Implementation of Social Policy in a Globalization Era: The Client’s Perspective

Abstract

The article presents a unique and personal perception of implementation of social policy in the globalization era, regarding the fields of education and social services. The article argues that there are gaps between formal policy (deciders) and its implementation, from the point of view of receivers. The article suggests some explanations to understand the nature of this gap and a new approach to bridge it, based on preliminary findings of my research "An Evaluation of Social Services Policy in Israel: from deciders to receivers". The picture emerging from the content analysis shows four themes (world-view, Various Aspects, Decentralization and Globalization Effects) that reveals a gap as a leading and common narrative. . An emotional dimension regarding gap emerged from the data analysis: inflexibility in service provision, feelings of isolation and loneliness among clientele. Two factors suggested as explanation to the nature of the gap, based on the preliminary findings and the literature: Tension between external and internal aspect, and The Globalization effect.

Keywords: National policyglobalizationgapimplementation

Introduction

The question of policy implementation in the public sector has been well documented, researched and studied in professional literature especially with the development of 'new public management' approach in a globalization era and the demand for public efficiency on the one hand and results on the other (Brodkin, 2011). This era has highlighted the values and principles of neo-liberal policies adopted by most western and industrialized countries as expressed in policies determined both in the fields of education and welfare. In education there was a transition from a policy of empowerment (of teachers and schools) to a policy of standards and measuring pupils' achievements, a process that began in the U.S.A. and England and spread to Israel and the rest of the world as well (Yogev, 2007). Similarly, there has been a change in direction in approaches to welfare states around the world: from welfare states with a social democratic approach, which sees the state as responsible for developing and providing welfare services to its citizens universally and based on citizens' rights, to a neo-liberal approach, which opposes state intervention in the area of solutions to social needs (Esping-Anderson, 1990; Doron, 2003).

This article focuses on examining implementation of stated policy in the field of social services in Israel, based on preliminary findings of my research, which is currently ongoing, through a discussion on the issues of policy and implementation in a context of globalization. In addition, findings of studies carried out on policy implementation and reforms in the field of education will be presented, in an attempt to reach conclusions and learning common to the two interfacing area and present common principles of action operated in providing services to people/citizens and based on long-term processes. To start, I will present a short literature review discussion and defining key concepts, followed by a review of the research methodology and to conclude, I will present findings, discussion and conclusions.

Literature review

Methodology

Examination of the advantages and disadvantages of qualitative research led to choosing the qualitative approach as the research methodology because it is inductive, and analysis of information collected from people in the field will lead to observations that will generate insights and the creation of new knowledge.

As stated, the research paradigm is constructivist qualitative. The research focused on evaluating policy implementation and not examining its nature and components, and did not deal with other additional components included in overall welfare policies.

Research method undertaken: data collection and analysis.

Data collection was undertaken using three different tools in order to reinforce findings and achieve triangulation: semi-structured in-depth interviews, focus groups and analysis of official documents.

The research questions were:

• What are the components that constitute welfare policy in Israel?

• What gaps can be found between declared official policy and its implementation?

• What constitutes the gap and how can it be bridged?

The research population included past and present policy designers (Ministers and Director Generals) in the Ministry of Social Affairs and Social Services - the most senior professional administrators in the Ministry of Social Affairs and Social Services, mayors, head of social services departments and end users of welfare services: people with special needs, people living in poverty, those who are socially excluded, and the elderly. In addition, the research considered and analyzed official documents on the subject of Ministry of Social Affairs and Social Services policies, and the reform and implementation process in social services.

As far as is known, no research has been carried out so far to evaluate social services policy implementation with regard to the present reform of social services, and to examine the implementation of policy on the continuum from policy makers to clients. This research tries to add to existing knowledge in the literature with regard to implementing policy in general and implementing social services policy in particular.

Findings and Discussion

The following findings express data collected from two receiver focus groups: one made up of people living in poverty and exclusion, and the second group, people with special needs. These groups were chosen from a heterogeneous community of social services' clients because they represent growing groups of clientele in the current era who are affected by globalization phenomena.

The meetings were recorded and transcribed with participants 'permission.

