March 23, 2023

The Centre for Research in Social Policy (CRSP) is an independent research centre based in the Department of Social Sciences at Loughborough University. … The Centre’s biggest role at present is the researching and analysis of A Minimum Income Standard for the United Kingdom. Sexuality Research and Social Policy ISSN: 1868-9884 (Print) 1553-6610 (Online) Description Sexuality Research and Social Policy is an international forum for the publication of original peer-reviewed state-of-the-art empirical research on sexuality, theoretical and methodological discussions, and the implications of this evidence for policies across the globe regarding sexual health, sexuality education, and sexual rights in diverse communities. This multidisciplinary journal also publishes brief research and conf … show all  The Department of Social Policy and Intervention is a multidisciplinary centre of excellence for research in social policy, the development and systematic evaluation of social interventions, and population studies. Key elements of our strategy to  deliver international research excellence are: building expertise by strategic recruitment and investment to consolidate and develop research strengths in specific areas; emphasising methodological excellence and innovation at the macro and micro level; engaging in international and collaborative research; and strengthening our capacities in evaluation research and international comparative analysis. We are committed to conducting research to inform policymaking and practice in the realm of social welfare. Our research is multi-disciplinary in approach, and often international in reach. We have numerous comparative research projects as well as many studies focused on particular countries. Although our expertise is mainly on the advanced economies, we have a growing volume of research on developing countries. Our research contributes both to academic knowledge and debates as well as to policy and practice, and we have had a significant impact on policy debate, formulation and implementation around the globe, as well as secondary impact on people’s wellbeing. In the most recent evaluation of university research in the UK (REF 2014), 79% of our research activity was classified as world-leading. Within the department, our research is organised around three main clusters MA Social Research Methods (Social Policy) The programme provides the right balance between ground breaking theoretical and practical research in Social Sciences in general – and in Social Policy in particular. You get in touch with a wide range of scholars and practitioners in policy-related subjects, always ready to help to make the most of your academic or professional careers. Social Policy Analysis & Research   INDICATORS IMPENDING POLICY DECISION Overview Conflict Prevention is the object of a wide range of policies and initiatives; its aim is to avoid the violent escalation of a dispute. Conflict Prevention includes: Monitoring and/or intervening to stabilize a potentially violent conflict before its outbreak by initiating activities that address the root causes as well as the triggers of a dispute. Establishing mechanisms that detect early warning signs and record specific indicators that may help to predict impending violence. Using planned coordination to prevent the creation of conflict when delivering humanitarian aid and in the process of development. Institutionalizing the idea of preventing conflict at the local, regional, and international levels. The concept and practice of Conflict Prevention evolved from being focused almost exclusively on Preventive Diplomacy, to a new more comprehensive approach that can be defined as Structural Prevention. This new approach includes long-term initiatives targeting the root causes of conflict. The evolution of Conflict Prevention as a practice will depend on the necessary resources being committed to Conflict Prevention initiatives in the future. Conflict Prevention faces serious problems in this respect because it is extremely difficult to evaluate whether conflict prevention initiatives have been responsible for a conflict not having happened. It is possible to distinguish three sets of elements that compose the process of Conflict Prevention: The definition of the context with reference to the nature of a conflict, its causes, and its cyclical phases; The use of mechanisms to monitor indicators and signs to forewarn impending violence; and The selection of the specific initiatives to be taken. Evolution The concept of Conflict Prevention emerged in the theoretical literature of the early 1990s, but initially without significant practical application. The idea of Conflict Prevention was presented as an official policy of the UN by Secretary General Boutros-Boutros Ghali in 1992 in his An Agenda for Peace. He emphasized “fact-finding and analysis-to identify at the earliest possible stage the circumstances that could produce serious conflict-and the need for Preventive Diplomacy to resolve the most immediate problems with attention to underlying causes of conflict.” The focus was on punctual preventive interventions. The end of the Cold War gave the impression that the international community could intervene more flexibly and effectively to prevent the explosion of conflicts. This impression was reinvigorated by the negative experiences of Yugoslavia and Rwanda. A different behavior of neighboring countries, in the case of Yugoslavia, and a limited but robust military intervention in Rwanda, was commonly believed, could have saved hundreds of thousands of lives. A successful UN deployment in Macedonia confirmed this idea. Since then, the concept of Conflict Prevention has developed further and moved its focus from “Preventive Diplomacy,” including a limited set of diplomatic or military initiatives, to more structural interventions. Academics and practitioners have since stretched the concept to include, in addition to diplomacy and military operations, institution building, economic development, and grass roots community building. In the 2001 Report of the Secretary General on Prevention of Armed Conflict, “an effective preventive strategy” is said to require “a comprehensive approach that encompasses both short-term and long-term political, diplomatic, humanitarian, human rights, developmental, institutional, and other measures taken by the international community, in cooperation with national and regional actors”. Structural Prevention lays its conceptual roots in part of International Relations Theory. Concepts of Security Community, and Johan Galtung’s “Warm Peace,” as well as theories of integration and international regimes, identify the structural foundations of a peaceful international community. The structure of these communities, it must be noticed, is composed not of elements of pure power but rather of norms, values and shared interests. Similarly, the peaceful interaction

Stakeholder involvement Practical guide to involve stakeholders in the WFD process This paragraph is largely based on Slob (2008). More information on stakeholder involvement can be found in WFD-CIS Guidance Document no.8 Public participation in relation to the Water Framework Directive. 1 Introduction Stakeholder involvement is of increasing importance for environmental policy-making such as water quality management, not only because European Union regulations demand societal participation, but also because of the increasing complexity of environmental policy issues in general. This complexity is caused by the many groups that have a role in environmental problems, the competing interests of stakeholders and the involvement of several policy levels (regional, national and international). There are many stakeholders as well as policy levels that are involved within river basins and the interests of all these groups are quite diverse. This chapter will focus on the basic questions concerning stakeholder involvement in the decision-making processes and, consequently, on the recommendations that can be derived from this. The structure of this chapter is as follows. First, attention will be given to the question of who the stakeholders are (paragraph 3.2 ) and why stakeholders should be involved (paragraph 3.3 ). Stakeholder analysis is a method to make an inventory of all stakeholders that have a role (a stake) in the issues and solutions. This is a necessary step to know which stakeholders one should involve in sediment management and will be discussed in paragraph 3.4 . Stakeholders should not be considered as one, homogenous, group. Stakeholders are diverse and heterogeneous and this is reflected in their perspectives. This inevitably leads to discussion on how to involve stakeholders (paragraph 3.5 ) and the tools and mechanisms to do this (paragraph 3.6 ). The last paragraph (3.7 ) deals with the risks and pitfalls that are attached to stakeholder involvement, for which the policy-makers should be warned. 2 Stakeholders A distinction is to be made between three types of stakeholders: Organizations and people that have a direct impact on water quality management or are directly affected by the relevant policies. This group includes: water authorities; industries using water and/or dumping their wastewater; farmers; water cleaning companies; regulators on the local, regional, national and international level dealing with water issues and subjects of environment, agriculture and safety, or with conventions such as international river committees; harbour authorities; shipping companies; dredging companies; organizations maintaining natural defences; water managers; owners of nature areas; and citizens that are directly affected by the measures planned or taken. Organizations and people that have an impact on the relevant decision making. This group covers: citizens; landowners; homeowners; insurance companies; NGOs such as Greenpeace and the WWF; scientists; and drinking-water companies. Those who have an indirect impact on or are indirectly affected by implementation of the WFD This group consists of all the other users of the waterways and fisheries, and includes citizens. The above mentioned WFD-CIS Guidance Document no.8 provides examples of public participation in water management projects. 3 Why stakeholders should be involved There are several arguments for stakeholder involvement with respect to the WFD. Apart from the basic fact that stakeholders have an impact on the quality and quantity of the water, the main arguments can be grouped into three themes: obstructive power; enrichment; and fairness (Gerrits, 2004). In modern society, parties other than governments have obstructive power. That is, they have the ability to obstruct or even block a decision or the implementation of a certain policy. The early involvement of stakeholders reduces the risk of the policy not being carried out. Stakeholder involvement, therefore, can be regarded as counteracting obstructive power (Renn, 1995; Healy, 1997). Such a choice will slow down the policy process in the early phases, but will speed it up in a later phase. The above mentioned reason for stakeholder involvement is sometimes regarded as a negative one, born out of strategic considerations. However, there is a positive motive as well. This considers enrichment. Policy makers do not possess all the resources, i.e. knowledge, required for the design, planning and implementation of sophisticated policies such as environmental policies. Relevant knowledge is in most cases distributed among several stakeholders. This counts the more for sustainable management of River Basins, a subject where knowledge is still fragmented and debated. From that point of view it is wise to invite stakeholders from the relevant fields in order to obtain and apply knowledge and information generated by them (Fisher, 2000). The last argument for stakeholder involvement is fairness. It is fair to involve actors affected by policy, and give them a say in the decision-making process. This raises awareness and creates support for the issue and its solutions. As a final remark on the motives for stakeholder involvement, we want to point out that stakeholders, especially the organized ones, often will look for ways to get involved themselves, as they are aware of their stake in the process.   4 Stakeholder analysis Stakeholder analysis consists of 3 steps: Convening Identification of Stakes Inventory of relations between stakeholders 4.1 Step 1: Convening The first step in the process of involving stakeholders is often referred to as convening, i.e. getting people to the table. This consists of four (sub) steps: assessing a situation (convening assessment); identifying and inviting the stakeholders; locating the necessary resources; and organizing and planning of the process (Susskind, 1999). We will focus here on the identification and analysis of the stakeholders. Stakeholder and network analysis starts with assembling a list of all relevant stakeholders. This can be done with a small group of people belonging to the convening organization, who know the issues and have an overview of possible stakeholders. This group should be diverse, as this prevents a one-sided selection of stakeholders. The first step in the process is to identify the different perspectives on the issue with a wide variety of people. At this stage of the process, the goal is not to identify people or organizations who should be involved. At this point, the way the different stakeholders

Introduction A national system of education is often defined from the perspective of formal education system. This includes institutionalized formal education from early childhood education, primary education, secondary education, tertiary education and university education. The informal and non-formal education subsets are often assumed to be part of the formal education and if not ignored altogether, they are given little attention. However, it is important the national educational system should be wholly inclusive of all the subsets of the educational system, that is, formal, informal and non-formal education. In light of this simple understanding of a national system of education, it is important to note that, behind every system of education, there are factors or features that determine or influence and hence shape each one of the system. However, the national character of a given system of education is never determined by one factor, but rather a combination and interweaving of several factors. Some factors are dominant in one particular system while in another system, they would be less dominant. Consequently national factors of a country are closely related with nationalism and national system of education. As such, in the study of comparative education we should study the factors which make the education of a country national. These factors include geographical, economic, social, cultural, historical, religions, political, language and technological. In this chapter we shall study some such factors;   1) Geographical Factors. The geography of any particular place is often natural, which means that it is undefined by man. Man in this respect ought to behave in accordance with the geography and nature in particular. In this regard the education system cum school system is influenced by the geography of the particular region. By and large the geography of a particular area dictates the type of building and equipment, means and methods of transporting children to school, school going age of pupils among others. However, there are three major geographical aspects that influence the educational system directly. These are, climatic conditions, population distribution and land configuration. In regard to climatic conditions they influence the system of education in terms of ,content of education depend on the continental climate, for example, training of doctors in the tropics is likely to emphasize more on tropical disease like malaria. Extreme low temperatures in Continental Europe, affects accessibility to school by young children. Temperatures also affect the time at which schools can reasonably begin in the morning and when they end. In Norway, for example, the sun does not rise during winter until ten o’clock in the morning and often temperatures fall to negative 20 degrees. Thus in the Scandinavian countries there are no infant schools or early childhood education departments in some schools because of extreme temperatures. Climatic conditions also influence the education system in relation to time of vacations. In North America and many countries in Europe take school vacations during cold winter and others during hot summer. In hot climatic conditions especially experienced in arid and semi-arid areas, learning often takes place during morning hours when it is cool. When it is hot in the afternoon very little learning takes place due to excessive heat.   