津巴布韦和南非应对covid-19的社会政策比较

Clement Chipenda
{"title":"津巴布韦和南非应对covid-19的社会政策比较","authors":"Clement Chipenda","doi":"10.1163/2031356x-35020001","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\nZimbabwe and South Africa have been burdened by the challenges of poverty and inequality, a consequence of their historical legacy and post-colonial developmental challenges. To counter these, the development and adoption of progressive social policies has been witnessed. In 2020, the social policy architecture of both countries was put to the test by the covid-19 pandemic. What has been the social policy response to covid-19 by the two countries and how effective has it been? This is the major question which this article addresses, utilising the transformative social policy framework as a conceptual and heuristic tool to undertake a comparative analysis of social policy responses to covid-19. It shows that responses crystallised around cash transfers, food mitigation and health interventions. Although timely, these interventions proved inadequate in addressing the welfare needs of citizens. The article highlights the limitations of the current social policy paradigm in mitigating covid-19-induced shocks and reducing vulnerability.","PeriodicalId":32512,"journal":{"name":"Afrika Focus","volume":"41 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-12-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Comparative Perspectives on Zimbabwe and South Africa’s Social Policy Response to covid-19\",\"authors\":\"Clement Chipenda\",\"doi\":\"10.1163/2031356x-35020001\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"\\nZimbabwe and South Africa have been burdened by the challenges of poverty and inequality, a consequence of their historical legacy and post-colonial developmental challenges. To counter these, the development and adoption of progressive social policies has been witnessed. In 2020, the social policy architecture of both countries was put to the test by the covid-19 pandemic. What has been the social policy response to covid-19 by the two countries and how effective has it been? This is the major question which this article addresses, utilising the transformative social policy framework as a conceptual and heuristic tool to undertake a comparative analysis of social policy responses to covid-19. It shows that responses crystallised around cash transfers, food mitigation and health interventions. Although timely, these interventions proved inadequate in addressing the welfare needs of citizens. The article highlights the limitations of the current social policy paradigm in mitigating covid-19-induced shocks and reducing vulnerability.\",\"PeriodicalId\":32512,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Afrika Focus\",\"volume\":\"41 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-12-20\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Afrika Focus\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1163/2031356x-35020001\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Afrika Focus","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1163/2031356x-35020001","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

津巴布韦和南非一直背负着贫困和不平等的挑战,这是它们的历史遗产和后殖民时期发展挑战的结果。为了解决这些问题,已经制定和采用了进步的社会政策。2020年,两国社会政策架构经受了新冠肺炎疫情的考验。两国采取了哪些社会政策应对新冠肺炎疫情?效果如何?这是本文要解决的主要问题,本文利用变革性社会政策框架作为概念和启发式工具,对应对covid-19的社会政策进行比较分析。它表明,应对措施围绕现金转移、粮食缓解和卫生干预措施而具体化。这些干预措施虽然及时,但在解决公民的福利需要方面证明是不够的。本文强调了当前社会政策范式在缓解covid-19引发的冲击和降低脆弱性方面的局限性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Comparative Perspectives on Zimbabwe and South Africa’s Social Policy Response to covid-19
Zimbabwe and South Africa have been burdened by the challenges of poverty and inequality, a consequence of their historical legacy and post-colonial developmental challenges. To counter these, the development and adoption of progressive social policies has been witnessed. In 2020, the social policy architecture of both countries was put to the test by the covid-19 pandemic. What has been the social policy response to covid-19 by the two countries and how effective has it been? This is the major question which this article addresses, utilising the transformative social policy framework as a conceptual and heuristic tool to undertake a comparative analysis of social policy responses to covid-19. It shows that responses crystallised around cash transfers, food mitigation and health interventions. Although timely, these interventions proved inadequate in addressing the welfare needs of citizens. The article highlights the limitations of the current social policy paradigm in mitigating covid-19-induced shocks and reducing vulnerability.
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
CiteScore
0.60
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
审稿时长
20 weeks
×
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