Content analysis of data collected from the meetings brought out four themes, divided into categories as presented in Table 1 (using short quotations from interviewees' answers).

The picture emerging from the content analysis of the above themes and categories reveals a gap as a leading and common narrative.

With the exception of one positive statement (regarding group working methods as an empowering and respectful intervention) all statements indicated gaps, lack, dissatisfaction with how services are provided, lack of congruence between needs and responses, etc. Gaps were identified particularly with regard to the fact and claim that participants did not have enough information about their rights and sometimes did not know what they were eligible to receive or how to get it. It was even contended that concealing information was a deliberate policy. An emotional dimension regarding gaps emerged from the data analysis, a dimension that refers to inflexibility in service provision, feelings of isolation and loneliness among clientele. From a more detailed examination of themes related to the gap component and its nature, the following conclusions emerged.

• World View – Receivers' world view was that the state has responsibility for and obligation to care for all its citizens. Their position expresses a desire for a generous, universal social democratic welfare model, based on citizens' rights and without stringent eligibility testing. In addition, they emphasized that policy should concentrate on children. In both groups, participants pointed out selectivity and stringent eligibility testing in order to receive services, a process that they claim has become more acute in recent years, and harms more and more citizens. This argument is supported by the literature review that presented a worldwide ideological transition, in Israel too, from perceptions of generous welfare states until the 1970's to a liberal and even neo liberal hegemony, supported by politicians from both left and right. This ideology emphasizes discourse about rights, freedom of action and absence of government intervention in economic and social areas, and leave it to market forces to create responses to social needs. From clients' points of view, they find themselves falling between two stools and expect the state to take responsibility, and care for developing and providing services to its citizens.

• Various Aspects - Categories in this theme express functional elements alongside emotional aspects, where emotional aspects are fed by functional elements. Participants asked to see other priorities in welfare policy. They sense that this area is the first to be harmed when there are national problems, and decision makers hasten to cut welfare budgets. They even pointed out that " Israel is at the bottom of the world ladder on the issue of poverty and welfare " - an insight that reflects the mood of participants. Another functional aspect that was identified is the phenomenon of excess bureaucratization, being passed between various services, different eligibility tests and lack of congruency between needs and responses, and as expressed by one participant: " It makes people not want to ask for the service ". On the basis of these gaps, one can identify gaps with more emotional characteristics that refer to policy implementation as expressed in the manner in which services are provided to clients: participants pointed out the service provision is characterized by inflexibility, lack of trust, sense of threat.

• Decentralization - Data emerging from this theme reflect, in participants' opinions, a policy in which services are dispersed between different offices, responsible for different areas - without coordination, without information being passed between them and with different eligibility rules from service to service. This feeling was expressed as "falling between two stools" on the one hand, and on the other the sense that this was deliberate policy intended to confuse citizens and make them waive their rights to services to which they are entitled. My impressions during discussions in the focus groups and analyzing data content, are of a sense of isolation, loneliness and lack of trust in establishment systems that determine policy as well as formal systems that provide these services in practice. This finding is not congruent with the 'new public management' approach, brought about, among others, to overcome previous excess bureaucratization. The finding in the current research argues that there are more complications and bureaucratization because of multiple services about which there is no clear information with regard to eligibility and difficulties in realizing eligibility to receive services.

• Globalization effects - In content analysis, the narrative about globalization effects also appears in other themes in different ways: participants identified their right to receive services from the state (rights discourse), their right to get accessible and open information, transparency in all citizens' information systems etc. The issue of multiculturalism was raised, minority groups and the tension between groups against a background of entitlement and exploiting rights. The finding in this study, according to which there is an ambivalence regarding globalization influences on policy, is also reflected in studies as presented in the literary review. On the one hand, participants ask to adopt a discourse on welfare rights in a globalization era in all western countries, and on the other hand, complain about minority groups who realize their rights and justify restricting freedom of movement and citizens' rights to migrants and minority groups. In the literature, too, we saw that there is no agreement among researchers about the effects of globalization on policy determination: there is an approach that maintains that globalization has negated state autonomy to take decisions and determine independent policy, an approach that claims that globalization lacks influence on policy determination processes, and an approach that sees interdependency between policy determination and globalization expressed in the need to make adjustments to policy taking into account the implications of globalization and trying to leverage advantages of globalization for the benefit of strong and well-founded welfare policy.

