Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-fbnjt Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-10T11:16:22.411Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Into the Promised Land: Modelling the Role of Take-Up Agents in Realising Welfare Rights

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  24 November 2020

Roni Holler  and
Avishai Benish
Roni Holler
Affiliation:
Paul Baerwald School of Social Work and Social Welfare, The Hebrew University of Jerusalem, Israel E-mail: roni.holler@mail.huji.ac.il
Avishai Benish
Affiliation:
Paul Baerwald School of Social Work and Social Welfare, The Hebrew University of Jerusalem, Israel E-mail: avishai.benish@mail.huji.ac.il
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Throughout the years, social policy scholars have advanced a multi-level perspective of non-take-up, viewing it as is a complex process shaped by a broad range of interacting barriers and actors. However, a comparatively small amount of that scholarship has addressed the key role of take-up agents: professionals or semi-professionals who actively help clients realise their welfare rights. Moreover, most of this scant literature has tended to focus on the agents’ impact rather than on their role and practices. Drawing on semi-structured interviews with Israeli take-up agents from the public, business, and non-profit sectors, this study seeks to understand better the work of take-up agents in realising their clients’ welfare rights. Our findings show that in order to pass their clients through the gateways of welfare, agents use four keys: knowledge, networking, emotions, and power. The meaning of these keys and related practices is discussed.

Keywords

Take-up agentswelfare rightsbenefitsIsraeli welfare state
Type
Article
Information
Social Policy and Society , Volume 21 , Issue 2: THEMED SECTION: Policies and practices shaping long-term care: between an inclusivity ethos and service delivery realities , April 2022 , pp. 157 - 171
Copyright
© The Author(s), 2020. Published by Cambridge University Press

