{"title":"Take-up of social security benefits: past, present – and future?","authors":"Fran Bennett","doi":"10.1332/17598273y2023d000000005","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This article reviews evidence on and possible causes of non-take-up of social security benefits, focusing on the UK, and analyses the implications of the introduction of Universal Credit for take-up. It discusses why (non-)take-up is an important issue, in relation to those affected, the performance of social policies in relation to their goals and the nature of social citizenship. It explains how take-up is usually measured (or estimated) in the UK, giving some recent results, and describing recent policy decisions to halt the publication of figures on take-up of working-age benefits. It investigates explanations put forward about why entitlements are not claimed, highlighting analysis of obstacles at the individual claimant level; barriers within benefits administration; problems with system design; and wider structural issues in society. It examines the implications of the introduction of Universal Credit both for take-up and for the evidence base about it. The integrated nature of Universal Credit was argued to favour higher take-up; but features of its design and administration may have the opposite effect. Evidence is, however, lacking on the outcome of this combination. The conclusion reflects on the future of initiatives to boost benefit take-up, especially those relying on automation – often interpreted in different ways. It argues in favour of taking more account of the reasons for non-take-up relating to the nature of potential claimants’ relationship with the state, and the characteristics of benefits left unclaimed, rather than assuming that administrative information and automation will overcome all the obstacles currently resulting in non-take-up.","PeriodicalId":45090,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Poverty and Social Justice","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.1000,"publicationDate":"2023-12-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Poverty and Social Justice","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1332/17598273y2023d000000005","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"SOCIAL ISSUES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
This article reviews evidence on and possible causes of non-take-up of social security benefits, focusing on the UK, and analyses the implications of the introduction of Universal Credit for take-up. It discusses why (non-)take-up is an important issue, in relation to those affected, the performance of social policies in relation to their goals and the nature of social citizenship. It explains how take-up is usually measured (or estimated) in the UK, giving some recent results, and describing recent policy decisions to halt the publication of figures on take-up of working-age benefits. It investigates explanations put forward about why entitlements are not claimed, highlighting analysis of obstacles at the individual claimant level; barriers within benefits administration; problems with system design; and wider structural issues in society. It examines the implications of the introduction of Universal Credit both for take-up and for the evidence base about it. The integrated nature of Universal Credit was argued to favour higher take-up; but features of its design and administration may have the opposite effect. Evidence is, however, lacking on the outcome of this combination. The conclusion reflects on the future of initiatives to boost benefit take-up, especially those relying on automation – often interpreted in different ways. It argues in favour of taking more account of the reasons for non-take-up relating to the nature of potential claimants’ relationship with the state, and the characteristics of benefits left unclaimed, rather than assuming that administrative information and automation will overcome all the obstacles currently resulting in non-take-up.
期刊介绍:
The Journal of Poverty and Social Justice provides a unique blend of high-quality research, policy and practice from leading authors in the field related to all aspects of poverty and social exclusion. The journal has changed its name to reflect its wider scope and has growing international coverage. Content spans a broad spectrum of poverty-related topics including social security, employment and unemployment, regeneration, housing, health, education and criminal justice, as well as issues of ethnicity, gender, disability and other inequalities as they relate to social justice.