Developmental Social Policy,Social Welfare Services and the Non‐profit Sector in South Africa

The potential and challenge of constructing a democratic developmental welfare state through synergistic state‐civil society relations is the focus of this article. The author argues that while South Africa's pluralist approach, involving a leading role for the state in partnership with voluntary organizations, is a viable policy option to address the country's developmental challenges, anomalies between policy proclamations and actual practice raises questions about the efficacy of the partnership model and the gendered nature of welfare provision. Key governance issues and challenges, namely financial policies and institutional capability, underlie current failures in the delivery of welfare and care services, resulting in the non‐realization of these constitutionally guaranteed social rights. Further public action is needed to remedy the situation. Non‐profit organizations can advocate for policy reforms and challenge the instrumental nature of state‐civil relations and the abrogation of state responsibility for welfare services in contemporary South Africa.     

宋庆龄社会福利实践与社会福利思想研究

宋庆龄主席是中华人民共和国缔造者之一,是举世闻名的爱国主义、民主主义、国际主义和共产主义伟大战士。她的社会福利思想博大精深,体系恢宏,历史影响广泛深远。她为中华民族解放和新中国社会福利事业贡献毕生精力,实现福利思想与服务的完美统一。在社会现代化与全面建设小康社会背景下,宋庆龄福利思想具有重大的现实理论政策意义。     

Third Way Social Governance: Where is the State?

The ‘Third Way’ politics of Blair's New Labour government of the United Kingdom has popularised a number of policy reforms centred on a supposedly new discourse of ‘devolution’, ‘inclusion’, ‘partnerships’ and ‘community’. These notions reflect a re‐emergence of the ideas and values of civil society, participation and localism. Key drivers of this discourse are: new conceptions of citizenship; a retreat from the social state to a politics of community; and a questioning of both ‘big‐state’ interventionist and competitive market approaches to public policy. These trends have resonance in the Australian context. The welfare reform agenda of the Australian Commonwealth government together with community building and engagement initiatives of State governments have been sites for these policy directions. Much of the debate surrounding these policies excludes or minimises the fundamental role of an active state by focusing on an uncritical conception of community. Drawing on the notion of network governance, an alternative framework for re‐conceptualising state‐community relations and delivering improved community outcomes is posited. The paper concludes by suggesting possible social governance methodologies for actioning this framework.     

The Emperor's new clothes: South Africa's attempted transition to developmental social welfare and social work

This article critically interrogates the depth and quality of change of post‐apartheid welfare policy and social work practice towards a social development paradigm against the background of inequality and poverty in South Africa. It asks several questions: what kind of welfare system has the current welfare dispensation created? How far has it moved from a residual, ameliorative system to an institutional developmental system, in keeping with the developmental welfare paradigm? To what extent can residual provisions be transformed into developmental processes? What conditions are necessary for this to happen? The answers to questions such as these provide the basis for assessing South Africa's new developmental processes. The article highlights the fundamental contradictions in social development policy imperatives, which call for a marriage of economic and social considerations, and the internal contradictions across and within various welfare policies. Further, it argues that the government does not have the political will to bear the costs of the substantive change that the move towards developmental social work requires, choosing instead limited, individually targeted and ameliorative measures, such as increased social security spending. Thus, it suggests that ideological critique, consciousness raising and participation in public policy debates remain crucial for those who seek long‐term solutions to inequality and poverty in South Africa.     

A social welfare perspective of market‐oriented social enterprises

The article analyses market‐oriented social enterprises from a social welfare perspective, within the context of the innate conflict between business and welfare orientations. After defining the concept of market‐oriented social enterprises and presenting some successful examples on such entities that employ different marginalised populations, particularly people with disabilities, the article asks three interrelated questions: (i) What policy environment is needed to encourage the development of social enterprises? (ii) Given the innate tension between the social and economic objectives in social enterprises, what structural principles are needed to enable them to meet those dual objectives? Lastly, (iii) What intervention modalities are best suited to help individual participants in those frameworks? Answers to these questions are discussed within conceptual frameworks from the worlds of welfare and business that jointly provide a base for a social welfare rationale for market‐oriented social enterprises.     