Discussion

The 'new public management' approach became a central strategy in the implementation of social policy integrated too in legislation in the areas of education and welfare, in order to achieve policy aims as determined by decision makers (Brodkin, 2011). It appears that despite the fact that this approach promises incentives - whether to formal bodies or private bodies (outsourcing), gaps are still found between declared policy and its implementation in the field, as emerged from the initial finding of this research. From this one can learn that despite the fact that new approaches to implementation have been used, approaches that take into account language and tools developed on the background of globalization, there is still place for and a need to further examine and learn from where the gaps between policy and implementation derive, and to propose alternative, additional more complicated points of view that will explain these gaps and propose appropriate strategies to close them.

Morris & Scott (2003) pointed out that traditionally the tendency is to blame teachers and schools for failed implementation of educational reforms. In their understanding, this is a simplified and shortsighted view that does not take into account the systematic view of cultural, governmental, economic and other contexts of reform implementation, as well as ignoring personal aspects and a more basic aspect that appears in the literatures to explain failed implementation of changes and that is resistance to and fear of change.

The main reason for failure of reforms and changes, as identified in the literature, is resistance to change. The trend is to identify fear of the unknown as the main reason for peoples' resistance to change (Samuel, 1996). Other reasons given to explain resistance to change are: defensive resistance, preferring to deal with what is known out of inertia, moral opposition, fear of losing status, freedom of action, opposition to the way in which change is implemented and more (Fox, 2001). That is to say that the nature of the gap that leads to non-implementation of policy is defined both at the systemic level of context in which policy is determined and implemented and on the individual level of professionals in the field who are supposed to act and implement the change (what has been termed by researchers as street level bureaucracy - SLB).

Riccucci et al. (2015) added to the list of insights that are likely to explain gaps in non-implementation of policy the critical role of heads of public services in the field. Their research findings indicated that in order to strengthen reform implementation among street level teams, in bureaucratic systems, there is a meaning and need to structure responsibility and management roles in an organization, to provide a personal example and create conditions that support implementation: supporting workers, publicity, allocating resources, giving incentives and renewing priorities in organizational goals to support a reform. That is to say, to invest time and thought in deliberate and supportive recruitment of street level bureaucrats to adopt reform and implement change, real help and guidance to implement on a practical, personal and daily level. Lipsky (1980) and Brodkin (2011) spoke about the fact that there is empirical proof that there are street level bureaucrats who pass on and realize policy, whether they are teachers, social workers or doctors, who willingly work towards implementation and those who willingly block it. That is to say that they will carry out or not central government instructions, if they choose to do so or not.

Bemaman (2013) proposed additional explanations with regard to systemic levels and decision making processes that are likely to explain non-implementation of policy and reform in education. In his research, he tried to understand how certain reforms in the Israeli education system were implemented ('New Horizons', 'Oz Le'Tmurah') whereas other reforms ('Dovrat Commission') were not. His analysis is based on Tsebelis' (2000) 'veto players theory', and the conclusion that he reached was that it was not enough to identify and consider 'veto players' in the political arena, but to identify and refer to 'veto players' outside the political arena such as: trade unions, professional associations etc., who have the power to prevent implementation and thwart reform.

Conclusion

Gaps were found between deciders and receivers regarding policy needs and its implementation. The research suggested some explanations, based on preliminary findings and the literature to understand the nature of the gap:

• Tension between external and internal aspect. The external aspect deals with the macro level - politicians-deciders, different contexts, constrains etc. The internal aspects deal with the micro level: SLB - street level bureaucracy, receivers-clients, NGO's, personal psychological aspects, etc.

• The Globalization effect: Arena in which social policy is determined is complex, changing and unstable with many participants with diverse agenda.

Thus, bridging the gap demands a continuing and ongoing dialogue with all players both inside and outside the politics arena, top-down, bottom-up during the implementation process as well. It can be done in a bidirectional and multidirectional model, in which every component influences and is influenced, and new components can join this dynamic process.

