy. there were social factors/forces that were important levitical in its formation.

These forces in Britain, America, Belgium, Australia, Northern, Europe, Scandinavian countries were all
influential in influencing the intellectual thinking of scholars to be able to rationalize the issue of society
and social welfare.

Page 8 of 38
 In Britain especially where industrialization process started, there was a lot of population movement to
urban areas before 20th Century. This created problems in society e.g. dislocation of people from their rural
roots and therefore culture, housing problems in urban areas of increased levels of poverty resulting from
changes in the methods of production especially the process of mechanization which replaced most labour
in agricultural production
Most people therefore moved to urban areas to look for jobs were inadequate, those who got were paid little
– their social welfare degradation.
Therefore costs of living increased – pay transport, food, security, companionship.
All these brought issues of how population could survive.
British government to return the excess population from urban to rural areas where they had come from.
Government policy was to provide finances through the local Parishes that would provide the needed
services to that excess population – ideally provide for their social welfare – their livelihood in urban areas
was bad.

Elizabethan Poor Laws

Between 16 and 20th Centuries the British government enacted what came to be known as the Elizabethan
poor laws which required that the poor in the urban areas and the unemployed had to be moved back to the
villages.
Elizabethan poor laws were enacted during the reign of Queen Elizabeth towards the close of 16th century.
1598-1601 an Act was passed that provided a systematic plan for helping the poor and established a system
of public responsibility implemented through local care.
It differentiated three classes of the poor:
i. the able bodied poor – provided with work or punishment in prison or the stocks if they refused to
work
ii. the impotent poor, who were to be kept in alms houses and the
iii. Dependent children – who were to be apprenticed until they were 24 years old for boys and the girls
until they were either 21 years old or married.
Monies to finance these laws were taxes levied on lands, houses, and tithes from money left from charitable
works and from fines on wrong doers.

The first social welfare policy to be widely implemented worldwide was the Elizabethan Poor Laws. Untill
1600s, the needs of the poor were the responsility of feudal landowners in England. As England became
more urban, rulers saw the need for assistance to poor people who did not did not “belong” to a landowner.
This new sense of public responsibility for the poor resulted in the Elizabethan Poor Laws, formally
adopted in England in 1601, which outlined the public’s responsibility for the poor. The primary principles
of the Elizabethan Poor Laws as follows:
 The poor were categorised as ether “worthy” or “unworthy” to receive aid.
 The worthy poor included widows, orphans, the elderly, and people with disabilities
 The unworthy poor included able-bodied single adults and unmarried women with our-of-wedlock
children

Page 9 of 38
  Aid for the poor first came from families, and only when the family absolutely could not provide
economic support did public authorities step in
 Legal residency in the community was necessary to be eligible for assistance
 Assistance was temporary and only for emergencies. The ultimate goal was for each recipient to
gain employment or marry someone who was employed .
Increased urbanization and industrialization made the work of parishes increasingly difficult since there
were more people displaced in urban areas – mechanization - more returned to rural areas not able to work
with the influx.
There was need to develop a national system for the needy or members in society worse off than the
poorest in work.
British had to develop a means-test mechanization of categorizing population in terms of their poverty
levels.
Means-test was a scale used to determine levels of poverty and everybody who fell below this scale was
described as the poorest of the poor – those falling below poverty line.
In the 19th Century, there was an attempt to alleviate poverty by re-organizing the British Society e.g. by
attempting to strengthen the traditional institutions e.g. the communities, family systems, kinship and the
social exchange relationships that had been disorganized by capitalism and industrialization process.
Other attempts included policies to reduce women’s and children’s working hours in factories and
industries, policies to improve general safety in workplace, general working conditions, public health
policies aimed at reducing incidents of diseases and poor sanitary conditions.
To compliment the work of the government, local authorities were also to provide services to the people
within their jurisdiction.
They were also required to employ professional staff e.g. social workers, probation officers, counselors,
medical officers.
Religious organizations were also expected to make an input e.g. in provision of education to the children
of the poor – church sponsored education programmes started.
By 1880 schooling was compulsory for children aged 5 – 10 years who were provided free educational
policy of education to all.

By 1908, British government enacted the old age pension act that provided for security in old age in terms
of income and any other services they would need.
1911 – National Insurance Act – was financed by voluntary contribution for people above means – test
poverty line.During the 1st war and after, there were many effects that were experienced by families in the
economy generally e.g. displacement and dis-jointment of families as a result of consumption to the war.

Page 10 of 38
The men had to go to the war and left behind their families.For those left behind, there was the problem of
general survival and livelihood which needed the government to provide subsidized housing,
unemployment benefits especial after the war for the ex-servicemen.

The interwar period (1914 – 1944) was an increased consolidation in social policy because of the prevailing
social, political and economic circumstances that were unfavorable to the livelihoods of society generally.
The British government had to come up with measures such as the introduction of contributory social
security for protection of all citizens to cater against sickness, unemployment, old age income, family
allowances, maternity benefits and provision for widows as a direct consequence of the husbands having
been lost in the wars.
In 1944, there was also introduction of Education Act providing for universal free secondary education by
the government.In 1948, Children’s Act specifically meant to benefit all children in deprivation.
As a result the government created children’s departments which were run by social work professionals.
During 1940 in Britain, as a result of both the wars and after years were important for development of the
present discipline of social policy.
During 1960’s, there were a number of academic studies and researches that were undertaken to analyse,
evaluate and understand the process of social policy in Britain.
This led to the development of social policy perspective/frameworks that guided academic discourses about
the direction of whether it was still necessary to provide social services or not and if it was necessary, to
what extent should services be provided by the public sector vs private sector.
Some scholars were for the idea of providing services by the government (public sector), some for
withdrawal – private sector (market forces in provision of services).
This has been the guiding principles for all social theories and academics in terms of alignment to either the
pro-public services provision or on the other hand, those who ascribe to the free market provision of social
services.

Dichotomy of social services scholars – provision.

Social policy as a discipline developed concurrently with sociology as its mother discipline and has been
influenced to a larger extent in the ideology and methodological procedures used and applied in sociology.
e.g. the scientific analysis of society and how services can be provided to society objectively even as much
as service provision is subjective. Social policy has to go beyond main discipline of sociology because of
the idea of making choices – need gap – services.
Scholars argue – they are objective in their choices.
Choosing F.P. Education you are subjective, scholars argue in this subjectivity there’s objectivity – has
more benefit to society compared to others e.g. maternal health.

Page 11 of 38
 That traditional influenced study of social policy in attempts to study social services objectively and by
justifying why the concept of subjectivity is exlusive to the social policy field – i.e subjectivity point can be
conceptualized differently from the same way soci does.
Their subjectivity is about choices. What is the justification for subjectivity because:

Services are provided as a result of specific need/situations.

The assumption therefore is that its not everybody who needs a specific service at a particular time – F.P. Education,
maternal health, provision of water, public health.
We have to choose that population that deserves in terms of the need gap – services will only be provided to fill a
gap.
S. Policy scholars have therefore no option but to be subjective.

INTER-RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN SOCIAL POLICY AND OTHER DISCIPLINES

There was the realization that human society and their situations/conditions are so complex and varied that there was
need for social policy planner and scholars to make use of other disciplinary orientations in order to successfully be
able to analyze and provide social services from a scientific point of view – i.e. objective point of view.
A point of view that rationalizes and analyses merits that have to influence service provision.
As a result, social policy has had to do with the input of several other disciplines. The main of which is social but
the others include economic, geographical, demography and population studies, pot science, philosophy and ethics,
medicine, history, religion, statistics, epistemology, herbalism.These disciplines represent aspects of
individuality/community factors which influence the evaluation of the need gap and services to provide.
Sociology
Soci is the mother discipline in which social policy was developed and that’s because the subject matter of sociology
and social policy focuses on society, the people at individual, group/societal level.
Socilogy becomes important as it contributes to the understanding of social policy through its theories e.g. social
exchange theory, social action theory, symbolic interaction, social behaviourism, structural functionalism, conflict
theory, importance of all these theories.
Conflict, activities of Red cross – how conflict.So that they become situations for us to understand society.

We have to apply sociological methodologies e.g. interviews, questionnaires, observations, surveys, case studies and
sampling methods. These methods are the ones used to evaluate society e.g. levels of witchcraft illiteracy.

The application of sociological concepts e.g. society, individual group, comm. Sub-group institutions, social
structures, social problem, social issues.
Soci provides the necessary hypothesis that are used to theorize comm. In order to understand the needed service.
A hypothesis – Statement of fact that describes the cause effect linkages in social phenomena.

Page 12 of 38
Propositions – more women likely to be of low income.
Hypothesis – Gender is more likely to influence economic level.

