Abstract:

Leaving differences and variances aside, the ultimate intention of social states or welfare regimes, acting with the humanitarian pursuit of social policy, is to offer a standard, decent living condition to those under its banner. In this sense, welfare states often undertake constitutionally binding commitments to citizens and implement minimum, fair social policies not to undermine the citizens’ living conditions below the level of “worthy of human dignity.” Whereas these policies, introduced against any social risks to adversely affect one’s welfare, should be implemented equally for everyone, states may also adopt positive discrimination while implementing these policies for groups denoted as fragile or disadvantaged that are likely to be more affected by social risks to retain their welfare within “humane” standards. However, the effect of in-kind or cash social transfers within the mentioned policies to the aforementioned groups often remains veiled. Moreover, debates go on about targeting of these transfers. The present descriptive survey research attempted to measure the effectiveness of social policies aimed at improving the living conditions of individuals by contributing to their welfare. We surveyed 582 Burdur-based individuals who could be denoted as disadvantaged due to some tangible reasons. Our findings demonstrated that the participants had worse health status, higher disability rates, and severe housing health-related problems compared to the general population. We also discovered that the participants considered poor had much more inadequate living standards and welfare than those not. The participants’ poverty - calculated based on their income levels – was 54.7% before receiving social assistance and became 39.5% after being opted for social assistance. In other words, we figured out that social assistance reduced the participants’ poverty by 15.1%.

Keywords: