Redistributive politics and the temporalities of crisis: Reconfiguring social protection in a post-pandemic South Africa

IF 1.5 Q2 POLITICAL SCIENCE
E. Fouksman, H. J. Dawson
{"title":"Redistributive politics and the temporalities of crisis: Reconfiguring social protection in a post-pandemic South Africa","authors":"E. Fouksman, H. J. Dawson","doi":"10.1177/14680181231201493","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"How does crisis open-up – or foreclose – new possibilities for alternative economic futures? This article explores the possibilities afforded by crisis for reconfiguring redistribution and welfare in contexts where access to income via work is increasingly tenuous. To do so, we turn to South Africa, where we examine the unfolding political possibilities and support for more generous and universal forms of social protection and (re)distribution during and after the Covid pandemic. In particular, we analyse visions of alternative redistributory policies both from above and from below, via original empirical data on the views of low-income inner-city residents in Johannesburg; interviews with government actors and civil society activists; and a close reading of media and policy discourse around social protection between 2020 and 2023. We argue while framing Covid as a crisis forced the state to embrace less workerist approaches to social protection, the very fact that new policies were rooted in an emergency context may have blunted more radical redistributory visions. This argument is underscored by the vacillations and internal contradictions of the South African government’s expansion of its social grant system, as well as by the delimited scope of grassroots demands for more generous or unconditional economic support during and after the pandemic. We make the case that ‘crisis temporalities’ – and the temporality of work and welfare more generally – is critical to understanding the lack of political will and popular demands for more radical forms of redistribution and economic security beyond work.","PeriodicalId":46041,"journal":{"name":"Global Social Policy","volume":"22 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":1.5000,"publicationDate":"2023-09-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Global Social Policy","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/14680181231201493","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"POLITICAL SCIENCE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

How does crisis open-up – or foreclose – new possibilities for alternative economic futures? This article explores the possibilities afforded by crisis for reconfiguring redistribution and welfare in contexts where access to income via work is increasingly tenuous. To do so, we turn to South Africa, where we examine the unfolding political possibilities and support for more generous and universal forms of social protection and (re)distribution during and after the Covid pandemic. In particular, we analyse visions of alternative redistributory policies both from above and from below, via original empirical data on the views of low-income inner-city residents in Johannesburg; interviews with government actors and civil society activists; and a close reading of media and policy discourse around social protection between 2020 and 2023. We argue while framing Covid as a crisis forced the state to embrace less workerist approaches to social protection, the very fact that new policies were rooted in an emergency context may have blunted more radical redistributory visions. This argument is underscored by the vacillations and internal contradictions of the South African government’s expansion of its social grant system, as well as by the delimited scope of grassroots demands for more generous or unconditional economic support during and after the pandemic. We make the case that ‘crisis temporalities’ – and the temporality of work and welfare more generally – is critical to understanding the lack of political will and popular demands for more radical forms of redistribution and economic security beyond work.
再分配政治和危机的暂时性:在大流行后的南非重新配置社会保护
危机如何开启——或阻止——替代经济未来的新可能性?本文探讨了在通过工作获得收入越来越脆弱的背景下,危机为重新配置再分配和福利提供的可能性。为此,我们以南非为例,研究在疫情期间和之后,为更慷慨和普遍的社会保护和(再)分配形式提供的政治可能性和支持。特别是,我们通过约翰内斯堡低收入内城居民观点的原始经验数据,从上层和下层分析了替代再分配政策的愿景;对政府行为者和民间社会活动人士的采访;并仔细阅读2020年至2023年期间围绕社会保护的媒体和政策话语。我们认为,虽然将Covid定义为一场危机迫使国家采取不那么工人主义的社会保护方法,但新政策植根于紧急情况的事实可能会削弱更激进的再分配愿景。南非政府在扩大其社会补助制度方面的摇摆不定和内部矛盾,以及在疫情期间和之后,基层要求更慷慨或无条件经济支持的范围有限,都突显了这一论点。我们认为,“危机的暂时性”——以及更普遍的工作和福利的暂时性——对于理解缺乏政治意愿和民众对更激进形式的再分配和工作以外的经济安全的要求至关重要。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Global Social Policy
Global Social Policy POLITICAL SCIENCE-
CiteScore
3.20
自引率
6.70%
发文量
41
期刊介绍: Global Social Policy is a fully peer-reviewed journal that advances the understanding of the impact of globalisation processes upon social policy and social development on the one hand, and the impact of social policy upon globalisation processes on the other hand. The journal analyses the contributions of a range of national and international actors, both governmental and non-governmental, to global social policy and social development discourse and practice. Global Social Policy publishes scholarly policy-oriented articles and reports that focus on aspects of social policy and social and human development as broadly defined in the context of globalisation be it in contemporary or historical contexts.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信