1988Journal of Social PolicyRequires access

Justice and the Bounds of Welfare

John Edwards

Open publisher page 10 citations

Abstract

ABSTRACT The welfare state is but the vehicle for the provision of welfare and the latter does not necessarily entail the former. Much recent debate occasioned by government policy and rhetoric has therefore confused means and ends. This paper argues that a defence of welfare must come before a concern for protecting the welfare state. A number of foundations for guaranteed welfare provision, including justice, rights and contract are considered but the most persuasive foundation for welfare as need-meeting is found to lie in the Kantian categorical imperatives. Not only do these provide a moral prescription that welfare ought to be provided, they also dictate the ways in which it ought to be provided. It is against these requirements therefore that the necessity of a welfare state as a means of providing welfare can be tested. The second part of the paper then considers how extensive a welfare state needs to be, and how the boundaries between the public and private domains in the provision of welfare may be drawn. The equality principle, allied to the notion of equality of welfare, is found to be a useful instrument in determining the bounds of the public domain but only (so the paper concludes reluctantly) when harnessed to objective specifications of need.

About this research paper

What this paper is about

ABSTRACT The welfare state is but the vehicle for the provision of welfare and the latter does not necessarily entail the former. Much recent debate occasioned by government policy and rhetoric has therefore confused means and ends. This paper argues that a defence of welfare must come before a concern for protecting the welfare state. A number of foundations for guaranteed welfare provision, including justice, rights and contract are considered but the most persuasive foundation for welfare as need-meeting is found to lie in the Kantian categorical imperatives. Not only do these provide a moral prescription that welfare ought to be provided, they also dictate the ways in which it ought to be provided. It is against these requirements therefore that the necessity of a welfare state as a means of providing welfare can be tested. The second part of the paper then considers how extensive a welfare state needs to be, and how the boundaries between the public and private domains in the provision of welfare may be drawn. The equality principle, allied to the notion of equality of welfare, is found to be a useful instrument in determining the bounds of the public domain but only (so the paper concludes reluctantly) when harnessed to objective specifications of need.

Why it matters

OpenAlex reports 10 citations for this work. Citation counts describe recorded attention and do not establish research quality.

Key contribution

A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.

Method / approach

Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Main findings

Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Limitations

Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Applications

Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Available abstract

ABSTRACT The welfare state is but the vehicle for the provision of welfare and the latter does not necessarily entail the former. Much recent debate occasioned by government policy and rhetoric has therefore confused means and ends. This paper argues that a defence of welfare must come before a concern for protecting the welfare state. A number of foundations for guaranteed welfare provision, including justice, rights and contract are considered but the most persuasive foundation for welfare as need-meeting is found to lie in the Kantian categorical imperatives. Not only do these provide a moral prescription that welfare ought to be provided, they also dictate the ways in which it ought to be provided. It is against these requirements therefore that the necessity of a welfare state as a means of providing welfare can be tested. The second part of the paper then considers how extensive a welfare state needs to be, and how the boundaries between the public and private domains in the provision of welfare may be drawn. The equality principle, allied to the notion of equality of welfare, is found to be a useful instrument in determining the bounds of the public domain but only (so the paper concludes reluctantly) when harnessed to objective specifications of need.

Key concepts: Welfare, Economic Justice, Law and economics, Rhetoric, State (computer science), Public economics, Welfare state, Government (linguistics)

Related papers

Back to paper searchBrowse research topicsOriginal source
Justice and the Bounds of Welfare — Research Paper | ScholarLens