IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/loceco/v27y2012i5-6p514-528.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Debating conditionality for disability benefits recipients and welfare reform: Research evidence from Pathways to Work

Author

Listed:
  • Katharine Weston

    ()

Abstract

The Coalition Government’s reform of welfare has revived debate about the imposition of conditions on receipt of disability benefits. In particular a debate published in the journal Policy and Politics in 2011 discussed the extension of increased conditionality to this group and the associated policy levers, often referred to as ‘carrots’ (incentives) and ‘sticks’ (sanctions). This article adds to the debate by presenting findings from research with service users of Pathways to Work (until recently the main employment programme for people on disability benefits). These findings help to argue for greater recognition of the heterogeneity and diverse levels of need among disability benefits claimants, demonstrate advantages and disadvantages of conditional benefit receipt, and highlight the limited effectiveness of incentives and sanctions. Furthermore findings suggest a need to reconsider the emphasis in government policy on conditionality, where this obscures messages about the availability of personalised support.

Suggested Citation

  • Katharine Weston, 2012. "Debating conditionality for disability benefits recipients and welfare reform: Research evidence from Pathways to Work," Local Economy, London South Bank University, vol. 27(5-6), pages 514-528, August.
  • Handle: RePEc:sae:loceco:v:27:y:2012:i:5-6:p:514-528
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://lec.sagepub.com/content/27/5-6/514.abstract
    Download Restriction: no

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. repec:eee:socmed:v:187:y:2017:i:c:p:20-28 is not listed on IDEAS

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:sae:loceco:v:27:y:2012:i:5-6:p:514-528. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (SAGE Publications). General contact details of provider: http://www.lsbu.ac.uk/index.shtml .

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.