What is it about?
Governments are using the social security system as a lever for behaviour change. One example is the 'No Jab, No Pay' policy in Australia, whereby payments to families can be cut off if children are not immunised. This paper argues that using the social security system as a lever for behaviour change is coercive and shows disrespect for citizens' autonomy. There are better ways for governments to influence behaviour.
Featured Image
Why is it important?
Many other researchers have shown that using the social security system as a lever for behaviour change has bad consequences. This article specifically focuses on how these policies affect citizens' autonomy. This is important because governments are trying to address many different types of undesirable behaviour through incentives in the social security system. Policymakers are not thinking enough about other policy tools that could be used instead.
Perspectives
Note the author of this article supports childhood vaccination as an important strategy for preventing the spread of disease. This article questions whether welfare conditionality is an appropriate tool for achieving the valid goal of high childhood immunisation rates.
Dr Katherine Curchin
Australian National University
Read the Original
This page is a summary of: The Illiberalism of Behavioural Conditionality: A Critique of Australia’s ‘No Jab, No Pay’ Policy, Journal of Social Policy, January 2019, Cambridge University Press,
DOI: 10.1017/s0047279418000879.
You can read the full text:
Resources
Contributors
The following have contributed to this page
