Between welfare state and (state-organised) charity How Turkey's social assistance regime blends two competing policy paradigms

Öktem KG, Erdogan C (2020)
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF SOCIOLOGY AND SOCIAL POLICY 40(3/4): 205-219.

Zeitschriftenaufsatz | Veröffentlicht | Englisch
 
Download
Es wurde kein Volltext hochgeladen. Nur Publikationsnachweis!
Abstract / Bemerkung
Purpose Over the last four decades, Turkey has built an elaborate social assistance regime, which provides extensive coverage of the poor but lacks some of the key characteristics of European minimum income protection systems. The purpose of this paper is to explore what ideational roots underlie the regime and how these ideas and paradigms historically shaped the structure of the regime. The paper focuses on two central social assistance legislations: the social pensions law of 1976 and the Law that established the Fund for the Encouragement of Social Cooperation and Solidarity in 1986. Design/methodology/approach Based on a discursive institutionalist approach, the paper combines a qualitative content analysis of parliamentary debates and official reports with a policy analysis of social assistance legislations in Turkey. Findings The paper shows that two competing policy paradigms shaped the ambivalent structure and design of Turkey social assistance regime: a welfare state paradigm and a state-organised charity paradigm. The welfare state paradigm, which perceives social assistance as a social right, was dominant in the 1970s and is embodied in the social pension programme. The state-organised charity paradigm, which aims to reinvigorate the Islamic tradition of charitable foundations (waqf), was dominant in the 1980s and is embodied in the Fund for the Encouragement of Social Cooperation and Solidarity. Today's social assistance regime combines both elements in a curious synthesis. Originality/value - The paper contributes to comparative social policy research and discursive institutionalism by uncovering the historical and ideational foundations of a largely neglected case, social assistance in Turkey.
Stichworte
Social policy; Turkey; Discursive institutionalism; Welfare state; Policy paradigm; Social assistance
Erscheinungsjahr
2020
Zeitschriftentitel
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF SOCIOLOGY AND SOCIAL POLICY
Band
40
Ausgabe
3/4
Seite(n)
205-219
ISSN
0144-333X
eISSN
1758-6720
Page URI
https://pub.uni-bielefeld.de/record/2942893

Zitieren

Öktem KG, Erdogan C. Between welfare state and (state-organised) charity How Turkey's social assistance regime blends two competing policy paradigms. INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF SOCIOLOGY AND SOCIAL POLICY. 2020;40(3/4):205-219.
Öktem, K. G., & Erdogan, C. (2020). Between welfare state and (state-organised) charity How Turkey's social assistance regime blends two competing policy paradigms. INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF SOCIOLOGY AND SOCIAL POLICY, 40(3/4), 205-219. doi:10.1108/IJSSP-11-2018-0217
Öktem, K. G., and Erdogan, C. (2020). Between welfare state and (state-organised) charity How Turkey's social assistance regime blends two competing policy paradigms. INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF SOCIOLOGY AND SOCIAL POLICY 40, 205-219.
Öktem, K.G., & Erdogan, C., 2020. Between welfare state and (state-organised) charity How Turkey's social assistance regime blends two competing policy paradigms. INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF SOCIOLOGY AND SOCIAL POLICY, 40(3/4), p 205-219.
K.G. Öktem and C. Erdogan, “Between welfare state and (state-organised) charity How Turkey's social assistance regime blends two competing policy paradigms”, INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF SOCIOLOGY AND SOCIAL POLICY, vol. 40, 2020, pp. 205-219.
Öktem, K.G., Erdogan, C.: Between welfare state and (state-organised) charity How Turkey's social assistance regime blends two competing policy paradigms. INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF SOCIOLOGY AND SOCIAL POLICY. 40, 205-219 (2020).
Öktem, Kerem Gabriel, and Erdogan, Cansu. “Between welfare state and (state-organised) charity How Turkey's social assistance regime blends two competing policy paradigms”. INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF SOCIOLOGY AND SOCIAL POLICY 40.3/4 (2020): 205-219.