CHAPTER - 2

CONCEPT OF SOCIAL POLICY AND SOCIAL PROGRAMMES

WHAT IS SOCIAL
The common term between social policy and social

programme is 'social', So far it has been difficult for

scholars to define the term 'social' precisely because

soci~d aspects of development at'e not as tangible as

economic indicators of development, Hence, what is

available by way of definition is vet'y bt'oad and vague.

For instance,according to one view of social is, " ...

everything that refers directly to the conditions in

which people live" (UN:1Q66, Social and Economic Factors

in Development). Myrdal (1968) refers to the same as a

long tet'm phenomenon which is not diffet'ent ft'om most of

the investments in the overall capital projects like dam

and power plants. Kulkarni (1979) considers it as

putting back 'human element' into development. He

fLlt·thet· states ttlat social consequences of national

deve h::lpmen t al'(;~ not p l-anned, wh i ch t'es\.\ 1 t in social

dislocations. Although various studies (Ah I uwa I ia,

1974; and Sen 1980) have est;ab 1 ished the need and

importance of including social aspects in the national

10
plannin~, the term 'social' is still left precisely

undefined. It can be said that it is being treated as

a) non-economic (Wat'ham, 1970); b) mOt'e than economic

(Dubey, 1973, Myrdal 1968); c) investment in human

development (f(u 1 kut'n i, 1979) and d) all

conditions influencing human beings (Eyden, 1963).

SOCIAL POLICY:

Just like social, the word 'social pollcy' is also not

yet def Ined pr'ec I sely. Though thet'8 many

definitions both narrow and broad there is no one

definition which defines social policy comprehensively.

Narrow View of Social Policy:

Nat'l'ow definitions of social policy identify i t;

pI'imm'ily with:

al government decisions (Rein,1970; Mal'shall,1970; and

Titm\lSS,1976) ;

b) decisions by the political parties (The Concise

Oxford Dictional'y) and

c) society acting through its lawfully constituted

government, shapes social policy thus I'ightly ordering

11
the netwo~k of ~elationship between men and women

(Macbeth,1957; Eyden 1969)

Hence social policy is identified with the gove~nment

and/o~ legislations. Since this involves decisions

which a~e political, it is influenced by influential

g~oups in the SOCiety having cont~ol over the political

powe~ (Warham,197~; Rein, 1970)

The Middle Range View of Social Policy:

The middle ~ange view of social policy is seen as

providing social purpose to economic development to help

achieve a ~ight balance between social and economic

development, (Mehta,1958; and Dubey, 1973)

This can be seen as me~ely improving the welfare of

citizens eithe~ collectively o~ individually lEyden,

1963) or b~oadly ~eferring to the elimination of

pove~ty, the maximisation of welfare and pursuit of

equality as the aims of social policy (Marshall, 1970;

and Titmus. 1974). In fact, the three models of social

policy suggested by Titmuss - Residual Welfare, The

Achievement Performance and Institutional Redist~ibutive

12
 - are representatives of the middle range view of social

policy. These are discussed in brief here.

Residual Welfare Model:

Individual is the prime concern here. It believes in

the principle of self-determination on the part of the

individual and the cause for any failure is attributed

solely to him and not to the social system of which he

is a pal't. The wester'n-or'iented weI fal'e sel'vices based

on self-help fall under this model.

The Achievement Per-fot'manes Model:

The stress of this model is that, though the community

is obliged to provide the services, the individuals have

to pay for it or avail it on the basis of merit, for

which they have to wOt"k and increase productivity. The

occupational and fiscal welfare services are available

particularly to those who are favourably placed in the

organisational structure and in respect to the ownership

of other resources. The impact of these services, tend

to stabilise every widening gap of inequalities in the

Dwn€O't'shi.p and decisi.ons I'egal'ding means of pI'oduction in

13

•
society.

The Institutional Redist~ibutive Model:

This model is in direct contrast to the Achievement

Performance Model as it is based on the principles of

social justice and equality. It stresses on the

obligation of the State to provide serVices to the

citizens irrespective of whether they can afford or not.