Economics
Econ and other disciplines have to be seen in the context of contribution to society.
Econ. contributes economic theories – needed to evaluate society and therefore the need gap.
Economic theories – macro and micro economic theories, theories of development, under development significantly
contributes to the understanding and thus formulation of relevant social policies. E.g. Rationalization of free market
situation in society and application of principles of supply and demand.
Economically – why Africa poor
Social policy planners have to fall back on economists – economic growth.
Economic methods concepts, hypothesis – imp. In rationalization and analysis of society e.g. level of economic
rationality of society, operation of market forces of supply and demand, cash.

Political Science
Is the study of governments and government structures.The government policies that are formulated – National
Development Plans – Sessional papers, Regional Programmes that governments have to make.We need to put into
operation theories that explain government structures of operations and why those governments exist where they are
…
To… to provide a service, social policy planners must understand the nature of existing political system.Capitalist –
operation of market system predominate over the social market which is now likely to be sound in
socialism/communism.
Need to understand how government determine proposition of private or public…
Difference between central government and decentralized government at district, locational level, importance of
councilors etc.
Have to use political science hypothesis and propositions e.g. there explain the nature of government organizations.
Good leadership is likely to lead to good governance in rural areas.

Geography
Is the study of the spatial distribution of population, plants and animals living and non-living within a particular
natural environment. Importance – in understanding environmental and climate factors that explain predisposition to
specific need gaps by a particular group or society – climate and environment – determinant of vulnerability – N.
Eastern – flooding, drought and hunger situations.

Page 13 of 38
Need to apply geographical theories – classical theories, modern theories, imp. In explanation of natural
environment phenomena/operation of the universe e.g. the rise and setting of the sun, the seasonality from Jan –
Dec., short rains, long rains, tropical seasons.

Apply geographical methodologies – geographical information systems in order to be able to understand natural
elements, social elements e.g. can explain fertility conditions of a particular region vis-à-vis the population and how
these factors explain vulnerability – need gap.
Geographical concepts, hypothesis and prepositions – hypothesis have to relate to natural phenomena – cause of
climate change, desertification.

History
Is the study of past events and focuses on the record system of the post factual happenings (things that have already
happened)

Importance – understanding where social policy came from – how it developed it has a history.
Provision of any social service is historical – where does it start, where does it end F.P.E. started in 2003
There are some services that are historical to humanity and therefore society can’t do without them.
Need – understand history of communities – to acknowledge their situational conditions, understand why they are
the way there are e.g. history of pastoralists, long distance traders, women..
Some communities don’t use certain services – cultural history, social history, political history – e.g. family
planning not able to penetrate all communities. In Kenya – Muslims, need for education especially for women.
History of pastoralists and education – cattle rustling brings insecurity (need gap)
To understand historical phenomena.
Use historical theories, concepts, hypothesis, propositions methods.
Methods – oral trade, historical surveys, historical observation (archeology).
Social policy planners need historians archaeologists.

Religion
Is both historical and present – is important because it defines existences of man’s beliefs where man is coming
from, heading to.
Religious differences explain vulnerability situation and need gaps.
Muslims, Catholics, Reformed Catholic church, Animists, non believer, traditional religion, Catho – oppose modern
family planning services – against religious doctrine.
Predominantly catholic community sells modern family planning.
Religion is about people of their beliefs.
To be able to succeed in social services provision, there must be a simple belief that the services will be useful e.g.
belief..

Page 14 of 38
Religious theories – creation theory must be some foundation on which that service is provided
Religious methodology – used to understand people and provide services – define people as poor – richer elsewhere
when they die.
2 kg no complain – suffer for the present – future, good.
Preaching, keshas – service introduction through religious leaders.
Religious concepts – sin, man, woman, creation, satan, congregation, believers. Some services – sinful, satanic in
terms of one’s religious beliefs
Rel. hypothesis of preposition – suffering of man to end in everlasting heaven. – social control measures

Philosophy
Study of knowledge – source of knowledge
There are always foundations of knowledge.
In every society, there are philosophical orientations – government systems have philosophy.
These ideas – importance – predetermine whether society can get some services or not.
Phil. – that women should not be educated beyond certain level slums.
African child
- Philosophical theories
- Hypothesis
- Methodologies
- Phil. Cuts across all those disciplined in an attempt to understand – phil of society understand social,
philosophy of economic, development, relations.

Medicine
- Is impossible because – one of the areas directly used as a social service.
- Is used in the understanding of diagnosis and prescription of diseases.
- A major part of social services revolve around the biology of humanity medicine – becomes
impossible in ability to understand that
- Family planning – medical theories, concepts, methods,

Statistics
- Study of the absolute number of people
- Is impossible – ensures, demographic surveys, inter-censals, demographic, household surveys.
- Government – Central Bureau of statistics – no of pastoralists affected by Rift valley fever.

Demography of Population Studies

Study of population in terms of signs, composition, structure and distribution.
Services are provided to specific people in terms of population – men, women, aged, young, a particular region.

Page 15 of 38
Demographic transition theory, fertility decline theory, modernization and industrialization theories.
Methodologies, concepts and hypothesis – useful in that analysis.

Why is it elusive for social policy to stand on its own as a discipline?

THE PROCESS OF SOCIAL POLICY MAKING AND ANALYSIS

What is Social Policy?

A policy is typically described as a principle or (set of) rules to guide decisions and achieve rational and predictable
outcome(s). Policies are generally adopted by government bodies and parliaments, or the board of or governance
body within an organization or companies.A plan or course of action, as of a government, political party, or
business, intended to influence and determine decisions, actions, and other matters.

Basically, Social Policy is the study of human wellbeing, to which there can be two kinds of response: So it’s all
about doing good for people thus it must be about pretty much everything really. Social Policy entails the study of
the social relations necessary for human wellbeing and the systems by which wellbeing may be promoted. It’s about
the many and various things that affect the kinds of life that you and I and everyone can live. Think for a moment
about the things you need to make life worth living: essential services, such as healthcare and education; a means of
livelihood, such as a job and money; vital but intangible things, such as love and security. Now think about the ways
in which these can be organized: by government and official bodies; through businesses, social groups, charities,
local associations and churches; through neighbours, families and loved ones. Understanding these things is the stuff
of Social Policy.

Social Policy is concerned with much, much more than the things that governments spend our money on.
Nevertheless, though it refers only to the visible tip of the Social Policy iceberg, the most conspicuous evidence of
the importance of social policies is ‘social spending’.

Social policy, in its most general sense, aims to improve the wellbeing of society and meet the basic welfare needs
of its members. The term describes the principles and priorities which underpin the state approach to supporting the
most vulnerable. It encompasses a wide range of social care, housing, health, education and public service responses
designed to provide a safety net and govern the level and thresholds for state intervention in social problems.

We refer to Social Policy as a social science, and the term ‘science’ might suggest that it is cold and clinical, hard
and objective. Originally, however, the term ‘science’ was applied to all branches of human knowledge, including
creative and philosophical forms of thinking. Social Policy is self-evidently concerned with the policy-making
process, which has always entailed an element of intuition and creativity.

What does social policy do?

Social policy will help the community much more improvement in different aspects for example some come in the
following:
 Quality of life
 Education
 Citizenship
 Culture
 Income
 Economic
 Resident in the rural areas
Policy-based management
There are different approaches in management especially in today's turbulent ongoing days. Because
environment changes a lot so policies and policy making strategies always changes and becoming more

Page 16 of 38
complicated and sophisticated. Now policy-based management is one of these strategies. Policy-based
management is an administrative approach that is used to simplify the management of a given endeavor by
establishing policies to deal with situations that are likely to occur. Policies are operating rules that can be
referred to as a way to maintain order, security, consistency, or otherwise furth a goal or mission. For
example, a town council might have a policy against hiring the relatives of council members for civic
positions. Each time that situation arises; council members can refer to the policy, rather than having to make
decisions on a case-by-case basis (policy-based management, 2011:Rahimi & Noruzi, 2011).

Policy Cycle
In political science the policy cycle is a tool used for the analyzing of the development of a policy item. It can also
be referred to as a "stagiest approach". One standardized version includes the following stages:

1. Agenda setting (Problem identification)

2. Policy Formulation
3. Adoption
4. Implementation
5. Evaluation
An eight step policy cycle is developed in detail in The Australian Policy Handbook by Peter Bridgman and Glyn
Davis: (now with Catherine Althaus in its 4th edition)

1. Issue identification
2. Policy analysis
3. Policy instrument development
4. Consultation (which permeates the entire process)
5. Coordination
6. Decision
7. Implementation
8. Evaluation

The Althaus, Bridgman & Davis model is heuristic and iterative. It is intentionally normative and not meant to be
diagnostic or predictive. Policy cycles are typically characterized as adopting a classical approach.
Accordingly some postmodern academics challenge cyclical models as unresponsive and unrealistic, preferring
systemic and more complex models (Young & Mintzberg, 2009). They consider a broader range of actors involved
in the policy space that includes civil society organizations, the media, intellectuals, think tanks or policy research
institutes, corporations, lobbyists, etc (Medvetz, 2004).

