Page 1 of 35
THE SOCIAL CONSTRUCTION OF TARGET POPULATIONS AND ITS
IMPLICATIONS FOR THE POLITICS AND POLICIES OF THE WELFARE
STATE
1.0 Introduction
1.1 Welfare policies are an issue for multiple reasons, one being:
The social construction of the target populations always has to be understood.
This also helps to determine the policies and their implementation agenda. Nedlund
(2022) transitions to the notion of identifying a distinct category for someone to be
included within social policy. The educational categorization process implies labeling
people by their perceived characteristics and requirements, which frequently brings a
system of exclusion of some people with less favored traits. The process of classifying
population groups leads to unequal resource distribution and services, since policy
makers often give priority to some population over the others. O'Leary (2021) further
analyzes the politics around disability when crafting welfare policies in the USA, adding
that the culture of 'othering' the disabled people influences welfare policies and
programs. Individuals with disabilities are frequently pushed to the fringes and labeled
by narrow-minded people. Consequently, discriminatory policies and legislative
processes emerge. By means of this architecture bias the needy and the deserving are
deprived and hence the process of the holistic welfare policy lies to be shattered. Under
the social policy of public assistance, appraising those groups who are to be counted
leads to a sectioning off of the rest of the population. For instance, workers considered
as "able-bodied" may receive an edge over those categorized as “disabled”, as
observed in the analysis conducted by O‟Leary (2021). The unconscious segregation
Page 2 of 35
here can cause the full system inequalities, where people on one side of the track will
be able to receive more resources and better support systems than those on the other.
Also, the entrenchment of identity groups as the 'deserving' or 'undeserved' of welfare
relief only enhance inequality in accessing essential services (Jones, 2020). These
categorizations which are not only the basis of policy decisions that come up but also
often results in the more societal attitudes and prejudices, the process in which the
marginalized communities are the target of and eventually not integrated into the society
socially and economically.
1.2 The notion of the targeted audience is one aspect.
Thereafter, the system of social construction of the goal groups further brings
complexity to the process of policy diffusion. As Oschinski and Land would have it,
(2021) the divergence of meanings and their contexts constitute the problem of
conceptual travelling. Concepts of policies are usually impacted by cultural, political,
and social groundings in order to be integrated in new milieu. This issue is very
pronounced in social policy where low-income groups and other people have different
needs and preferences from country to country and even within regions. That way, it will
be the responsibility of decision-makers to consider the social and cultural aspects of
the target population that are the shaping factors while designing and implementing the
welfare policies. If the policies are not made in that case then it can result in the wrong
policies that fail to address the issues of the marginalized communities. People's
attitudes and beliefs about the low-income population is also a key determinant of policy
diffusion. In addition to that, 'deservingness' or 'welfare dependency' are not universal
but will have to be adjusted within the specific cultural and political context (Soss, 2017).
Page 3 of 35
This can lead to clashes and an absence of social harmony in receiving countries as the
imported policies may not conform to the social constructions of the targeted
populations in those countries. Thus, policymakers' considerations of social constructs
can have vital importance for designing inclusive and fair welfare programs worldwide.
Moreover, pedagogical differences in the categorization of individuals also undermine
the applicability of policy circulation. Edward Nedlund (2022) asserts that given the fact
that they are distinct, the classification of societies can be different and altering
regardless of the location in the world. It can be a barrier for the transferring of policies
to a given population in a particular area since even within the same context, the same
group can be defined and classified using different factors. Welfare policies need to be
communicated within this context, taking into account the complexity of this process and
the customization of solutions set for each population group.
The image of beneficiaries that social construction creates leads to the politics
and the policies of the welfare state. Pedagogical categorization, the image of the
disabled other, and especially, the difficulties in policy transfer into action, together
make the policymaking process rather complicated. The main way to deal with this
situation is by showing policymakers that social construction is an important factor to
consider during the policymaking. Through innovative, inclusive strategies, that take into
account the needs of these marginalized groups and the various cultural and regional
considerations, policymakers can be able to create welfare policies that champion
equity and inclusion. Nedlund (2022) proposes paying due attention to the pedagogical
classification, which opens the door of social policies, underlining the need for policy
makers to take into account the consequences that emerge from the classification of
Page 4 of 35
individuals according to their perceived features or requirements. O'Leary (2021)
definitely has a point – it is crucial that our policymaking authorities take into account
the stereotype of “disabled other” in their policymaking processes in order to fight the
discrimination and marginalization of the disabled individuals. Oshinski and Béland
(2021) point out the complications of policy diffusion in various situaions indication the
relevance of understanding cultural and specific context variables and their role in the
formation of a target group. Thus, it is necessary to implement these lessons within
policymaking frameworks in the way of building more inclusive and efficient welfare
policies that not only enhance social justice but also give everyone an equal chance to
have a decent life.
2.0 The social construction theories among the causes of gender inequality
2.1 Assumptions and the weight which is added to the attributes.
Gender disparity is so ingrained because of the basic concepts and the values
given to some attributes in particular in social construction theories. Peck and Theodore
(2022) assert that capitalist crises contribute to precariousness to make public insecurity
in labor markets more serious. Hence, the idea of work based on gender norms leads to
the discrimination of women's labor and reinforces inequalities in salaries and chances.
Women, as the caregivers are, are underappreciated and underestimated, the reason
why they fail to acknowledge their economic contribution. In addition, Roosma, van
Oorschot, and Gelissen (2022) elucidate how the welfare state re-stratification in
Europe is in a multidimensional pattern. Sexism involves a storyline that portrays
women as primarily caregivers and emphasizes women‟s benefit from social welfare,
hence, perpetuating the gender box. This view helps the situation where women in the
Page 5 of 35
workplace are pushed aside and do not have access to economic resources, which
keeps the problems of gender inequality growing. The persistence of gender inequality
feeds upon the social perception and attitudes towards the sexes and their gender-
related duties and functions. Peck and Theodore (2022) encompass the question about
the economic turbulence and the labor markets in her article. She explains how these
markets are more risky for women since very strong gender based roles mostly prevail
in this field. Women as caregivers are often belittled and treated as "selfless" which is
an unequal standing compared to men. Furthermore, as Roosma, van Oorschot, and
Gelissen (2022), gender role‟s perpetuates the belief that it is predominantly to be the
caregiver and not to earn an income is the women‟s role. The inclusion of this story in
the biographies of these historical figures perpetuates this marginalization, curbing
woman access to economic resources and, hence advancing, gender disparity in the
social sphere.
2.2 The Stereotyping and Dictionary process
Moreover, the perpetuation of gender stereotypes and the understanding of
those through the lenses of social constructions is an additional reason for inequality.
Slootjes and Kampen (2022) focus on whether public opinion supports immigrant
access to social citizenship rights while showing two things: how gender stereotypes
affect perceptions of deservingness and how, similarly, immigrant stereotypes affect the
perceptions of deservingness. Often, immigrants facing such discrimination are women
in particular. It is because such discrimination is associated with gender roles such as
caretakers and their contributions to society. The theme is also covered by van
Oorschot and Finsveen (2022),who take a closer look at attitudes of the public on
Page 6 of 35
migrants‟ rights to social benefits , pointing to the importance of gendered stories in this
process. The gender role beliefs and the idea of deservingness of welfare are mixed up
with the ideas and opinions about immigrants. The latter all have influence on the
attitudes of people toward the social rights and resources of migrants. These portrayals
continue the gender injustice by means of strengthening stereotypes and relegation of
the marginalized groups. The interaction of the stereotype of gender and the social role
creates an important clue to the longevity of the inequality that is very evident in the
migration talk, in which access to social rights is taken to the public domain. According
to Slootjes and Kampen (2022), it turns out that the pattern of discourses around
women's rights and responsibility in relation to acceptance of immigrants' entitlement to
social citizenship reflects deeply-rooted stereotypes about gender roles. In the case of
immigrant women, they face lots of discrimination since they occupy the role of
caretakers with their work being looked down upon and their input in the society not
given the respect it deserves. Just as this, in fact, van Oorschot and Finsveen (2022)
get into the core of empirics relative futuro of gendered narratives and the perception of
rights to social benefits among migrants. They provide insights on how such ideas are
being linked to populations of immigrants that are perceived negatively. Thus, these
assumptions can create a prejudice in the eyes of the majority population and help limit
their access to fundamental services. The subsequent narratives not only maintain
stereotypes, but also ensure gender inequalities by being an obstacle for marginalized
groups.
Page 7 of 35
2.3 Role of narratives and methodologies.
Social construction conceptions have a large hand in the regularizing of sexism
and gender stereotypes through the standpoint of generalizations that are rooted within
our culture. Thus, weighting some character traits, including domestication and
dependence to a wife, on the one hand and obstacles to resources and opportunities,
on the other hand, essentially smothers women. These theories are the basis for society
gender roles, which shows itself in the form of behavioral and cultural preferences, and
people's expectations in education, work, and politics. Gender constituted narratives in
addition to other various forms of inequality such as race and migration status amplify
the social inequality gaps. Immigrant women are frequently confronted with double
discrimination as a result of the cross-cutting of gendered and raced stereotypes that
later on affects their ability to access jobs and public services like healthcare and
utilities. On the one hand, gender inequality as a concept needs to be challenged by
replacing these suggestions and narratives with the ones on the promotion of gender
equity in all spheres of society. This refers to tearing down a stereotypical idea of
women‟s status and functions, presenting equal opportunities for women in the
workforce and senior management positions, and designing policies that make it
possible to pursue work and career responsibilities alongside caregiving roles. As a
result, acknowledging gender with other forms of inequality inclusion in broader
strategies' development for discrimination/oppression in the system is of great
importance. Accepting and addressing the social structure that fosters gender bias,
societies can strive towards building a fairer and more diverse place, where individuals
Page 8 of 35
are not isolated from each other based on their gender, race or other characteristics that
might define them.
3.0 Identifying winner and loser groups in the welfare state
3.2 Deservingness guidelines, and perceptions of them among the community.
As deservingness rules constitute an element of guidance within the framework
of welfare systems, they are also used to provide assistance for qualifying and guarding
distribution of resources. Created from shared understanding of what is perceived by
society what types of people are instead to receive help and who are not, these rules
being a result of that. As mentioned by made by Vikse et.al in 2021, 0 the welfare
reform policies in most cases tend to depict depicts the welfare recipients as lazy and
undeserving of any social benefits thereby making the creation of social gaps between
the poor and the rich. These enactments increase the level of community perception,
determining how people look at welfare beneficiaries. Wible and Schacher (2022) refer
to the power of narrative in the changing of policy, by portraying how dominant stories
help to give meanings on worthiness, which in turn affect public opinion and policy
outcomes. In this instance, the positive and negative compound verbs such as
"deserving" and "exploiting" are crucial for shaping a particular audience view of welfare
receivers as either deserving or deviating. To understand the social eligibility rules
embedded in welfare, we should look at the dominant societal ideologies on work,
poverty, and personal responsibility. As for Vikse, Carroll and Henderson (2021), show
that distributive benefits of welfare policy are often framed in line with stereotypes about
recipients as lazy or exploiting the system. The approach here is to justify thereby the
cut in social welfare provisions. Such stories not only mold public understanding, but
Page 9 of 35
also cause decisions in the policymaking, thus farming a notion of deserving and
legitimization of austerity measures against the welfare recipients. In addition, Weible
and Schlager (2022) assert that narratives function as crucial instruments in the
policymaking process, as they produce popular beliefs that define the deservingness of
public assistance which then influences public opinion majority. The usage of affirmative
compound verbs such as "deserving" is an indication that people who work hard should
get support and thereby possessing positive connotation whereas negative ones like
"exploiting" in which recipients are portrayed as undeserving and unworthy of help
which carries a negative connotation. The language and narratives used to frame the
welfare policy show how people create images of worthiness which, in turn, affect the
perceptions of the recipients of the welfare and, eventually, lead to the molding and
implementation of the welfare system.