Public Opinion against Markets? Attitudes towards Market Distribution of Social Services – A Comparison of 17 Countries

This article studies how citizens view the appropriateness of market criteria for allocating services commonly associated with social citizenship rights and welfare state responsibility. The article focuses specifically on a potential role for the market in the provision of social services. The relationship between welfare policy institutions, socio‐economic class and attitudes is explored by comparing attitudes across 17 countries of the Organisation for Economic Co‐operation and Development, using multilevel modelling and data from the 2009 International Social Survey Programme. Results show that public support for market distribution of services is relatively weak in most countries, a result suggesting that public opinion is unlikely to pose a driving force within ongoing processes of welfare marketization. Still, attitudes are found to vary a lot across countries in tandem with between‐country variation in welfare policy design. First, aggregate public support for market distribution of services is stronger in countries with more private spending on services. Second, class differences in attitudes are larger in countries with more extensive state‐led delivery of services. Together, these results point to the operation of normative feedback‐effects flowing from existing welfare policy arrangements. The theoretical arguments and the empirical results presented in this article suggest that future research exploring the relationship between welfare policy and public opinion from a country‐comparative perspective is well advised to place greater focus on the market institutions that, to varying extents in different countries, act as complements to the state in the administration of social welfare.     

Straddling Two Continents: Social Policy and Welfare Politics in Turkey

There has been an increasing academic interest in understanding the dynamics of social policy in the Middle East and developing a conceptual ‘model’ to account for the particular characteristics of welfare arrangements in the countries of the region. While part of this framework, Turkey represents an exceptional case due to the Europeanization processes the country is undergoing in various policy areas, including social policy. The influence of the European Union on the shape of Turkish social policy, as illustrated by the government's recent reforms in the labour market and social security domains, is hereby used to outline the position of Turkey vis‐à‐vis both the Southern European welfare regime and the Middle Eastern pattern. This article seeks to assess the dynamics of Turkish social policy in light of the country's political, and socio‐economic dynamics, as well as the external influence exerted by the EU and international financial institutions. The aim is to examine Turkish welfare arrangements in a comparative manner and consider its suitability with reference to either of the two models. Looking at major trends in social security and the labour market, the article argues for a Turkish ‘hybrid’ model embodying the characteristics of both. Subject to EU explicit pressures for reform absent elsewhere in the Middle East, the data nevertheless show that Turkey has yet to make the qualitative leap forward that could place it firmly within the Southern European welfare group.     

Social Policy between Plan and Market: Xiagang (Off-duty Employment) and the Policy of the Re-employment Service Centres in China

China's gradual transition from a command economy to a market system has been vexed by its ailing state‐owned enterprises (SOEs) employing huge numbers of surplus workers. Under the growing challenge of market competition, the survival of SOEs depends critically on the release of unwanted staff. If not handled well, however, massive layoffs could trigger ugly protests, erode social stability and challenge the governing mandate of the Chinese Communist Party. Facing this dilemma, the state's response has been to invent a process of ‘xiagang’ (off‐duty employment) whereby redundant state workers can leave the production process without causing social turbulence, and to introduce a national programme of re‐employment service centres (RSCs) which offer living allowances, social security, job training and re‐employment assistance as a transitional measure. As a distinct form of unemployment, xiagang reflects the special challenge confronting the state and civil society in a critical stage of China's market transition. This article sets out to explore the political and social meanings of xiagang and the RSCs to elucidate how the state uses a specific social policy to balance both group and national interests and to steer the country on to the next stage of market development.     

社区社会企业的责任承担及培育发展

改革开放以来,中国社会处于快速转型期,政府失灵、市场失灵及社区服务组织失灵的现象给社区建设带来了严峻的挑战。社区社会企业作为一种新型的社区服务组织,对这种挑战做出了积极的回应。本文介绍了社区社会企业的发展现状,分析了社区社会企业在推动社区居民就业、提高社区服务水平、承担社区环保中的责任,并提出社区社会企业的培育发展需要政府、社会企业家、志愿者、社会支持机构共同努力的对策建议。     

Social Enterprise – A New Phenomenon in the Field of Economic and Social Welfare?

Drawing upon insights from historical institutionalism, this article critically examines the origins of social enterprise and its emergence into the mainstream policy arena. It begins by relating the social enterprise idea to major non‐state/non‐private institutional traditions, including the European social economy, US non‐profits and the UK charitable sector, and places it within the specific field of economic and social welfare. In so doing, the article contests the idea that social enterprise is a new phenomenon in the social welfare field and proposes instead that the supposed ‘novelty’ of social enterprise as an organizational form and a subject of public policy lies primarily in the nature of the socio‐political and economic context of the 1980s–1990s, during which time it became ‘en vogue’. The process of institutionalization of social enterprise and its ascension into the mainstream policy arena is examined in more detail in the case of England during the time New Labour was in office and beyond, and lessons are drawn from this experience concerning both the role that social enterprise plays or is expected to play as a vehicle to address economic and social needs, and how this is intertwined with both a dominant neo‐liberal discourse, as well as alternative perspectives that emphasize more equalitarian and sustainable development paths. The article concludes with some reflections in relation to the apparent consensus that seems to exist around social enterprise as a legitimate subject of public policy and the resulting social enterprization of public services which is currently taking place in England.     