Social Policy and Administration

Social Policy and Administration is an academic subject concerned with the study of social services and the welfare
state. It developed in the early part of the 20th century as a complement to social work studies, aimed at people who
would be professionally involved in the administration of welfare. In the course of the last forty years, the range and
breadth of the subject has developed.
The principal areas relate to:
a. policy and administrative practice in social services, including health administration, social
security, education, employment services, community care and housing management;
b. social problems, including crime, disability, unemployment, mental health, learning disability, and
old age;
c. issues relating to social disadvantage, including race, gender and poverty; and
d. the range of collective social responses to these conditions.

Social Policy is a subject area, not a discipline; it borrows from other social science disciplines in order to develop
study in the area. The contributory disciplines include sociology, social work, psychology, economics, political
science, management, history, philosophy and law (Spicker, 2007: Rahimi & Noruzi,
2011).

Page 17 of 38
Social policy is an interdisciplinary and applied discipline which is concerned with analysing the distribution and
delivery of resources in response to social need. The subject draws on ideas and methods from sociology, political
science and economics, while also using insights from a range of disciplines including social anthropology, human
geography, social psychology and social work. As a discipline in its own right, social policy studies the ways in
which societies provide for the social needs of their members through structures and systems of distribution,
redistribution, regulation, provision and empowerment. It seeks to foster in its students a capacity to assess critically
evidence from a range of social science disciplines and to appreciate how social policies are continuously
reconstructed and changed. Students will understand the contribution to these processes from those who come from
different value positions and different social, cultural and economic backgrounds. They will also appreciate the fact
that some social groups are more able to protect, alter or advance their value positions more effectively than others.

Social policy has a strong focus on those aspects of the economy, society and polity that are necessary to human
existence and well-being. These include adequate food and shelter; a sustainable and safe environment; the
promotion of health and the treatment of illness; the social, physical, environmental, educational and financial
resources to enable individuals to lead independent lives and participate fully in their societies (while recognising
the essentially interdependent nature of human existence).

In addition, social policy also focuses on wider structural and cultural issues. These include different approaches to
social control, risk and regulation; poverty, inequality and exclusion; discrimination and empowerment; the role of
beliefs and ideologies; policy-making and administrative processes, and the institutional composition of different
welfare systems.

Different social policy programmes are likely to include various combinations of a number of these, or other
relevant topics:
ageing and social policy, children and social policy, citizenship in theory and practice, crime and criminal justice
policy, community care, comparative social policy, devolution and social policy, disability and social policy ,
economics, economic issues and social policy, education and social policy, environmental issues and social policy,
equal opportunity policies and their impacts, family and social policy, gender and social policy,
globalisation/transnationalisation/internationalisation and social policy, health and health care services, history and
development of social policy, housing and urban policies, income maintenance and social security policy, local
governance, local welfare institutions and their policies, leisure and social policy, mixed economies of welfare
(voluntary, private and informal sectors) organisation, administration, governance and management of welfare
institutions, philosophy of welfare, policy-making processes, including the formulation and implementation of
policies, and processes by which services are provided, political and social theory, ideology and social policy,
poverty, social exclusion and social policy, public sector management, race, ethnicity and social policy, science,
technology and social policy, service-user perspectives and user involvement in the social policy process, sexuality
and social policy, social care, social policy and the mass media, social policy and the 'virtual society, social research
methods, supranational social policy, transport and transport policy, welfare rights and social policy, work,
employment, and labour market policies, youth, youth work and associated policies etc.

The Role of Policy in Management

Policy plays an important role within the University. It provides the principles which dictate how the members of the
University will act. The variables of uncertainty and ambiguity are often associated with some postclassical
approaches to social policy that seem to pervert. Moreover, risk and risk assessment are central to contemporary
welfare state to involve both critical approaches, and to the more orthodox social policy, pointing to the pensions
which are a good example to illustrate the elements of exclusion and notions of riskbased insurance and their
inherent limitations for much of the design schemes of social policy. But more than any essential contradiction, it is
argued that we need a more informed dialogue and proud, to ensure a frank exchange of ideas on some initial
clarification of the major social policy issues. Those principles are derived from and shaped by: the law and
regulations that govern the University; national standards and community expectations, and the values and mission
the University articulates in its strategic plan (Rahimi & Noruzi, 2011).

It is the role of Policy to:

 translate values into operations;
 ensure compliance with legal and statutory responsibilities;

Page 18 of 38
 guide the University towards the achievement of its strategic plan;
 set standards; and
 Improve the management of risk (policy library, 2011).

Policy Contents
A policy always has different contents but mainly there are some similarities among them below we bring the
common ones

 A purpose statement, outlining why the organization is issuing the policy, and what its desired effect or
outcome of the policy should be.
 An applicability and scope statement, describing who the policy affects and which actions are impacted by the
policy. The applicability and scope may expressly exclude certain people, organizations, or actions from the
policy requirements. Applicability and scope is used to focus the policy on only the desired targets, and avoid
unintended consequences where possible.
 An effective date which indicates when the policy comes into force. Retroactive policies are rare, but can be
found.
 A responsibilities section, indicating which parties and organizations are responsible for carrying out individual
policy statements. Many policies may require the establishment of some ongoing function or action. For
example, a purchasing policy might specify that a purchasing office be created to process purchase requests, and
that this office would be responsible for ongoing actions. Responsibilities often include identification of any
relevant oversight and/or governance structures.
 Policy statements indicating the specific regulations, requirements, or modifications to organizational behavior
that the policy is creating. Policy statements are extremely diverse depending on the organization and intent,
and may take almost any form (Irani & Noruzi, 2011). Some policies may contain additional sections,
including:
 Background, indicating any reasons, history, and intent that led to the creation of the policy, which may be
listed as motivating factors. This information is often quite valuable when policies must be evaluated or used
in ambiguous situations, just as the intent of a law can be useful to a court when deciding a case that involves
that law.
 Definitions, providing clear and unambiguous definitions for terms and concepts found in the policy document.

When considering an environmental policy for example, the following Stages will have to be considered:

Stages of the policy cycle

Awareness raising

Information is gathered about the key issues (e.g. need to reduce emissions, need to adapt to climatic changes);
potential barriers and opportunities are identified, collected and analysed (e.g. opportunities relating to a change in
energy infrastructure, barriers relating to the introducing of new drought-resistant crops).

Problem definition

Potential problems and their implications are identified (e.g. problems relating to energy infrastructure and
droughts).

Identification of options

The consequences of potential policy options are assessed (e.g. the consequences of introducing renewable energy,
the consequences of introducing drought-resistant crops and the impacts at the socio-economic, technical and
environmental level).

Policy selection

Page 19 of 38
The preferred policy options are chosen, once the problem and its implications are fully understood (e.g. choosing a
renewable energy policy that reduces emissions, or introducing an agricultural policy that reduces vulnerability to
drought).

Implementation of policies

Policy is translated into concrete action (e.g. introducing a renewable energy policy that reduces emissions, or by
introducing an agricultural policy that reduces vulnerability to drought).

Evaluation of policies

The progress of selected and implemented policies are evaluated, monitored and tracked (e.g. monitor whether
emissions have declined and agricultural productivity has increased).

SOME OF THE APPROACHES OR MODELS OF SOCIAL POLICY

As an aid to our study, it is helpful to examine three contrasting models or functions of social policy. The purpose of
model-building is not to admire the architecture of the building, but to help us to see some order in all the disorder
and confusion of facts, systems and choices concerning certain areas of our economic and social life. Tentatively,
the three models can be described as follows:
The Residual Welfare Model of Social Policy
This formulation is based on the premise that there are two 'natural' (or socially given) channels through which an
individual's needs are properly met; the private market and the family. Only when these break down should social
welfare institutions come into play and then only temporarily. As Professor Peacock puts it: 'The true object of the
Welfare State is to teach people how to do without it.’ The theoretical basis of this model can be traced back to the
early days of the English Poor Law, and finds support in organic-mechanistic biological constructs of society
advanced by sociologists like Spencer and Radcliffe-Brown, and economists like Friedman,
Hayek and the founders and followers of the Institute of Economic Affairs in London.