3.2 Positive and negative compound verbs.
Through a favorable or disfavorable compound verb patterns welfare receiver-s
attitudes and opinions are built up. Wolff (2021) covers how the language creates
ethical guidelines in the context of automate that stresses the importance of the frames
with the discussion of the public discursive. There is likeliness for the compound verb
like "contributing" and "supporting" to be associated with deservingness building of a
good picture. Oppositely, compound verbs that have a connotation of being negative
like "testing" and "deceptive" only strengthen the negative stereotypes of "lazy" or
"untrantable" attitude among welfare recipients. These linguistic selections are not only
reflective but also promote the societal attitude regarding welfare recipients, which
further decisions relating to policy and resource allocation. Confirming the language of
Page 10 of 35
speaking about welfare recipients is not rather descriptive but ethical and normative
because these categories set ethical systems as well as people's perceptions.
According to Wolff (2021), the author's analysis exposes the way language serves as a
means to formulate ethical questions in automation contexts, thus enlightening public
discourse on the matter from linguistic perspective. Like the verbs "contributing" and
"supporting", the positive compound verbs paint a picture of someone being involved
into something active and deserving him/herself to be received assistance, creating a
positive image of welfare recipients as important people who deserve to be helped.
Another example of how verbs helps in the narration of the story is the negative
compound verbs "abuse" or "exploit" which present the recipients as stingy people, lazy
or dishonest and hence undeserving of the support. These narrative devices, by the
virtue of being neither just a harmless storytelling technique nor innocent linguistic
choices, parallel the views of society towards welfare recipients, influencing public
attitude and the decision-makers. Through the assignment, of the positive and negative
compound verbs to deserving and undeserving, respectively, , power of language is
transformed into the tool that leads to the building of and maintaining the social
hierarchies and inequalities. Politics and advocacy experts need to take note of the
linguistic connotation surrounding welfare recipient when creating narratives to fight
some of the stereotypes and create equal policies and help in changing the attitudes
towards those who need help.
3.3 Coupling with racism, social class, gender.
Deservingness perceptions in the welfare system are interconnected via a
complex matrix, including racism, class, and gender issues. Using examples of
Page 11 of 35
enforcement agents, Vikse and her co-authors (2021) show how the politics of welfare
reform shape these identities to include racialized and gendered dimensions in
determination of deservingness. In addition to reminding about race and gender, these
issues are also connected to how apparently deserving someone is, which produces
selective targeting and deprivation of these groups. To illustrate, Hispanic and Black
individuals, both women and men, together with the poor, remain in the eyes of the law
enforcement seen as suspect for the mere acts of being poor which are wrongly
ascribed to immoral character. In their article (2022), Weible and Schlager continue on
this front by highlighting how set narratives can be harmful in respect to race, class, and
gender and thus, impact policy outcomes. A positively constructed compound verb
might be optionally associated with specific social groupings, and this may otherwise
reinforce social disparities and preexisting stratification in the welfare system itself. For
example, the stories that portray the welfare beneficiaries as the "active" or " winning"
community would referred to the white individuals or those who are from the higher
social class, while the negative compound words like "exploiting" or " abusing" would be
rarely connected to those who belong to the minority ethnic groups or the
socioeconomic lower class. The connection of racism, social class, and gender work
each other out in the process of distribution of welfare benefits to show that the systems
are biased in a sense that there are systemic inequalities embedded within society.
These interrelated factors are not only responsible for the style of police conduct and
policies but they cause stigmaticization and discrimination among the vulnerable
people. In order to acknowledge and scrutinize the confluence of discriminating forces
which augment each other within welfare systems, policymakers must be aware and set
Page 12 of 35
in place active measures to challenge these oppressions. This entails a shift in the
approach to welfare policy which places more emphasis on equality and the
experiences of marginalized communities.
4.0 Implications for Welfare Politics
4.1 Respect and fear for Obama as a powerful figure in America.
The reputation of Barack Obama as one of the most strong influential
governments in the USA has its symbolic significance for welfare politics. According to
Béland and Waddan 2019), political leaders' actions and rhetoric have a profound effect
on the diffusion of policy ideas and they underline the role of prominent members of the
society in determining what is decided to be the guiding principle in the society. The
presidency of Obama is noted for his attempts to widen the health coverage under the
Affordable Care Act (ACA), thus, showing how his influence is commanding on the
welfare state. Choi (2021) examines the political nature of welfare state reform of South
Korea. The position of the leaders of political parties is seen as relevant to form the
opinion of leaders. The respect and fear for Obama as a formidable authority may well
steer the sayings of the public on welfareing issues that would affect the backing on
policies designed to deal with poverty and injustices. Policymakers may spy upon
Obama‟s legacy and public viewings, while creating welfare policies, having in mind his
lasting impact on American politics. Being an ex-president of the US Barack Obama is
obviously a person who holds much political influence as the blueprint for welfare
policies and public mindset towards welfare matters. As summarized by Béland and
Waddan (2019), political leaders have the potential to shape ideas whose
implementation results in policy change. Through the Affordable Care Act (ACA),
Page 13 of 35
Obama was instrumental in maintaining some form of healthcare coverage for more US
citizens. The presidency of Roosevelt is semantic of a great progress in welfare, which
is depicted as a strong role that politicians can play in creating policy agendas and
issues that need to be prioritized. Choi (2021) indicated that public opinions towards
welfare personnel were shaped not only by state policy reforms but also by perceptions
of political leaders. The awe that is associated with Obama's powerful image may shape
the public opinion of welfare policies and the recipients of such a service.