In regard to population distribution, which is often as a result of geographical influence also affects the educational system. Generally worldwide, population is either concentrated in the urban centers, or scattered in the country side. For example Australia has two systems of education, that is, one for the urban areas and the other for rural areas. In the urban areas there are well-equipped schools with adequately qualified teachers and administrative personnel. While in the rural areas, schools are small with one teacher for ten up to forty students. This is because farms are far from the nearest schools and daily attendance is difficult. Therefore the central government is responsible for their administration and financing. The government also provides the means and organization of correspondence, tuition and traveling teachers. As such most students receive education through correspondence and occasional visits by the traveling education inspectors.   In regard to land configuration, this also influences the education system in terms of architectural structure of farm houses, school buildings, village location and also the whole way of life and thinking of people because of the rigours of the climate, in some cases, because of closeness of family ties, boarding schools for children are non-existence, except for the few who come from far and inaccessible places on daily basis. By and large land configuration determines settlement and location of schools.   2) Economic Factors. The type of education largely depends on the economic strength of any country. Also the economic factor determines the content and method of an education system. It is important to note that formal education is often possible where production exceeds consumption. In indigenous traditional education people were trained depending on the economic conditions and needs of the community. From an economic perspective, expenditure on education refers to the amount or percentage of national revenue spent on education by both individuals and the government. If the economic condition is poor, education becomes backward in many aspects while if the economy of a country is strong, then educational aims and the curriculum are given a special direction for making the country prosperous. For example, in the USA and Japan, education system is patterned so as to make the individual graduate, strong and capable enough to stand on his or her own feet after having received education. While in India, college and university graduate do not know where to go after completing their education and most of the students continue to stay on in the university as long as they can so that one can post pone for a few years the problem of the educated – unemployed.   Another economic influence on education is that, the poorer classes in communities tend to be content with minimum education for their children, and the richer classes are known to be able to keep their children longest at school

Key facts The Republic of Kenya is a country in Eastern Africa, with a population of approximately 41.61 million people. It lies on the equator and is bordered by Ethiopia (North), Somalia (East), Tanzania (South), Uganda (West), and Sudan (Northwest), with the Indian Ocean running along the southeast border. It has an extension of 582,646 sq. km. The country is named after Mount Kenya – before 1920, the area now known as Kenya was known as the British East Africa Protectorate. Kenya is a diverse nation of 42 distinct ethnic groups. Official languages are Swahili and English and the currency is Kenyan Shilling. Political context Kenya’s political context has been heavily shaped by historical domestic tensions and contestation associated with centralisation and abuse of power, high levels of corruption, a more than two decades long process of constitutional review and post-election violence. The approval of the new constitution in 2010 and relatively peaceful elections in March 2013 are milestones constituting steps forward in Kenya’s transition from political crisis. The Constitutional Review Process Campaigning for constitutional review initiated in the late 1980s by civil society actors, mainly intellectuals and human rights activists, in response to over 40 years of authoritarian rule, decay of the institutions of government, sharp economic decline, and lack of access to basic services and trust in the government. Campaigning intensified in early 1990s and rapidly won the support of religious groups, opposition political parties, professional associations, trade unions, and a broad spectrum of civil society. The campaign was bolstered by the emphasis of international finance institutions and donors on “good governance” enabling campaigners to secure political support and financial assistance from international development organisations. The process initiated under the leadership of the Constitution of Kenya Review Commission (CKRC), an expert independent body whose tasks were, amongst others, to prepare a draft constitution for consideration at a National Constitutional Conference (NCC) tasked with debating (and if necessary amending) and adopting the document and to the National Assembly (NA) responsible for enacting changes to the constitution by formal amendments. A landmark of this process was the 2005 referendum that resulted in people’s rejection of the proposal put forward by the government which diverted significantly from the draft prepared by CKRC. A different draft constitution was then produced by the Attorney General Amos Wako that included new changes that did not reflect the consensus that had been reached. It was submitted to a referendum on 21 November 2005 and rejected by 58% of voters. Intended to last two years, the review process only culminated in 2010 after parallel review processes (government led and civil society led – known as Ufungamano Initiative), establishment of several Constitutional review forums (such as the Inter-Parties Parliamentary Group – IPPG), several amendments of the Constitutional Review Act of 2000,  a series of national conferences, two referendums and post-election violence that culminated with a power-sharing agreement called the National Accord and Reconciliation Act which included provisions for constitutional review. The new constitution was only adopted after a second referendum held on 4th August 2013, when 67% of Kenyans voted in favour of its introduction. The new constitution introduces an expanded Bill of Rights that includes social, economic and cultural rights (with a strong focus on the needs and entitlements of children and women), reduces Presidents’ powers, defines better separation of powers between the three arms of government, circumscribes the power of security agencies, reforms the electoral devolves power to regions and introduces changes to the budget process. In relation to gender equality and women’s rights, the Constitution charts out targeted measures that deal with the traditional exclusion experienced Kenyan women. It requires affirmative action measures to be taken at various levels to ensure that women are included in decision-making processes. It sets aside a number of slots in political institutions which should mandatorily be filled by women. It variously exhorts public institutions and agencies to avoid taking measures that discriminate against women and girls. In addition it sets up various institutions that should oversee the implementation of the new gender responsive framework. The main shortcomings of the new Constitution are that it fails to establish clear principles to deal with past human rights violations; restricts sexual and reproductive rights and opens space for the application of religious laws in matters of marriage, divorce and inheritance. Socio-economic context Kenya has the largest and most diverse economy in East Africa, with an average annual growth rate of over 5% for nearly a decade. In terms of Human Development Index Kenya ranks highest in the region. Its entrepreneurship and human capital give it huge potential for further growth, job creation and poverty reduction. The recent discovery of oil and other mineral resources creates great potential for the Kenyan economy. However, despite a decline of the country’s absolute poverty rate, wealth has not been distributed equally. Kenya remains a highly unequal society by income, by gender, and by geographical location.  