Universalism, Universality, and Universalization in Canadian Political Culture and Policy History

THE UNIVERSAL IN THE SOCIALPresentation to the Social Science History Association 37th Annual Conference, November 1, 2012, VancouverMichael J. Prince

Purpose

“Today’s welfare policies are always the result of yesterday’s ideological, moral and political frameworks.” (Squires 1990:41)

•My purpose is to offer a conceptual structure for examining the ideas and practices of the universal in social policy, and thus to better understand the history and contemporary nature of the welfare state in Canada

2

The ontology of the universal•What does it mean to say that something

is universal?•What are the essential features of the

universal in social action or state intervention?

•What is the history of the universal in public policy and in the welfare state?

•How does universalism or universality relate to other entities; for example citizenship or societal cohesion?

3

Previewing the arguments•Both the universal and the social are contested

and dynamic categories and phenomena•Notions of the universal are integral to the

social as well as to the design and legitimacy of particular state programs and public services

•The social is also multi-faceted conceptually and materially

•Various ideological meanings and working models of the universal are evident in the policy history of the welfare state

4

The conceptual structureUniversalism

Normative ideas, principles, beliefsPolitical discourses, claims, debatesAcademic models and theories

UniversalityProgram design featuresSpecific laws and policy systemsIntended effects

UniversalizationCultural/discursiveMaterial/programmatic

5

Universalism I

•A vision of preferred relations between citizens, governments, and markets

• Ideas of communal responsibility, equity and sharing; equality of opportunity, of human dignity and of public status; importance of social inclusion/integration

•Links to other “isms”: collectivism, egalitarianism, nationalism, federalism

•Counter “isms” of economic liberalism, market individualism, and neo-conservatism

6

Universalism II•Political claims for and against the universal

in in social policymaking and public services• It is about much more than the issue of

universal versus selective program design •Universalism is a proxy for deeper

ideological convictions and political doctrines

•Ways of talking about the universal in public discourse: in the Canadian context are three such discourse coalitions

7

Universalism III

•Academic concepts and theories on social policy and the welfare state:▫Absolute versus relative poverty measures▫Horizontal, intergenerational, and vertical

equity mix of rights and responsibilities ▫Social citizenship ▫Differentiated or interactive universalism▫The place of altruism and charity in the

provision of care, supports and services▫Residual, Institutional, Redistributive welfare

models

8

Universality I: program features•Nordic model of universal social programs:

▫Compulsory legislation▫Access irrespective of financial need or income▫Available to general population▫Principle of equal benefits or equal access▫ Integrated scheme of benefits

•Bismarck model of social insurance programs:▫Compulsory coverage of a given population▫Contributory financing by contributions, earned

rights▫Entitlement linked to labour force participation

9

Universality I: program features•Canadian model of demogrants :

▫Cash benefits to individuals or families with eligibility based on demographic characteristic (age, having children)

▫Access based also on citizenship or residence▫Flat-rate benefit payments (assumed need)▫Financed out of general government revenue▫Benefits may be treated as taxable income▫Benefits may be indexed to cost of living

10

Universality II: explicit legislation•In Canada at the federal level:

▫Veterans, Pension Act, 1919▫Family Allowances Act, 1945▫Old Age Security, 1952▫Youth Allowance, 1964▫Medicare Act, 1966▫Universal Child Care Benefit, 2006

11

Universality III: intended effects•De-commodification – access independent

of labour force status, wage-level, or making direct financial contributions

•Without a means-test, no social stigma and likely a high take-up rate

•Common program experiences across classes, thus public support and political endorsement

•Adequacy of public benefits and services•Sense of belonging and community

12

Universalization I•Two related processes:1.Discursive: the growing acceptance, circulation and

influence of universalist ideas, values, and discourse in public discussions and political debates

2.Material: the adoption and extension of universality in design features of income benefits and public services

•At four levels of social action:▫Single program▫Policy field▫Welfare state▫Society in general

13

Universalization II• Political dimension of these processes

▫Rise and fall of certain beliefs, claims, ideas▫Shifts in the prominence of voice by certain

groups, interests or sectors in society▫Patterns of resource allocation and distribution

• Temporal dimension of these processes▫ Changes over time in specific programs (scope,

coverage, benefit levels), the termination or the introduction of a new universal program

▫Thus, de-universalization and selectivization are related processes in policy developments

14

Features of the welfare state1. Universal programs in health, education, a

few income benefits and social services2. Social insurance programs for employment,

retirement3. Targeted programs such as welfare4. Tax levels and tax expenditure measures5. Private or occupational benefits6. Charitable and nonprofit community

activities7. Family relationships and supports

15

A diverse politics of the universal•Symbolic universality of public health care as

an icon of Canadian identity and core values•Tenuous universality in health care debates

of defending the maintenance of existing universal arrangements (Redden 2002: 115) against pressures for privatization

•Restrictive universality in old age pensions by federal governments in recent decades

•Expansive universality called for by groups in child care, home care and pharmacare

16

Concluding observations (i)• The universal (and non-universal) both constitute

and operate in the social; both depict community membership and citizenship

• Expressions of universalism and introductions of universality elaborate and change the social space

• In all welfare states, universal programs function in a policy world populated with selective programs and particular values and identities

• We still have public welfare programs with roots to the 17th and 18th centuries with their inadequate benefits, intrusive rules, and stigma

17

Concluding observations (ii)• Universalism and universality take on meanings in

particular historical circumstances and specific contexts of political economy, making such policies fluid, unstable, responsive, controversial

• Universality in part has institutionalized ascribed statuses (especially age) and has been bounded by other programs that entrench achieved statuses (labour force participation and earnings levels)

• The politics of the universal is a politics of diverse values and beliefs, multiple policy instruments and administrative techniques, and socio-economic trends

18

Concluding observations (iii)• Universalism, universality, and universalization are

not just things governments do when making public policy or in financing and delivering programs

• Universalism, universality, and universalization are public ideas, organizational techniques, and social processes practised by individuals, families and communities, interest groups and social movements, professions and political parties ; all engaged in the identification and interpretation of human needs, rights of citizenship, and the allocation of symbolic and material resources through time

19

Thank you

Michael J. PrinceLansdowne Professor of Social PolicyFaculty of Human and Social DevelopmentUniversity of Victoriamprince@uvic.ca

20