by

1
COSHOD AND THE DESIGNOF A CARIBBEAN SOCIAL
POLICY FRAMEWORK

• by
• Prof. Clive Y. Thomas
• IDS, University of Guyana
• April 10, 2004

2
Rationale for a Caribbean SPF Approach

• Conceptual Advance shift away from
  instrumentalist views of social policy
  (midwife/handmaiden) to equal partner in
  development policy
• Systemic Domestic Pressures on Welfare Provision
  increasing mix of elements of risk-based, basic
  needs, rights-based, entitlements, and
  citizenship in social welfare provision
• Systemic External Pressures on Welfare Provisions
  via
  
• Global economic effects
• economic impact of globalisation/liberalisat
  ion
  

3

• Rapidly evolving global norms/standards, i.e.,
  global public goods
  
• reflected in increasing number of
  international agreements, conventions,
  targets, obligations
  
• International good-practice
• donor community, IFIs, intergovernmental
  organisations, global NGOs See Schedule 1
  
• Global culture/behaviour
• demonstration effect of good and bad
  practice
  

4
SCHEDULE 1 GOOD-PRACTICE, STATE-OF-THE-ART
BENCHMARKS FOR SOCIAL POLICY

• Cooperation by donor agencies throughout all
  stages of programmes and projects
  
• Partnership with local stakeholders
• Widening of local stakeholder coverage and the
  creation of opportunities to work jointly with
  them, without requiring government permission
  
• The promotion of local ownership of the
  process
  
• Sector-wide approaches (SWAPS)
• Participatory methodologies to be followed
  throughout all stages from design to
  post-implementation evaluation
  

5
SCHEDULE 1 GOOD-PRACTICE, STATE-OF-THE-ART
BENCHMARKS FOR SOCIAL POLICY (CONTD)

• Clear and precise targeting of beneficiaries,
  with the focus on their empowerment
  
• Improved coordination between economic and social
  ministries
  
• Stress on good governance and the soundness of
  social, political, and economic institutions
  
• The need to reconcile equity with growth and
  social reform with economic change
  
• Recognition of the interdependence of all
  elements of development
  

6
Theoretical Issues in Designing SPFs

• Determining the Nature of the Social Welfare
  Regime (Paradigm) SWR
  
• Welfare Mix
• Welfare Outcomes
• Stratification Effects
• Typology of SWRs
• Liberal-conservative-social democratic
• Developmentalist-Universalist
• Developmentalist-Particularist
• Minimalist-Facilitative
• Components of Extended Welfare Mix in
  Caribbean-type Societies Table 1
  

7
Table 1 Components of the Extended Welfare Mix
Source Gough, (1999) p.4.
8
SCHEDULE 2 CARIBBEAN WELFARE MIX INSTITUTIONAL
DOMAINS AND SOCIAL PROVISIONING
Note means tending to increase.
9
SCHEDULE 3 MAJOR EXTERNAL AND INTERNAL PRESSURES
ON CARIBBEAN SWR
10
SCHEDULE 3 MAJOR EXTERNAL AND INTERNAL PRESSURES
ON THE SOCIAL WELFARE SYSTEM (CONTD)
11
Eight Implications For SPF Construction in the
Region

• Shift from handout/welfarism to building social
  capital/ investing in people
  
• Improved coordination of social institutions
• Focusing on the role of the core bread-winner
• Improved institutional capacity, flexibility and
  adaptability
  
• Firm legal basis for poverty programmes and
  social services delivery
  
• Strengthening social relationships and shared
  values (social cohesion and integration)
  
• Halt the retreat from redistribution concerns
• Reduce over-reliance on Universalist approach
  to social services delivery
  

12
DESIGNING A SOCIAL POLICY FRAMEWORK

• A. Structure
• Definition/Description Premises
  The Overall Objective The
  Derived Strategic Objectives The
  Modalities for Operationalising Policies
  The Basic Concerns as Cross-Cutting Themes

13
B. Definition

• Social policy refers to 1) those aims,
  objectives and declared intentions of a range of
  organizations in the public, private/business,
  civil sectors and international community that
  are intended to reduce poverty and to meet the
  needs of the population, both male and female, in
  order to improve their well-being or welfare, and
  to promote the development of the country 2) the
  way these declared aims, objectives and
  intentions are translated into specific
  programmes and projects for change and 3) the
  monitored outcomes of these programmes and
  projects (Thomas, 2001).

14
C. Four Key Premises

• That the population of the region, both male and
  female, is seen as actors, owners, and initiators
  of social policy. Persons are expected therefore,
  to have (and demand) increasing agency over the
  development of society, economy, polity, and
  culture. More specifically, the population is
  not conceived as objects of social reform or
  purely economic agents operating in the market
  place.
• That because of the underlying economic,
  political, social, and cultural situation
  discussed earlier, it is premised that the
  necessity/imperative for social reform and change
  is a widely shared value among the population.
  More specifically, it is not conceived as the
  singular property of elites, whether political,
  social, or economic.

15

• That while social change can be measured in many
  ways it is best measured by the nature and
  quality of the social relations,
  inter-connections, and shared values among the
  population. More specifically, sustainable
  social change is not conceived as being possible,
  if it is led from above in a top-down commandist
  structure of social relations and
  interconnections.
• That social development is treated as a public
  good, in that, it is part the commons or
  common heritage of all citizens and therefore,
  the responsibility for its provision is
  collectively shared by all members of society.

16
D. Identifying the Overall Objective

• The creation of more secure and functional
  social relations (or as it is also termed social
  capital) these relations (social capital) would
  enlarge the capability of the population, both
  men and women, (and in particular the poor and
  vulnerable groups) in meeting their own needs and
  interests through effective participation in the
  activities of the four central institutions of
  society state, market, community, and household.
  (Thomas 2003)

17
E. The Derived Strategic Objectives

• Development Objective
• Social Protection/Welfare Objective

18
F. Nine Goals of the Development Objective

• The goals focus on investment in peoples and
  communities. They avoid large-scale transfers of
  primarily a primary social protection type
  
• poverty eradication building social capital
  securing family/household relations gender
  equity participation/empowerment institutional
  sustainability environmental sustainability
  international competitiveness and macroeconomic
  stability and balance. (Thomas 2003)

19
G. The Social Protection/Welfare Objective

• Capability/resources
• Social Risk-based
• Rights-based

20
H. Basic Concerns/Cross-Cutting Themes

• Empowerment (investment in human capital)
• Livelihood Security (social protection/
  compensation)
  
• Social Services Provision (social integration
  policies)

21
J. CONCLUSION