Social Security and Fairness in a Changing World

Dirk J. Wolfson

doi:doi:10.11648/j.jppa.20210503.11

| Peer-Reviewed

Social Security and Fairness in a Changing World

Dirk J. Wolfson

Published in Journal of Public Policy and Administration (Volume 5, Issue 3)

Received: 7 May 2021 Accepted: 7 June 2021 Published: 16 June 2021

Views: Downloads:

Download PDF

Share This Article

Twitter
Linked In
Facebook

Abstract

People are not alike. Hence, the basic difficulty in a democracy is that elections may determine the general stance of policy, but do not provide operational information on how to customize for diversity in the business of governance in a world that in changing after the crash-landing of covid-19. This background calls for a restructuring of social security, and introduces a situational mode of contracting that deals with asymmetric information in principal-agent theory when perspectives of suppliers and beneficiaries of public support may differ. Its core question is how to combine customized support for diverging needs, capabilities and employability, as recognized by caseworkers, with customized obligations on the part of beneficiaries, in co-production between civil servants and individual clients or their representative organizations. Situational contracts match demand and supply in social support throughout the process of public policymaking and delivery, and in horizontal relations with network partners as well. Inspired by recent findings from behavioral public administration, the situational mode deals with complexity in a consensual principal-agent model. This paper claims that there is scope for transaction as a tool to reveal, from the actual decisions taken, how we can match efficiency and fairness in a mode of situational contracting as developed below.

Published in	Journal of Public Policy and Administration (Volume 5, Issue 3)
DOI	10.11648/j.jppa.20210503.11
Page(s)	62-71
Creative Commons	This is an Open Access article, distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, provided the original work is properly cited.
Copyright	Copyright © The Author(s), 2024. Published by Science Publishing Group

Keywords

Diversity, Discretion, Complexity, Responsive Policymaking, Situational Contracting