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Adams, J., White, M., Moffatt, S., Howel, D. and Mackintosh, J. (2006) ‘A systematic review of the health, social and financial impacts of welfare rights advice delivered in healthcare settings’, BMC Public Health, 6, 1, 81, doi: 10.1186/1471-2458-6-81.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Alexandrova, A. and Grishina, E. (2007) ‘Who receives targeted benefits in transition? The effect of household characteristics on take-up rates in Russia’s Child Allowance Programme’, Social Policy and Society, 6, 2, 141–50.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Allmark, P., Baxter, S., Goyder, E., Guillaume, L. and Crofton-Martin, G. (2013) ‘Assessing the health benefits of advice services: using research evidence and logic model methods to explore complex pathways’, Health and Social Care in the Community, 21, 1, 59–68.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Altreiter, C. and Leibetseder, B. (2015) ‘Constructing inequality: deserving and undeserving clients in Austrian social assistance offices’, Journal of Social Policy, 44, 1, 127–45.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bateman, N. (2006) Practising Welfare Rights, London: Routledge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Baumberg, B. (2016) ‘The stigma of claiming benefits: a quantitative study’, Journal of Social Policy, 45, 2, 181–99.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ben-Arieh, A. and Gal, J. (2001) Into the Promised Land: Issues Facing the Welfare State, Westport, CT: Praeger.Google Scholar
Braun, V. and Clarke, V. (2006) ‘Using thematic analysis in psychology’, Qualitative research in psychology, 3, 2, 77–101.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Buck, A. and Smith, M. (2015) ‘The importance of family and friends in advice-seeking for rights problems’, Social Policy and Society, 14, 2, 175–88.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dean, H. (2015) Social Rights and Human Welfare, London: Routledge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dean, J., Goodlad, R. and Rosengard, A. (2000) ‘Citizenship in the new welfare market: the purposes of housing advice services’, Journal of Social Policy, 29, 2, 229–45.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Djuve, A. B. and Kavli, H. C. (2015) ‘Facilitating user involvement in activation programmes: when carers and clerks meet pawns and queens’, Journal of Social Policy, 44, 2, 235–54.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Farr, M. and Cressey, P. (2019) ‘The social impact of advice during disability welfare reform: from social return on investment to evidencing public value through realism and complexity’, Public Management Review, 21, 2, 238–63.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Finn, D. and Goodship, J. (2014) Take-up of Benefits and Poverty: An Evidence and Policy Review, JRF/CESI Report, https://www.bl.uk/collection-items/takeup-of-benefits-and-poverty-an-evidence-and-policy-review [accessed 28.09.2020].Google Scholar
Finzi, S., Bronstein, J., Bar-Ilan, J., Baruchson-Arbib, S., Rafaeli, S. and Ravid, G. (2012) ‘Volunteers acting as information providers to citizens’, Aslib Proceedings, 64, 3, 289–303.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Forbess, A. and James, D. (2014) ‘Acts of assistance: navigating the interstices of the British state with the help of non-profit legal advisers’, Social Analysis, 58, 3, 73–89.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gal, J. (2017) ‘The Israeli welfare state system: with special reference to social inclusion’, in Aspalter, C. (ed.), The Routledge International Handbook to Welfare State Systems, Oxon: Routledge, 364–78.Google Scholar
Galanter, M. (1974) ‘Why the haves come out ahead: speculations on the limits of legal change’, Law and Society Review, 9, 95–160.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Galanter, M. (1976) ‘Delivering legality: some proposals for the direction of research’, Law and Society Review, 11, 2, 225–46.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gibbons, D. and Foster, S. (2014) Advice, Support and Poverty: Evidence Review, Centre for Economic and Social Inclusion, https://www.bl.uk/collection-items/advice-support-and-poverty-evidence-review [accessed 28.09.2020].Google Scholar
Graham, M. (2002) ‘Emotional bureaucracies: emotions civil servants, and immigrants in the Swedish welfare state’, Ethos, 30, 3, 199–226.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Greasley, P. and Small, N. (2005) ‘Providing welfare advice in general practice: referrals, issues and outcomes’, Health and Social Care in the Community, 13, 3, 249–58.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hasenfeld, Y. (2009) Human Services as Complex Organizations, Los-Angeles: Sage Publications.Google Scholar
Herd, P. and Moynihan, D. P. (2019) Administrative Burden: Policymaking by Other Means, New York: Russell Sage Foundation.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hernanz, V., Malherbet, F. and Pellizzari, M. (2004) Take-Up of Welfare Benefits in OECD Countries: A Review of the Evidence, OECD Social, Employment and Migration Working Papers 17, OECD Publishing, https://www.oecd-ilibrary.org/social-issues-migration-health/take-up-of-welfare-benefits-in-oecd-countries_525815265414 [accessed 28.09.2020].Google Scholar
Kirwan, S. (2016) ‘The UK Citizens Advice service and the plurality of actors and practices that shape “legal consciousness”’, The Journal of Legal Pluralism and Unofficial Law, 48, 3, 461–75.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Levy, A. (2014) National Insurance Institute Bill (Amendment: Fee Limit in Representation before the Institute), 2014: Description and Presentation of the Parties’ Positions. Jerusalem: Knesset Research and Information Center (Hebrew), https://fs.knesset.gov.il/globaldocs/MMM/a570aa75-2f7b-e511-80d1-00155d0ad6b2/2_a570aa75-2f7b-e511-80d1-00155d0ad6b2_11_9048.pdf [accessed 28.09.2020].Google Scholar
Maynard-Moody, S. and Musheno, M. (2000) ‘State agent or citizen agent: two narratives of discretion’, Journal of public Administration Research and Theory, 10, 2, 329–58.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McDermont, M. (2013) ‘Acts of translation: UK advice agencies and the creation of matters-of-public-concern’, Critical Social Policy, 33, 2, 218–42.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McDermont, M. and Kirk, E. (2017) ‘Working in law’s borderlands: translation and the work of an advice office’, Oñati Socio-Legal Series, 7, 7.Google Scholar
Moffatt, S. and Mackintosh, J. (2009) ‘Older people’s experience of proactive welfare rights advice: qualitative study of a South Asian community’, Ethnicity and health, 14, 1, 5–25.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Moffatt, S. and Scambler, G. (2008) ‘Can welfare-rights advice targeted at older people reduce social exclusion?’ Ageing and Society, 28, 6, 875–99.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Morris, D. and Barr, W. (2013) ‘The impact of cuts in legal aid funding on charities’, Journal of Social Welfare and Family Law, 35, 1, 79–94.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Morse, J. M. (2015) ‘Critical analysis of strategies for determining rigor in qualitative inquiry’, Qualitative health research, 25, 9, 1212–22.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Nadan, Y., Roer-Strier, D., Gemara, N., Engdau-Vanda, S. and Tener, D. (2018) ‘In the eyes of the beholder: parental and professional value mismatch in child risk and protection in two communities in Israel’, International Journal of Psychology, 53, 23–33.Google Scholar
Nowell, L. S., Norris, J. M., White, D. E. and Moules, N. J. (2017) ‘Thematic analysis: striving to meet the trustworthiness criteria’, International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 16, 1.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ratzmann, N. (2019) Caught between the Local and the (Trans)National: EU Citizens at the Front-Line of German Welfare Policy, Doctoral dissertation, The London School of Economics and Political Science (LSE).Google Scholar
Serpa, S. and Ferreira, C. M. (2019) ‘The concept of bureaucracy by Max Weber’, International Journal of Social Science Studies, 7, 2, 12–18.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Van Mechelen, N. and Janssens, J. (2017) Who is to Blame? An Overview of the Factors Contributing to the Non-Take-Up of Social Rights, Herman Deleeck Centre for Social Policy, https://ideas.repec.org/p/hdl/wpaper/1708.html [accessed 28.09.2020].Google Scholar
van Oorschot, W. (1991) ‘Non-take-up of social security benefits in Europe’, Journal of European Social Policy, 1, 1, 15–30.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
van Oorschot, W. (2001) ‘Troublesome targeting: on the multilevel causes of nontake-up’, in Ben-Arieh, A. and Gal, J. (eds.), Into the Promised Land: Issues Facing the Welfare State, Westport, CT: Praeger, 239–58.Google Scholar
Weiss-Gal, I. and Gal, J. (2009) ‘Realizing rights in social work’, Social Service Review, 83, 2, 267–91.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wiggan, J. and Talbot, C. (2006) The Benefits of Welfare Rights Advice: A Review of the Literature, National Association of Welfare Rights Advisors, http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.502.198&rep=rep1&type=pdf [accessed 28.09.2020].Google Scholar
Wilson, K. and Amir, Z. (2008) ‘Cancer and disability benefits: a synthesis of qualitative findings on advice and support’, Psycho-Oncology, 17, 5, 421–29.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed