The issues involved in poverty, inequality and social justice are many and varied, from basic access to education and healthcare, to the financial crisis and resulting austerity, and now COVID-19. Addressing Goal 1: No Poverty, Goal 5: Gender Equality, Goal 10: Reduced Inequalities and Goal 16: Peace, Justice and Strong Institutions, our list both presents research on these topics and tackles emerging problems. A key series in the area is the SSSP Agendas for Social Justice.
This focus has always been at the heart of our publishing with the view to making the research in this area as visible and accessible as possible in order to maximise its potential impact.
Bristol University Press and Policy Press are signed up to the UN SDG Publishers Compact. In Poverty, inequality and social justice, we aim to address the following goals:
Poverty, Inequality and Social Justice
You are looking at 1 - 10 of 8,244 items
This article aims to shed light on the challenges of minimum-income schemes in multi-level models through analysis of the Spanish case. The approval of a nationwide state benefit in 2020, the Ingreso Mínimo Vital (MLI Minimum Living Income), which coexists with regional minimum-income schemes, provides a favourable scenario for this purpose. The article develops a comparative analysis of the regulation of regional minimum-income schemes. After grouping the regional schemes according to their institutional design, this classification is contrasted with information related to elements such as the level of coverage and the adequacy of the different regional programmes. The analysis leads to a diverse panorama where regions with restrictive regulations achieve intermediate levels of coverage while others with more generous regulations achieve low levels of coverage. This highlights the limitations of relying solely on regulatory or institutional analysis to characterise social protection models and underscores the importance of administrative capacity to enforce laws as a critical variable in social policy analysis. The Spanish case shows the need to improve the articulation of national and sub-national policies for adequate implementation of the European Pillar of Social Rights.
People seeking asylum often have a range of complex social, emotional and economic needs that may be exacerbated by the hostile reception that they often receive. These needs and the stress of navigating asylum systems leave asylum seekers vulnerable to crisis, with refused asylum seekers particularly vulnerable. Even after receiving settled status of some form, barriers to accessing employment or housing and other services remain, as do the impacts of trauma, abuse, and loss sustained in the country of origin, during flight, or during the wait to receive settled status, again leaving refugees vulnerable to crisis. Early action can both have benefits for the individual asylum seeker and reduce the need for costly crisis interventions. This scoping review explores best practice in early action in the voluntary sector, while identifying gaps in the evidence base.
The household means test plays an essential role in social assistance schemes worldwide. Consequently, the legal definition of what constitutes a household importantly impacts social outcomes, while also being constantly challenged by the dynamic societal reality of living arrangements. Despite its significance, this ‘household-construct’ has received strikingly little attention among social policy analysts. Our contribution explores this issue through a longitudinal analysis of the household-construct in the Netherlands’ social assistance legislation and parliamentary history. After conceptualising the household means test in view of the literature on targeted and conditional welfare provision, we discuss the importance of demographic developments (diversifying household composition) as a continuous challenge for household means-tested income support. We then provide a longitudinal analysis of the most important legislative changes (and underlying rationales) to the household-notion in the Dutch main social assistance (minimum subsistence) scheme. The results demonstrate that the household means test has gone through considerable alterations over time, largely in response to societal shifts and in recent decades also as an outflow of the welfare conditionality paradigm. At the same time, the fundamental logic of (1) needs-based targeting and (2) needs assessment at the level of household resources (rather than the individual) have remained intact, thereby adhering to the traditional conception of the economic union of marriage and maintenance obligations between partners. The study demonstrates how a systematic examination of legislative documents can provide valuable insights into the complex interrelationships between this specific area of social security policy, the changing social context and social policy paradigms.
Since 2008, the UK has seen substantial political, economic and social change. Following the global financial crash, there was a shift in the role of the state in providing a ‘social minimum’ – or a properly constituted safety net – for all. Austerity and cuts in public spending contributed to increasing conditionality within social security, and a programme of restrictive welfare reforms undermined support for those on low or no income, delivered in part through the UK welfare state. This article uses the lens of decent minimum living standards to examine the impact of austerity on social security support, income adequacy and minimum living standards in the UK from 2008 to 2023. Minimum Income Standard (MIS) research in the UK provides the basis for this analysis. MIS sets out what the public agree is needed for a minimum socially acceptable standard of living, that meets essential needs and enables social participation. MIS provides an annually updated benchmark, rooted in public consensus, against which the adequacy of benefits and wages can be assessed and tracked over time. The article provides an overview of MIS, before setting out how illustrative households have fared over this period. We chart the impact of austerity on the adequacy of social security and minimum wages, relative to MIS. We end by reflecting on the question of what sort of social security system the UK needs to ensure that all can live in dignity at all stages of life.