References

[1]	Agranoff, R. 2006. Inside collaborative networks. Ten lessons for public managers, Public Administration Review, 66: 50-6.
[2]	Ansell, Chr. and Gash, A. 2007. Collaborative governance in theory and practice, Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 18: 543-571.
[3]	Atkinson, A. B. 2015. Inequality. What can be done? Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
[4]	Bénabou, R. and Tirole, J. 2003. Intrinsic and extrinsic motivation, Review of Economic Studies, 70: 489-520.
[5]	Besley, T. and Ghatak, M. 2005. Competition and incentives with motivated agents, American Economic Review, 95 (1-2): 94-105.
[6]	Boone, Chr., De Brabander, B. and Van Witteloostuijn, A. 1999, the impact of personality on behavior, in five prisoner’s dilemma games, Journal of Economic Psychology, 20: 343-377.
[7]	Breton, A. 1995. Organizational hierarchies and bureaucracies, European Journal of Political Economy, 11 (3): 616-626.
[8]	Busuioc, E. M. and Lodge, M. 2016. The reputational basis of public accountability, Governance, 29 (2): 247-263.
[9]	Calmar Andersen, S. and Moynihan, D. P. 2016. How leaders respond to diversity” The moderating role of information use, Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 26 (3): 448-460.
[10]	Carson, S, J., Medoc, R. and Wu, Tao. 2006. Uncertainty, opportunism, and governance: The effects of volatility and ambiguity on formal and relational contracting, Academy of Management Journal, 49 (5): 1058-1077.
[11]	Conklin, J. 2006. Dialogue Mapping: Building a Shared Understanding of Wicked Problems, Chichester: Wiley Publishing.
[12]	Cornelisse, P. A. and Thorbecke, E. 2010. Exchange and Development, Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.
[13]	Dahrendorf, R. 1979, Life Chances. Approaches to Social and Political Theory, London: Weidenfeld and Nicolson.
[14]	Dur, R. and Zoutenbier, R. 2013. Working for a Good Cause, Public Administration Review, 74 (2),: 144-155.
[15]	Emerson, K., Nabachi, T. and Balog, S. 2008. An integrated framework for collaborative governance, Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, doi: 10.1093/j0part/mur011.
[16]	Euwals, R., De Mooij, R. and Van Vuren, D. 2009. Rethinking Retirement. The Hague: CPB.
[17]	Giddens, A. 1979. Central Problems in Social Theory: Action, Structure and Contradiction, Berkeley: University of California Press.
[18]	Hajer, M., and Wagenaar, H., eds. 2003. Deliberative Policy Analysis: Understanding Policy Analysis in a Network Society, Cambridge: University Press.
[19]	Hirschman, A. O. 1970. Exit, Voice and Loyalty, Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
[20]	Hurwicz, L. 1972. On incentives and the control of organizations, in McGuire, C. B. and Radner, R., eds., Decision and Organization, a Volume in Honor of Jacob Marshak, Amsterdam: North-Holland, 297-336.
[21]	Hurwicz, L. 2008. But who will guard the guardians? (Nobel Lecture), American Economic Review, 98 (3): 577-585.
[22]	Hupe, P. and Evans, T., eds., Discretion and the Quest for Controlled Freedom, Basingstoke: Macmillan 2000.
[23]	IPPC 2014. (International Panel of Climate Change), Fifth Assessment Report (internet version).
[24]	Jilke, S. 2015. Essays on the Microfoundations of Competition and Choice in Public Service Delivery, Ph. D. Thesis, Erasmus University Rotterdam.
[25]	Jilke, S, Van Ryzin, G. G. and Van de Walle, S. 2015. Responses to decline in marketed public services: an experimental evaluation of choice overload, Journal of Public Administration Research And Theory, 26 (3): 403-420.
[26]	Jones, B. D. 2003. Bounded rationality and political science: Lessons from public administration and public policy, Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 13 (4): 395-412).
[27]	Kahneman, D., Wakker, P., and Sarin, R. 1997. Back to Bentham? Explorations of experienced utility, Quarterly Journal of Economics, 112 (1): 375-405.
[28]	Kahneman, D. 2003. Maps of bounded rationality, psychology of behavioral economics (Nobel Lecture), American Economic Review, 93 (5): 1449-1475.
[29]	Keele, L., Tingley, D. and Yamamoto, T. 2015. Identifying mechanisms behind policy interventions via causal mediation, Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, 34 (4): 937-963.
[30]	Leach, W. D., Weible Chr. M., Scott, R., Vince, S. N. Siddiki, and Calanni, J. 2013. Fostering learning trough collaboration: knowledge acquisition and belief change in marine aquaculture partnerships, Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 24 (3): 591-622.
[31]	Mascini, P. 2000. Judges’ Use of Discretion: A Socio-Legal Approach, in Hupe and Evans, op. cit.
[32]	Maskin, E. S. 2008. Mechanism Design. How to implement social goals. (Nobel Lecture), American Economic Review, 98 : 567-576.
[33]	McBeath, B., Carnochan, S., Stuart, M. and Austin, M. 2017). The managerial and relational dimensions of public-non-profit human service contracting, Journal of Strategic Contracting and Negotiation, 3 (2) 51-77.
