Journals / Hacettepe Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi / 2023 / Cilt: 5 Sayı: 1

Is the Digitalisation of Welfare Creating New Social Risks? The Cases of the UK, Finland and Sweden

REFAHIN DİJİTALLEŞMESİ YENİ SOSYAL RİSKLERİ Mİ ORTAYA ÇIKARIYOR? İNGİLTERE, FİNLANDİYA VE İSVEÇ ÖRNEKLERİ

Pages
106–132
Publication Date
2023-10-01
DOI
—
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

The research shows that digital welfare systems tend to create "new social risks".

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:Existing social policy literature does not adequately explain how welfare states are changing today in the digital age.
📊
Key Findings & Data:However, we are witnessing how digitalisation is fundamentally shifting the policy paradigms of welfare states in today's living conditions.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:The research shows that digital welfare systems tend to create "new social risks".
🔬Design:Research Article
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Sosyal Politika · Dijital Refah · Refah Devleti

Abstract

Existing social policy literature does not adequately explain how welfare states are changing today in the digital age. However, we are witnessing how digitalisation is fundamentally shifting the policy paradigms of welfare states in today's living conditions. The transition to data-driven systems, especially in public administration, has been one of the important agenda items of many countries for some time. Such a landscape has provided a suitable ground for discussing some opportunities and challenges for traditional welfare states. The main theme of these debates is centred around the question "are traditional welfare states transforming?".This article traces the course of digitalisation in social policy and analyses the opportunities and challenges faced by countries implementing digital social policy today in a descriptive manner. The article is organised in three main parts. In the first part, the digital welfare state is conceptually analysed by discussing the course of digitalisation in social policy and the turning points on the road to digitalisation. In the second part, the opportunities, risks and dilemmas of the digital welfare state are discussed. In the last section, the digital welfare state practices of the UK, Finland and Sweden are analysed. The findings of the research indicate that digital welfare systems bring serious dilemmas and risks as well as advantages. The research shows that digital welfare systems tend to create "new social risks".

Özet

Mevcut sosyal politika literatürü, refah devletlerinin dijital çağda bugün nasıl değiştiğini yeterince açıklamıyor. Ancak günümüz yaşam koşullarında dijitalleşmenin refah devletlerinin politika paradigmalarını nasıl temelden değiştirdiğine tanık oluyoruz. Özellikle kamu yönetiminde veri odaklı sistemlere geçiş, bir süredir birçok ülkenin önemli gündem maddelerinden biri. Böyle bir manzara, geleneksel refah devletlerine yönelik bazı fırsatların ve zorlukların tartışılması için uygun bir zemin hazırlamıştır. Bu tartışmaların ana teması “geleneksel refah devletleri dönüşüyor mu?” sorusu etrafında yoğunlaşıyor. Bu makale, sosyal politikada dijitalleşmenin seyrini takip etmekte ve günümüzde dijital sosyal politikayı uygulayan ülkelerin karşılaştığı fırsatları ve zorlukları betimsel bir şekilde analiz etmektedir. Makale üç ana bölüm halinde düzenlenmiştir. İlk bölümde sosyal politikada dijitalleşmenin seyri ve dijitalleşme yolundaki dönüm noktaları tartışılarak dijital refah devleti kavramsal olarak analiz ediliyor. İkinci bölümde dijital refah devletinin fırsatları, riskleri ve ikilemleri tartışılıyor. Son bölümde ise İngiltere, Finlandiya ve İsveç'in dijital refah devleti uygulamaları analiz edilmektedir. Araştırmanın bulguları, dijital refah sistemlerinin avantajların yanı sıra ciddi ikilemleri ve riskleri de beraberinde getirdiğini göstermektedir. Araştırma, dijital refah sistemlerinin "yeni sosyal riskler" yaratma eğiliminde olduğunu gösteriyor.

🔖

Cite This Article

KOCA, D. (2023). Is the Digitalisation of Welfare Creating New Social Risks? The Cases of the UK, Finland and Sweden. Hacettepe Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi, Cilt: 5 Sayı: 1, 106–132. https://ajindex.com/articles/964237

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (14)

  1. Alston, P. (2019). Report of the Special rapporteur on extreme poverty and human rights, https://www.apc.org/en/news/extreme-poverty-and-digital-welfare-new-report-un-special-rapporteur-extreme-poverty-raises
  2. Andersson, O., Sjögren, J., & Åsberg, H. (2017). Nätläkarbolagen dränerar en underfinansierad primärvård, https://www.dn.se/debatt/natlakarbolagen-dranerar-en-underfinansierad-primarvard/
  3. Archenaa, J., & Anita, E. M. (2015). A Survey of big data analytics in healthcare and government. Procedia Computer Science, 50, 408–413. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.procs.2015.04.021
  4. Arıcı, K. (1999). Sosyal güvenlik dersleri. Ankara:
  5. Sarfın Ofset. Beck, U. (1992). From industrial society to the risk society: Questions of survival, social structure and ecological enlightenment. Theory, Culture & Society, 9(1), 97–123. https://doi.org/10.1177/026327692009001006
  6. Black, A., Sahama, T., & Gajanayake, R. (2014). eHealth-as-a-Service (eHaaS): A data-driven decision making approach in Australian context. In E-Health–For Continuity Of Care (pp. 915-919).
  7. IOS Press.
  8. Blix, M., & Jeansson, J. (2018). Telemedicine and the welfare state,https://www.ifn.se/media/oavp05tg/2019-blix-jeansson-telemedicine-and-the-welfare-state.pdf
  9. Bonoli, G. (2007). Time matters: Postindustrialization, new social risks, and welfare state adaptation in advanced industrial democracies. Comparative Political Studies, 40(5), 495-520.
  10. Buchert, U., Kemppainen, L., Olakivi, A., Wrede, S., & Kouvonen, A. (2022). Is digitalisation of public health and social welfare services reinforcing social exclusion? The case of Russian-speaking older migrants in Finland. Critical Social Policy, 43(3), 375–400. https://doi.org/10.1177/02610183221105035
  11. Buhr, D. (2017). What about welfare 4.0?. In CESifo Forum (Vol. 18, No. 4, pp. 15-24). München: ifo Institut-Leibniz-Institut für Wirtschaftsforschung an der Universität München. Carney, T. (2019). Robo-Debt Illegality: The seven veils of failed guarantees of the rule of law?. Alternative Law Journal, 44(1), 4-10.
  12. Choi, Y. J., Kühner, S., & Shi, S. J. (2022). From “new social risks” to “Covid social risks”: The challenges for inclusive society in South Korea, Hong Kong, and Taiwan Amid the Pandemic. Policy and Society, 41(2), 260-274.
  13. Clasen, J., & D. Clegg. (2011). Regulating the risk of unemployment: National Adaptations to Post-Industrial Labour Markets in Europe. Oxford University Press.
  14. Coles-Kemp, L., Ashenden, D., Morris, A., & Yuille, J. (2020). Digital welfare: Desi