Poverty is highest in the arid and semi-arid areas that cover about 80% of the land area and are inhabited by about 20% of the population. Poverty also affects the coastal area, which receives fewer resources. Rapid population growth is another major challenge, further complicated by high unemployment rates especially among the youth. More than 70 per cent of Kenya’s population are below the age of 30 and the population under age 14 alone amounts to 43 percent. Policy Influencing Actors Civil society The “civil society scene” is characterised by increased voice and protest and negative memories of past repression and violence. Kenyan civil society groups are actively engaged in the political life of the country and media is considered vibrant and active. Feminist and women’s groups are amongst the most active, particularly in policy influencing. Four Kenyan civil organisations formed a coalition and established the national campaign for “Safeguarding the Gains of Women in the Draft Constitution” aimed at mainstreaming social justice, gender mainstreaming and gender equality in the language and mechanisms of the review process and in

Functions of social policy Social Policy cannot be analysed solely by looking at individual measures; rather these can only be understood by looking at the underlying role and function. A first step is to recognise a fundamental shift during the evolution of social policy. The origin of social policy in the modern sense is to be seen in the so-called social question, arising as a result of the industrial revolution. Society, then, had been more than ever characterised by a fundamental split between classes. Even if societies before had by no means been societies of equals they had means of dealing with the inequalities, i.e. the early clientelism, the carried religiously motivated doing good (and punishment and strict exclusion), the mutual help of the guilds. Capitalism, now, lacked any of such support systems or even motivations for any social support systems and was thus extremely vulnerable. Nevertheless, the lack of such a motivation is true only on the individual level. As capitalist society this systems clearly showed a need and it was this, what the capitalist state had to deliver � a political system, bridging the ever-widening gap between the classes. Seemingly neutral, the aim was to maintain the hierarchy and exploitation of one class by the other. In particular five functions of social policy can be seen against this background. 1.    Protective function Protection against negative consequences arising from working life; including intervention into the economic system Protection of the employee to maintain the ability to work 2.    Function of distribution Determination of income as means or reproduction 3.    Function of productivity Securing the ability to work and securing against abuse of the workforce (including health, education etc.). Including as well the provision of societal and social stability (industrial peace) In this context as well the provision of military forces. 4.    Function of societal politics social policy having a socio-political function or being social politics 5.    Function of re-distribution interpersonal re-distribution inter-temporal re-distribution   Welfare and society Social policy draws on sociology to explain the social context of welfare provision. If we are trying to improve people’s welfare, it is helpful to try to understand something about the way that people are, and how welfare policies relate to their situation. Some writers have gone further, arguing that because welfare takes place in a social context, it can only be understood in that context. This has been particularly important for ‘critical social policy’, which begins from a view of social policy as underpinned by social inequality – particularly the inequalities of class, race and gender. Issues of inequality are considered in a companion file on Welfare and equality. Social structure Family The normal family Lone parents Teenage pregnancy Work Patterns of work The labour movement Nation Nations and welfare Immigration and nationality Social problems Deviance The social structure Societies are ‘structured’ in the sense that people’s relationships follow consistent patterns. Fiona Williams has argued that social policy is dominated in practice by the dominant values of society – the issues of family, work and nation. [1] Family A range of policies are built around the idea of the ‘family’ as a man, woman and children. Examples are child benefits, education and child care. Some countries have policies built on the idea of the man as ‘breadwinner’, with support based on the idea that the marriage is permanent and the woman will not work. Families which deviate from the norm – for example, poor single mothers – are likely to be penalised, though there may also be anomalies in the organisation of benefits (e.g, when promiscuity is accepted and stable cohabitation is not). Work Many systems of social protection depend on a stable work record for basic cover in unemployment, ill health and old age. Workers who misbehave – for example, by striking or being dismissed – may be penalised. Nation Most systems discriminate against non-citizens, and many have residence rules for particular benefits or services. Immigrants are likely to have different, and often second-class, services. These issues are discussed further in the sections which follow. Family policy The normal family “Normal” does not mean “average”; it means “conforming to social norms”. The ‘normal’ family consists of two parents with one or more children, but it is increasingly untypical in developed countries. Several factors have contributed to this trend: ageing populations, which mean that increasing numbers of households consist of elderly people without children; the delay in undertaking childbirth, which means that more households consist of single women or couples without children; the growth of lone parenthood; and household fission – the tendency for households to split, because of divorce and earlier independence for children. Social policies sometimes seek to reinforce the normal family, by rewarding normal conduct or penalising “deviant” (non-normal) circumstances. Rewards include subsidies for married dependants and children; penalties include requirements to support one’s family, and legal and financial deterrents to divorce. At the same time, the assumption that couples live more cheaply than single people may lead to two single people getting greater support: cohabitation rules, treating people living together as if they were married, are used to ensure equity with married couples. Lone parents The rise in lone parenthood is mainly based on three factors: Divorce, which has been increasing as women have gained independence in finance and career; Unemployment. Unemployment is correlated with divorce, partly because it strains the marriage, and partly, perhaps, because it has undermined the role of the traditional male breadwinner. Cohabitation. This effect is a statistical artefact, rather than a real change in parental status. There is no reason to attribute the rise to teenage motherhood (which, like other forms of motherhood, has tended to fall). The position of lone parents who receive social benefits has been controversial. The liberal individualist position is that if people choose to have children it’s then up to them to look after their family. The collectivist position, and to a large extent the dominant position in continental Europe, is that children are other people’s business

When we speak of rational behavior, we should remember that our focus in this discussion is not on making decisions, but rather on how to support the process of making decisions. Managers are change agents, not just decision makers, so the steps before and after a decision are as important as the actual choice of action. Preparatory steps include creating tension for change, understanding the positions of the various constituencies, and developing political support for a chosen action. Steps after the decision include naming the change monitor and identifying the monitoring methods. Therefore, the mission of good information system is broader than just collecting data to make a choice. Designers of information systems must understand not only how managers think but also how the decision process will be implemented in the managers』 environment. An information system that is well design is an information system that is used. Thus, an information system, in order to be useful, must be implemented. To understand the implementation process better, we review three models of organizational decision making－rational, administrative, and political.   The Rational Model.     The rational model of decision making was introduced earlier in this chapter. It is based on the logic of optimal choice: the choice that would maximize value for the organization. The manager is assumed to be an objective, totally informed person who would select the most efficient alternative, maximizing whatever amount and type of output s/he values. We can summarize the rational choice process as follows: An individual is confronted with a number of known alternative courses of action. Each alternative bears a set of possible consequences. These consequences are known and are quantifiable. The individual has a system of preferences or utilities that permits him or her to rank the consequences and choose an alternative. There is no empirical support for the contention that these three phases are actually used. In reality, managers seldom have the time or money to analyze all alternatives or envision all consequences. If rationality were ever-present among members of an organization, the organization would appear as a coherent and rational policy-making entity that maximizes the attainment of a unique set of goals and has no internal conflicts. In other words, a rational decision process implies a rational organization. A rational organization is an organization that has (1) centralized power, (2) harmony and consistency of goals across boundaries, and (3) members who are objective, fully informed, and inclined to choose alternatives that maximize the common good of the organization. The rational model represents a sanitized vision of how organizations make decisions. In reality, organizations often seem more like complex groups of coalitions fighting for shares of limited resources, and using multiple sources of information with varying reliability to achieve a set of fluid goals. Individuals within organizations typically have widely divergent perceptions and goals and act to maximize their own gains, not necessarily those of the organization. Because of this disparity between the rational model and reality, we prefer to accept the rational model primarily as a benchmark for comparing the remaining two organization decision-making processes. In searching for a more realistic description of how organizations make decisions, we turn to the satisficing, or administrative, model.   The Administrative Model.    The quest for a more realistic description of organization decision making produced a variation called the administrative model. This model sees decision makers as people with varying degrees of motivation who are besieged by demands but have little time to make decisions and thus seek shortcuts to find acceptable solutions. Under the administrative model, a decision maker does not try to optimize but instead 「satisfices」－treats objectives as loose constraints that can tighten if there are many acceptable alternatives that fulfill those constraints. While optimization would require choosing the alternative with the highest value, satisficing requires finding the first alternative with an acceptable value, that is, an alternative with a value above a minimally acceptable level on a given constraint. Assume you had a car you wanted to sell. If you listed your car for $2,500 and had 10 offers, you could choose with either method. With the rational method, you would determine which offer had the highest value in terms of conditions and price. With the satisficing model, you would accept the first offer that met your lowest acceptable price. Satisficing may lead to a reduced decision quality, but it saves time and effort. Satisficing is a dynamic construct: the aspiration levels of the manager and the number of alternatives determine what is a 「feasible, good enough solution.」 It has been pointed out that satisficing is an appropriate (i.e., rational) strategy when the cost of delaying a decision or searching for further alternatives is high in relation to the expected payoff of the supposedly superior alternative. When you take into consideration the costs related to extended search, it is questionable whether the optimum procedure is to search for the optimum value. When a decision has been reached and the solution to the problem implemented and found to be acceptable, then the organization institutionalizes the procedure used to solve the problem into a standard operating procedure (SOP). SOPs are rules, programs, and routines that are invoked by managers to gain time and to avoid the task of solving a problem from scratch each times it appears. Sometimes managers invoke those SOPs when the organization is facing a similar but not identical problem to the one that the SOP originally solved. Since SOPs are often processes that worked once but nobody is quite sure why or whether it was the best way to solve the original problem in the first place. SOPs are not always the time-savers they are supposed to be. Once implication of having rationally bounded decision makers in organizations is that organizations cannot be seen as single entities. Rather, problems are broken down and assigned to specialized units within the organization that develop their own priorities and goals. These goals, sometimes termed subgoals, may not agree with the organization』s overall goals. This phenomenon

MEANING OF DECISION MAKING PROCESS MEANING OF DECISION MAKING The thought process of selecting a logical choice from the available options When trying to make a good decision, a person must weight the positives and negatives of each option, and consider all the alternatives. For effective decision making, a person must be able to forecast the outcome of each option as well, and based on all these items, determine which option is the best for that particular situation. The act or process of deciding something especially with a group of people the project will require some difficult decision-making. All members of the organization have a role in decision-making. —often used before another noun the company’s decision-making process   Decision-making involves the selection of a course of action from among two or more possible alternatives in order to arrive at a solution for a given problem”. As evidenced by the foregone definitions, decision making process is a consultative affair done by a comity of professionals to drive better functioning of any organization. Thereby, it is a continuous and dynamic activity that pervades all other activities pertaining to the organization. Since it is an ongoing activity, decision making process plays vital importance in the functioning of an organization. Since intellectual minds are involved in the process of decision making, it requires solid scientific knowledge coupled with skills and experience in addition to mental maturity. Further, decision making process can be regarded as check and balance system that keeps the organisation growing both in vertical and linear directions. It means that decision making process seeks a goal. The goals are pre-set business objectives, company missions and its vision. To achieve these goals, company may face lot of obstacles in administrative, operational, marketing wings and operational domains. Such problems are sorted out through comprehensive decision making process. No decision comes as end in itself, since in may evolve new problems to solve. When one problem is solved another arises and so on, such that decision making process, as said earlier, is a continuous and dynamic. A lot of time is consumed while decisions are taken. In a management setting, decision cannot be taken abruptly. It should follow the steps such as Defining the problem Gathering information and collecting data Developing and weighing the options Choosing best possible option Plan and execute Take follow up action Since decision making process follows the above sequential steps, a lot of time is spent in this process. This is the case with every decision taken to solve management and administrative problems in a business setting. Though the whole process is time consuming, the result of such process in a professional organization is magnanimous. STAGES OF DECISION MAKING PROCESS 5 Steps of Decision Making Process. It is every marketer’s goal to get inside the head of a consumer. … There are 5 steps in a consumer decision making process a need or a want is recognized, search process, comparison, product or service selection, and evaluation of decision. 5 Steps of Decision Making Process 47 SHARES It is every marketer’s goal to get inside the head of a consumer. You want to figure out how the consumer makes decisions and how you can get them to make a decision to purchase your product or service. There are 5 steps in a consumer decision making process a need or a want is recognized, search process, comparison, product or service selection, and evaluation of decision. Problem Recognition Most decision making starts with some sort of problem. The consumer develops a need or a want that they want to be satisfied. The consumer feel like something is missing and needs to address it to get back to feeling normal. If you can determine when your target demographic develops these needs or wants, it would be an ideal time to advertise to them. For example, they ran out of toothpaste and now they need to go to the store and get more. Search Process Most of us are not experts on everything around us. In the searching phase we research for products or services that can satisfy our needs or wants. Search Engines have become our primary research tool for answers. It is an instant and easy way to find out what you are looking for. Also don’t forget about actual human beings. Our friends and families all have had many different experiences and can offer us recommendations. In most cases recommendations from actual people instead of a search engines are preferred. You have more of a trust factor with people close to you then a computer program. You also may have had past experiences that assist you in solving your problem. You may have had a life experience in the past that helps you make the correct purchase decision. You could also just know what decision to make just by picking up things over the years and knowing how to solve them. Recommended for You Webcast, May 25th: How to Consistently Create High Quality Marketing Content In this stage you are also beginning your risk management. You might make a pro’s vs. con’s diagram to help make your decision. People often don’t want to regret making a decision so extra time being put into managing risk may be worth it. People also remember bad experiences over good ones, take that into account. Evaluating Alternatives Once the consumer has determined what will satisfy their want or need they will begin to begin to seek out the best deal. This may be based on price, quality, or other factors that are important for them. Customers read many reviews and compare prices, ultimately choosing the one that satisfies most of their parameters. Selection Stage After tallying up all the criteria for the decision the customers now decide on what they will purchase and where. They have already taking risk into account and are definite on what they want to purchase. They may have had prior experience with this exact decision or maybe they succumbed to

ECONOMIC domain: mode of production – relation of production (mode of ownership of means of production) e.g. agrarian society vs industrial society will have different modes of welfare (see above) economic structure: proportions of the various components of agriculture, industries (light vs heavy), commerce, service, finance…etc.; ratio of public (government) and private sector in entire economy; or government’s control of economy; level of productivity in society: labour productivity – quantity (population size, structure) and quality (education and skill level, orientation to work) – wealth of nation (Gross National Product GNP); a higher productivity can produce greater GDP/GNP to finance welfare, government financial policy & situation: source of revenue – tax base, tax structure & policy; fiscal policy, balance of payment; and monetary policy—control over the economy higher tax can finance more welfare; citizens’ mode of consumption: culture, value system, family functioning….etc. greater personal saving will reduce government’s welfare burden;   POLITICAL domain: structure of society: social cleavages – conflicts (e.g. race, religion, economic situation, sex…..etc.); configuration/structure of political power; more pluralistic society encourages more welfare for different sectors of people; legitimacy / origin of political authority (government formation): pluralistic competition or autocracy ? a government without citizens’ legitimization may provide more welfare to appease citizens; structure of the polity: mutual check-and-balance among the 3 branches of authority – legislature, executive, and judiciary ? a more powerful legislature may force the executive branch to provide more welfare (to appease the electors); political culture: civil society developed or authoritarianism ? are the people participatory or apathetic ? a more participatory citizenry may force government to provide more welfare; salience and coverage of government intervention: extent of government influence/penetration into citizen’s living; 　SOCIAL domain: population: quantity & structure (“dependency ratio”, productivity); quality (education, skill, technology, work ethic…etc); a more productive population may produce higher GDP to finance more welfare; social structure (of the civil society): family structure and functions; civic organizations (e.g. kaifong associations, kinship or locality associations, trade unions/ professional associations, pressure groups, religious organizations ….etc.) – numbers, activity and function in society; stratification – along wealth, race, religion, sex, prestige….etc. (the 3 “P”s : property, prestige, power); culture: value system, norms, moral standards, traditions; religions; political culture, civic awareness….etc.; a ‘self-reliant’ culture may reduce demand for government welfare;   CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK for studying social welfare 1. Identify the need/ problem: what kind of problem is faced by the people concerned (e.g. the elderly, the children, the disabled, the women….etc.); what kind of need is derived from such kind of problem(s): e.g. the problem of inadequate jobs calls for the need for job placement, the problem of inadequate nutrition calls for the need for improvement in diet; etc. assess the degree or extent of such kind of problem and need e.g. number of people affected, proportion in society, duration of such kind of problem….etc.; 　 2. Analyze the various possible factors leading to such problem and need : is it caused by individual or social factors ? e.g. individual inadequacy in character (e.g. being lazy ?) or societal structural problems ? (e.g. racial or sexual discrimination, deprivation …?) is it caused by single or multiple factors ? assess and weight the relative incidence of different possible factors attributing to the problem/ need; 　 3 Identify the agents who/ which are responsible directly/indirectly to cause the problem: are the individuals who are suffering responsible for their own problems ? is the government responsible ? are the employers responsible ? are the other social systems like the family, the religious institutions, interest groups….etc. responsible ?   4. What can be done to remedy the problem or satisfy the need ? what measures can be taken to improve the situation ? e.g. increasing welfare ? improve functioning of some social systems like the family, the neighbourhood, the kinship system, the religious institutions, the educational system, the political system …. etc. ?   