Substance of Social Policy - Personal Statement Example

Running Head: Discuss with examples Discuss with Examples: The Fact that the Substance of Social Policy is Increasingly Transnational and Determined by Global Economic Competition Reinforces and/or Challenges Social Inequalities Student Name University Name Subject Name Instructor Name Date of Submission Discuss with Examples: The Fact that the Substance of Social Policy is Increasingly Transnational and Determined by Global Economic Competition Reinforces and/or Challenges Social Inequalities Introduction Social policy can be regarded as a public policy system and practice methodology in the very areas of labour, education, inequality, criminal justice, human services and health care. However, the problem of increasing social inequality worldwide is becoming prominent and the effects of transnational integration and global economic competition need to be monitored, assessed and analysed. In success parts of the developing and developed world, rapid capitalist evolution has diminished absolute poverty, but it also heightened vulnerability and insecurity from time to time. Contextually, challenges posed by an unregulated capitalist system worldwide have to be recognised, since social inequality is increasing in many parts of the world and problems like unemployment exist even in the developed countries (Wood and Gough, 2006). This paper is based on the review of quality literature in this sphere, followed by a section of analysis which considers the situational and comparative aspects of the topic. After that, the cases of Taiwan, South Korea, Malawi and UK are discussed in this context. Taiwan and South Korea has been chosen because these Asian countries have successfully challenged the social inequalities. Taiwan demonstrates a nationalist, capitalist economy while South Korean economy carries the traces of Post –War decolonisation by Japan. Malawi is an example of the adverse effects of globalisation. It also exhibits an African case. UK is a mixed economy capitalism which is a developed country but is still facing certain challenges in maintaining its social policy and minimising the social inequalities. It represents a West European economy. Finally, the paper culminates at a viable conclusion. Literature Review Social policy is the set of activities, legislation, principles and guidelines which affect people and their living. Country specific social policy is meant for the populace of the country concerned. However, social policy structure and design is increasingly becoming less immune to international interventions and influence. In the twenty first century, globalisation has become a major determining factor in this context. Hence, it is an imperative to understand globalisation in the perspective of nationhood and social policy structuring. “Globalization may be defined as an integrated set of developments which are in the process of creating a single global economic, social and political structure, and which necessarily, therefore, challenge and undermine the claims that have historically been made on behalf of the state. It denotes not mere interconnectedness, but a dynamic which is bringing into existence a new world order, from which no part of the globe can be excluded. The mythology of unfettered state sovereignty may thus safely be consigned to the past: states can aspire only to the role of managers or mediators of the impact of global forces on their domestic political, economic, and cultural arenas.” (Clapham, 2002) Hence, the need to develop (or the course of the development of) new directions in social policy is undeniable (Clarke, 2004). This testifies that the substance of social policy is rapidly becoming transnational. However, the factor of global economic competition is also very important and rapidly becoming forceful. In the Cold War era, it cannot be denied that the Western Bloc and the Communist Bloc had intense economic competitions between them (besides military, political and technological rivalries). At that time too, therefore, economic competition influenced social policy making. However, with the collapse of the Communist Bloc, the process of globalisation followed and the economic competitions were defined in a multidimensional, diverse way now. These economic competitions are essential supplementary to the global economies of today and hence the modern welfare states have entered a transitory phase again (Esping-Andersen, 1996) Disparities in economic conditions around the world have become more copious and sometimes detrimental due to this wave of emerging global competitions which has led to increased insecurity in relation to the welfare regimes in the context of the Asian, African and Latin American populaces (Gough and Wood, 2004). In this situation, we must further consider that “Although resource scarcity is frequently presented as the major constraint to the institutionalisation of comprehensive social policies in poor countries, choices over resource allocation are primarily political decisions, reflecting normative views of socially acceptable outcomes. Moreover, the allocation and use of resources for social policy invariably reflect the interests and priorities of central government