Researchers from University of Geneva Describe Findings in Sociology (Paradoxes of Universalism: The Case of the Swiss Disability Insurance)

2020 MAR 31 (NewsRx) -- By a News Reporter-Staff News Editor at Insurance Daily News -- Research findings on sociology are discussed in a new report. According to news reporting out of the University of Geneva by NewsRx editors, research stated, “Social policies rely on specific expectations vis-a-vis their beneficiaries, who have to abide by certain eligibility criteria or behavioral standards to access the benefits or services provided.”

Our news correspondents obtained a quote from the research from University of Geneva: “As such, they draw boundaries between the deserving and undeserving, which results in the following paradox: While social policies claim to be universal, they actually exclude potential beneficiaries by imposing on them the compliance with these eligibility criteria and behavioral standards. In other words, purportedly universal social policies may have exclusionary effects, in the form either of selectivity (street-level bureaucrats select what they perceive as legitimate beneficiaries) or of self-exclusion and non-take-up (people entitled do not claim benefits or services). Based on the case of the Swiss disability insurance, this article explores the extent of, and the reasons underlying, the paradoxes of universalism within active social policies. It relies on a mixed-methods research design, combining sequence analysis (showing the selectivity of active reforms regarding people’s access to disability benefits) and in-depth interviews. The conclusion of this article suggests that not all forms of universalism are equally exposed to such paradoxes and proposes a hypothesis to be explored in further research: The more requiring and precise in terms of eligibility criteria and behavioral standards social policies and activation strategies are (hard universalism), the higher the risk that they lead to selective practices in contradiction with their universal ambition.”

According to the news reporters, the research concluded: “By contrast, fuzzier eligibility or behavioral criteria (soft universalism), which allow for adjustment to individual circumstances, may lead to more genuinely universal and inclusive social policies.”

For more information on this research see: Paradoxes of Universalism: The Case of the Swiss Disability Insurance. Social Inclusion, 2020,8(1):168-177. (Social Inclusion - http://www.cogitatiopress.com/socialinclusion). The publisher for Social Inclusion is Cogitatio.

A free version of this journal article is available at https://doi.org/10.17645/si.v8i1.2499.

Our news editors report that more information may be obtained by contacting Emilie Rosenstein, Department of Sociology, University of Geneva, Switzerland. Additional authors for this research include Jean-Michel Bonvin.

(Our reports deliver fact-based news of research and discoveries from around the world.)