Conceptions of Social Welfare*

							                                                                                                               02/18/2003 ed.
                                    CONCEPTIONS OF SOCIAL WELFARE*
    Neoconservative                    Residual         Institutional                                    Developmental
Bring the market into       Based on the premise that     Social welfare is seen as a              Focuses on the multicausal
social welfare. Social      an individual’s needs         normal and “legitimate                   nature of social
welfare is a good “market” should be met through the      function of modern                       issues…emphasizes
for business (e.g., health  market economy and            society” (Dolgoff &                      multilevel interventions”
care, day care, long-term   through the family. The       Feldstein, 2003, p. 140).                (Elliott & Mayadas, 1996,
care, etc.)… Opportunity    market economy and the        There is no stigma (or                   p. 62). Assumes that it is
“is based on a person’s     family are considered to be shouldn’t be) with this                    “possible for society to set
relationship to the         the normal, appropriate       approach. The welfare                    up a social welfare
marketplace” (K&S, 2002, means through which the          state is not something to be             institution simply to make
p. 9). Maximizing self      social welfare system can     avoided or dreaded. But,                 living better, to improve
interest is a high social   best function. (note: the     not all institutionalists are            the quality of life, and to
good. Social service        above applies too the         advocates of a full-blown                fulfill human development,
consumer is best served     neoconservative               welfare state. Humanize                  not necessarily to solve a
with choices at hand        perspective as well…)         the welfare state rather                 problem” (Dolgoff &
(health maintenance         Government is distrusted      than abolish the welfare                 Feldstein, 2003, p. 140).
organizations vs. health    rather than trusted.          state. The family, market                Goes “beyond the welfare
insurance, etc.).           Welfare state is something economy and the private                     state.” Becoming a
Interest in social policy   to be avoided. Welfare is     sector cannot address all                “welfare society” rather
(esp. in privatizing it)…   permeated with feelings of social welfare needs….                      than a “welfare state”.
Everything in the residual  stigma. Philosophical         Institutional social welfare             Emphasis on large scale
model applies here as well, links-Conservatism in the     programs “are considered a               primary prevention.
except for the (a) interest U.S. (Russell Kirk, Barry     right of citizenship” (K&S,              Anticipating problems and
in social policy here, and  Goldwater, William F.         2002, p. 515). Assumes                   “creating environments.”
(b) more aggressive drive   Buckley, Jr.) Social          some social problem that a               In theory, there is no
to bring the market         welfare as charity, as a      social welfare institution is            stigma here. Critique of
economy into social         privilege, not a right.       about the business of                    other conceptions for being
welfare. Local              There is something of a       correcting or perhaps                    too social problem
government preference       disinterest here in “social   preventing. Most                         oriented, and not
over the federal            policy,” in “social           programs are universal and               prevention oriented.
government. Thinktanks-     planning,” or in any long-    not selective. Equality is               Nearly all programs are
AEI (American Enterprise range plans to address or        seen as the hoped for result             universal and non-
Institute, Cato Institute,  prevent social problems, or of social welfare efforts.                 selective. Full,
Heritage Foundation,        even in comprehensive         Liberals feel at home here.              comprehensive
Hoover Institution, etc…)   discussions of social         This would be (in general)               commitment to equality in
Encourage mediating         issues. Consistent with a     the social welfare                       all areas of life.
structures…(family,         kind of rugged                philosophy of the liberal
church, neighborhood,       individualism.                wing of the Democratic
private sector, etc.)                                     Party.
Day care services example (Dolgoff & Feldstein, 2003, p. 140):
Developmental – Nurseries in shopping centers, fully funded by government. “Anticipating needs” in this and other ways. Need
for day-care services for many extends beyond work hours. Government going an “extra mile.”
Institutional – Day care services largely funded by government or through government. Assumption that “many parents in
industrial society will need to work and will need the help of day care services.” (Dolgoff & Feldstein, 2003, p. 140).
Residual – Day care services instituted because “certain parents are not yet properly trained or are incapable of taking care of
their children as should be the norm” (Dolgoff & Feldstein, 2003, p. 140). Mix of private and public (preference for private).
Neoconservative – same as the residual. Add-strong preference for private day care services. Privatize all of day care, if at all
possible. Tax incentives for companies to offer day care. Build in wide consumer choice (company day care vs. small home day
care vs. other approaches…)
*This is not meant to be a comprehensive listing of all components of each model, but is only an “idea collection,” some assorted
ideas and notions (in digested form) espoused by adherents of each. Also, it should be kept in mind that there are not always
clear lines separating one conception from the other.
                                                                                                            Source: Prof. T. Watts
                                                                                                                      SSW., U.T.A.
                                                                                                02/18/2003 ed.
Functional

         Recast social welfare programs so that they are more conjoined with economic productivity. There
is an emphasis here on the functional relationship between welfare and society. The functional model
corresponds with the urging of Kenneth Boulding that economic policy and social policy should be closer,
more intertwined. The functional model is related to functionalism in sociological theory, a view of society
as a complex of interdependent institutions, each of which makes some contribution to overall social
stability. Functionalist theory focuses more on social equilibrium than on social change. The components
of a given society are consequently analyzed in terms of their specific function in system maintenance.
         Two criticisms of the functional conception (among others) are that it is an inherently conservative
model that reinforces the status quo, and that there is such an emphasis on corresponding social policy with
economic policy that social policy becomes too diminished.
         The functional conception of social welfare has ties with utilitarianism. It is empirically anchored.
There is less concern here with moral principles (in contrast to the institutional and developmental
conceptions) such as “rights” to welfare, and more concern with cost-effectiveness. With welfare reform,
the functional model would not provide benefits unconditionally, but would require work provisions. The
functional conception of social welfare is very interested in employment, which reflects a concern with
workplace issues. With the functional conception of social welfare, all social welfare recipients are viewed
as participants in a larger economic marketplace, and to a large extent are viewed as worthy of some
assistance in that context.


See: Stoesz, David. (1988). “The functional concept of social welfare,” Social Work, 33(1) Jan.-Feb, 58-
       59.

Definition of “Functional Welfare”:
       A social welfare-related concept that holds that social service benefits should be justified in relation
to productivity. Usually a standard of conforming conduct is required on the part of recipients in exchange
for benefits.

From: Karger, H. J., & Stoesz, D. (2002). American social welfare policy: A pluralist approach. (4th ed)
      (p. 514). Boston, MA: Allyn & Bacon.

Selected References:
Dolgoff, R., & Feldstein, D. (2003). Understanding social welfare. (6th ed) Boston, MA: Allyn & Bacon.
Elliott, D., & Mayadas, N. S. (1996) Social development and clinical practice in social work. The Journal
         of Applied Social Sciences, 21(1), 61-68.
Also see:
Elliott, D. (1993) Social work and social development: Towards an integrative model for social work
         practice. International Social Work, 36(1), 21-36.
And,
Mayadas, N. S., & Elliott, D. (1997). Lessons from international social work: Policies and practices. In
         M. Reisch, & E. Gambrill (Eds.), Social work in the 21st century (pp. 175-185). Thousand Oaks,
         CA: Pine Forge Press.
Also, see other works by Elliott and Mayadas on this topic (and also works by James Midgley, and others).
                                                                                           Source: Prof. T. Watts
                                                                                                   SSW., U.T.A.