Needs and preferences of beneficiaries

Join

Step 1 Select a dimension of ex/inclusion Open

Selected: Intersecting risks and drivers

Some groups are at a higher risk of exclusion and inequality, but the status of excluded often transcends a single group affiliation and lies at the intersection of multiple identities.  Being a female – as a factor – may not automatically put someone at a high risk of exclusion from the labour market. But being a Roma woman from an under-served rural community in Central and Eastern Europe increases the risk dramatically.

 

The traditional group-based approach to ex/inclusion is primarily concerned with identification and support, through social insurance, of excluded groups vulnerable to uninsured risks. More recent approaches focus on individual risks, pointing out that the group-based lens may not provide strong evidentiary basis to weigh policy options in the case of multiple sources of exclusion.  Applied individually, both of these approaches may suffer from errors and blind spots. Yet a combination of the two – i.e., an approach of intersecting risks and drivers – is feasible and has a solid policy value.

 

Four inclusive policy markers are used to operationalize this dimension.

Step 2 Select an Inclusive Policy Marker Open

Selected: Tailored policy design and service delivery

Concerns of fitness, accessibility and responsiveness of government-provided schemes to the needs of categories of groups of beneficiaries are at the centre of the inclusive agendas. Two design considerations elaborate on ways to address these. 

Step 3 Select a Policy Design Consideration

Selected: Needs and preferences of beneficiaries

Policies dealing with inclusive development should be increasingly tailored to take into consideration the needs and preferences of their intended beneficiaries. Tailored interventions are designed to increase access and uptake but, unlike targeted services, they are not exclusive to certain groups and beneficiaries. They are, rather, concerned with better fitting the existing mainstream services to their needs – for example through inclusion of specific content and approaches in the mainstream education system – and provision, where required, alternative services. An example of such tailoring comes from New Zealand, where efforts are being made to customize policies to the needs of Māori by making them more accessible, effective, and responsive. 

 

Explore concrete policy examples on the map.

 

No policy example in this category yet
SUBMIT EXAMPLE

Join