Lecture 2 Notes: Social Policy & Values

The Sociological Imagination

• Definition from C. Wright Mills: a tool or skill for critical reflection on social life and our own lives; a “quality of mind” that enables us to grasp history and biography and the relations between the two within society (Mills, 1959, p. 15).

• Key elements:

  • Interaction between self and society

  • Seeing the general in the particular (Berger, cited in Germov & Poole, 2007, p. 7)

  • A bridge between personal experiences and larger social forces

• Purpose for social policy: helps connect personal experiences (troubles) to public issues, enabling recognition of social origins and patterns, and identifying routes for social change through policy

• Personal troubles vs public issues:

  • Personal troubles are experiences experienced by individuals

  • Public issues are collectively experienced problems with social origins and patterns

  • Recognizing that personal troubles can be public issues leads to potential social change via policy

• Reflection prompts:

  • What are your personal problems?

  • Are they public issues?

  • What role can social policy play?

Critical Thinking

• What it is:

  • Identifying other people’s positions (and your own)

  • Evaluating evidence for alternative points of view

  • Reading between the lines and identifying false or unfair assumptions

  • Weighing opposing arguments and evidence fairly

  • Recognising techniques used to make certain positions more appealing than others

  • Reflecting on issues in a structured way

  • Drawing conclusions about whether arguments are valid and justifiable (Cottrell 2005: 2)

• Why we need it in policy:

  • Helps assess not just what is proposed, but why and for whom

  • Reveals underlying assumptions and power dynamics in debates

Applying Critical Thinking to Policy: The Bacchi Approach

• Key questions (Bacchi 1999, adapted):
  1) What key ‘problem’ is identified in a policy debate/proposal/document?
  2) What assumptions or values underlie this understanding of the ‘problem’?
  3) What policy initiatives would result from this understanding of the ‘problem’?
  4) What does this understanding of the ‘problem’ ignore or leave silent?
  5) How would policy responses differ if the ‘problem’ were thought about or represented differently?

• Purpose: to uncover taken-for-granted problem constructions and explore alternative representations and solutions

Stats NZ Data (Tatauranga Aotearoa)

• Source: Stats NZ news release, 15 May 2018, 11:00am

• Core findings:

  • Around $rac{4}{10} = 0.4$ of Pacific people live in crowded homes in New Zealand

  • The rate is highest for people with Tuvaluan or Tongan ethnicity

  • Overall, around $rac{1}{10} = 0.1$ of New Zealanders lived in crowded houses in 2013, a rate largely unchanged since the early 2000s

  • Crowding, especially severe crowding, is linked with poorer health, higher rates of infectious diseases, and poorer educational outcomes for children (Dr Rosemary Goodyear)

• Chart context:

  • Percent of people living in crowded households, by selected ethnic groups (level 2), 2006 and 2013 Censuses

  • Ethnic groups include NZ European, Maori, Pacific groups, and others (e.g., Samoan, Tongan, Fijian, etc.)

Discussion Prompts (Reflection on the StatsNZ data and policy implications)

• Discussion 1: 1) What key understanding of the ‘problem’ does StatsNZ identify?

  • Overcrowded housing is more prevalent among Pacific peoples; implications for health and education
    2) What assumptions or values underlie this understanding of the ‘problem’?

  • A Western framing of housing as a space to be occupied (nuclear family norms) and a link between crowding and negative outcomes
    3) What policy initiatives would result from this understanding of the ‘problem’?

  • Possible occupancy limits; housing affordability measures; educational campaigns about crowding risks
    4) What does this understanding of the ‘problem’ ignore or leave silent?

  • Cultural norms of intergenerational living; benefits of intergenerational households; broader poverty contexts
    5) How would policy responses differ if the ‘problem’ were thought about or represented differently?

  • Build affordable larger homes; allow intergenerational households in public housing; support papakāinga development; tailor housing allocation to whānau

Discussion Prompts (Alternative framing and policy responses)

• Discussion 2: 1) What assumptions or values underlie this understanding of the ‘problem’?

  • A Western nuclear-family model; crowding linked to negative outcomes rather than considering poverty
    2) What policy initiatives would result from this understanding of the ‘problem’?

  • Maximum occupancy rules; affordability improvements; risk education about overcrowding
    3) What does this understanding of the ‘problem’ ignore or leave silent?

  • Cultural norms of intergenerational living; benefits of such living arrangements
    4) How would policy responses differ if the ‘problem’ were thought about or represented differently?

  • Provide affordable larger homes; permit intergenerational households in public housing; support papakāinga development; more culturally attuned housing allocation

Kāinga Tuatahi Case Study: Reinventing how we live

• Video series following Ngāti Whātua Ōrākei developing Kāinga Tuatahi – an innovative medium-density urban papakāinga

• Key project details:

  • A whānau redeveloped their traditional quarter-acre home into a multi-generation family whare housing four generations

  • Eight-bedroom whare houses five family units (19 whānau members)

  • Model for intergenerational papakāinga

• Kāinga Tuatahi specifics:

  • 30 medium-density houses designed for Ngāti Whātua descendants, with a substantial proportion of first-time homeowners

  • Focus on affordability: both initial cost and long-term affordability over the lifetime of the houses

  • Cultural identity: expression of Ngāti Whātua ōrākei hapū principles related to environmental wellbeing and sustainable design

• Sustainability features:

  • Community gardens and shared play spaces

  • Zero waste initiatives

  • Stormwater retention and filtering systems

  • Onsite renewable energy production and storage

• Resource: Auckland Design Manual case study on Kāinga Tuatahi (design guidance and success stories)

Why do we need critical thinking?

• Critical thinking helps reveal and challenge power dynamics in defining social problems

• Social problems tend to be defined by those with the most power or those whose values are seen as ‘normal’ in society

• Reference to a related video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iEzwJO4D1AI

How do values shape understandings of social justice and policy solutions?

• Values are assumptions or beliefs that influence policy concepts and judgments

• Values are often linked to questions of morality

• Types of values to consider:

  • Personal

  • Cultural

  • Political

The Three Pairs of Values in Social Policy

1) Rights vs Responsibilities

• Rights:

  • Confer benefits, allow choices, establish entitlements, and confer duties or sanctions

  • Citizenship rights are central for social policy; legally enshrined but dependent on government implementation

  • The political left emphasizes social rights (economic welfare and security)

• Responsibilities:

  • Obligations owed to the state in return for benefits

  • The political right emphasizes responsibilities (e.g., unemployed obligated to participate in work-for-the-dole)

2) Equality vs Equity

• Equality:

  • Formal legal equality; equal opportunity; same treatment before the law

• Equity:

  • Substantive equality; focused on equal outcomes; addressing differences in starting points or needs

3) Universalism vs Selectivity

• Universal services/benefits:

  • Free or universal for all (e.g., emergency health care, NZ Superannuation)

• Selectivity (Targeted):

  • Discretionary assistance; means-tested or targeted to the poor or those most in need (e.g., Job Seeker Support, Working for Families, Accommodation Supplement)

Lecture Summary

• Critical thinking is essential for analyzing social policy problems and solutions

• Helps identify:

  • The values and assumptions underlying a policy problem

  • Alternative solutions and why there are different understandings of social justice

• Key tensions in social policy:

  • What rights do individuals/groups have to social justice, and who is responsible to ensure this is achieved?

  • Does achieving social justice mean equality or equity?

  • Should policies aiming to achieve social justice be universal or selective?

Next Week Preview

• Topics: Political Sociological Theory

  • Liberalism

  • Marxism

  • Social Democracy

  • Anti-racist theory

  • Decolonial theory

• Reminder: Please do your readings (J)