4.2 The policymakers's decision-making process and their agendas
Decision-making of policymakers in welfare politics is a quite complex process
that cannot be isolated from other factors unrelated to scientific evidence. Betzelt and
Brzinsky-Fay (2022) have claimed a new approach to policy analysis that entails the
focus on purposeful groups and forging the understanding that interest groups shape
policy agendas. Interest groups use information and money to pay attention of
policymakers and leaders. They frequently contribute resources and efforts to lobby
which include points that they agree no matter the evidence of science. Choi (2021)
analyses the social construction of the deserving poor, exposing a politic agendas that
guides welfare policy reforms. Policymakers can pursue their agenda of the mighty
powerful groups even though it is away from the scientific evidence and the interest of
the weak and marginalized group. Hence, the policymaking procedure in welfare politics
involves a mix of political pressure, public opinion, and mobilization of the interest
groups, which in turn exemplifies the imperfection of depending only science-based
evidence in making policies accordingly. In the issue of welfare politics, policymakers do
not make decisions on basis of ground realities alone but their decision-making process
Page 14 of 35
is also driven by a whole lot of other factors. According to Betzelt and Brzinsky-Fay
(2022), the position of this group really necessitates an expanded perspective on policy
analysis that does not treat interest groups as the sole driving force for shaping policy
agendas. These groups firmly assert their power through all means available like
lobbying and resource mobilization which are mostly tailored to their own interests with
no regard for scientific evidence or the conditions of the people lacking resources. Choi
(2021) explores the social solidarity approach to deal with the problem of deserving
poor. From a political perspective, reforming the welfare state is a major factor. It is an
obvious fact that policy-makers mostly weigh the agendas of powerful interest groups.
Therefore, these decision-makers, in most cases, align their views with the interests of
these groups or even ignore scientific evidence and continue to sustain inequalities. The
diverse political factors impacting social welfare politics demonstrate the need to
consider political pressures, public opinion, and interest group mobilization in policy
making.
4.3 Type of interest group mobilization
Decision-making of policymakers in welfare politics is a quite complex process
that cannot be isolated from other factors unrelated to scientific evidence. Betzelt and
Brzinsky-Fay (2022) have claimed a new approach to policy analysis that entails the
focus on purposeful groups and forging the understanding that interest groups shape
policy agendas. Interest groups use information and money to pay attention of
policymakers and leaders. They frequently contribute resources and efforts to lobby
which include points that they agree no matter the evidence of science. Choi (2021)
analyses the social construction of the deserving poor, exposing a politic agendas that
Page 15 of 35
guides welfare policy reforms. Policymakers can pursue their agenda of the mighty
powerful groups even though it is away from the scientific evidence and the interest of
the weak and marginalized group. Hence, the policymaking procedure in welfare politics
involves a mix of political pressure, public opinion, and mobilization of the interest
groups, which in turn exemplifies the imperfection of depending only science-based
evidence in making policies accordingly. In the issue of welfare politics, policymakers do
not make decisions on basis of ground realities alone but their decision-making process
is also driven by a whole lot of other factors. According to Betzelt and Brzinsky-Fay
(2022), the position of this group really necessitates an expanded perspective on policy
analysis that does not treat interest groups as the sole driving force for shaping policy
agendas. These groups firmly assert their power through all means available like
lobbying and resource mobilization which are mostly tailored to their own interests with
no regard for scientific evidence or the conditions of the people lacking resources. Choi
(2021) explores the social solidarity approach to deal with the problem of deserving
poor. From a political perspective, reforming the welfare state is a major factor. It is an
obvious fact that policy-makers mostly weigh the agendas of powerful interest groups.
Therefore, these decision-makers, in most cases, align their views with the interests of
these groups or even ignore scientific evidence and continue to sustain inequalities. The
diverse political factors impacting social welfare politics demonstrate the need to
consider political pressures, public opinion, and interest group mobilization in policy
making.
Page 16 of 35
5.0 Policy Design and Implementation: Touching Down on the Consequences
5.1 Resource reservation and eligible condition.
The responsibility of welfare policy design and implementation include resource
allocation and eligible conditions, thus determining who are able to get social insolvency
thru the transferred resources. Daguerre (2018) pens down on ageing related welfare
state reforms pointing out that the dynamics of the population shift in need of the
existing welfare system and thus the whole composition of welfare has to be readapted.
Resource allocation includes allocation of enough funds and resources to sustain
welfare programs and affordable to these economically disadvantaged group of
individuals. Conditions eligible for abreast welfare benefits are established , where the
criteria each permit for and who can access aid are determined. On one hand, draw the
line on the spending of public money focusing on parties and policy claimants who
determine the budget for allocation. The structure of welfare policies, which range from
resource constraints to eligibility criteria, is required to be focused on delivering
assistance to the needy population, and this must be done in a way that ensures that
people receive the social protection they deserve. In relation to the welfare policy, the
social assistance system and its delivery methodology is highly interdependent with the
allocation of resources and the applicant qualifications. The Daguerre study (2018)
highlights the necessity of welfare systems to be adjusted according to population
changes, including demographic challenge such as population aging, by revitalizing the
welfare mix to respond to the emerging requirements. At the heart of the change is the
allocation of some budget to be held in reserve such that wellbeing programs are
adequately financed to offer support to the qualified beneficiaries. Furthermore, the
Page 17 of 35
States establish the standards for these compromising conditions to be eligible to
receive welfare benefits, based on factors such as income, age, or disability. Eggers
and Fouirnaies (2022) then illuminate the political aspects of resource distribution
points. They would show the role of their political parties and the policy demanders who
prioritize the public expenditure making it. Either because of these pressures or not a
welfare policy design should be able to balance resources availability with the criteria of
eligibility so that the poor get the real support. By trying equitable distribution of social
security, governments can minimize their social differences and reduce the impacts of
poverty and inequality.
