Social Security in Crisis Mode (SoSiKri)

How the future impacts the present in social policy

We live in turbulent times. Policymakers and bureaucrats are thus seemingly in crisis mode, aiming to manage immediate crisis effects. But this affects not only the economy in general. A number of institutions that have been built to provide safety and security for the population are also feeling the heat of increasing pressures from a number of crises – crises that have multiple dimensions, are frequently global in scope, and are increasingly interrelated. These pressures also affect the welfare state and the institutions of social security that it operates. In other words, the future sustainability and functioning of these institutions seems endangered as well. It is an open question whether social security institutions will perform well in a crisis-ridden future or if (and, if so, how) they should be reformed.

Answers to these questions, which policymakers are eager to address, are complex and thus require a wide range of expertise. Various actors contribute scenarios, outline potential courses of action and their effects, or otherwise engage in the making of “futures” to satisfy the need of the state to know about possible and probable developments on the horizon and prepare accordingly. But how does this anticipation of futures influence policymaking? How can we understand the role of anticipations in times of crisis in general – (how) does it affect decisions and the welfare state at large? The project “Social security in crisis mode” aims to find this out. This blog post delves deeper into the question of how the future enters the present of social policymaking.

Here, I argue that anticipating futures of crisis has indeed more far-ranging consequences than just helping policymakers to orient themselves in light of a complex world and the challenges to come. In fact, anticipation can potentially shape both the policymaking process at large and what (reform) alternatives to consider as a response.

First, crisis anticipation puts new options on the table, but it also makes others seem less appropriate in light of risks or threats on the horizon. As a particular imagination of the future becomes more credible, policymakers may find themselves constrained to at least engage with the possibility of its realisation. Therefore, crisis anticipation – even where it just presents potential developments or options – can shape what problems policymakers care about, what issues to address, and what policies to consider.

Second, crisis anticipation changes the general character of policymaking. There is a range of scholarship that delves into how crises are threatening situations that are characterised by enormous uncertainty, while at the same time demanding for urgent responses. The anticipation of future crises can equally lead to changes in the time horizons of policymaking, meaning that actors feel a heightened sense of the need for timely action. This can affect how decisions are reached, how quickly policies are implemented, and who is included (and excluded) in policymaking processes.

Third, crisis anticipation influences what has been called ‘rationales’ of policymaking. Traditionally, social security is engaged in offering compensation and providing services when it comes to particular contingencies, such as the loss of jobs, ill health, or an accident at the workplace. What we can observe when actors are influenced by futures charactersied by challenges or even threats is that there is much more emphasis on preventive or precautionary action. In other words, policymakers aim to prepare for the anticipated development, or even pre-empt it from happening altogether.

Fourth, crisis anticipation already results in policymakers discussing and implementing reforms to social security institutions that make them more resilient. Resilience is a booming concept in current crisis-ridden times, because it promises strengthened resistance to adverse effects, to not become affected by them, but rather quickly return to “normal”. At the same time, in its application to social security, the concept of resilience can be criticised, because it may make the individual or household affected by crises responsible for their own situation – just aiming to help them reduce risks – instead of tackling the often engrained structural problems that are at the root of their vulnerability. Resilience, here, is just one example for a number of reform concepts that can be elevated by a discourse shaped by crisis anticipations.

To date, the role of these and other effects of crisis anticipation on social security reforms in particular and social policymaking in general has not entered academic debates – and even less so public discussions. The project “Social Security in Crisis Mode” aims to produce answers to how we can understand and conceptualise crisis anticipation in its political effects, but also how, ultimately, crisis anticipation can productively be used to make better decisions in social security policymaking.