Dutch minimum income support provides a generous social safety net compared to most other European Union (EU) member states but has not been able to structurally reduce poverty. This inadequacy did not come about overnight but is the result of six decades of policy decisions. In this article, we aim to explain the current income shortfalls of people on minimum income support by studying the historical evolution and determinants of the Dutch minimum income scheme. We demonstrate that it has on average maintained a constant level of purchasing power over the period 1980–2023. This fits well with the notion that poverty is of an absolute nature, and that a social minimum should guarantee a stable level of purchasing power. It fits less well with relative or contextual approaches to poverty, and the view that a social minimum should adapt to changing norms when a society grows richer. To uncover the reasons for the growing gap between general prosperity and the minimum income benefit, we decompose it into smaller gaps by illustrating the evolution of prosperity, labour productivity, gross wages, collectively agreed wages, the minimum wage and the minimum income benefit. We show that each of these gaps matters and argue that this provides valuable insights into the structural, institutional and political forces that have shaped Dutch minimum income support since its introduction in 1965. Based on these results, we argue against the current ad hoc measures of the government and in favour of a more structural approach to supporting low-income households.
What prevents an individual claimant from accessing social rights in the UK? This chapter unpacks this question by focusing on the range of systemic barriers that they face – from the recognition of social rights violations to the attainment of effective remedies. It critiques the current, limited understanding of access to justice, highlighting the necessity of a broader view that encompasses factors that are often obscured, including the need for legal consciousness, emotional resilience and financial resources. Drawing on extensive empirical insights from practitioners, the chapter reveals the profound inadequacies in the current legal system, particularly regarding legal aid and representation for welfare claimants. In response to these issues, it argues for an approach that addresses procedural and substantive barriers to accessing social rights through timely and effective judicial and administrative remedies. It emphasizes the importance of embedding international human rights standards into domestic law to provide robust protections against social rights violations. Ultimately, it advocates for structural reforms and collective solutions to enhance access to justice and promote systemic change.
This chapter maps the conceptual terrain for understanding social justice in the United Kingdom (UK), focusing on the state’s international obligations concerning social rights (SR) such as housing, food, fuel and social security. It addresses the substantive violations of these rights and the systemic barriers that impede access to social justice. By situating its analysis within the legal frameworks of administrative law, human rights and social justice, the chapter also draws from various social science theoretical lenses, including hegemony, power narratives and deliberative democracy theory. Empirical insights from practitioners across the UK highlight the multifaceted nature of SR violations and the inadequacies of the current legal system. This chapter proposes a model for improving access to social justice by recognizing and overcoming procedural and substantive barriers. It emphasizes the need for a multi-pronged approach to legal processes that ensure effective remedies and uphold human rights standards. In doing so, it advocates for the simultaneous development of both individual and structural remedies to achieve social justice.
Available open access digitally under CC-BY-NC-ND licence.
This book proposes a conception of social justice according to international human rights law. Social rights include everyday rights such as housing, food, fuel and social security.
Drawing on extensive research with frontline practitioners, the book frames access to social justice as a journey that should end with the realisation of an effective remedy. It highlights discourses that marginalise and disempower rights holders and reclaims the narrative around social rights as legal rights.
This is a unique contribution to our understanding of access to social justice from a social rights perspective complete with key recommendations for policy and practice.
This chapter takes a deeper dive into the concerns and challenges that emerged from the UK-wide empirical case studies by identifying various dynamics that interconnect laws, policy and public services to create the daily realities of policy in action ‘on the ground’. Informed by a critical discourse lens, it highlights how barriers to social justice are socially and discursively produced, and, more importantly, how understanding these dynamics can inform practice and chart ways forward to create legitimacy for social rights (SR) in the UK. It reveals how competing discourses marginalize those who experience violations of SR, pushing them further towards the margins and further away from social justice. If access to justice for SR is to be realized in the UK, attending to both structural injustice as well as a keen understanding of social and discursive barriers is necessary. This chapter concludes with a set of recommendations which, if implemented by the relevant decision makers, could begin to address the accountability gaps that plague SR adjudication in the UK, facilitating a rights-based approach and reclaiming the narrative for social rights as legal rights.