Special serVices are also meant for weaket' and

disadvantaged sections. The impact of these set'vices

are eKpected to bring stability and equality in the

social system and to counter the "disruptive" forces of

change.

Dubey (1976) t'ightly regards Titmuss" models as

concet'ning social welfal'e policies on social insul'ance,

pub Ii c assistance, health, housing, education and

services for the handicapped and offering corrective or

at best supplementary measures. In addition, he offers

two other policy models - development social policy and

social r'efw'm policy.

Development social policy model:

14
Development social policy, according to Dubey, aims at

improvin~ the overall quality of life of the people by

allocating l'eSbUI'ces fOI' the pI'oduction of goods and

sel'vices to the needy. There are two kinds of

development social policies. The first one is the

Populist Development Social Policy which encout'ages

labour' intensive investment, pl'OdlJction of goods and

services for mass domestic consumption, favour external

mechanisms and dl;1fine and maintain mad:et mOI'altty.

policies in this categOI'Y inclUde I'ationing subsidised

comrnoditier~ to the POOl', pt'eventing adultet'ation

hOiwding essenti.al commodities, and favoul'i ng

progressive tax structure. The second is the Elitist

Development poli.cy which f <lIVOUI'S capital.

intensive investment and production of goods and

services for higher capital generation,

Social reform policy model:

Social reform policies are expected to deal with the

improvement of lower sections of the society, including

minorities by eradicatin~ social, economic, political

handicaps, discriminatory practices, attitudes and

15
beliefs. Social t'efol'm policies cwe conceptualised as

(a) increm~ntal (bl compensatory and ecl l'evolutional'Y·

The Inct'emental Pol icy, focuses on loosening up the

existing social, economlC and political stt'uctut'es in

order to pel'mit a limited access to the disadvantaged

population into the valued societal t'esoUt'ces civil

rights to the blacks and reservation to SC, ST and other

backwal'd c las'ilE!s, <1mol"1g othel's.

Compensa tOt'Y policies, in addition to the removal of

bat'I'iet's to the opportunity structure, provide

compensation to the victims of past injustices.

Revolut ional'y social I'efot'm pol icies focus on the

r'eplacement of old values, social l'eLations, economic

and political order by new ones based on equalitat'ian

ideology. For example policies relating to eradication

of untouchability and land ceiling at'e covered by it.

These aceot-ding to the N?seat'cher', should be taken as

pr-ovi.ding the bl'Oe,d scope, if not definition of social

pol icy.

16
Notwithstanding any nOI'mative model, fOI'mulat ion of

social policy in any society, according to Titmuss

(1974) depends upon:

(i) the intensity of the cause;

(ii) strength of the group sponsoring it;

(iii)capacity to which all'eady

institutions deal with;

(iv) the degree to which the public and

administative machiner'y is aware of it; and

(vI other factors like time.

In other' war'ds, social pol icy is the continuous gl'owth

in the volume of public, quasi-public and private

intel'ventions in social life (Myrdal as cited in Marsh,

1979) •

Social policy should be seen as the total well-being of

all, to be achieved by measuI'es not met'ely economic

unde I' taken by agencies in society along wi th/ol'

indeperldent of gQvernment. A content analysis of

different views of social policy ranging ft'om narrow

to broad -is pl'esented in the fOl'm of a chart covering

origin, objectives and nature of social policy and

points aut Who influences it (See Chart 1). The chart

17
 CHART - I
CONTENT ANALYSIS OF DIFFERENT VIEWS OF SOCIAL POLICY
Narro" ________________________ _ ________________ )_______ Broad

60v~rn.~nt d~d si ons _ Ruling Other political Voluntary Sotiety

Social legislation party parti~s Action
and progra~.es decision deci si on

ORIGIN Casuati ve "ere Any short- Party interests Beliefs, To alleviate Based on Sodal
(lIHY lactors obligation ter. erigen- Political pressure sori al soci etal objecti ves,
and of cies of a lac ti OI~, eY~n group, proble.s delands Influenced
WHERE! shte situation opposi t ion consequence based on and by sodal
pressur e of econoli c Soci al needs supply values
groups pDlicy,
public
opinion