[34]	Milanovic, B. 2016. Global Inequality, Cambridge: The Belknap Press.
[35]	Myerson, R. 2008. Perspectives on mechanism design in economic theory (Nobel Lecture), American Economic Review, 98 (3): 586-603.
[36]	Noben, C. et al. 2015. Economic evaluation of a new organizational BTW intervention to improve cooperation between sick-listed employees and their supervisors: a field study, Journal of Occupational & Environmental Medicine, 57 (11): 1170-1177.
[37]	Noonan, K. G, Sabel, Ch. F., and Simon, W. H. 2009. Legal accountability in the service-based welfare state: Lessons from child welfare reform, Law & Social Inquiry, 34 (3): 523-568.
[38]	Oberfield, Z. W. 2010. Rule Following and discretion at government’s frontline: continuity and change during organization socialization, Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory.
[39]	Piketty, Th. 2014. Capital in the Twenty-first Century, Cambridge, Ma: The Belknap Press.
[40]	Prins, R. 2009. Developing Well-Targeted Tools for the Active Inclusion of Vulnerable People. Synthesis Report on behalf of the European Commission.
[41]	Putnam, R. B. 2015. Our kids. The American Dream in crisis, New York: Simon and Shuster. www.astri.nl/media/uploads/files/09505_Developing_well-targeted_tools_Peer_Review_Norway2.pdf.
[42]	Pruitt, D. and Kimmel, M. (1977). Twenty years of experimental gaming: Critique, synthesis, and suggestions for the future, Annual Review of Psychology, 28: 363-392.
[43]	Rose-Ackerman, S. (2016). What does “Governance” mean? (30^th Anniversary Essay), Governance (early view) doi. 10.1111.
[44]	Scharph, F. W. 1997. Games Real Actors Play. Actor-Centered Institutionalism in Policy Research, Boulder: Westview Press.
[45]	Schnellenbach, J. (2012). Nudges and norms: On the political economy of soft paternalism, European Journal of Political Economy, 28: 266-277.
[46]	Scott, T. A. Thomas, C. W. 2016. Unpacking the collaborative toolbox: why and when do public managers choose collaborative strategies?, Policy Studies Journal (early view).
[47]	Sen, A. K. 1977. Rational fools: a critique of the behavioral foundations of economic theory, Philosophy and Economic Affairs, 6: 317-344, reprinted in Sen, Choice, Welfare and Measurement, Oxford: Basil Blackwell 1982: 84-106. 1985 Commodities and Capabilities (Hennipman Lecture), Amsterdam: North-Holland Publishing Company.
[48]	Sen, A. K. The Idea of Justice, London: Allan Lane.
[49]	Sen, A. K. 2013. The ends and means of sustainability, Journal of Human Development and Capabilities, 14: (1) 6-20.
[50]	Stern, N. et al. 2007. The Economics of Climate Change. The Stern Review, Cambridge: University Press; also http://www.hm-treasury.gov.uk.
[51]	Stiglitz, J. E. 2002. Information and the change in the paradigm of economics (Nobel Lecture), American Economic Review, 92, 460-501.
[52]	Thomson A. M. and Perry, J. 2006. Collaboration processes: Inside the Black Box, Public Administration Review, Special Issue (December): 20-32.
[53]	Tuk, M. et al., 2019. You and I have nothing in common: The Role of dissimilarity in interpersonal influence, Organizational behavioral human decision processes, 151: 49-60.
[54]	Tummers, L. G. and Bekkers, V. 2014. Policy implementation, street-level bureaucracy, and the importance of discretion, Public Management Review, 16 (4): 527-547.
[55]	Tummers, L. G., Bekkers, V., Vink, E. and Musheno, M. 2015. Coping during public service delivery: a conceptualization and systemic review of the literature, Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 25 (4): 1099-1126.
[56]	Tummers, L. G., Olsen, A. L., Jilke, S. and Grimmelikhuijsen, S. G. 2016. Introduction to the virtual issue on Behavioral Public Administration, Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 16 (4): 527-547.
[57]	Van Slyke, D. M. 2007. Agents or stewards; using theory to understand the government-non-profit social service contracting relationship, Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 17 (2): 460-501.
[58]	Williamson, O. E. 1996. The Mechanisms of Governance, New York: Oxford University Press.
[59]	Wolfson, D. J. 2012. Situational Contracting: Building Reciprocity between Rights and Obligations, Governance, 2012, 25 (4): 661-685.
[60]	Wolfson, D. J. 2015a. Implementing Fairness in Social Policy, Journal of Human Development and Capabilities, (16): 272-286.
[61]	Wolfson, DJ2015b. The Political Economy of Sustainable Development: Valuation, Distribution and Governance, Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.
[62]	Wolfson, 202 Discretion from an economic perspective, in Hupe, P. and Evans, T., eds., op cit., Discretion and the Quest for Controlled Freedom, pp. 143 Basingstoke: Macmillan, op cit.
[63]	Wolfson, D. J. 2020. Life Chances Revisited, Archives of Psychology (4): 1: issue 3, August 2020.

Cite This Article

Plain Text BibTeX RIS

APA Style

Dirk J. Wolfson. (2021). Social Security and Fairness in a Changing World. Journal of Public Policy and Administration, 5(3), 62-71. https://doi.org/10.11648/j.jppa.20210503.11

Copy | Download

ACS Style

Dirk J. Wolfson. Social Security and Fairness in a Changing World. J. Public Policy Adm. 2021, 5(3), 62-71. doi: 10.11648/j.jppa.20210503.11

Copy | Download

AMA Style

Dirk J. Wolfson. Social Security and Fairness in a Changing World. J Public Policy Adm. 2021;5(3):62-71. doi: 10.11648/j.jppa.20210503.11

Copy | Download

@article{10.11648/j.jppa.20210503.11,
  author = {Dirk J. Wolfson},
  title = {Social Security and Fairness in a Changing World},
  journal = {Journal of Public Policy and Administration},
  volume = {5},
  number = {3},
  pages = {62-71},
  doi = {10.11648/j.jppa.20210503.11},
  url = {https://doi.org/10.11648/j.jppa.20210503.11},
  eprint = {https://article.sciencepublishinggroup.com/pdf/10.11648.j.jppa.20210503.11},
  abstract = {People are not alike. Hence, the basic difficulty in a democracy is that elections may determine the general stance of policy, but do not provide operational information on how to customize for diversity in the business of governance in a world that in changing after the crash-landing of covid-19. This background calls for a restructuring of social security, and introduces a situational mode of contracting that deals with asymmetric information in principal-agent theory when perspectives of suppliers and beneficiaries of public support may differ. Its core question is how to combine customized support for diverging needs, capabilities and employability, as recognized by caseworkers, with customized obligations on the part of beneficiaries, in co-production between civil servants and individual clients or their representative organizations. Situational contracts match demand and supply in social support throughout the process of public policymaking and delivery, and in horizontal relations with network partners as well. Inspired by recent findings from behavioral public administration, the situational mode deals with complexity in a consensual principal-agent model. This paper claims that there is scope for transaction as a tool to reveal, from the actual decisions taken, how we can match efficiency and fairness in a mode of situational contracting as developed below.},
 year = {2021}
}

Copy | Download

TY  - JOUR
T1  - Social Security and Fairness in a Changing World
AU  - Dirk J. Wolfson
Y1  - 2021/06/16
PY  - 2021
N1  - https://doi.org/10.11648/j.jppa.20210503.11
DO  - 10.11648/j.jppa.20210503.11
T2  - Journal of Public Policy and Administration
JF  - Journal of Public Policy and Administration
JO  - Journal of Public Policy and Administration
SP  - 62
EP  - 71
PB  - Science Publishing Group
SN  - 2640-2696
UR  - https://doi.org/10.11648/j.jppa.20210503.11
AB  - People are not alike. Hence, the basic difficulty in a democracy is that elections may determine the general stance of policy, but do not provide operational information on how to customize for diversity in the business of governance in a world that in changing after the crash-landing of covid-19. This background calls for a restructuring of social security, and introduces a situational mode of contracting that deals with asymmetric information in principal-agent theory when perspectives of suppliers and beneficiaries of public support may differ. Its core question is how to combine customized support for diverging needs, capabilities and employability, as recognized by caseworkers, with customized obligations on the part of beneficiaries, in co-production between civil servants and individual clients or their representative organizations. Situational contracts match demand and supply in social support throughout the process of public policymaking and delivery, and in horizontal relations with network partners as well. Inspired by recent findings from behavioral public administration, the situational mode deals with complexity in a consensual principal-agent model. This paper claims that there is scope for transaction as a tool to reveal, from the actual decisions taken, how we can match efficiency and fairness in a mode of situational contracting as developed below.
VL  - 5
IS  - 3
ER  -

