Social policy definitions and theoretical perspectives

Social Policy

De-commodification

In context of the welfare provision in Canada, de-commodification can be described as the degree to which these welfare services are provided to the Canadian inhabitants and are free of the market. De-commodification is an important concept because the states practicing this system provide welfare services like education, jobs and healthcare to all the citizens and this system has no linkage with the processes that prevail in the market. In a society where de-commodification is practiced as a system, all the individuals hold the right to a source of revenue that is not dependable on market. If we talk about the Canadian society, social welfare is indeed a crucial feature which provides for the people who are unable to earn a livelihood in the market place. This has helped the Canadians to replace the pre-industrial, dependable modes of social security from family unit, place of worship or mutual aid societies. Almost every Canadian has been affected by the social services and income security programs that are made available by the government at various levels. Nearly all the Canadians benefit from the Canadian system of income security and this is why Canada can thus be described as a predominant de-commodified state (Hick, 2002).

Corporatism, Liberalism and Social Democracy are the three worlds of welfare capitalism. These three worlds differ in their basic understanding and comprehension of de-commodification, stratification and public/private provision. Corporatism can be best described as a chain of command that is based on fraternity, class, and mutual aid. This favors the group over the individual. In corporatism, an unequal social order is maintained and the state or the leader is thought to be the one who knows best what is needed by the people. De-commodification in a corporatist state is in fact, a supporter of the labor-force participation, work performance or strong family obligations. The corporatist welfare state has a dominant stratified and unequal system of social security where the skilled workers are provided more than the unskilled workers. The preferred social structures are hierarchy and patriarchy. A corporatist state also controls the system of insurance and favors status. Its goal is to harmonize the relations among classes (Esping-Andersen, 1990).

Liberalism holds individual at the highest place and gives it supreme importance. It has introduced a free market and laissez-faire and has also lessened the role of the state in economics. Canada is a liberal welfare state where the market has prime significance and is known to know the best. Liberalism has a de-commodification system in which means-tested programs are conducted to help the most deplorable and suffering individuals. Liberalism in Canada is practiced to promote individual freedom and equality. If truth be told, Canada has promoted a dual social security system in which labor force has been given utmost importance and is provided comparatively high benefits without the portrayal of any disgrace. The Canadian government has initiated programs which have toned down the effects of the market. It has also introduced programs that have helped the market to prevail (Esping-Andersen, 1990).

The third world of welfare capitalism is social democracy which claims that the people know best. De-commodification in the socially democratic states is citizenship-based. The work performance is not given prior importance. Instead, this system provides generous paid work leaves, pensions and public insurance programs. In such a system, everyone enjoys the same benefits. The market place does not affect the lives of the citizens (Esping-Andersen, 1990).

De-commodification best fits the Liberal Theory as the needs of the people are the preferences. In Canada, every citizen enjoys an equal status and has been given the right to pursue his own wants and needs through the market. However, social welfare claims are made every now and then, especially by the voters who look upon the government to introduce better programs. According to them, the government of Canada needs to align the designed policies with its practices. Their ideological perspective reflects the "Garbage Can Model" which was designed by Cohen and attempts "to describe policy-making as it unfolds in the day-to-day life on governments and organizations" (Wharf & McKenzie, 1998). The social welfare claimers specifically need the government to design a system which could promote the values deemed important by all the Canadians and to harmonize the political process to influence the society on a larger level. The claimers are asking for a society that would be capable of communicating and agreeing upon principles of social justice. The government and the power holders are expected to establish a societal solidity and assistance. In the Canadian society, social justice is a highly preferred matter. The social claimers are strategizing in order to achieve all the ends that can be fruitful for the society as a whole and not particularly beneficial for the elites. The objective principles and national standards do not govern the Canadian society. Social policies are always created here by using the common sense and the political process. The political parties in Canada have propounded various ideologies but it is required that they realize the common interests and well-being of the Canadians. Barriers in the way of a unified vision and thriving of social justice are required to be taken down. This strategy must be utilized by the power holders who want Canada to shine among all the world's nations. To do so, power holders have undertaken attempts that could have an excessive influence on the society.