5. Critical examination of underlying values, assumptions, beliefs, cultural norms/ traditional mores….etc. throughout the exercise: is the definition/ identification of problem/ need affected by some specific set of beliefs/ values ? is the identification of responsible agents biased by some particular assumptions (e.g. the government should bear ultimate responsibility to provide welfare); is the decision on choice of solutions affected by some non-rational, not well-thought considerations ? (e.g. increase welfare provision by government will incur higher taxes, will the economy be affected ?);   Hong Kong’s social welfare POLICY FORMULATION and ADMINISTRATION Organizations (‘actors’) involved in policy initiation and formulation: Executive Council [EC] lays down general policy direction esp. long-term Legislative Council [LC] (if there’s a need for legislation) (now our Dept has DrCKLaw & Dr.YeungSum as LC Councilors) Welfare Panel of Legislative Council立法會福利小組 (for policy discussions & monitoring the gov’t) Social Welfare Advisory Committee (SWAC) 社會福利咨詢委員會 (advising on government’s policy) (** now we have Dr CKLaw & Dr Joe Leung serving as members) Health & Welfare Bureau衛生福利局 (policy and/or legislation initiation) Social Welfare Department (SWD) 社會福利署 (implement policies laid down by Bureau & LC) Advisory Committee on Social Work Training and Manpower Planning (ACSWTMP) 社會工作教育及訓練咨詢委員會 (including all department heads of universities providing social work training) Hong Kong Council of Social Service (HKCSS) 香港社會服務聯會–社聯 (gov’t recognized representative role in coordinating different NGOs in giving policy feedback to government) (** our Dept has a number of staff actively involved in the HKCSS’s work) Hong Kong Social Workers Association (SWA, 香港社會工作人員協會–社協) policy critique Hong Kong Social Workers General Union (SWGU, 香港社會工作人員總工會–社總) policy critique 　 [1-6 formal channels; 7-9 informal channels] (at local level, the District Council [previously called District Board ‘DB’] will also be consulted on the implementation of welfare services) Different levels of policy paper/plans: White paper:policy paper for laying down the major basic principles of the government in provision of welfare, usually published after the consultative green paper, 4 White Papers: 1965, 1973, 1979, 1991 “Social Welfare into the 1990’s”. 5-year Plan: 5-year rolling plan of various social welfare programs, review biannually by both SWD and voluntary sector (HKCSS). Program Plan: detailed

Definitions of social welfare : Dolgoff,R. & D.Feldstein (1980) Understanding Social Welfare, P.91: “In its narrowest sense, social welfare includes those nonprofit functions of society, public or voluntary, which are clearly aimed at alleviating distress and poverty or at ameliorating the conditions of the casualties of society.”　 Dolgoff,R., D.Feldstein & L. Stolnik (1997) Understanding Social Welfare,4th ed. P.5: “All social interventions intended to enhance or maintain the social functioning of human beings.”　 National Association of Social Workers, Encyclopedia of Social Work Vol.II. 1971, p.1446: “Social welfare generally denotes the full range of organized activities of voluntary and governmental agencies that seek to prevent, alleviate, or contribute to the solution of recognized social problems, or to improve the well-being of individuals, groups, or communities.” United Nations 1967: “Social welfare as an organized function is regarded as a body of activities designed to enable individuals, families, groups and communities to cope with the social problems of changing conditions. But in addition to and extending beyond the range of its responsibilities for specific services, social welfare has a further function within the broad area of a country’s social development. In this larger sense, social welfare should play a major role in contributing to the effective mobilization and deployment of human and material resources of the country to deal successfully with the social requirements of change, thereby participating in nation-building.” Hong Kong Government 1965 White Paper: “Social welfare services, in common with education, medical, housing and other parallel services, form a part of the social services which most developed communities have come to require and expect …Social welfare services are required by those who are not capable without help and support of standing on their own feet as fully independent or ‘self-directing’ members of the community.”　 Hong Kong Government 1979 White Paper: “Used in its broadest sense the term ‘social welfare’ can embrace all efforts aimed at improving health, education, employment, housing, recreational and cultural services for the community at large. However, for the purpose of the White Paper, ‘social welfare‘ will be used in a narrower sense as the range of services provided by Social Welfare Department and the voluntary welfare sector.”　 Hong Kong Government 1991 White Paper: Social welfare embraces laws, programmes, benefits and services which address social needs accepted as essential to the well-being of a society. It focuses on personal and social problems, both existing and potential. Hong Kong Government “The Five Year Plan for Social Welfare Development in Hong Kong – Review 1998” by Social Welfare Department, p.3: “Social welfare (in HK) embraces laws, programmes, benefits and services which address social needs accepted as essential to the well-being of a society. It focuses on personal and social problems, both existing and potential. It also plays an important developmental role by providing an organized system of services and institutions which are designed to aid individuals and groups to achieve satisfying roles in life and personal relationships which permit them to develop their full capacities and to promote their well0being in harmony with the needs and aspirations of their families and the community.” Nature of Social Welfare: 　 It is ONE of the 5 SYSTEMS OF SOCIAL SERVICES in modern industrial societies: Social welfare is conceived in a broad sense, which is also called “social service” which includes 1) education, 2) medical & health, 3) housing, 4) income maintenance, and 5) personal welfare. “Social welfare” if defined in a narrow sense refers to ‘personal welfare’.   It is a PRODUCT of MODERN LIFE in INDUSTRIAL SOCIETIES: substituting functions of extended family and kinship system; – provides affectional, developmental, socialization, rehabilitative needs; facilitating economic growth – human resource development (e.g. by education); producing vs consuming society resources; sustaining individuals in periods of dependency (e.g. sickness, disability, maternity, retirement, unemployment,); Development of welfare state in post-war European countries – Britain as illustration: 1942 Beveridge Report paved the way for welfare reform — i.e. increasing government role in welfare provision; post-war Keynesian economic theory dominated – state intervention in economy to boost demand; closely related to economic, political and socio-cultural development of society. Models of welfare: It has 4 LEVELS OF FUNCTIONS: 1) remedial: removing disabling conditions, regaining normal functioning; needy groups, under-privileged sector in society, minimum standard of service provision, emergency relief, ad hoc basis, remedy gross hardships and human sufferings, minimum state intervention, private and family care, alleviate abnormalities, short-term basis; also related to residual services; 2) preventive: early prevent abnormal behaviour and conditions; creating new conditions; eliminate causes of problems, research analysis on causes for effective prevention, prevention is better than cure, screening service, early identification, systematic planning, universal services…etc.; 3) developmental: improving situations, development of individual and society, constructive planning, social investment, awareness on social responsibility, develop potentials and new capacities, growth towards mature and responsible citizenship; 4) supportive: achieving objectives of other sectors in society; mutual benefits among various services and clienteles, support services, education and continuous training, community support; inter-related nature of various social policies; better effectiveness and efficiency, economy; functions or emphasis of welfare is largely determined by philosophy and value preferences of the government, social and political situation and economic affordability, inter-related functions of services, complementary roles of services at different levels; 5 . it can have different levels of COVERAGE: from the poor and most needy to all citizens, in different socio-economic strata; from almsgiving, charity to social development in general; from particular to general; from selective to universal; different TYPES/ CLASSIFICATION: (narrow vs broad conception) individual, personal; fiscal; occupational; social (including all 5 systems of social services); classification by role/ functions: (above) :* range from “revolutionary” to “social control” role; classification by targets: elderly, youth, family, disabled, offenders, communities, women, adults…..etc.; classification by objectives: achieve optimal income security, income redistribution in society; provide basic need like housing, health, material needs, education, environmental quality, safety,; guarantee social rights, social functioning; Characteristics of social welfare programmes: serve community interests – derived from community need assessment, service design to satisfy such needs; value-based – e.g. human