Copy | Download

Author Information

Dirk J. Wolfson

Department of Public Administration, Erasmus University Rotterdam, Rotterdam, The Netherlands

Download PDF

Sections

Plain Text BibTeX RIS

APA Style

Dirk J. Wolfson. (2021). Social Security and Fairness in a Changing World. Journal of Public Policy and Administration, 5(3), 62-71. https://doi.org/10.11648/j.jppa.20210503.11

Copy | Download

ACS Style

Dirk J. Wolfson. Social Security and Fairness in a Changing World. J. Public Policy Adm. 2021, 5(3), 62-71. doi: 10.11648/j.jppa.20210503.11

Copy | Download

AMA Style

Dirk J. Wolfson. Social Security and Fairness in a Changing World. J Public Policy Adm. 2021;5(3):62-71. doi: 10.11648/j.jppa.20210503.11

Copy | Download

@article{10.11648/j.jppa.20210503.11,
  author = {Dirk J. Wolfson},
  title = {Social Security and Fairness in a Changing World},
  journal = {Journal of Public Policy and Administration},
  volume = {5},
  number = {3},
  pages = {62-71},
  doi = {10.11648/j.jppa.20210503.11},
  url = {https://doi.org/10.11648/j.jppa.20210503.11},
  eprint = {https://article.sciencepublishinggroup.com/pdf/10.11648.j.jppa.20210503.11},
  abstract = {People are not alike. Hence, the basic difficulty in a democracy is that elections may determine the general stance of policy, but do not provide operational information on how to customize for diversity in the business of governance in a world that in changing after the crash-landing of covid-19. This background calls for a restructuring of social security, and introduces a situational mode of contracting that deals with asymmetric information in principal-agent theory when perspectives of suppliers and beneficiaries of public support may differ. Its core question is how to combine customized support for diverging needs, capabilities and employability, as recognized by caseworkers, with customized obligations on the part of beneficiaries, in co-production between civil servants and individual clients or their representative organizations. Situational contracts match demand and supply in social support throughout the process of public policymaking and delivery, and in horizontal relations with network partners as well. Inspired by recent findings from behavioral public administration, the situational mode deals with complexity in a consensual principal-agent model. This paper claims that there is scope for transaction as a tool to reveal, from the actual decisions taken, how we can match efficiency and fairness in a mode of situational contracting as developed below.},
 year = {2021}
}

Copy | Download

TY  - JOUR
T1  - Social Security and Fairness in a Changing World
AU  - Dirk J. Wolfson
Y1  - 2021/06/16
PY  - 2021
N1  - https://doi.org/10.11648/j.jppa.20210503.11
DO  - 10.11648/j.jppa.20210503.11
T2  - Journal of Public Policy and Administration
JF  - Journal of Public Policy and Administration
JO  - Journal of Public Policy and Administration
SP  - 62
EP  - 71
PB  - Science Publishing Group
SN  - 2640-2696
UR  - https://doi.org/10.11648/j.jppa.20210503.11
AB  - People are not alike. Hence, the basic difficulty in a democracy is that elections may determine the general stance of policy, but do not provide operational information on how to customize for diversity in the business of governance in a world that in changing after the crash-landing of covid-19. This background calls for a restructuring of social security, and introduces a situational mode of contracting that deals with asymmetric information in principal-agent theory when perspectives of suppliers and beneficiaries of public support may differ. Its core question is how to combine customized support for diverging needs, capabilities and employability, as recognized by caseworkers, with customized obligations on the part of beneficiaries, in co-production between civil servants and individual clients or their representative organizations. Situational contracts match demand and supply in social support throughout the process of public policymaking and delivery, and in horizontal relations with network partners as well. Inspired by recent findings from behavioral public administration, the situational mode deals with complexity in a consensual principal-agent model. This paper claims that there is scope for transaction as a tool to reveal, from the actual decisions taken, how we can match efficiency and fairness in a mode of situational contracting as developed below.
VL  - 5
IS  - 3
ER  -

Copy | Download