The Politics of Social Policy Language

A number of scholars have recently shown that key social policy concepts like ‘welfare state’ are both vague and problematic. Drawing on the international literature on the role of ideas in social policy, this article compares the development of two major policy concepts in two countries where the language of social policy is openly contentious: the USA and France. Focusing on the last three decades, the article discusses the meaning and development of the concepts of ‘social security’/‘sécurité sociale’ and ‘welfare state’/‘État‐providence’ in both countries. As suggested, these two concepts have long been controversial, in part because they are typically involved in the inherently political drawing and redrawing of the contested boundaries of state action. Overall, the article explains how the comparative analysis of social policy language can help scholars adopt a more reflexive approach.     

Economic Policy and Social Policy: Policy-linkages in an Era of Globalisation

This article argues that changes in the role of the state in economic affairs will affect the process of social policy. Growing economic integration caused by globalisation now places a greater constraint upon the discretion of the nation state, bringing about a transformation into a more competitive state. States are increasingly having to compete against each other in order to promote competitiveness and attract foreign direct investment (FDI) from international capital markets. This competition influences in turn the social policy formation requiring the redesigning of social policy. Thus, welfare states may need to reform their social policy towards a "business-friendly social policy". The analysis of social policy inputs and outputs presented here suggests that there are common trends in most welfare states towards: a market-conforming policy on business taxation, a reduction of the share of employer's contributions in social protection revenues, more limited income security programmes, an increased allocation of resources for active labour market programmes and less state intervention in the labour market. All these reforming trends in social policy can be understood as a response of welfare states to the evolving needs of business caused by structural change, notably globalisation.     

Chinese Workfarism: Logics and Realities of the Work–Welfare Governance Model

Given the fundamental disparities between China and the west in political structures, social values, policy regimes, and problem loads, it is meaningful to use “workfare” as a challenging analytical standpoint and detect that China had created unique workfare regimes to build up the past state‐socialism and the present market‐socialism. In the era of state‐socialism, the dual‐track welfare system, apparently adopting an institutional approach to the city and a residual approach to the countryside, was purposely integrated with the segregated urban‐rural work system, constituting a China‐specific workfare regime in which the whole workforce was included and effectively organized into the socio‐economic order. Under market‐socialism that appears as an awkward hybrid, the work‐welfare governance model is being gradually transformed into a pragmatic, much marketized one, though without idealogical legitimacy as well as a clear‐cut vision. On the one hand, employment differentiation and income disparity resulted from a strategic shift from the “reform‐without‐losers” stage to the “reform‐with‐losers” stage in the labor market, together with a large scale rural‐to‐urban labor migration, are structuring a market‐oriented, stratified employment system. On the other hand, while being a welfare laggard, China's productivist, status‐segregated welfare system is taking shape owing to a set of welfare reforms along the line of marketization and societalization. All these changes would imply that China is converging towards a neo‐liberal regime in which the role of the state is residual to the market.     

How to Measure Social Progress?

A good society is the goal for social policy. Recent years have seen a growing awareness that gross domestic product (GDP) alone does not measure this. Happiness and well‐being have increasingly been seen as elements that should influence welfare policies. This review article provides an overview of many of the ways to measure well‐being and happiness. It attempts to cover three distinct, but interrelated subjects. First, why and what can be used to complement GDP as measures for societal development. Second, is there a relation between well‐being, happiness and central social policy areas? Third, whether knowledge on what makes people happy could inform policymakers in their decisions. The article discusses the many new attempts to measure societal development, and the fact that there are so many that decision makers and citizens are drowning by numbers and thereby not able to grasp whether or not there is social progress. Lastly, by using the classical depiction of welfare states, the article analyses whether the indexes are in line herewith, and that, therefore, they might be used as an instrument for steering societies in the direction of a good society.     