The Industrial Achievement-Performance Model of Social Policy

This incorporates a significant role for social welfare institutions as adjuncts of the economy. It holds that social
needs should be met on the basis of merit, work performance and productivity. It is derived from various economic
and psychological theories concerned with incentives, effort and reward, and the formation of class and group
loyalties. It has been described as the 'Handmaiden Model'.

The Institutional Redistributive Model of Social Policy

This model sees social welfare as a major integrated institution in society, providing universalist services outside the
market on the principle of need. It is in part based on theories about the multiple effects of social change and the
economic system, and in part on the principle of social equality. It is basically a model incorporating systems of
redistribution in command-over resources-through-time. These three models are, of course, only very broad
approximations to the theories and ideas of economists, philosophers, political scientists and sociologists. Many
variants could be developed of a more sophisticated kind. However, these approximations do serve to indicate the
major differences – the ends of the value spectrum - in the views held about the means and ends of social policy. All

Page 20 of 38
three models involve consideration of the work ethic and the institution of the family in modern society. The three
contrasting models of social policy represent different criteria for making choices.

ISSUES IN SOCIAL POLICY AND ADMINISTRATION

Issues has to do with those things in society or in real life situation where there’s no complete consensus about
whether to be or not to be means – there’ll always be continuing debate/academic discourse about merits and
demerits or why they should/should not be there in society.
Dis-consensus could come from government vs the masses – e.g constitution review.
Issues don’t have total agreement from all section of society. There could be differences e.g. between masses
themselves – different sectors/sections of society, how they view advantages and disadvantages of a particular issue.

In social policy, there are many issues that have never been agreed on from policy planners, academicians (theories
and methodologies that have to be used) government/state has to provide those services.
1. Social welfare
Is a situation in a society, community, government where a large proportion if not all of the needs are
provided for by the community, society, government.
2. There’s need to identify all needs in society, categorize them in terms of basic needs and non basic
needs/wants.
3. Community society/government strives to make these needs through the services accessible.
4. Basic needs – those required for survival of humanity without which humanity will perish – food, shelter,
clothing.

Non-basic needs – those which make life better qualitatively – lack of accessibility may not necessarily create harm
to humanity but lack of access to basic needs will create harm to humanity.

By making them accessible government pays for the services – they are provided free of charge.
Subsidy of those services – cost sharing to enable a larger majority of the people to be able to afford them.
Allow operation of voluntary charitable – NGOs which provide these services also free of charge from a different
organizational point of view.
E.g. there’s need for government/community to ensure all members of society have minimum standards of income
for survival.
If majority – above minimum income levels – can afford their own welfare.
There’s need to provide health services, education, housing, security, infrastructure and telecommunication services.
Those who work for social services – idea – are for the good of mankind – why they have to be provided – make
humankind better that it had been, positive change e.g. provision of F.P Education – some good e.g. by 2000.
Existence of social services is a noble idea – eventually human happiness.
Those who oppose – don’t see the merits.

Page 21 of 38
Capitalist point of view – provision of free services requires a lot of good funding – what would be the source - no
options other than F. P Education.
Capitalists argue – its immoral to provide services to people who don’t want some people have no need for it, free
health care – some don’t need it, security for everyone – some are a security threat – don’t need it.
Consensus argue – let there be a certain proportion and let the free market exist to a certain extent.
Argue – on the proportion – to all youth need F.P. Education.

Universalism is selectivity
Provision of services in social policy can be provided to the whole community/affected group i.e. to the whole need
situation
When that happens, it refers to universal provision of social services available of accessible to all within a particular
social situation.
They are therefore provided to everyone who has either the current need/future need.
- Services are provided on selective basis through appreciation of process of choice and selectivity is
based on the theoretical grounding that there are varied need situations e.g. the need for F.P. Education
is different from need of security, education, need for material health, security (police/armed forces).
- Because of the variety of these needs, they also call for variety of services specifically provided and
appropriate for those need situations.
- Its assumed – not everyone has the same type of need/social condition/problem – rationalization of
social policy planners selecting which needs to provide services for which need to prioritize, is more
important, which services to provide e.g. maternal health, immunization programmes (selective for
children), bursary programs, provision of relief food in specific hunger stricken areas flooding areas.
- S. policy planners have continual debate – to be able to develop theoretical basis – rational for
selecting people, for providing universal services.
- Those who argue for selectivity – arguments for selectivity.

1. Resources are always scarce/finite and that services are funded through resources and therefore the need for
the most efficient utilization of those particular resources of that can only be achieved by concentrating on
specific need gaps – why bursary not available to everyone – it’s a scarce resource, should be available
only to those in greatest need, maternal health – women in productive period of not men.
2. Situation – social policy planners must be subjective – make choices.

This is not biased – others strength, goodness in provision of maternal health because it will reduce maternal
death.
Selective services make it possible for a state/government to begin to equalize the conditions of life experienced
by different groups/categories.

Page 22 of 38
Assumption – there’s inequality in society – some are not equal, others less equal in society – it’s unfair,
immoral to have some people more equal than others.
Need – provide services for the worse off members of society – come closer to life conditions of better society
members or at par corruption, inheritance, idea have an egalitarian society – a society that’s equitable in terms
of life chances and life conditions.
Selective services make it possible for the government/state to be able to bend over backward in order to make
sure that the deserving people in society have a service that they require.
Deserve – an important and useful service to the community and one that’s likely to have multiplier effect in
society e.g. women education/girlchild, maternal services, women are able to live longer – will tend to create a
healthy society, children deserve F.P. Education to make a better society.
It becomes important for the government/state to supervise that deserve service so that its not hijacked by those
who don’t deserve.
Arguments for universal provision of social services.
There are a number of arguments and rationality as to why services should be provided on universal basis.
There are certain universal needs in society which are not easy to provide through the private market or the
household family.
That’s because they would be too expensive on the private market and would require large inputs of resources
from the family if they were to be provided.
E.g. state protection and security, provision of education, medical services, infrastructure/ road, railways,
telecoms), electrification programmes, H20 Provision.
It becomes cheaper for these needs to be provided universally through universal services by the state/local
authorities.
Individual provision will make them too cumbersome – one’s own primary school section, school, university.
Nature of the services makes individuals unwilling because they are too expensive – best way – government to
provide them for everyone.
Universal services are provided in a situation where there is greater social inequality in a community/society –
universal services become important in mitigating the situation of the poor e.g. 60% of Kenya below poverty
level – important for government to do that. In this case, universal services have to be provided until levels of
irregularity change positively.
The services are required in under-developed countries.
In this case, universal services are seen as temporary until society achieves a desired level of socio-economic
development. If society is under-developed, where does the money come from..
Universal services have to be provided as a social human right or on the basis of the basic minimum human
necessities that enables a fair opportunity for individuals to achieve positive livelihoods.
To reduce amount of harm to humanity as a result of the lack of basic necessities – humanity will find life very
precarious – without them right to survive – need the basic needs.

Page 23 of 38
Universal services are provided in order to reduce the element of stigmatization in society or negative labeling
in society.
This arises when only some categories of people have to associate with certain needs and in certain services –
people are labeled/stigmatized as unable to provide for themselves.
To remove this kind of stigma, provision of free primary education – not labeled as unable because of taking
children to free primary education.
The rationale for choosing of people to provide selective services will be expensive – there has to be a census or
evaluation taken e.g. Central Bureau of Statistics to evaluate analysis of all household incomes – will be
expensive.
Instead of wasting resources to determine which categories deserve, the same resources should be used to
provide universal services – assumption being those who have the need will go for the services.
There will be need for a means – test criteria in order to pre-judge the socio-economic conditions of groups
communities and individuals or society in itself.
This is divisive – tends to create a divided society – ability and inability.
Selectivity has a tendency of alienation of those who use them – why should I be juged to be poor/unable to
afford.
Because of this alienation, people may opt not to go for them – few people have the bold face to use the services
provided by selective services – provided them for free on universal basis – so that anyone who wants them can
access them without issue of alienation.
Universal services should be provided as a compensatory mechanism.

SOCIAL POLICY POLICY TOOLS

One of the most remarkable changes in American politics over the past 50 years has been the proliferation of
tools or instruments through which governments seek to influence citizen behavior and achieve policy purposes.
These include such commonly-used techniques as standards, direct expenditures (subsidies), sanctions, public
corporations, contracts, grants, arbitration, persuasion, education, licensing, and so forth.
Lowi's primary contention was that each policy type (distributive, redistributive, regulatory, and constituent)
produced its own distinctive patterns of participation, with pluralist patterns characterizing regulatory policy
and elitist characterizing distributive policy. Lowi's framework is useful for understanding some of the dynamic
political consequences of different types of policies.

Authority Tools
Authority tools are one of the oldest and most common techniques used by government to achieve policy aims.
These are simply statements backed by the legitimate authority of government that grant permission, prohibit,
or require action under designated circumstances. Authority tools are used mainly within the hierarchical
system of government to guide the behavior of agents and officials at other levels, but such tools occasionally
extend to the target populations.

Page 24 of 38
Differing levels of intensity represented by authority tools can be revealed by arraying them along a continuum
ranging from largely voluntary actions (granting permission) to those that are compulsory. These tools assume
agents and targets are responsive to the organizational structure of leader-follower relationships and that lower
level agents usually will do as they are told.
When authority tools are used in relation to the target populations, they almost always are accompanied by other
motivating devices. However, as Kelman (1981) makes clear, policy may depend on citizens doing what is ex-
pected of them even without tangible payoffs. Designated radio stations, for example, tell their listeners during
civil defense tests that in the event of an emergency, they will receive (and will be expected to follow)
directions given over the air.

Incentive Tools
The incentive category includes tools that rely on tangible payoffs, posi- tive or negative, to induce compliance
or encourage utilization. Incentive tools assume individuals are utility maximizers and will not be positively
motivated to take policy-relevant action unless they are influenced, encour- aged, or coerced by manipulation of
money, liberty, life, or other tangible payoffs. Within this broad category are several subtypes (inducements,
charges, sanctions, and force) that rely upon subtle but important differences in the behavioral assumptions.
Inducements offer positive payoffs to encourage participation in policy- preferred activity. The underlying
assumption is that individuals respond to positive incentives and that most will choose higher-valued
alternatives.
Economic development policy uses tax credits or waivers, grants, relaxation of standards or requirements,
provision of land, and so forth to induce firms to move to particular locations. Some educational reforms
contain specific awards for schools, or teachers, whose students perform at certain levels. Contracts are a type
of inducement that has the added advantage of promot- ing competition among potential suppliers.
Grants with highly specific pur- poses are inducements, such as the federal programs offering grants to states
that agreed to remove juveniles from adult jails within a three-year period. Charges are usually associated with
standards or guidelines that define permissible limits and specify monetary charges for those who do not meet
the standards or who want to exceed their quota.
Charges may be used to control, limit, or allocate goods or activities, but unlike sanctions, charges are not
intended to extinguish the activity or confer social disapproval upon it (see Kelman 1981). The intent is simply
to control the amount of use. Charges usually are proportional to the regulatory need or to the social bur- den
imposed by the activity. Some pollution control policies use charges that are calibrated so that the polluters pay
for the pollution they produce. Sev- eral states use charges to discourage local communities from sending pris-
oners to state institutions by charging them for each person committed above the pre-established quota for the
community.
Sanctions also are associated with standards or rules that prohibit or re- quire certain activities, but sanctions
imply disproportionately severe penal- ties for failure to comply.3 Sanctions are the primary tools used to
enforce the criminal and civil codes. The intent is to extinguish certain kinds of behavior by raising the costs far

Page 25 of 38
above the proportional value of the behavior itself through fines, deprivation of life or liberty, or the social
control techniques used in probation or parole. Classical deterrence theory assumes that indi- viduals respond to
the severity, certainty, and celerity (speed) of punish- ment, and in this respect it implies that individuals are
utility maximizers. The use of force, particularly incapacitation or death, physically produces the desired
actions.Force removes opportunity from its direct recipients and also serves as a deterrent to others. Underlying
the use of force is the assumption that some individuals cannot be influenced to take the actions needed by
government, or that it would be too costly to produce the desired behavior.
Incarceration of criminals or political opponents, the use of drugs on mentally ill patients, and take-overs of
schools, railroads, or companies by the national guard are examples. Policy tools that rely on incentives are
analogous to policy games in which policy provisions serve as an experimenter offering certain positive or
nega- tive payoffs to individuals, the groups to which they belong, or to the larger collectivity. Incentive policy
tools manipulate the tangible benefits, costs, and probabilities that policy designers assume are relevant to the
situation
Capacity Tools
Capacity tools provide information, training, education, and resources to enable individuals, groups, or agencies
to make decisions or carry out activi- ties. These approaches assume incentives are not an issue, but there may
be barriers stemming from lack of information, skills, or other resources needed to make decisions or take
actions that will contribute to policy goals. Barriers often are found during the early part of the decision-making
process, or are created because individuals rely on decision heuristics rather than strictly rational, utility-
maximizing, decision strategies. For example:
1. Target populations or agency officials may not know that more effective policy alternatives are available, or
they may not recognize the need or opportunity to change their decisions or behavior. For these reasons, they
neither search for nor consider any alternatives to their current pattern of activities. In this instance, outreach or
community mobilization programs may be useful in identifying target groups or agencies who could benefit
from the policy alternative.
2. If agencies or target groups know about an alternative, and recognize the need or opportunity to change
current practices, they may not have accu- rate information about the relevant characteristics of the alternative
to permit an evaluation of the benefits, costs, and probability that it would serve policy purposes. In this
situation, information programs that rely upon written materials, training, education, conferences, and technical
assistance may be helpful.
3. Individuals may rely on decision heuristics (shortcuts to and deviations from rational decision making) that
produce decisions or activities detri- mental to achievement of policy purposes. Decision training, such as
education in decision-making skills, risk assessment instruments, or deci- sion aids may be indicated. Some
drunk driving programs, for example, teach people to estimate their blood alcohol level more accurately and
demonstrate (empirically) the reduced reaction time when such levels are reached. Environmental hazards
policy has engaged in aggressive educa- tional efforts to increase public understanding of risks and how risks
should be assessed. These are efforts to increase rationality in decision making.

Page 26 of 38
4. Individuals may recognize the instrumental value of the policy-preferred activity, but lack sufficient
resources or support (financial, organizational, social, political) to carry it out with a reasonable probability of
This situation calls for resources, often in the form of grants, direct expen- -ditures (subsidies), loans, loan
guarantees, vouchers, skill-training, or counseling.

Capacity programs assume that the target groups will have sufficient in- centive or motivation to participate in
the activity, or change their behavior, if they are properly informed and have the necessary resources. Thus,
these programs assume individuals are free agents, able to make their own deci- sions, and do not need to be
coerced through the passage of formal laws man- dating certain behavior. Cigarettes are still legal, for example,
but individu- als are provided with information that is intended to discourage the habit. Welfare programs, job
training programs, AIDS prevention, family planning programs, energy conservation programs, and many
others rely largely on capacity-building strategies.
Capacity tools also are used to influence agency practices and to encourage adoption of innovative programs.
Individuals in the agency may not be aware that there is a need for improvement, or even if they recognize an
oppor- tunity for improvement, the policy-preferred alternative may not have oc- curred to them. Surveys of
why juvenile courts have not adopted restitution programs or victim-offender mediation programs, for example,
regularly confirm that most of the agencies simply "have not thought about.
Symbolic and Hortatory Tools
As Wildavsky noted, individuals have many preferences on subjects for which they have almost no information
(Wildavsky 1987). Symbolic and hortatory tools assume that people are motivated from within and decide
whether or not to take policy-related actions on the basis of their beliefs and values. Individuals bring into
decision situations cultural notions of right, wrong, justice, individualism, equality, obligations, and so forth.
Many of the values, then, that individuals perceive in the decision situation are be- yond the control of
incentive-based policy tools. Symbolic and hortatory tools assume that target populations are more apt to
comply with behavior desirable from a policy perspective if the targets see that behavior as consis- tent with
their beliefs.
Symbolic and hortatory tools may be used to encourage compliance, uti- lization, or support of policy, to appeal
for self-initiated activities in the pub- lic or private sector that will further certain goals without the need for
coer- cive or incentive-driven government intervention, or to simply state goals and priorities thereby giving
deference to some values over others even though no tangible actions are taken to promote the goals or values.
These policies may authorize programs of persuasive communications that seek to change perceptions about
policy-preferred behavior through appeals to intangible values (such as justice, fairness, equality, right and
wrong) or through the use of images, symbols, and labels. Policy tools may use persuasion to change
perceptions about policy activities or goals without actually changing the tangible payoffs at all. Symbolic and
hortatory approaches as- sume that individuals rely on decision heuristics and hold preferences based on
culturally-defined intangible values. In contrast with capacity tools, how- ever, symbolic and hortatory tools
may capitalize on decision heuristics rather than seeking to minimize their influence.