OBJECTIVES Attack "ini~u. Eli.inatiDn Pursuit of Haxi Ii sali Dn Total "ell-being

(NHAT) on shnmdards of povert)' equali ty of Melfare of all,
insecurity other
philosophical
and emotional goals

NATURE al Benevolent ,---------lIBlen~vol~nt----,---­ BenevDl ent

(HOWl Coerci Vf Pun it i ve Persuasive

bl Negative----- ---iNeutral ---------!'Positi ve

c) E c o n o l i c - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - SDcial, including
economic

d) Present---·---- --Exigencies ,---------EEx ig~ncies

exigencies of .hort-tern of long-ter.
of iuediate nature nature
nature

e) Rigid----,..-- Fl exibl e

- - - - __ ~. __ w _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ ~ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ ~ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ • ______ ~ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ ~ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ ~_~ __ ~ ______ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ ,

NOTE: The chari is an atteapt t~ show how Ihe concept travels frol a narrow to a brDad vi eM. There need not
necessarily be any relatiDnship betMeen the cate~Dries either vertically or dia90nally, i.~" there is a
possibility of a social polity being an out-COSf Df politic~l decisions which lay be persuasive in character
tor short duration to achieve the aig of security. Thus, various patterns of social policy can eeerge by
the way of Morking out different cD~binations of the who, why and "here, Mhat and hON of social policy.
is evident of ampit'ical t'eality and not suggestive of

any normative reference. However', the t'eseat'chet'

believes that what is offered on the extreme right of

the chat't can be suggested as pt'esct'iptive social

policy.

SOCIAL PROGRAMMES:

As stated in Chaptet' 1, howsoever', well fot'mulated

a social policy may be, it cannot by itself achieve its

objectives. Social programmes translate the intent of

social policy into acticm. Just as social policies may

get fot'mulated ill nat't'ow, middle I'ange of bt'oad tel'ms,

social pt'ogt'ammes in society also seem to be

contributing to objective~ ranging from narrow to broad.

Not only thet"e is a need fat' mot'e social pI'ogt"ammes in

society, which will contribute to the broad objectives

of social policy, but there should also be proper

blending of bread seei.l policy with broad social

programmes or alternatively it should be ensured that

achievement of nat't'oW Ot' mid I'ange social pI'ogl'ammes

would cumulatively contribute te the achievement of

broad social policy goals.

19
In short, objectives, scope and natLlt'e of social

pr'ogr'amme will gt'eatly depend upon the objectives, and

scope of social policy as adopted by the society.

any society adopts reformative and development-oriented

social pol icy, bl..tt allows its pt'ogt'ammes to be basically

welfare oriented, then in the name of broad social

policy very narrow objectives of providing welfare to

certain disadvantaged sections in the society will only

take place.

Every society needs to take residual .... chievement

pet'fot'm.... nce, redistributive welfare, reformative and

developmemtal. approaches to alleviate its social

pl'ob lems. Social pt'og,'ammes t'i.H'ely set've as me .... ns

towards achieving such different aims. How fat' and to

what extent the society should follow these different

approaches and how to achieve functional relationships

among them so tt1at one does not wQt'k at cot'SS pur'poses

with others are then the concern and the scope of social

pol icy. If it is not taken at social policy's level,

social pt'ogt'ammes hawsoevet' well fot'mulated will be

20
aimless exercise in wilderness. At the time of

formulating social programmes, therefore it becomes

essential to see whethel' it suits the objective of

social policy on which it is made dependent and whether

its achievement will lead to the success of social

policy's objectives.

In any society, therefore, evaluation of its welfare

measul'es should be seen as concomitant of evaluation of

its social policy as translated into action through

social p I'og t'ammes. If social policy is a hole and

social p 1'09 ," ammes at"'e pegs, then it should be seen

I
whether' t'ound pegs al'e in I'ound holes.

21