5.2 Delivery of service and the accessibility.
Services Delivering Welfare and their Ease of Access are Important Issues in
Settlement and Implementation of Policy. According to Gofen and Yarhi-Milo (2020), the
liberal protest movement in America is a new phenomenon that may restore the
democracy in the United States by vigorously encouraging equal representation in
political decision-making. Service delivery – refers to the mechanisms whereby welfare
benefits are distributed to eligible recipients. Such mechanisms comprise of
administrative processes (like the forms through which one applies) and service
provision channels (for example, the physical offices or online platforms through which
one can apply for benefits). Accessibility stands for the convenience that people face
when they seek welfare services, addressing elements like bridging geographical gap,
language difference, and administrative challenges. Hagen (2021) examines the point of
race within social service policies, focusing on the fact that those who are seen as
unworthy of welfare benefits are less likely to get them. Governments should take care
Page 18 of 35
of the fact that welfare delivery is updated properly and that all the restrictions to the
access are down the barriers to the social assistance programs for you, who need it. In
essence, welfare service delivery is a term referring to the functional procedures by
which benefits are effectively availed to those who are qualified. In the opinion of Gofen
and Yarhi-Milo (2020), taking into account the diversity of the communities is the
primary concern in the process of designing welfare policies as well as ensuring their
relevance to communities. Successful disbursemech methods comprise of
administrative processes and service provision routes that are tailored in a way to make
sure the timely and effective distribution of benefits to people. The other component of
welfare delivery is accessibility, which indicates how easily people can reach welfare
facilities. Factors like geographical proximity, linguistic barriers, and bureaucratic
impediments can create the circumstance of in access, specifically for those
communities that are on the edge. The idea of how people who do not deserve the
welfare services get into the therapy and the fact that they are often based on race and
the social status has been given by Hagen (2021). Because the cost to people and their
families is so prohibitive, policymakers should take care to eliminate the barriers to
welfare services. In this way, the poor people and those with problems will not be
excluded because of their background and circumstances.
5.3 Measurable aims and accomplishments.
In terms of policy formation, we need to get targets set and evaluate those
targets based on the effectiveness of the implementation. Hagen (2021) speaks to the
politics of belongingness and social safeguard that stresses the importance of closing
the gap in welfare provision based on ethnic Involving measurable aims means that
Page 19 of 35
specific goals and objectives should be set for welfare policies, like a goal to reduce the
poverty rate or to make the healthcare sector better. Consequences relate to the goals
realized or, on the contrary, not realized as a result of the implementation of the policy
thus being able to pinpoint areas where demand for improvement is the most needful.
Eggers and Fouirnaies (2022) point out the role of parties and policy demanders in
influencing the allocations of public expenditure. They also put a particular stress on
accountability in the policymaking matters. Building definitive goals and periodically
reviewing the successes can help policymakers create welfare policies that are flexible
to adjust to societal needs and capable of solving the problems encountered by those at
the bottom of the social ladder. The so-called "SMART" approach to goal setting, i.e.
setting Specific, Measurable, Achievable, Realistic, and Time-bound goals is of great
importance for welfare policy formulation and implementation in order to have a real
impact and meet certain targets Hagen (2021) stresses how racial disparities in social
welfare should be tackled by indicating some of these similarities. He also underscores
that goals to reduce these inequities in access to social security should be put in place.
By setting these goals, policymakers will know the particular concerns to address,
including eradicating poverty among the society's underprivileged and boosting
healthcare outcomes for non-whites. While assessments are going through the
processes of policymaking, accomplishments concern the outcomes from policy
implementation in order to gauge the effectiveness. Eggers and Fouirnaies (2022)
consider the question of responsibility a key factor for policymaking as they accentuate
the importance of examining success since it is then possible to adjust public spending
so that it aligns with the major social needs. Assessment of policy performance will help
Page 20 of 35
policy makers to find the strong points and also to pin down the weaknesses and to use
this knowledge for approaching future policy decisions.
6.0 Crimson and disorancouvering consistencies
6.1 Depicting negative effects and re-frames of the story.
In the context of policy making, the evocation of negative outcomes and a
recasting of narratives are the two important strategies for causing people to change
their opinion and change the course of the policy outcomes. Dualization is the age term
popularized by the scholars Häusermann and Palier, who claim that the policies of
neoliberalism fuel insecurities in the labor markets and households. Disclosing the
detrimental effects means pointing them out and focusing on the adverse assets of the
policy in place or the proposed new reform, such as rising income gap or social
exclusion. Re-framing in this case means putting forward a diverse range of stories that
re-direct the dominant discourse to find other alternatives. The author (McConnaughy,
2019) discusses a theme involving ownership perception in the mass partisan politics,
this includes the process of framing as a key process to policy attitude. Portraying the
negative impacts and new versions of narrative can assist in galvanizing support for
change in policy from activists and policymakers and also enable building up of
alternative visions of a society we desire. Effective communication in policy discourse
requires a clear understanding of the existing incorrect policy or a innovative policy
reform idea that will raise public awareness and thus facilitate policy commitment.
Häusermann and Palier (2017) bring the shadows of labor markets and households
emerging from the dark side of neoliberalism for review. Beware how the neoliberal
ideas can harm the social welfare. In this way, the effects of inequality which are seen
Page 21 of 35
to be negative can be brought to attention so as to influence the basis of people‟s
choice in policies that minimize these problems. Another key aspect is rewriting the
story in order to counter the paradigm and offer solutions that are different. According
McConnaughy (2019), framing is the most substantial component that determines one's
policy attitudes. It can be said that some narratives can have different effects on public
perception and preferences on certain policies. Through the use different portrayals
focused on social protection and challenging the existing ideologies, advocates and
policymakers can extend the scope of the aspiration of policy discourses and push
forward the more egalitarian policies. Through this approach of conveying bad
consequences and remaking the storyline, a policymaker and advocates can better
manage the public opinion and make a policy outcome.
6.2 Include participative and participatory methods.
Epideictic and participatory approaches are essential tools in the efforts to create
a fair and democratic legislation. Herd and Moynihan (2019) stress the administrative
burden which can alternate a change in policies, if not the citizens are not involved fully
in policy design and implementation. Participative methods refer to involving
stakeholders which consist of the communities affected, as well as civil society
organizations, in the community process through public hearings, consultations, and
citizen assemblies. Participatory techniques moreover broaden the scope of
empowering those who are socially and economically marginalized to actively
participate in policy formulation that directly addresses their concerns, thus promoting
the idea of grassroots policymaking. Hudson and Gyu Kang (2022) focus the social
construction of target population and their corresponding effects in public policy, stating
Page 22 of 35
the need for richness of opinions in formulation of policy. Through the synergistic use of
participatory and participative methods, the policy offer can better respond to the
expectations and preferences of all the stakeholders, thereby, generating more
legitimacy and efficiency. As participatory and participative tools are the keys for more
inclusive and democratic policymaking processes, they should be highly prioritized.
Herd and Moynihan (2019)focus on the crucial role of civil society in policy design and
implementation, where they argue that there should be lessened administrative burdens
and promoted public involvement. Participatory methods for example stakeholders
consulting and public hearings let people have opportunities to participate in policy
making, thanks to this, which different vision and experiences shape the policies. As
well as that, such methods will enable marginalized groups in the society to take part in
the setting up of policies that affect them. This is possible primarily by ensuring that
there is both an avenue and a role for the affected people to determine the priority
policy issues, as well as be part of the decision-making process from the very
beginning. Certainly Hudson and Kang Gyu ( 2022) underscore the fact that including a
range of perspectives is paramount when it comes to policymaking, especially when the
social constructions of groups are under consideration.
6.3 Advocacy and social movements
The world would continue with a lot of injustices in the globe if advocacy and
social movements continue to serve their proper role in changing the policies that are
not good and fight for positive changes. Larsen (2018) highlights the dynamics of policy
undoing, the gender implications considering the role of activism. Advocacy comprises
of the pushing of specific policy agendas through the lobbying, media campaigns, and
Page 23 of 35
the direct action by presenting the cases before the decision-makers and public
opinions. Both social movements and social justice movements are focused on specific
problems, however social justice movements advocate for broad social justice issues
and the transformation of the system. Mijs, Bakhtiari, and Bogumil Praag (2020) lay
bare the politics of immigration integration in the Netherlands: from ethnico-
territorialization policies to immigrant mobilization campaigns. Through advocacy and
social mobilization, marginalized communities can enhance their own voices and
question the existing strong power systems which govern the direction of welfare
policies towards greater social-economic equality. Appeals and social movements
represent effective approaches for a reformation of the extant law and evocation of
resistance to these reforms. Larsen (2018) stresses the contribution of gender policy
change and activism to the implementation of the policies that mean to end
discrimination and to give equality to women. Advocacy comprises of specific conducts
intended to persuade governments and public opinion which includes lobbying, media
campaigns and direct action among others. The strategies adopted by advocates help
to achieve a high level of awareness among the people and to create focused policy
responses to the systemic inequalities. Controlling on top of lobbying, social movements
have a central role in the movement of the collective action around the social justice
issues of the society. Mijs, Bakhtiaran, and Prag (2020) feature immigrant activism and
its impact on oppressive ethnic demarcation policy and demand immigrant integration in
the Netherlands. Social movements act as the pulpit for the hearing of voiceless
communities to loudly affirm themselves, develop a united front and shift the systems
for structural reform. Social movements have the ability to bring people to the streets to
Page 24 of 35
participate in protests, rallies and grassroot campaigns, leaders of these social
movements constantly remind the policy makers of the gaps in social welfare and
demand that these gaps to be closed and thus inequalities and injustices addressed.
6.4 Leveraging Social Construction and Policy Design
Social construction and policy design are two parallel streams that branch out of
the river of welfare politics, continuing together to the point where they form an
outcome. Ingram, Schneider, and DeLeon (2007) illustrate construction theory of policy
in a sense of how policymakers, as well as the stakeholders, structure stories and
aspects to formulate the agenda of a policy on behalf of what you have in mind. The
social co-construction of target populations is pivotal for the policies that are designed in
such a way as to focus correctly on the population‟s needs and preferences. Laenen, et
al. (2019) suggest drawing qualitative studies into deservingness concept, pointing out
subjective and interpersonal aspects of resignation of the welfare. To get the most out
of the perspective of social construction in policy making, policy makers to devise and
design responsive and inclusive policies, through which the realities of the downtrodden
groups are given attention. Social construction theory presents relevant opinions
regarding policymakers' and stakeholders‟ agenda-setting process that they create
narratives of issues and frame problems. Ingram, Schneider, and DeLeon (2007) stress
that policy design is rooted in the social construction which mainly shows the necessity
for getting familiar with the narratives and frames which dictate policy decisions.
Policymakers now can identify social constructs that marginalized communities use, and
through this, policies can be developed to reflect these needs and preferences of the
excluded, leading to a fairer welfare systems. Moreover, Laenen, Rossetti, and van
Page 25 of 35
Oorschot (2019) endorse dear validity of integrating qualitative research into
deservingness theory being the process which calls for understanding of subjective
experiences and perceptions by the welfare recipients. Incorporating qualitative
perspectives during policy planning process, policymakers can achieve better
comprehension of people‟s experiences with the welfare policies, to embark on in a
more compassionate and effective way. The use of this technique leads to such system
of welfare policies that do not just rely on objective criteria but also consider
complexities as well as the views of marginalized people groups or communities.
6.5 Addressing Paradoxes and Complexities
Policy making and implementation processes very often become a maze of
acting between similar paradoxes and complexities existent in the social welfare politics.
According to Koning (2021), the European welfare states are faced with a dilemma:
between social protection which is ensured on one hand, and labor market participation
on the other which is activated and flexible. Policies creating a paradox like national
ethnic division in immigrant integration, with all likelihood, further reinforcing inequalities
or enhancing exclusionary practices. Mijs, Bakhtiari, and Praag (2020) argue that this
ethnic cantonization policy brings about two contradictory effects on immigration which
has sensitized the need for a more contextualized approach as regards immigrant
integration. Policymakers often find themselves entangled in the intricate dilemmas and
complexities, which they need to recognize that the issues are all interconnected and
the resultant strategies tied to the conflicts of such values must be balanced to the
competitive priorities. One way to contribute to the improvement of socially-oriented
policies is to explain this or that paradox or complex issue. This will make the policies
Page 26 of 35
more adequate to the modern reality. In few cases, welfare politics is very much
challenging for policymakers due to some contradictions that exist between policy
construction and implementation. Koning demonstrated the dilemma between
encouraging participation in labor market and maintaining social security in European
social state which in turn shows that social assistance is an imperative step for effective
activation and social protection. Just like, Mijs, Bakhtiari, and Praag (2020) have shown
how the ethnic cantonization policy in Netherlands has a complex function, namely,
while some canton policies are formulated to help the minorities settle down, they, in
fact, strengthen the inequalities and create an exclusion environment. The combination
of these apparent contradictions emphasizes the landscape for policymakers to
consider multifaceted strategies in the process of policy design and execution.