Page 27 of 38
There are three underlying assumptions here. Individuals are more likely to take actions in support of policy
goals if the goals or actions are:
(1) prmoted by government officials as important, high priority issues
(2) consis- tent with their values, beliefs, and preferences
(3) associated with positive symbols, labels, images, and events. Symbolic and hortatory tools can take different
forms, each relying on different underlying assumptions. Symbolic pronouncements seek to convince people of
the importance and priority government is associating with certain activities or goals, even though actual
commitment of resources or development of programs may not be underway. Rationales go beyond simple
pronouncements of government support and incorporate elaborate explanations or justifications that associate
the policy- preferred activities with positive values. Rationales may emphasize that the policy contributes to
freedom, equality, order, safety, preservation of tradi- tional values, efficiency, effectiveness, and so forth. Or,
the rationales may focus on how the policy is in accord with the beliefs and values of particular groups.

Learning Tools
Learning tools are used when the basis upon which target populations might be moved to take problem-solving
action is unknown or uncertain. A problem may be recognized, but it is not understood or there is no agree-
ment about what should be done. One of the most important characteristics of learning tools is that they assume
agencies and target populations can learn about behavior, and select from the other tools those that will be
effec- tive (Ostrom 1988; Ostrom, Feeny, and Picht 1988).
Policy tools that promote learning provide for wide discretion by lower-level agents or even the target groups
themselves, who are then able to experiment with different policy approaches. Agents are encouraged or
required to draw lessons from experience through formal evaluations, hearings, and institutional arrange- ments
that promote interaction among targets and agencies. Policies that uti- lize learning tools may be rather open-
ended about purposes and objectives, specifying only broad-based goals and leaving the choice of tools to
lower- level agents. More narrow purposes are adjusted through time to reflect what is discovered to be
reasonably achievable. When there is disagreement about what should be done or how it should be done,
mediation or arbitration programs may facilitate resolution of con- tradictory problem definitions and promote
understanding of prevailing motivations.
The framework we present should enable political scientists to identify policy tools or instrumetained in laws,
regulations, and programs; and should facilitate an analysis of the implicit or explicit behavioral theories upon
which they rely. Policy tools are techniques the government uses to achieve policy goals. For policy goals to be
realized, target populations may need to comply with policy directives, utilize policy opportunities when these
are offered, or engage in other forms of coproduction to promote socially desired results. These citizen actions
are forms of policy participation that take place every day, by every individual, and that have a profound impact
on the allocation of values for society. Policy tools act as independent variables, initiating a chain of effects that
have im- portant political consequences. Yet, very little systematic attention has been given to policy
instruments and even less attention has been focussed on the behavioral characteristics through which effects on

Page 28 of 38
target populations are produced. The framework we present clusters tools on the basis of their underlying
motivational strategies.
Authority tools rely on the inherent legitimacy found in hierarchical arrangements. Incentive tools assume
individuals are utility maximizers who will change their behavior in accord with changes in the net tangible
payoffs offered by the situation. Capacity tools assume individuals may lack information, resources, skills, and
may rely on decision heuristics (shortcuts or rules of thumb), but that these biases and deficiencies can be
corrected by policy. Symbolic and hortatory tools assume individuals are motivated from within, and that policy
can induce the desired behavior by manipulating symbols and influencing values. Learning tools assume agents
and targets do not know what needs to be done, or what is possible to do, and that policy tools should be used to
promote learning, consensus building, and lay the foundation for improved policy.

WELFARE REGIMES
In the classic formulation of Esping-Andersen (1990), welfare regimes are ways of conceptualising the welfare
programmes, outcomes and effects of those capitalist societies that have been transformed into welfare states.
The concept of welfare regime embraces at least the following features:
1. the pattern of state social policies and programmes, usually distinguishing social assistance, social insurance
and universal citizenship modes of distributing benefits in cash and in kind
2. the wider pattern of welfare provisioning in society, usually in terms of the division of responsibility between
the state, the market and the household
3. the welfare outcomes of these institutions, in terms of the degree of ‘de-commodification’ achieved - the
extent to which a household’s standard of living is insulated against their position in the labour market (to this
Esping-Andersen (1999) has now added a measure of ‘de-familiarisation’ - the extent to which a person’s
standard of living is independent of their family or household membership
4. the stratification outcomes of these institutions: how and to what extent the welfare system in turn shapes
inequalities, interests and power in society and in this way reproduces the welfare regime through time. The
first two components are sometimes referred to as the ‘welfare mix’. Thus in a nutshell: Welfare regime =
Welfare mix + welfare outcomes + stratification effects.

There remains a problem of terminology. The term ‘welfare’ in the Asian context frequently denotes ‘state
hand-outs’ or charity. It is often contrasted to ‘development’ as in human resource development or social
development, concerned with investing in people and productivity-enhancing social institutions. Thus the term
welfare regime is liable to be seriously misunderstood. Perhaps social policy regime or human development
regime would be a preferable term - I retain an open mind on this. For the moment I will continue to use the
original term, but with the understanding that it refers to a wide definition of social programmes, as indicated in
Figure 1, encompassing broad social and developmental goals.

WELFARE REGIMES IN NORTHEAST ASIA

Page 29 of 38
Attempts to explain East Asian social policy have mainly concentrated on the most developed economies: the
Four Tigers of Korea, Taiwan, Hong Kong and Singapore, only the first of which is represented in this study. I
shall begin with this literature before addressing the countries of Southeast Asia. By comparison with Western
countries, the welfare systems of the NICs and Japan can be simplisticly summarised as follows.

They spend relatively little on social benefits yet their states pursue a strategic economic role. The
unprecedented rates of growth substitute in part for social policy and encourage its continuing subservience to
economic policy. There are few social entitlements and little vertical redistribution. Public social policies are
segmented between different groups alongside a residualised social assistance. The explanations of this distinct
welfare regime can be divided into two levels: those which privilege different components of the welfare mix
(though not usually expressed in this way) and explanations which situate these in a broader sociological or
political economic setting.

The other components of the welfare mix identified by Esping-Andersen (1997) and Jacobs (1998) are:
 Market: fast rising incomes plus a reasonable distribution of factors incomes permits a very high savings
rate and fast rising private finance of welfare. This is aided by low taxes which in turn restrict the growth of
public alternatives.
 Enterprise: social benefits, employment protection and seniority wages continue to play a substantial role.
They underpin a ‘male breadwinner model’ of welfare, by providing good benefits for primary sector
workers which can only be redistributed within the family. This generates vested interests in their retention.
 Family-household: a ‘modified stem family’ has emerged in which the majority of elderly live with
children. Income pooling within families reduces middling-high inequality between individuals resulting
from the male breadwinner model. This partly feeds off the
 Cultural: ‘Confucian values’ is a protean notion, but has been advanced as an explanation because of its
emphasis on family obligations, education, paternalism and social harmony. However, in earlier
incarnations it was used to explain Asian backwardness in terms of its emphasis on respect for authority.
White and Goodman (1998: 16-16) reject this explanation on the grounds, among others, that it is
essentialist, static, abstract and overelastic.
 International: Economic openness is hardly unique to East Asia, but it developed early in the region, and
the East Asia states have for long ‘made a virtue out of this necessity’ (Holliday 2000). Their post-war
history of political vulnerability, US hegemony and centrality in the Cold War may also explain their role
as successful models of the globalisation strategy.
 Developmental state: This is usually defined as a state where elite policy makers set economic growth as
the fundamental goal and pursue a coherent strategy to achieve it. This can be combined with different
social policies, but all entail the explicit subordination of social policy to economic policy and economic
growth. It requires that state policy makers be relatively insulated from interest groups and have a high
degree of internal coherence and loyalty. Esping-Andersen (1997), writing on Japan, characterises it as a

Page 30 of 38
 hybrid welfare regime, with similarities to that of Southern Europe. However, he contends that interests
have not yet fully crystallised around these welfare structures - the regime is still evolving. In particular,
modernisation pressures threaten both family and enterprise welfare.

EAST ASIAN AND EUROPEAN WELFARE REGIMES COMPARED

By ‘Europe’ I will usually refer to the 15 member states of the European Union (EU). This definition
excludes among other countries Norway, Switzerland and all the countries of Central and Eastern Europe.
Even so, we immediately encounter the fact that, according to Esping-Andersen (1990) and almost every
subsequent analyst, Europe comprises several distinct welfare regimes. These are reflected in different
welfare mixes, different welfare outcomes, and different stratification effects and paths of development.
These regimes are usually identified on the basis of social security and employment systems, and do not
translate directly when, for example, health or education systems are addressed (Gough 1999).
Nevertheless, much analysis suggests his regime model is robust across a wide range of social policy
themes. We are justified in taking for granted the existence of different welfare regimes within Europe.
Several recent writers differentiate southern Europe and thus end up with four regime types in Europe (eg
Ferrera et al 2000)
• liberal: UK and Ireland
• social democratic: the Nordic countries
• continental: Germany, France, the Benelux countries and Austria
• southern: Italy, Spain, Portugal and Greece Unlike the US, the EU is not a single regime
despite integration and convergence.
•
It follows that the ’lessons of Europe’ are multiple and may be conflictual. On the positive side Europe provides an
ongoing laboratory within which social programme experiments are conducted.