policy-makers and the providers of financial and technical support (the international financial institutions and donors), resulting in a top-down design of interventions with little reference to local contexts or understanding of the population groups on whom these policies are targeted.” (Devereux and Cook, 2000) Therefore, in the rapidly changing socio-economic environment of the world, social policy is both reinforcing and challenging the social inequalities, especially in the terms of economics. The interaction between globalisation and welfare state is sometimes just simply bypassing the question of the poor and needy people in the societies, while there are such examples too when globalisation eradicated poverty at least to some extent (Mishra, 1999). Hence, according to Wood and Gough (2006), in understanding certain facts concerning globalisation, we are fundamentally settling for a code of mixed economy capitalism or social capitalism. Also, it should be understood that neither markets, nor states, nor communities alone can offer a sufficient framework for fulfilling the human needs. Thus political economies which manage (by deliberation or default) to combine these three institutional spheres provide for a more supple and sustainable scaffold for the purpose of enhancing human well-being. Accepting the global truth for the predictable future involves that this combination will function within a framework characterised by widespread private property, or in other words, a capitalist framework. (Wood and Gough 2006) Hence, an analytical review of the economic truth of the world would uncover some bitter facts regarding poverty in connection to social inequalities and the effects of globalisation. The pattern of human living standard development in the poorer countries has not been encouraging, since economic disparities continue to offer serious challenges to the social welfare programmes and public administration costs. Surging private income coupled with the degradation of the public assets in the developing and underdeveloped countries pose serious problems in the way of addressing the social inequalities by the means of social policy design and implementation. Practical and acceptable economic solutions have to be explored (Anand and Ravallion, 1993). Analysis For the several poverty stricken, partially capitalised populaces and societies, the socio-economic and even political security of the people relies upon different clientelist relationships. The formalisation of rights to security by development of strategies targeted to de-clientelisation thus becomes important in protecting the people in the face of the increasing market volatility, and hence, insecurity. “The problem arises when permeability functions with the opposite effect and when alternative principles prevail: of privilege; of natural superiority of rights and entitlements; and of selfishness; of private short-term gain; of fission; and of social closure” (Wood and Gough, 2007) At this point, it must also be noted that almost all of the domestic components of the social functionary exhibit signs of slow recovery and failure. Further, “Markets are imperfect, communities are clientelist and socially exclusive, households patriarchal and states marketised and/or patrimonial. Under such conditions, how does it make sense to expect the state to disentangle itself from deep social and political structures and function to compensate for them?” (Wood and Gough, 2007) The above question can be effectively answered if the socio-political functionary and the policy makers concerned recapitulate some basic concepts of social policy. The substance of social policy remains powerful and effective in relation to handling the woeful problems and emerging dimensions of social inequalities. “In terms of objectives, conventional social policy interventions are generally designed to: (a) ensure access to a range of goods and services to enhance welfare and achieve socially defined objectives; (b) reduce uncertainty or insure against risks or shocks (such as drought or unemployment), to smooth consumption and income over the life cycle.” (Devereux and Cook, 2000) The social order models and concepts developed by the West may not prove to be enough analytical and thoroughly applicable to the regions of the world where the developmental patterns are uneven. Even, the confusion between the concepts of development and growth has also added new problems to economic planning and management on the part of the governments. In the countries like Indonesia, Thailand, Philippines, etc., although the picture of economic growth has sometimes raised hopes, the issue of fractured social development has persisted at various political, economic and social levels. For example, religious fundamentalism has been prominent in Indonesia, and prostitution has been extensive in Thailand. In Africa, the countries like Democratic Republic of Congo, Nigeria, Zimbabwe, Botswana, etc. exhibit grimly scenarios where social policy has not only been seriously challenged but also the scope of policy implementation has been minimized due to violence and racial discrimination. Hence, inequalities continue to exist. The enigmatic question of social policy implementation remains unanswered and the intensions of the international community does not become clear (Wilkinson, 1996) However, resurgence even from complete economic, social and political devastation is not impossible. South Korea and Japan are the beat examples. Unlike the developed western economies like Sweden and UK, these countries have spent less amount of money for government expenditure. In those countries, “expenditure approach does not measure the delivery of social welfare” (Kwon, 1997). By comparing the historical development patterns of the western developed economies with the eastern ones, transnational social policy models to solve the problem of social inequality may be derived. This sort of comparative study is particularly important when globalisation is leading to new economic challenges and the transnational orientation of the processes is becoming more and more copious (Morales-Gomez, 1999). Moreover, in the context of the countries like Sudan, Somalia, Zimbabwe, etc., where the human rights situation is rapidly deteriorating, the international community must play more active role to ensure prevention of human rights violation which is a precondition to social policy implementation. “The international system has had long experience of dealing with what (however crudely) may be termed `bad states, and has attempted to devise mechanisms through which (however ineffectually) to contain, control or reform them: the Geneva Conventions, the UN Charter, the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, and a mass of other provisions which have come to constitute recognized international practice for this purpose. All these instruments basically depend, however, on the existence of effective states, which can be held responsible for their own misdeeds, and against which leverage can in turn be brought by other states or international organizations.” (Clapham, 2002) Case Examples Taiwan In the case of Taiwan, effect of transnational politics and economics can be noted in the view of the events of 1950s when the right wing KMT implemented a social policy manifesto to counter the influence and rivalry from communist China and the erstwhile Soviet Union. In the Cold War era, Taiwan proceeded along the lines of a welfare regime by implementing Retired Government Employees’ Insurance, Government Employees’ Insurance and Labour Insurance programmes. However, in the 1980s, a complex welfare system emerged in the country and the issue of social inequalities were not properly addressed since the welfare programmes covered only a small portion of the population. Although the Soviet Bloc collapsed in the following years, social policy continued to be an issue of focus during the process of globalisation too. To ensure political stability in the face of global economic competition, Taiwanese polity integrated the welfare programmes, extended the scope of social policy by covering the farmers and unorganised labourers, and thus minimised the social inequalities (Kwon, 1999). Although competition with communist China played an important role, social policy influenced by the global economic competition finally challenged and minimised the social inequalities in the society. South Korea In the World War II, South Korea was one of the countries worst hit. It emerged as a post colonial economy following the decolonisation of its territory by Japan. During the Korean War, South Korea also faced the transnational political interventions due to due to the activities of the communist North Korea and its allies. In order to retain its sovereignty and maintain its democratic social order, South Korea had to focus on social policy to relieve its people from economic pressure and protect them from communist influence. The country took a regulator type of policy intervention to finance welfare programs and its fiscal and social policies made only limited impact on the situation of income distribution. Towards the beginning of twenty first century, Public Assistance Programme, Industrial Accident Insurance, National Pension Programme and National Health Insurance programmes emerged as the most important welfare programmes under the South Korean social policy structure (Kwon, 1997). South Korean social policy now provides socio-economic protection to farmers, unorganised labourers and self employed workers as well. Globalisation provided impetus to its social policy following the capitalist welfare model to challenge social inequalities as a whole. Malawi In the broader context of Africa, the situation of Malawi during the twentieth century could be explained on the basis of the generalised wave of vulnerability and poverty throughout the major parts of the continent. It had been a poor and underdeveloped country with a fragile base of natural resource. However, in the 1990s, economic liberalisation due to the process of globalisation led to more exposure to global economic competition. This adversely affected the scope of the social welfare programmes in the country since its Samllholder Agricultural Credit Association collapsed, fertiliser subsidies were removed and Malawi Kwacha (the country’s currency) was heavily devalued. Hence, the commodity prices were raised, food supply was limited and the failure of implementation