Legislators should note that these problems are interconnected, and they should accept
the fact that they will be compelled to balance different priorities and sets of values.
Governments can accomplish this through the adoption of policies that are tailored to
the disparities and complexities of the local context, which in turn can promote social
cohesion and fairness. This requires the adoption of inclusive strategies that are able to
balance the intentions of ensuring labor market participation for all, with the duty of
striving to provide all citizens with social protection.
7.0 Conclusion
7.1 To sum up the major takeaways
Focusing on different aspects of welfarism policy and its practical application, I
consider a series of issues that emerge during the process. To begin with, it clearly is
that welfare policies are complicated by power dynamics, social constructions and are
Page 27 of 35
associated with economic ideas. Häusermann and Palier (2017) demonstrate the
consequences of an uncomfortable nature of neoliberalism employment market and
welfare due to which the need of change is not only inevitable but necessary to end the
social inequalities. Through McConnaughay (2019) it becomes evident that the framing
has a significant influence in forming the policy sentiments. This makes the challenge of
stereotypes and conventional stories more important to achieve the exemption of
progressive reforms. Thereby, these dynamics come to show the problematic nature of
welfare policies as well as the need for the introduction of more wide-ranging policy
designs. Investigating the politics of welfare and strategic policy composition, one
realizes the complex relationships between social forces, social constructs as well as
economic ideology. Häusermann and Palier (2017) emphasize the negative outcomes
that have had neoliberal policies to worsen labor market insecurities and domestic life
leading to intensification of poverty and social inequalities. This is testimony that
fundamental transformation is needed from the local to the global level to address the
origin of inequality and neglect social sensibility. Furthermore, McConaughy (2019)
stresses framing's position as a key driver in influencing attitudes towards policy, seeing
its need in undermining stories of the status quo to gain support that will enable the
progress of reforms. To reword policy arrays and stories, a policymaker can engage
public awareness and support the policies that gave out to equity and social welfare. In
order to comprehensively overcome the problems of marginalized groups and achieve
social justice, policymakers need to use integrated approaches to consider the
multiplicity of relationships between power, social symbols of class, and economic
ideologies. It is only when the policymaking process happens to cover all the
Page 28 of 35
comprehensive and inclusive approaches; the relevant development and progress is
reached towards the building of the more equitable and just welfare systems.
7.2 Critical consciousness emphasis
Therefore, building up on critical consciousness is a must if one wants to
succeed in the social welfare field. There is a creation of awareness among the
individuals and communities of social injustices and power imbalances which therefore
lead to mobilization of society for change and lobby for policies that prioritize equity and
social justice. According to the researchers Herd and Moynihan (2019), the concept of
the administrative burden illustrates this phenomenon of policy-making by means other
than policies, thus emphasizing the key role of the citizens in the decision-making
processes. Moreover, Hudson and Gyu Kang (2022) describe that social constructions
of target populations concerning public policy are crucial, hence the third point involves
the incorporation of diverse voices in policy formulation. Thanks to critical
consciousness, the general public can challenge the legacy structures of power and
take steps to eliminate poverty and inequality at the source. Critical consciousness
precept rather proposes that issues of social injustices and power asymmetry related to
welfare policy should be brought to public domain. Recognizing and understanding
these relationship dynamics, people and institutions will be able to mobilize for a change
and to plead for equity and social system where the choice is social justice. Herd and
Moynihan bring in the notion of administrative burden, which in their view functions as a
tool for those who make policies in ways other than prescribed by official regulations.
This gives the community chance to be involved in policy formulation processes for
better cooperation, transparency and accountability. First of all, Hudson and Gyu Kang
Page 29 of 35
(2022) argue that „social constructions of target populations perform an important
function in shaping legislation.‟ Diversity inclusion, in their view, is vital in the policy-
making process to ensure that the final policy is appropriate for the condition and of the
neglected parts of society. Critical consciousness, which is the ability to see the world
through a different lens, can lead to a change in the power distribution and to the
creation of policies that seek the causes of poverty and inequality. Any meaningful
change to the welfare system aimed at making them more inclusive and equitable will
only be possible through citizen engagement, along with citizen-centered policymaking
processes that consider the needs of all members of society.
7.3 Directions and reforms to envision the future
Moving on, the thought on how to solve the problems of the welfare state and the
poor people's and the promising reforms is the beginning of the work. Larsen looks at
policy dismantling schemes (2018) paying attention to the role of gender policy
transformation as well as activism. Through advocacy activities like lobbying or media
campaigning, stakeholders have an opportunity to promote their agendas and press
decision makers onto supporting certain policy directions However, movements not only
bring people for common goal but also they engage in social change and advocating for
systemic alterations. Mijs et al., (2020) analyse the immigration political arena of the
Netherlands reiterating the impact of ethnic cantonization policies and immigrant
activism. For instance, through advocacy and activism, marginalized communities not
only amplify their voices but also contribute to the democratization of current narratives
as well as the influence the changing landscape of social welfare by addressing the
issue of inequality and social injustice. While contemplating the future of social politics,
Page 30 of 35
it is paramount to begin with tackling the underlying structural problems and end up
among the supporters of the leftist reforms. She (Larsen, 2018) has emphasized that
gender policy changes and activism are indispensable in pushing gender parity by
changing existing measures and advocating for gender equality. Through advocacy
endeavors, such as lobbying and mass-media campaigns, stakeholders can elaborate
their agenda and put pressure on decision-makers. Additionally, social movements are
about effectuating environmental action which can go even further to address wider
social justice issues. Mijs, Bakhtiari, and Praag (2020) explain how immigrant activism
has encouraged the process of integration for immigrants into the Netherlands. Through
the cascade of ethnic cantonization policies and the amplifying of their voice towards
the welfare policies, the marginalized groups can therefore affect the direction of welfare
policies which moves towards the greater equity and social transformation. Regarding
this, marginalized communities can choose to challenge the dominant narratives,
enhance their voice, and lobby policies that emphasize fairness and social justices by
their involvement in these initiatives. Finally, there is the necessity to tackle the problem
of systemic unfairness and progressive development of welfare systems which are
supposed to comprehensively cover the needs of every individual in society.
