Document Type : Original Article
Highlights
Desirable Model of State Intervention in the field of Social Security, Social Investment and Requirements of Justice
The differences between the approaches to the social security system and its developments can be classified into the approach of expanding protective interventions and social security benefits, the neoliberal approach, later the activation approach and finally its development into the social investment approach. In this way, the distributive logic of the social security system with the special function of social protection, income reduction compensation and providing a safety net was weakened and state interventions in this area have been transferred to preventive and empowering investment with a long-term perspective. In this approach, the emphasis on poverty alleviation through employment, which was a central idea in the neoliberal approach as well as activation approach, continued and social investment was introduced with the aim of preventing poverty by increasing economic growth and the employability of citizens. Economic growth and social welfare that previously considered incompatible goals are consistent goals in this approach. Social investment state invests optimally to achieve both economic grow and social welfare by anticipating future risks. Accordingly, the intervention of the social investment state in this area is considered as a kind of pre-distribution in comparison with the traditional redistribution methods of the welfare state.
Social investment has been considered the solution to the new social risks associated with the globalized knowledge-based economy and the changes in the traditional family structure. The Social Investment state provides public social services to address employment barriers and enables citizens in related areas. The two axes of human capital and employment are the main axes of social investment state intervention, which are pursued in the fields of education, care services and active labor market policies.
This study, through descriptive-analytical methods, library studies and a critical approach to the idea of social investment state tries to answer the question of whether replacing social security with social investment is a desirable model in state interventions. Furthermore this study addresses the question of what are the requirements of justice on the limits and nature of state interventions in this area. The aim of this study is to achieve a desirable model of state interventions in regarding to social investment and traditional welfare state interventions in the form of social security system by considering the requirements of justice.
The findings of this study indicate inadequate and inappropriate interventions of the social investment state. Discriminatory implementation of activation programs in relation to groups with low employment capacity, increasing the likelihood of arbitrary decisions related to broad discretionary powers of officials, heterogeneity of decisions related to decentralization, reducing attention to public interest and social justice as a result of new public management approach show the inadequacy of social investment state interventions and its negative effects on the right to social security.
From the point of view of justice, the idea of "job as an asset" emphasizes that in a globalized knowledge-based economy, even assuming full employment people with the same skills will not have the same jobs in terms of duties and benefits. It creates employment that will restrict real freedom. Accordingly, those who acquire jobs with preferential duties and benefits are required to pay employment tax in the form of "employment rent". The idea of "differences in internal endowments" also emphasizes that some of the jobs that people can do are related to internal endowments that are not the product of individuals' efforts or choices and should be considered as a natural resource. In this concept of justice, differences in these endowments affect employability capacity and because no one has a priori ownership right over natural resources, some people will be entitled to compensation.
Based on these findings, it should be said that despite the necessity to reform and adapt the traditional welfare state to the needs of the globalized knowledge-based economy, social investment alone does not provide a desirable model of state intervention in this area. The present study concludes the necessity of using both social investment and minimum guarantees of the traditional welfare state in the form of social security system. Accordingly, at the level of state intervention, it is suggested that in addition to participation with private actors and intervention in the form of a limited social security system which is conditional to work, based on private insurance, selective and with strict eligibility criteria, state takes the ultimate responsibility for ensuring income stability and providing universal and unconditional social protection. In this way, state will compensate the unequal results of its policies and ensure economic efficiency while promoting equality of opportunity. An active and generous welfare state with a social investment perspective is an efficient way to use public spending than imposing a double burden on it. It should be noted that as social security could not be successful facing new risks without social investment, correspondingly social investment without minimum social security guarantees would not only be successful but would also leads to an unfair mechanism. In addition, since providing unique programs to activate beneficiaries depending on direct interaction and supervision over applicants, promoting transparency and facilitating judicial review of decisions is suggested to avoid discrimination and arbitrary decisions.