EAST ASIAN WELFARE REGIME

Typifies the welfare regimes in Korea, Malaysia, Thailand, the Philippines and Indonesia, using the framework
presented in the introduction. It is divided into two parts, A covering the welfare mix and part B welfare outcomes.

A. INSTITUTIONAL PROGRAMMES: THE WELFARE MIX

1. State
State revenues and expenditure account for just below one fifth of GDP in Southeast Asia, not noticeably lower than
in other middle income countries. However, state social expenditures are very low except on education. Total
spending on education, health and social security varies with Level of development, ranging from 3% of GDP in
Indonesia, 6% in the Philippines and Thailand to 8% in Malaysia and 11% in Korea. The share of total government

Page 31 of 38
spending devoted to social services is less than one half, varying between around one quarter in the Philippines to
just over one half in Korea. However, rapid growth means that real resources devoted to the social sector have
expanded faster than in most countries. There is a generalised hostility to Western ideals of the ‘welfare state’, yet
social provision for state personnel (civil servants, the military and police, teachers, etc) is everywhere extensive and
generous.
Education: Education East Asian governments have consistently emphasised the central role of education in
economic development, though this is not matched by a higher than average expenditure on education. But with fast
economic growth real spending has climbed rapidly (except in the Philippines) and the general verdict is that the
allocation of resources is more rationally targeted on basic education than in other developing countries (World
Bank 1993: 192-203). All five countries have achieved near-universal primary education. Secondary school
enrolment is rising but the countries are at different stages on this path: the Philippines and Korea had enrolled over
one half of children in the 1970s and Malaysia in the 1980s, whereas Thailand and Indonesia remain below this
level.
Health: Health expenditure is low in East Asia compared with other middle income countries and actually fell as a
share of GDP in the 1990s in all countries except Thailand (Ramesh 2000: Table 4.5). Since private spending
accounts for about one half of the total, public health expenditure is remarkable low - between 0.7% GDP in I and
2.3% in Korea (though Korea’s absolute spending dwarfs the rest). Not surprisingly, all health inputs (doctors,
nurses, hospital beds) are very scarce on a world scale.
Pension: Pensions Public spending on social protection, including pensions, is also low in comparative perspective,
whatever the comparator. The World Bank figures for social security expenditure are far higher than the ILO
figures, but even these range only from 0.7% (Thailand) to 2% (Korea). The ILO records social security benefits in
the Philippines at 1.4% in 1993, plus another 1.5% for ‘government service insurance’ - a total of 2.8% of GDP. The
national pension systems divide into two main types:
1. Defined benefit social insurance. • the Philippines: This is more than forty years old and continues to expand its
coverage, including voluntary membership even for Filipinos working overseas. Replacement rates are high at
around 60%, but the employer compliance rate is low, with up to two thirds of the paper members not contributing
at any one time (Ramesh and Asher, 2000: 71). • Korea: From a late start in 1988, the National Pension Scheme is
extending its coverage and building up a transitory fund over a 20 year period - full pensions will not start until
2008. • Thailand, in January 1999 added an old age pension element to the Social Security Act of 1990. This is a
defined benefit paygo scheme but will not pay out full pensions until 2014.
2. Provident Funds. • Malaysia: Now in its 50th year the EPF is a developed, expensive and savings-effective fund.
Since 1994, members have been able to opt for an annuity instead of a lump-sum. Reforms have established separate
accounts for education and health and have encouraged more flexible individual investment. • Indonesia: Despite an
equally long history the Jamsostek fund has a small coverage, uneven record keeping and tiny reserves, but coverage
has climbed in the 1990s. It provides only a lump sum payment on retirement.
Safety nets:Formal safety nets can be defined as public programmes targeted to the poor with the objective of raising
living standards to a specified social minimum. They can take the form of cash transfers, public works employment

Page 32 of 38
and subsidies for important need satisfiers, such as food and housing. They are limited in scale, coverage and cost
throughout the region, but they have been expanded in response to the crisis. The major elements are detailed in
World Bank. As a share of GDP they are most extensive and expensive in Korea (2% GDP in 1999) and Indonesia
(planned 1.25% GDP in 1999-2000), but are tiny in Malaysia and Thailand.

2.Marketing:
The expansion of wage labour is a universal feature in East Asia; over the last two decades until 1997 the labour
force grew by 2% pa. The regional participation rate is high: ranging from 89% in Thailand to 66% in Malaysia.
This labour force is becoming feminised but, with the exception of Thailand where it is higher, the overall share of
women at about 40% is roughly the world average. Official data on unemployment is frequently unreliable and
incomparable in economies with substantial informal sectors, and household surveys are a better source of
information (Vroman 1999, World Bank 1999a: 65). From the early 1980s to 1997, unemployment rates were
consistently low in Thailand (below 1%), Korea (2-3%) and Indonesia (4-5%), consistently high in the Philippines
(8-10%), and falling in Malaysia from 8% in the mid1980s to around 3%. Unemployment rates everywhere
escalated during the crisis of 1997-98 (World Bank 1999a: 14), but are now declining.
Only in Korea is there an unemployment insurance scheme, established in 1995 and expanded in 1998. In all four
Southeast Asian countries there is no unemployment insurance, unemployment assistance or contractual severance
pay programme (Vroman 1999: Table 2). On the other hand, all countries have enacted wide-ranging labour
legislation covering minimum wages, hours of work, paid leave, employment security, protection against dismissal,
redundancy pay and occupational health and safety (Deery and Mitchell 1993, Rigg 1997: 223-27). This surprisingly
extensive labour protection framework should be considered as a functional alternative to traditional social
protection, at least for workers in the formal sector. However, the other consistent finding is that implementation of
these laws and regulations is weak or non-existent due to weak government agencies and bribery of officials.

Private finance and provision of services and benefits The role of the market in the social sector is substantial and
has been growing fast - with a (temporary?) pause after 1997. Table A8 brings together data for education and
health. Broadly speaking we may characterise the region as ‘mixed provision plus mainly private finance’ (cf.
Ramesh 2000: 87). Around one third of hospital beds and secondary school places and one half of higher education
places are in private institutions (including nonprofit) - a substantial and growing share, but not yet dominant.
However, one half of all education spending and almost two thirds of all health spending is privately financed. Much
of this is reactive and unorganised, comprising out-of-pocket expenditures, book purchases, self-medication etc.
This is an unusual pattern compared with OECD countries, where public finance/ public provision or public finance/
private provision is more typical. In Korea, households spend very high proportions of their income on education
(10%) and health (5%), compared to 1.4% and 1.3% in the UK (Shin 2000).

3. Community, civil society and NGOs

Page 33 of 38
Non-profit and non-governmental organisations active in the field of human development and welfare are a very
recent phenomenon in East Asia, where in the past they have been discouraged by authoritarian regimes (Yamamoto
1999). (The one exception is the Philippines where they have a longer history due to the American legacy and the
Catholic church). A certain tension persists with the governments in Malaysia and Singapore, and has only recently
diminished in Indonesia. However, following democratising changes in the 1980s in the Philippines, Korea and
Thailand they have developed rapidly. Other reasons for their growth includes the emergence of a middle class, new
needs following rapid economic development and urbanisation, and the decentralisation of public sectors. Networks
of NGOs and umbrella organisations have been established in all countries, and regional associations are emerging.
Community development is a burgeoning part of social policy, and includes such innovations as community
health financing in Thailand. However, the total amount of such funds is small relative to Thailand’s total health
expenditure (Wibulpolprasert 1991). Moreover, all NGOs remain heavily dependent on external sources for
funds, notably official overseas aid organisations, US philanthropic funds and Japanese corporate funds. (In
Korea, the chaebol have generated philanthropic corporate funding to an extent unknown in the other countries -
mainly as a form of tax evasion).