Page 31 of 35
8.0 References
Béland, D., & Waddan, A. (2019). The politics of policy diffusion. In Oxford Research
Encyclopedia of Politics.
https://doi.org/10.1093/acrefore/9780190228637.013.1126
Betzelt, S., & Brzinsky-Fay, C. (2022). Target groups in social policy: A new perspective
on policy analysis. Social Policy & Administration, 56(2), 247-262.
https://doi.org/10.1111/spol.12774
Choi, S. (2021). The social construction of the deserving poor: Exploring the political
dynamics of welfare state reform in South Korea. Social Policy & Administration,
55(2), 308-322. https://doi.org/10.1111/spol.12651
Daguerre, A. (2018). Welfare state reforms in the context of population ageing:
Renegotiating the welfare mix towards a new social contract. Journal of
European Social Policy, 28(4), 321-333.
https://doi.org/10.1177/0958928717753964
Eggers, A. C., & Fouirnaies, A. B. (2022). Parties, policy demanders, and the politics of
public spending. Journal of Politics, 84(1), 51-67. https://doi.org/10.1086/715106
Gofen, A., & Yarhi-Milo, K. (2020). After critique: How the liberal protest movement is
reinvigorating American democracy. International Organization, 74(4), 762-796.
https://doi.org/10.1017/S0020818320000362
Page 32 of 35
Hagen, J. (2021). The politics of belonging: Social protection, race, and Brexit.
American Behavioral Scientist, 65(8), 1026-1045.
https://doi.org/10.1177/0002764221989435
Häusermann, S., & Palier, B. (2017). The age of dualization: Confronting the new
insecurities in labor markets and households. Politics & Society, 45(1), 123-150.
https://doi.org/10.1177/0032329216683792
Herd, P., & Moynihan, D. P. (2019). Administrative burden: Policymaking by other
means. Russell Sage Foundation.
Hudson, J., & Gyu Kang, J. (2022). Social constructions of target populations:
Implications for public policy. Social Policy & Administration, 56(2), 315-330.
https://doi.org/10.1111/spol.12772
Ingram, H. M., Schneider, A. L., & DeLeon, P. (2007). Social construction and policy
design. In Theories of the policy process (2nd ed., pp. 93-126). Westview Press.
Koning, E. A. (2021). New ways of working: Activation, flexibility and insecurity in
European welfare states. Social Policy & Administration, 55(7), 1123–1137.
https://doi.org/10.1111/spol.12728
Laenen, T., Rossetti, F., & van Oorschot, W. (2019). Why deservingness theory needs
qualitative research: Comparing studies of income assistance policy preferences
in the social sciences. Comparative Population Studies, 44.
https://doi.org/10.12765/CPoS-2019-27en
Page 33 of 35
Larsen, C. A. (2018). Patterns of policy dismantling: Understanding gender policy
change. In L. A. Frizzell, C. Holland, & S. B. Mudditt (Eds.), Gender and
Sexuality in the Workplace (pp. 37-53). Emerald Publishing.
https://doi.org/10.1108/S0195-621020180000037003
McConnaughy, C. M. (2019). Conservative opportunities, issue ownership perceptions,
and policy attitudes: The basis of mass partisan politics. Journal of Elections,
Public Opinion and Parties, 29(4), 505-525.
https://doi.org/10.1080/17457289.2018.1518118
Mijs, J. J. B., Bakhtiari, E., & Praag, M. (2020). Policies forged from paradox: Ethnic
cantonization and the politics of immigrant integration in the Netherlands.
Sociology of Race and Ethnicity, 6(4), 560–578.
https://doi.org/10.1177/2332649220905479.
Nedlund, A. C. (2022). Inclusion through pedagogical categorization? Social Policy &
Administration, 56(2), 331-346. https://doi.org/10.1111/spol.12759
O'Leary, K. (2021). The politics of dis/ability: Exploring constructions of the disabled
other in U.S. policymaking. Social Policy & Administration, 55(4), 677-692.
https://doi.org/10.1111/spol.12676
Oschinski, M., & Béland, D. (2021). Comparing by integrating: The problem of
conceptual traveling in the analysis of policy diffusion. Policy Studies Journal,
49(4), 1149-1173. https://doi.org/10.1111/psj.12427
Page 34 of 35
Peck, J., & Theodore, N. (2022). Labor only: Capitalist crisis, precarity, and organized
insecurity. Critical Sociology, 48(1), 21-39.
https://doi.org/10.1177/0896920520976833
Roosma, F., van Oorschot, W., & Gelissen, J. (2022). The multidimensional re-
stratification of the welfare state in Europe: Towards a novel research agenda.
European Sociological Review, 38(2), 163-181.
https://doi.org/10.1093/esr/jcab051
Slootjes, J., & Kampen, T. (2022). We, the people? Public perceptions on immigrants'
access to social citizenship rights in cross-national perspective. Social Policy &
Administration, 56(2), 263-281. https://doi.org/10.1111/spol.12751
van Oorschot, W., & Finsveen, E. (2022). A comparative explanation for popular
attitudes toward migrants' rights to social benefits. Social Policy & Administration,
56(2), 298-314. https://doi.org/10.1111/spol.12736
Vikse, J. H., Wake Carroll, B., & Henderson, J. (2021). Paid to be tough? Enforcement
agent identities and the politics of welfare reform. Social Policy & Administration,
55(7), 1206-1221. https://doi.org/10.1111/spol.12721
Weible, C. M., & Schlager, E. (2022). Developing narrative strategies for policy change.
Policy Studies Journal, 50(1), 204-228. https://doi.org/10.1111/psj.12458
Wolff, J. (2021). The Ethics of Automation: Framing the ethics of 21st century
automated systems. In W. Wallach & G. Marchant (Eds.), Overcoming Barriers to
