Managing the COVID-19 pandemic crisis and changing welfare regimes

Public Admin & Development

Rezza

2021

Self Cite

Using the decommodification and (de)familisation framework, this paper examines the two main Social Safety Net programme during the pandemic and its effect on female welfare in Indonesia. It is argued that despite expansion of decommodification measures through unemployment benefits, females tend to benefit less because the existing labour force structure is highly dominated by males. Hence, the only way of being financially secure is to have access to Conditional Cash Transfer (CCT), which means it then exposes them to greater risk of familisation. This is because to be eligible for CCT, they are (informally) required to perform unpaid caregiving. This article concludes that familial ethics has become a rationale for the state to push females to seek social support through a family relationship, resulting in social risk internalisation during the COVID-19 crisis, rather granting them citizenship rights-based welfare.

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 90%

The forms of decommodification and (de)familisation measures during COVID‐19: What is the impact on female's welfare?

Public Admin & Development

Rezza

2021

Self Cite

“…Moreover, I also considered English language literature which discusses regional welfare regimes and social policy in the scope of EA, which is included Indonesia in their analysis. These studies include, Croissant (2004), Gough (2001, 2004, 2013), Sharkh and Gough (2010), Ramesh (2004, 2009, 2014), Hort and Kuhnle (2000), Suryahadi, Febriany and Yumna (2017), Kühner (2015), Papadopaulos and Roumpakis (2017), Putra (2019), Roumpakis (2020), London (2018), Yuda (2020a, 2020b), Sumarto (2020) and Mok, Ku, and Yuda (2021) (Figure 1).…”

Section: Search Strategy Study Identification and Data Analysismentioning

confidence: 99%

The complementary roles between clientelism and familism in social policy development

2021

Soc Policy Adm

Self Cite

What drives social policy development? Most of the literature addressing this issue focuses on the economic crisis and the increase in left power as its causation. On the basis of the Indonesian case, this paper engages in a debate about the clouts of clientelism and familial ethics in shaping social policy path development. This article claims that the quick replacement of productivist welfare regimes with the more inclusive system after Asian Financial Crisis is motivated by increased elites' interest in repositioning their clientelistic network within a public institution. This is occurring while familial precepts are being used as effective moral politics in encouraging kinship networks to internalize social risks during the regime replacement process. Overall, the case of Indonesia reflects the common characteristic of welfare regimes development in East Asian countries where efforts to modernize social policy are conditioned under a situation where democracy is not well‐established and the post‐modern family structure has not fully matured either. Consequently, the development of social policy to a large extent is still confined within a huge clientelistic influence and implemented under the familial ideology. This situation has ultimately retarded welfare state development.

“…Interestingly, such provision continues to persist after the 1998 economic crisis; thus, Singapore has a different characteristic of motion in terms of welfare regime change from other East Asian countries, such as Japan, Taiwan, and South Korea. Although said countries are moving to the type of social policy regime comparable to the European state (Mok et al, 2021), Singapore remains subject to the old legacies of the productivist path (Abrahamson, 2016; Hwang, 2018; Lee & Qian, 2017). Even, Singapore is acknowledged as a developed country that has maintained a government social expenditure on the smallest level when compared to other OECD countries (Hwang, 2018).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Lee constructs Singaporean values that are attuned to the vision of Singapore as an international hub in Asia, which seeks to unite West and East under an inclusive third‐way platform (Chua, 2017; Lee, 2013). It has shaped a unique pattern of social policy development found in Singapore as distinctly East Asian (Mok et al, 2021; Yuda, 2020b), differentiating it from other Asian countries which remain subject to be influenced by Asian values (Tan, 2012). Referring to the official government explanation, Singapore adopts the form of “shared values” which includes five key values: (a) nation before community and society above self, (b) family as the basic unit of society, (c) community support and respect for the individual, (d) consensus not conflict, and (e) racial and religious harmony (White Paper, 1991).…”

Section: Grasping the Ideas Of Singaporean Values To Welfarementioning

confidence: 99%

Revisiting the Singaporean values to welfare as foundational ideas of Central Provident Fund development

Asian Soc Wrk & Pol Rev

Pratiyudha

Kafaa

2021

Self Cite

This succinct review returns to the debate on political‐culture and Singaporean social policy nexus that has been abandoned since 2000. They put the spotlight on the social policy through the Confucian lens, examining to what extent Confucianism teaching was conditioned in formal welfare provisions. Yet, they are too focused on the common idea of Confucianism while overlooking the original idea of Singaporean value promoted by Lee Kuan Yew. Hence, this article raises the discussion of the links of Singaporean values and the Central Provident Found (CPF) which have barely been highlighted in the literature. Singaporean values are hybrid between Confucianism and Western values. This article argues that although the CPF has expanded in terms of features and benefits, it has not crossed the line that separates Singapore from Western models. Because of its Singaporean values, the country does not follow the typical European model, which is being adopted by other East Asian countries. This article concludes the CPF not only reflects its centrality to Singaporean values but also as a value stabilizer that has long history in contributing to Singaporean nation‐building.