弱势群体福利与生活状况研究——以burdurr省为例

Mehmet ÖÇAL, Özge KUTLU
{"title":"弱势群体福利与生活状况研究——以burdurr省为例","authors":"Mehmet ÖÇAL, Özge KUTLU","doi":"10.11611/yead.1333231","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Leaving differences and variances aside, the ultimate intention of social states or welfare regimes, acting with the humanitarian pursuit of social policy, is to offer a standard, decent living condition to those under its banner. In this sense, welfare states often undertake constitutionally binding commitments to citizens and implement minimum, fair social policies not to undermine the citizens’ living conditions below the level of “worthy of human dignity.” Whereas these policies, introduced against any social risks to adversely affect one’s welfare, should be implemented equally for everyone, states may also adopt positive discrimination while implementing these policies for groups denoted as fragile or disadvantaged that are likely to be more affected by social risks to retain their welfare within “humane” standards. However, the effect of in-kind or cash social transfers within the mentioned policies to the aforementioned groups often remains veiled. Moreover, debates go on about targeting of these transfers. The present descriptive survey research attempted to measure the effectiveness of social policies aimed at improving the living conditions of individuals by contributing to their welfare. We surveyed 582 Burdur-based individuals who could be denoted as disadvantaged due to some tangible reasons. Our findings demonstrated that the participants had worse health status, higher disability rates, and severe housing health-related problems compared to the general population. We also discovered that the participants considered poor had much more inadequate living standards and welfare than those not. The participants’ poverty - calculated based on their income levels – was 54.7% before receiving social assistance and became 39.5% after being opted for social assistance. In other words, we figured out that social assistance reduced the participants’ poverty by 15.1%.","PeriodicalId":422662,"journal":{"name":"Yönetim ve Ekonomi Araştırmaları Dergisi","volume":"74 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-10-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"A STUDY ON WELFARE AND LIVING CONDITIONS OF DISADVANTAGED GROUPS: THE CASE OF BURDUR PROVINCE\",\"authors\":\"Mehmet ÖÇAL, Özge KUTLU\",\"doi\":\"10.11611/yead.1333231\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Leaving differences and variances aside, the ultimate intention of social states or welfare regimes, acting with the humanitarian pursuit of social policy, is to offer a standard, decent living condition to those under its banner. In this sense, welfare states often undertake constitutionally binding commitments to citizens and implement minimum, fair social policies not to undermine the citizens’ living conditions below the level of “worthy of human dignity.” Whereas these policies, introduced against any social risks to adversely affect one’s welfare, should be implemented equally for everyone, states may also adopt positive discrimination while implementing these policies for groups denoted as fragile or disadvantaged that are likely to be more affected by social risks to retain their welfare within “humane” standards. However, the effect of in-kind or cash social transfers within the mentioned policies to the aforementioned groups often remains veiled. Moreover, debates go on about targeting of these transfers. The present descriptive survey research attempted to measure the effectiveness of social policies aimed at improving the living conditions of individuals by contributing to their welfare. We surveyed 582 Burdur-based individuals who could be denoted as disadvantaged due to some tangible reasons. Our findings demonstrated that the participants had worse health status, higher disability rates, and severe housing health-related problems compared to the general population. We also discovered that the participants considered poor had much more inadequate living standards and welfare than those not. The participants’ poverty - calculated based on their income levels – was 54.7% before receiving social assistance and became 39.5% after being opted for social assistance. In other words, we figured out that social assistance reduced the participants’ poverty by 15.1%.\",\"PeriodicalId\":422662,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Yönetim ve Ekonomi Araştırmaları Dergisi\",\"volume\":\"74 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-10-14\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Yönetim ve Ekonomi Araştırmaları Dergisi\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.11611/yead.1333231\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Yönetim ve Ekonomi Araştırmaları Dergisi","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.11611/yead.1333231","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

撇开差异和差异不谈,社会国家或福利制度的最终意图是,在社会政策的人道主义追求下,为其旗帜下的人们提供一个标准的、体面的生活条件。从这个意义上说,福利国家往往对公民承担具有宪法约束力的承诺,并实施最低限度的、公平的社会政策,不破坏公民的生活条件,使其低于“值得人类尊严”的水平。虽然这些政策是针对任何可能对个人福利产生不利影响的社会风险而引入的,应该平等地对每个人实施,但国家也可以在对易受社会风险影响的弱势群体实施这些政策时采取积极的歧视,以使他们的福利保持在“人道”的标准之内。然而,在上述政策范围内对上述群体的实物或现金社会转移的影响往往仍然模糊不清。此外,关于这些转移的目标的争论还在继续。& # x0D;目前的描述性调查研究试图衡量旨在通过促进个人福利来改善其生活条件的社会政策的有效性。我们调查了582名居住在burdurd的人,他们由于一些明显的原因而处于不利地位。我们的研究结果表明,与一般人群相比,参与者的健康状况更差,残疾率更高,住房健康相关问题也更严重。我们还发现,被认为贫穷的参与者的生活水平和福利比那些不贫穷的人要差得多。根据收入水平计算,在接受社会救助之前,参与者的贫困率为54.7%,而在选择接受社会救助后,贫困率为39.5%。换句话说,我们计算出社会援助使参与者的贫困减少了15.1%。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
A STUDY ON WELFARE AND LIVING CONDITIONS OF DISADVANTAGED GROUPS: THE CASE OF BURDUR PROVINCE
Leaving differences and variances aside, the ultimate intention of social states or welfare regimes, acting with the humanitarian pursuit of social policy, is to offer a standard, decent living condition to those under its banner. In this sense, welfare states often undertake constitutionally binding commitments to citizens and implement minimum, fair social policies not to undermine the citizens’ living conditions below the level of “worthy of human dignity.” Whereas these policies, introduced against any social risks to adversely affect one’s welfare, should be implemented equally for everyone, states may also adopt positive discrimination while implementing these policies for groups denoted as fragile or disadvantaged that are likely to be more affected by social risks to retain their welfare within “humane” standards. However, the effect of in-kind or cash social transfers within the mentioned policies to the aforementioned groups often remains veiled. Moreover, debates go on about targeting of these transfers. The present descriptive survey research attempted to measure the effectiveness of social policies aimed at improving the living conditions of individuals by contributing to their welfare. We surveyed 582 Burdur-based individuals who could be denoted as disadvantaged due to some tangible reasons. Our findings demonstrated that the participants had worse health status, higher disability rates, and severe housing health-related problems compared to the general population. We also discovered that the participants considered poor had much more inadequate living standards and welfare than those not. The participants’ poverty - calculated based on their income levels – was 54.7% before receiving social assistance and became 39.5% after being opted for social assistance. In other words, we figured out that social assistance reduced the participants’ poverty by 15.1%.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
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