谈中国特色社会工作行政体制建构

在中国情境下,社会工作发展与西方国家有不同特点,社会工作行政作为社会工作的间接专业方法,也有其不同于西方国家的特色。本文从社会工作行政与社会政策的关系问题、社会工作行政的对象问题、社会服务活动中的人力资源管理、学生实习的双重功能问题,以及社会工作行政的伦理困惑等五个方面,探讨了构建中国特色社会工作行政知识体系及制度架构所遇到的理论和实践议题,并在此基础上提出建构中国特色社会工作行政体制的政策建议,包括:建构与完善社会福利政策体系;构建与完善社会工作组织体系;加快社会工作行政高级人才培育;加强对于社会工作行政的理论和实践研究。     

Dynamics of the Welfare Mix in the Republic of Korea: An Expenditure Study Between 1990 and 2001

Although non-State sectors have played an important role in people's welfare, their expenditures have usually been excluded from social policy studies when measuring the welfare efforts of a nation. This article experiments with a new approach synthesizing welfare mix research using an expenditure study as a tool and applies the model to the Korean case. It presents the following major findings: first, the welfare system of the Republic of Korea has presented a genuine welfare mix in which the role of non-State sectors has been of immense importance; and second, the dynamics of the welfare mix since 1997 have been largely due to the growing role of the State in social welfare, both directly and indirectly. Based on these findings, this article ultimately urges the necessity of the welfare mix approach in comparative social policy research.     

Responding to child maltreatment: Comparison between the USA and China

A recent study estimated that over one‐fourth of Chinese children have suffered maltreatment (Fang et al., 2015 ). However, the current child welfare policy in China is limited to orphans, abandoned children, and children with disabilities. Also, there is very little comparative research in China on Chinese and other countries’ child welfare systems. The purpose of this study was to analyze applicable US and Chinese child welfare policies, identify gaps in Chinese policy regarding child maltreatment, and make recommendations for a policy agenda for improving child welfare in China based on cultural values and existing policy structures. Results show that China has considerable capacity to make improvements in child protective services, foster care, and adoption policies. Based on the results of this study, several implications are provided to develop China's child maltreatment policy to increase children's outcomes of well‐being, safety, and permanency. Key Practitioner Message: ? To understand the background and system of current Chinese child maltreatment policy; ? To review US child maltreatment policy and its implementation to identify gaps in the Chinese child maltreatment system; ? To provide policy suggestions to develop Chinese child maltreatment policy and provide recommendations for social work education and practice in China.     

Survey on Perceptions of Social Fairness and Their Implications for Social Governance Innovation*

At the present stage, social fairness or equity is an important area of governance in China, and increasing the level of fairness is an important theme of work. In 2016, the Chinese government laid down specific arrangements and operations relating to equity in education, social security, market competition, etc. The participatory governance model entails testing policy outcomes in relation to the sense of fairness of the mass of the people. Our survey found that perceptions of fairness are higher among middle- and high-income groups and are lower in the eastern region than in the central and western regions. In social security, however, perceptions of fairness and of improvements in the level of fairness are lower than they are for education and market competition. Overall, specific policies relating to fairness in education have been quite effective in enhancing people's perceptions of fairness. Accordingly, if we are to make effective improvements in the fairness of social governance, we need a more rational distribution system that takes into account public opinion and expands the scope of fairness in social security.     

The Dynamics of Welfare Policy‐Making in South Korea: Social Movements as Policy Entrepreneurs*

This paper analyzes the role of social movements in the creation and evolution of a welfare state in South Korea. We begin with a theoretical overview of the existing works on policy change, highlighting concepts such as ideas, policy paradigms, and windows of opportunity. We then examine state institutions, hegemonic policy paradigms, and the specific dynamics of welfare policy‐making during South Korea’s authoritarian period (1961–1987). Next, characterizing the democratic transition in 1987 and the economic crisis of 1997–1998 as “windows of opportunity,” we probe how social movements emerged as “policy entrepreneurs” and played crucial roles in building welfare institutions and promoting welfare policies. In particular, we focus on the role of social movements in legislating the National Basic Livelihood Security Act in 1999 and consolidating fragmented health insurance systems in 2000. We conclude that social movements in democratized South Korea have assumed the role of policy entrepreneurs, filling the vacuum left by the central government and elite bureaucrats in the field of social welfare policy‐making.     

Developments in East Asian Welfare Studies

This essay in introduction is to the field of study, rather than to the present, itself distinguished, collection of papers. As such, it opens with a series of ‘flashbacks’: to the ways in which social policy, and the study of social policy, developed out of the interaction between Western welfare states (in this case Britain) and Asia Pacific. The main body of the article then charts the increasing presence of East Asian modes of welfare within comparative social policy, before going on to distinguish between the different types of approach to East Asian welfare study which have so far been adopted. Two sets of three‐part criteria have been adopted for the purposes of classification: focusing first on the dimensions (single case studies of specific countries; East Asia as a region; East Asia in comparison with other parts of the world) and second on the level of issues (matters of policy; of welfare system; of welfare regime) characteristic of each study in question. The article concludes with a restatement of its purpose: not to question the adequacy of hitherto Western (notably, Esping‐Andersen) approaches to the study of welfare regimes, but to demonstrate the need for a substantive extension to their scope.