Gender, social protection systems and street-level bureaucrats

IF 1.2 Q3 PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION
Tara Patricia Cookson, Alexandra Barrantes
{"title":"Gender, social protection systems and street-level bureaucrats","authors":"Tara Patricia Cookson,&nbsp;Alexandra Barrantes","doi":"10.1111/issr.12371","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>Street-level bureaucrats are the “human face” of social protection delivery systems around the world. To date, most social protection literature approaches questions of gender with respect to policy and programme design and expected and unexpected outcomes. Mounting interest in gender-responsive and rights-based social protection systems, however, additionally begs a focus on the gendered individuals who mediate the relationship between citizens and these systems, representing the State as duty bearer of realizing the right to social protection. Much of the existing work on street-level bureaucrats (SLBs) focuses on their use of discretion in frontline work and how this shapes beneficiary experiences. This article adapts and extends Durose and Lowndes' (2024) framework for understanding gender and SLB discretion: 1) as shaped by the gendered laws, policies and guidance of institutions where SLBs work, 2) as reflective of SLBs as gendered actors, and 3) as having gendered effects on policy beneficiaries. While their framework was developed in a high-income context and to understand a different sector (policing), these three analytical propositions hold for SLBs in social protection systems. Yet, we suggest that understanding the role of SLBs in social protection systems requires two additional considerations from a human rights perspective: 4) discretion as shaped by the gendered social, political and economic contexts in which SLBs operate and social protection systems exist, and 5) moving beyond discretion, SLBs as rights-holders themselves, of the right to social security and the right to decent work. The article develops this framework in conversation with scholarship on social protection systems in the broad range of contexts in which they operate. In doing so, the article offers an analytical contribution to the emerging literature on gender-responsive social protection systems from a “frontline delivery” and human rights perspective, including their relation to Sustainable Development Goals 5 – gender equality – and 1.3 – social protection systems for all.</p>","PeriodicalId":44996,"journal":{"name":"International Social Security Review","volume":"77 4","pages":"7-22"},"PeriodicalIF":1.2000,"publicationDate":"2024-12-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/issr.12371","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Social Security Review","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/issr.12371","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Street-level bureaucrats are the “human face” of social protection delivery systems around the world. To date, most social protection literature approaches questions of gender with respect to policy and programme design and expected and unexpected outcomes. Mounting interest in gender-responsive and rights-based social protection systems, however, additionally begs a focus on the gendered individuals who mediate the relationship between citizens and these systems, representing the State as duty bearer of realizing the right to social protection. Much of the existing work on street-level bureaucrats (SLBs) focuses on their use of discretion in frontline work and how this shapes beneficiary experiences. This article adapts and extends Durose and Lowndes' (2024) framework for understanding gender and SLB discretion: 1) as shaped by the gendered laws, policies and guidance of institutions where SLBs work, 2) as reflective of SLBs as gendered actors, and 3) as having gendered effects on policy beneficiaries. While their framework was developed in a high-income context and to understand a different sector (policing), these three analytical propositions hold for SLBs in social protection systems. Yet, we suggest that understanding the role of SLBs in social protection systems requires two additional considerations from a human rights perspective: 4) discretion as shaped by the gendered social, political and economic contexts in which SLBs operate and social protection systems exist, and 5) moving beyond discretion, SLBs as rights-holders themselves, of the right to social security and the right to decent work. The article develops this framework in conversation with scholarship on social protection systems in the broad range of contexts in which they operate. In doing so, the article offers an analytical contribution to the emerging literature on gender-responsive social protection systems from a “frontline delivery” and human rights perspective, including their relation to Sustainable Development Goals 5 – gender equality – and 1.3 – social protection systems for all.

Abstract Image

求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
International Social Security Review
International Social Security Review PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION-
CiteScore
2.00
自引率
8.30%
发文量
29
期刊介绍: The International Social Security Review, the world"s major international quarterly publication in the field of social security. First published in 1948, the journal appears in four language editions (English, French, German and Spanish). Articles by leading social security experts around the world present international comparisons and in-depth discussions of topical questions as well as studies of social security systems in different countries, and there is a regular, comprehensive round-up of the latest publications in its field.
×
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