4. Family - household
This provides the ‘missing link’ in the South East Asian welfare regimes. The extended family persists as a
provider, saver and redistributor, despite rapid economic development and urbanisation. The level of savings is
extremely high in East Asia, the Philippines excepted. This should permit more families to mitigate risk by
‘self-insuring’: saving in good times and dissaving in bad times (World Bank 2000: Chapter 5). However,
despite impressive development of micro-finance and credit schemes, the unequal distribution of incomes in the
region (outside Korea) undermines this. Calculations of private transfers show high levels in the Philippines,
Indonesia and Malaysia, adding between 9 and 20% to the average incomes of recipient households. The extent
to which these benefit the poorest households is not certain, though the evidence for Malaysia certainly suggests
they are redistributive.
In the 1980s, the majority of people over 60 years were receiving income from family members and an even
higher proportion lived with children or family - between 3/4 and over 90% in the Philippines and Thailand.
These remarkably high proportions are falling over time, but if Japan and Korea are models, they will decline
only slowly in the face of rapid modernisation. Households and extended families are important decision-
making units, juggling the resources provided (or, more commonly, not provided) elsewhere in the welfare mix.
Studies of Chinese families reveal the way that they can maintain consumption and reduce vulnerability by
mixing higher cash incomes in the private sector with welfare benefits in public sector employment and with
agricultural produce from rural relatives (Lee ). This is likely to be equally important in Southeast Asia.
5. International welfare
a) States and IGOs

Page 34 of 38
Official development assistance by the OECD countries fell throughout the 1990s as a share of donors’ GNP,
recipients’ GNP and in dollars per head. This has impacted on aid flows to the region. Before the Asian
financial crisis, Korea and Malaysia received no ODA, but it East Asian welfare regimes 26 remains of some
significance - between 0.4-0.8% GNP - in the other three. The Philippines is reliant on loans chiefly from Japan,
the World bank and the Asian Development Bank. However, only one tenth was spent on human development
apparently reflecting the government’s reluctance to use official loans for such purposes (German and Randel
1998: 200-205). Following the 1997-8 financial crisis, IMF loans to Malaysia and Korea recommenced, and
they were increased to all five countries. There is some evidence that projects concerned with poverty
alleviation, social safety nets and human development were given greater priority notably by the WB, ADB and
UN agencies (ADB 2000).
b) Market
International firms see the region as a growing market for a variety of health products, ranging from drugs
(self-medication is rife) to health maintenance organisations. This is mainly the result of gaps in public
provision, but is increasingly being sponsored by governments. For example, Indonesia permitted for-profit
hospitals in 1988, extended this to foreign investment in large hospitals in 1994 and, in 2003, will permit
unrestricted foreign investment in all health care (EIU 1999: 115). There is also a growing market for overseas
health treatment of the rich, notably in regional centres such as Singapore, Hong Kong and Australia.
In education, a persistent shortage of university places in Malaysia and, to a lesser extent, in Thailand has
encouraged study abroad, mainly in English-speaking countries. To stem the drain on foreign exchange which
this entails, both countries have encouraged ‘twinning’ arrangements with foreign institutions - another form of
internationally marketised provision. Inward investment by MNCs has spawned considerable pension, health
and other fringe welfare benefits for higher paid employees in the region.
c) NGOs
I have not been able to find systematic information on the extent to which the countries of Southeast Asia are
reliant on funds and advice from international NGOs ..
d) Households
The dominant international household strategy is labour migration and remittances of money. The Philippines
is a big exporter of labour. By 1995 1.5m Filipinos lived abroad as permanent immigrants and a further 2m at
least worked temporarily abroad or at sea (Woodiwiss 1998: 101). The remittances they send home amount to
6.4% of Filipino GNP, according to the ILO. If unrecorded cash and goods brought home by workers are
included this increases by about one half to nearly 10% GNP (ILO 2000: Tables 2, 4). These flows, together
with the household flows within the country discussed above, constitute a significant element of the Filipino
welfare regime. However, it is an exception. Korea and Malaysia are both net importers of labour, Indonesia is a
net exporter but remittances appear to be small, and Thailand is both importer and exporter with a small net
inflow of remittances (see also Skeldon 1999). The significance of worker remittances in the Philippines reflects
its poor economic performance within a dynamic region.
B. WELFARE OUTCOMES

Page 35 of 38
Health
Mortality, including infant mortality, has declined remarkably in the last three decades. Korea and Malaysia are
here the star performers. The provision of sanitation, water and preventive health is also superior to comparison
countries. Less impressive are the high levels of maternal mortality and child malnutrition, notably in Indonesia
and the Philippines. These are symptomatic of a major failure to diminish further inequalities in health and
access to health-related services such as immunisation, obstetric care, piped water and sanitation. The region
also faces new health threats, stemming from ageing and the epidemiological transition, urbanisation (eg traffic
accidents) and lifestyle changes (eg. more smoking) (World Bank 1999b). Korea and Malaysia do better on all
fronts, whereas the Philippines does worse than its income level would warrant, reflecting persistently high
levels of poverty and inequality.
Education
Illiteracy is all but eradicated in Korea, the Philippines and Thailand, but persists in Malaysia and Indonesia.
Gender differences are low in a comparative context. This may reflect the relatively egalitarian nature of gender
relations in the region when compared with Northeast and South Asia.16 Measures of quality in education
outcomes show a different pattern: Korea is a world leader, whereas Indonesia, the Philippines and Thailand fall
below the ‘international mean’ (data is not available for Malaysia) (Mingat 1998: 701).
Human development
The UNDP Human Development Index provides a synthetic measure of achieved capabilities in three
dimensions: longevity, knowledge and standard of living (measured using the log of incomes or other
inequality-averse measures) (UNDP 1999: 159-160). In order to take account of the distribution of well-being,
the UNDP also calculates a Gender-Related Development Index (GDI) and a Human Poverty Index (HPI). The
GDI uses the same components as HDI but computes male-female differences in all three and weights these
using the Atkinson formula set to a moderate aversion to inequality. The HPI attempts to construct a non-
monetary, multi-dimensional index of poverty, based on the proportions of the population not expected to attain
40 years of age, who are illiterate, who lack access to safe water, or health services, or whose children are
underweight. It approaches a ‘Rawlsian’ measure of welfare, giving greatest weight to the welfare of the worst-
off.

Both HDI and GDI reveal high levels of human development in East Asia compared with countries at similar
levels of economic development. However, HPI shows that about one sixth of the population to be capability-
poor in Malaysia, the Philippines and Thailand, and over one quarter in Indonesia. Poverty and inequality
More conventional measures of poverty are constructed by each country. These reveal an impressive reduction
in poverty rates for all countries except the Philippines: from above 40% in the 1970s to around 10% or less in
the 1990s. In the Philippines, poverty rates have remained almost unchanged at nearly 50% throughout this
period (Table A10). The simplest measure of all - the proportion of the population living on less than $2 per
person per day (at PPP) - shows very high rates for the Philippines and Indonesia (63% and 50%) and lower
rates for the rest. Money measures thus confirm non-money measures except that the Philippines perform far

Page 36 of 38
worse.17 The evidence on income inequality is mixed. The World Bank (1993: ch.1), using as a measure the
income ratio of the richest and poorest quintile, asserted that East Asia had unusually low levels of inequality
among low to middle income countries. However, this is not borne out by current estimates of Gini coefficients,
with the notable exception of Korea (Table A10) and the latest data shows rising inequality in Thailand and the
Philippines (Atinc and Walton 1998: 10)
Social exclusion
The concept of social exclusion is difficult to define, let alone operationalise.18 If we refer to groups suffering
from significant and quasi-permanent social closure, then Rigg (1997, Ch. 4) identifies ‘hill peoples’, the ethnic
Chinese and migrant workers as three significant groups in the region. However, the Chinese are less poor than
the majority ethnic groups in all countries. The World Bank (1999a: 6) points to street children and orphans,
refugees and some groups of women as especially vulnerable.
De-commodification
De-commodification refers to the process of reducing workers’ dependence on the labour market by providing
alternative guarantees of income and services. It has no systematic measure in East Asia, but we may be
confident that it is low. Labour in Southeast Asia is either pre-commodified, working in subsistence agriculture,
or it is commodified - reliant on the labour market with few statutory protections or substitutes. The family can
temper exposure to market forces, but Esping-Andersen’s original concept focuses solely on publicly provided
or guaranteed rights. Room (2000) has argued that this concept - what he calls de-commodification for
consumption - misses an equally important dimension: de-commodification for selfdevelopment. This refers to
the ability of people to choose the nature and quality of the work they do, which in turn requires life-long
learning and investment in human capital.
This second dimension of decommodification embraces a wider concern with social development, and is thus
more fruitful a concept in the context of South East Asia. It focuses attention on educational opportunities, in
particular higher education. On this basis, Korea offers the greatest opportunities with a tertiary enrolment rate
of 50%, with the Philippines (27%) and Thailand (21%) some way behind. Most surprising here is the low
access to tertiary education in Malaysia (10%). It also emphasises the job options open to people and their
ability to move into new careers. This may seem a utopian goal to East Asian ears, but it is possible to argue
that rapidly expanding and transforming economies of the region do just that (the Philippines partially
excepted).

Page 37 of 38
Page 38 of 38