See Full Size >

It appears that designing and implementing national policy with change processes and long term interventions is a complicated challenge in the modern era and requires further observation, study and research focusing on receivers-clients.

References

1. Aviram, U. Gal, G. Katan, Y. (2007). Formulating Social Policy in Israel, Trends and Issues, Jerusalem: Taub Center for Social Policy Studies in Israel (In Hebrew)
2. Bemaman, Y. (2013). Reforms in the education system in Israel in the first Decade of the 21st Century in Light of the Institutional Veto Point Theory (Master’s thesis, The Hebrew University of Jerusalem). Retrieved from: http://public-policy.huji.ac.il/.upload/Thesis_HE/Teza_yairBemaman.pdf (In Hebrew).
3. Brodkin, Evelyn Z. (2011)"Policy work: Street-level organizations under new managerialism." Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory 21 (2) p. 253-277.‏
4. Doron, A. (2003). Welfare States in an Era of Cuts – an overview since the beginning of the 21st Century. Chevra Urevacha, 23 (3) 275 – 294 (In Hebrew)
5. Esping-Andersen, G (Ed.) (1996) Welfare State in Transition: National Adaptations in Global Economies. London Sage
6. Esping-Andersen, G. (1990). Social Foundations of post-Industrial Economics. Oxford: Oxford University Press
7. Fox, S. (2001). The Psychology of Resistance to Change. Ramat-Gan: Bar Ilan University Press (In Hebrew)
8. Goggin M. L., Bowman A. O., Lester J. P., & O'Toole, L. J. (1990). Implementation theory and practice: Toward a third generation. Harper Collins Publishers, USA
9. Hill, Michael, and Peter Hupe. "Analysing policy processes as multiple governance: accountability in social policy." Policy & Politics 34.3 (2006): 557-573.
10. Kraft, M.E. & Furlong, S. R, 2007.Public Policy, Washinton DC: CQ press
11. Lipsky, M. (1980) Street Level Bureaucracy. New York: Russell Sage
12. Magnum, G. (1969). The Emergence of Manpower Policy. New York.
13. May. M. (2003). The role of comparative study. In: Alcock, P., Erskine, A. & May, M. (Eds.). Social Policy (17-24) MA: Blackwell Publishing
14. McLaughlin, Milbrey Wallin (1987). "Learning from Experience: Lessons From Policy Implementation", Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 9(2): 171-178.
15. Mishra R., (1999). Globalization and the Welfare State, Cheltenham: Edward Elgar
16. Morris, Paul, and Ian Scott. "Educational reform and policy implementation in Hong Kong." Journal of Education Policy 18.1 (2003): 71-84.
17. Pierson, P. (Ed.) 2001. The New Politics of the Welfare State. Oxford UK, Oxford University press
18. Pressman, J.L.&Wildavsky A., 1973, Implementation, Berkeley, California: UCA Press
19. ‏Riccucci, N. M., Meyers, M. K., Lurie, I., & Han, J. S. (2004). The Implementation of Welfare Reform Policy: The Role of Public Managers in Front‐Line Practices. Public Administration Review, 64(4), 438-448.‏
20. Sabatier P. A., & Mazmanian, D. (1983). Implementation and public policy. Glenview, Illinois: Scott, Foresman and Company
21. Samuel, Y. (1996). Organization: Characteristics, Structures, Processes. Tel-Aviv, Zmora Bitan/University of Haifa. (In Hebrew)
22. Sykes R. (2003). Social policy and Globalization. In: Alock P., Erskine A., May M. (Eds) (2003). Social Policy. MA: Blackwell Publishing 2nd edition
23. Tsebelis, G. (2000). Veto Players and Political Analysis, Governance: An International Journal of Policy and Administration 13(4) p. 441-474
24. Weiss-Gal, I. & Gal, J. (2011). Policy Practice in Social Work. Jerusalem: The Hebrew University: Magnes, pp.87-115
25. Yogev. A., (2007), "Ideology Pedagogy and Educational Policy in Israel" In: Aviram, U. Gal, G. Katan, Y. Formulating Social Policy in Israel, Trends and Issues, Jerusalem: Taub Center for Social Policy Studies in Israel (In Hebrew) p.131-147