of a constructive social policy in the challenging transnational environment reinforced social inequalities all the more (Devereux and Cook, 2000). The case of Malawi is an example of the negative impact of global economic competition on a poor, underdeveloped country where economic liberalisation could not erect an appreciable capitalist welfare model. United Kingdom In the context of UK, it should be mentioned that the interrelation between public expenditure and social welfare depends on the nature of the state responsibility. The UK government itself delivers the social benefits and services that are then paid for by its expenditure. The National Health Service (NHS) of this country is a classic example where the social policy is based on a provider model (Kwon, 1997). However, social spending fluctuated in UK from time to time. The Conservative governments tried to restrain it, whereas the Labour governments allowed increasing it (Dean, 2006). Thus, UK represents mixed economy capitalism. However, due to more economic liberalisation during globalisation, a number of public sector companies have been privatised in the recent years. This has lowered the social security provided to the public sector workers, since many of them are now exposed to the dynamics of global economic competition. But still, the transnational social policy model of the developed world (particularly the Western Europe) is effective in the country and the social inequalities are being countered by the means of health, education, housing and personal social services (Dean, 2006). Today, the developed economy of UK is characterised by slow growth rates and it is to be closely monitored that how its social policy continues to challenge the social inequalities in synchronisation with the transnational and competition factor. Not only that, the country gives away fair amounts of money to the poorer countries in Africa and Asia (most of which were its colonies in the past) to challenge the social inequalities abroad as well. Conclusion The transnational orientation of social policy is not a very recent phenomenon. Also, global economic competition has always existed. Particularly during the Cold War, the capitalist and communist economic models fiercely rivalled each other. However, social policy making is being increasingly subjected to transnational dynamics and global economic competition, particularly due to globalisation. In the context of the contemporary situation of the global economies and the continued wave of economic liberalisation, it is testified that the substance of social policy under global influence and framework amply reinforces and/or challenges the social inequalities. In different countries, the cases are different. In the underdeveloped countries, social policy in the contemporary global economic environment only reinforced the social inequalities, as has been witnessed by Malawi. But the countries like South Korea and Taiwan have winningly utilised the global capitalist system to to improve their lot. However, even the developed countries like UK are facing new challenges in this sphere. In the international scenario, social inequalities have increased manifold. Economic disparity is becoming a serious problem due to the uneven patterns of economic development. It is clear that all the countries are not equally capable of taking advantage from the benefits of globalisation. Hence, development and implementation of effective and feasible social policy remain imperative. The international community analyse and recognise the fact that social policy reinforces and/or challenges social inequalities in the world. Reference List Anand, S. and Ravallion, M. (1993) ‘Human Development in Poor Countries: On the Role of Private Incomes and Public Services’, The Journal of Economic Perspectives, Vol. 7, No. 1, 133 – 150. Clapham, C. (2002) ‘The Challenge to the State in a Globalized World’, Development and Change, Vol. 33, No. 5, pp. 775-795. Clarke, J. (2004) Changing Welfare, Changing States: New Directions in Social Policy, London: Sage. Dean, H. (2006) Social Policy, Cambridge: Polity Devereux, S. and Cook, S. (2000) ‘Does Social Policy Meet Social Needs?’, IDS Bulletin, Vol. 31, No. 4, 63-73. Esping-Andersen, G. (1996) Welfare States in Transition: National Adaptations in Global Economies, London: Sage Publications with UNRISD. Gough, I. and Wood, G. (eds.) (2004) Insecurity and Welfare Regimes in Asia, Africa and Latin America, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Kwon, H. (1999) ‘East Asian Welfare States in Transition: Challenges and Opportunities’, IDS Bulletin, Vol. 30, No. 4, 82-93. Kwon, H. (1997) Beyond European Welfare Regimes: Comparative Perspectives on East Asian Welfare Systems, Journal of Social Policy, Vol. 26, No. 4, pp. 467- 484. Mishra, R. (1999) Globalisation and the Welfare State, London: Edward Elgar. Morales-Gomez, D. (ed.) (1999) Transnational Social Policies: The New Development Challenges of Globalization, London: Earthscan. Wilkinson, R. (1996) Unhealthy Societies. The Afflictions of Inequality, London: Routledge. Wood, G. and Gough, I. (2006) ‘A Comparative Welfare Regime Approach to Global Social Policy’, World Development, Vol. 34, No. 10, pp. 1696-1712. Read More