Progressive Era Social Welfare Policy During the Progressive Era, the period from about 1890 to 1920, reformers made concerted efforts to address the many critical social problems that resulted in human deprivation. The period saw the development of an array of services and programs designed to meet the needs of many suffering Americans; however, others, particularly people of color, continued to be ignored and marginalized from government policy. Progressive Era social welfare was dominated by the private sector, meaning charitable giving, as few states had instituted any measures to address social welfare needs. In addition, funding for social services on the federal level was virtually nonexistent. The Charity Organization Society and the social settlement houses funded by sectarian and nonsectarian giving had both begun a movement to respond to overwhelming need during the preceding decades. Other private efforts that influenced social welfare included mutual aid and benevolent societies and a proliferation of women’s clubs among African American and White women. These segregated women’s groups—the white General Federation of Women’s Clubs formed in 1890 and the black National Association of Colored Women founded in 1896—embraced the social reform movements of the day and became a constant force for legislative change and mutual help. The formal institutionalization of these women’s clubs ensured their influence well into the Progressive Era and beyond (Martin & Martin 1985; Neverdon-Morton, 1989). The Progressive Era was marked by economic, social, and political changes. This time period saw a steady movement toward economic prosperity, reforms in women’s rights, social services, health care, and education. A tremendous belief in social and economic justice was also characteristic of this era. It was believed that both individuals and social systems could be altered for the greater good. Emigrants from eastern Europe and migrants from southern rural communities filled the cities of the Northeast and Midwest in search of a better life with opportunities for employment, education, and recreation. The United States experienced tremendous industrialization and changed from a rural agrarian society to an urban society. Life was, however, not progressive for all. The filth, overcrowding, crime, and disease of urban communities extracted a heavy toll. These social problems ushered in an era of social welfare development. Unionization was an important component of the Progressive Era, and employment opportunities were tightly guarded and controlled. The depressions that occurred during this period were accompanied by strikes and labor riots. Despite the danger inherent in labor organizing, women were very active labor organizers. The International Ladies’ Garment Workers Union grew out of the depression of 1897–1908 (Day, 2006). Despite the protections that labor unions provided, or purported to provide, demands were sometimes ignored. The 1911 Triangle Shirt Waist Factory fire, in New York’s Tribeca, revealed a lack of attention to issues of health and safety resulting in a major labor disaster. Such labor issues magnified the degree of human suffering and the level of individual need among the poor. Simultaneously, the definition of private troubles expanded, bringing more attention to the need for public involvement and governmental responsibility. The awareness of the impact that environmental and structural forces had on individuals, families, and communities led to even more agitation for change. The expansion of social welfare from the private sector to a state regulated system became part of the Progressive Era agenda. Noted social workers, including Henry Street Settlement founder Lillian Wald and child labor reform advocate Florence Kelley, solicited input from New York City settlement houses to discuss the troubling issue of child labor. Owing to their initiative, in 1904, the National Child Labor Committee was formed as a clearinghouse against child labor. This led President Theodore Roosevelt to call social workers and child welfare workers to Washington to participate in the first White House Conference on Dependent Children in 1909. This conference moved responsibility for child welfare from the private and local levels to the public and federal arena. After nearly a decade of National Child Labor Committee lobbying, Congress passed legislation that established the Children’s Bureau in 1912. Similar to the 1909 White House Conference that failed to acknowledge the needs of African American children, the advocates and framers of the Children’s Bureau sacrificed African American children and their families in their zeal to move the Bureau’s agenda forward. The Children’s Bureau, nonetheless, was a landmark in federal involvement in children’s issues (Day, 2006; McRoy, 2004; Trattner, 1999. These social reformers were passionate and strategic in their campaign to have a woman lead the Children’s Bureau. Sympathetic to their request and finding no legal barriers, in 1912, President Taft appointed Julia Lathrop, a prominent Hull House resident, as the Bureau’s first chief. Lathrop lobbied vigorously for the establishment of public health clinics and hospitals, which resulted in the Sheppard-Towner Act in 1921. This legislation was effective in establishing children and maternal health centers in 45 states which eventually served thousands of women and children. Subsequently, both infant and maternal mortality dropped precipitously. Similarly the first mothers’ pension law was enacted in Missouri in 1911, followed two months later by Illinois. This legislation moved state government into the domain of out-door relief, marking a major breach in the American orthodoxy of private charity and indoor relief. By 1919, 39 states had some type of mother’s pension in place. The mother’s pension program was not a universally embraced welfare program. The idea that needy widowed mothers were “worthy” and should have the right to stay at home and raise their children was controversial. Some social workers, for example, were opposed to this legislation, fearing that it would eventually develop a populace who demanded relief as a right, while others believed that raising children was a valuable service to society and should be supplemented (Martin & Martin 1985). Operating with low appropriations and long waiting lists, the mother’s pension programs varied from state to state and served very few. Immigrants were generally ineligible for assistance based on residency and citizenship requirements. Moreover, the values and discretion of the local field investigators, along with

ORIGIN AND DEVELOPMENT OF SOCIAL POLICIES – Click to view FEATURES OF SOCIAL POLICIES – Click to view RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN SOCIAL WELFARE DEVELOPMENTS AND SOCIO- ECONOMIC- POLITICAL DEVELOPMENT – Click to view STAGES OF DECISION MAKING PROCESS – Click to view MODELS OF ORGANIZATIONAL DECISION MAKING – Click to view ROLES OF SOCIAL POLICIES – Click to view SOCIAL, ECONOMIC AND POLITICAL CONTEXT IN KENYA – Click to view FACTORS INFLUENCING NATIONAL SYSTEMS OF EDUCATION – Click to view ROLES OF STAKEHOLDERS IN POLICY FORMULATION – Click to view RESEARCH IN SOCIAL POLICY – Click to view STEPS IN POLICY ANALYSIS AND DEVELOPMENT – Click to view FACTORS INFLUENCING POLICY FORMULATION – Click to view IMPACT OF POLICY TO SOCIAL WORK – Click to view SOCIAL POLICY ANALYSIS AND DEVELOPMENT – Click to view IMPORTANCE OF POLICY ANALYSIS – Click to view PROCESS OF POLICY ANALYSIS – Click to view