Perspectives on Social Policy in Oxford - New Seminar Series
Introducing the OISP Seminar Series: Jonathan Wolff on Philosophy and Social Policy
This term, the Oxford Institute of Social Policy is hosting a seminar series on different perspectives on social policy within Oxford. Given that there is so much work that is relevant to social policy being done within other departments of the university, the seminar series this year, organised by Fran Bennett, will focus on what other disciplines can bring to the study of social policy. Last Thursday, the seminar series was kicked off with a talk by Professor Jonathan Wolff, a renowned political philosopher and the current Chair of Public Policy at the Blavatnik School of Government.
The seminar started with a discussion of the ways in which political philosophy can help us understand (social) policy issues. Professor Wolff argued that – despite what one might intuitively suggest –the role of political philosophy cannot be to provide a normative framework for social policy, given that its principles of justice are centred in ideal theory and thus very far apart from the real world. Rather, the distinctive contribution of political philosophy to social policy lies in the analytical abilities of philosophers, who are trained especially to examine the construction of problems and inconsistencies in belief structures. In addition, there is a trend in recent political philosophy towards moving away from ideal theory and towards investigation of more concrete policy issues.
A Political Philosophy Perspective on Poverty
Professor Wolff then moved on to discussing the application of philosophical thinking to a specific social policy concept: poverty. Starting with a discussion of Rowntree’s famous work on poverty, he highlighted the fact that people living in poverty have a need for relaxation and recreation just as much as anyone else, but their choosing to engage in these activities significantly constrains which other essential goods, such as food and shelter, they can afford. Hence, living in poverty diminishes individuals’ ability to live a human life, a life that consists not just of the bare minimum of survival, but also allows us to partake in the social functions of society. From a philosophical perspective, a capability approach, as advocated for instance by Amartya Sen and Martha Nussbaum, can prove illuminating. The capability approach especially underlines the different functionings individuals can achieve in their life. Poverty severely limits the capabilities individuals have to acquire different functionings, as they face constraints related to internal and external resources, as well as social, political and legal structures.
Poverty: More Than an Issue of Money
The issue, argued Professor Wolff, is that poverty theory tends to focus on monetary constraints. However, the monetary aspect of poverty interacts with other significant constraints to determine individuals’ set of capabilities. Poverty should therefore not only be conceptualized in terms of money, but in terms of the functionings that individuals need to achieve in order to live a good human life. Such functionings include physical needs, but also social and even status goods. The question for policy, then, is how to enable individuals to live a fully human life and achieve more relevant functionings.
Empirical evidence on how individuals in poverty will use additional income is relatively scarce, but it may be that a significant proportion will be spent on status goods rather than basic goods, given that these have a significant social function. Indeed, one might argue that people in poverty should be able to spend on status goods just as much as anyone else. Therefore, if the the goal is to afford poor people a good human life, the solution may be to make them less dependent on income by taking certain goods (for example, health care) out of the market and facilitate the realization of other functionings.
Broadening the Conception of Poverty
This does not imply that conceptualizing poverty in monetary terms is not useful. Using this conceptualization allows for drawing on a long research tradition and is very salient politically. In addition, in the short term a focus on money seems the only practical solution, given that increasing people’s incomes is much easier than changing the social structure. However, in the long term we should aim to move beyond a focus on money towards an understanding of poverty as the functionings that individuals are able to achieve.
The talk was followed by a lively and critical discussion. Questions raised included whether individuals do in fact spend additional income disproportionately on status goods; whether the concept of relative poverty can ever be separated from moral judgements; and what kind of empirical research on spending patterns and household dynamics is needed. Whether attendees agreed or disagreed with the use of a capability approach for the concept of poverty, it certainly gave a lot of food for thought.
For more information on the Hilary Term 2018 seminar series: Perspectives on Social Policy in Oxford, please visit https://www.spi.ox.ac.uk/events.
About the Author
Leonie is an MSc candidate in Comparative Social Policy. Before coming to Oxford, she graduated from University College London with a Bachelor of Arts in Philosophy and Economics, where, in her dissertation, she conducted a quantitative analysis of the influence of gender regimes on mental health responses to unemployment. In addition, she has engaged in policy analysis through working in social impact consultancy and for the UK Department for Business.