| Study ID | 04 |
| Study title | (In)Equality in Social Protection: Multi-level Analysis of Intersectionality in Social Assistance Provision – a Comparative Study |
| Study language | English |
| Institution(s) | European Policy Institute Skopje, ul. Antonie Grubisic 2/2, 1000 Skopje, Macedonia (a) Analitika – Center for Social Research, Hamdije Kreševljakovića 50, 71000 Sarajevo, Bosnia and Herzegovina (b) |
| Authors | Biljana
Kotevska (PI) (a) Simonida Kacarska (a) Elena Anchevska (a) Edin Hodžić (b) Mirna Jusić (b) Aida Malkić (b) |
| Disciplines | Political sciences Social policy Legal science |
| Period | 2014-2016 |
| Geographical space | Macedonia, Bosnia and Herzegovina |
| Abstract | The main objective of the research was to study social need from an intersectional perspective, identifying and mapping out the dynamics and characteristics of power relations as potential sources of inequalities, and to see whether and in what ways these are reconfirmed, perpetuated, and reconstructed, or alleviated and eliminated at the individual, symbolic and structural levels, as well as to study the interactions between these levels. The authors were, then, concerned with the question how social protection policies in Macedonia and BiH address multiple inequalities of persons that are or ought to be users of the social protection system, with a particular focus on the inequalities at the intersections, what impact this has on the livelihood of these persons, and how this can be improved. |
| Results | Findings from both country confirmed that the systems in both countries are viewed as corrupt, unjust, and that it fails to provide for those that need assistance the most. What was found in both countries was a failure to identify and address inequalities that lie at the intersections. State policies will provide assistance to persons with disabilities. However, as one moves away from the capitals, it seems that the accessibility decreases. Thus, living in a rural area poses additional obstacles for these persons. In addition, in the case of BiH, there is a staggering difference in the amounts of funds provided by social assistance among the three entities. Additional difference highlighted in the case of BiH is in relation to persons who acquired disability during the war and as war veterans and civilians, and all others. In both countries persons report burdening, lengthy and complex procedures for acquiring and keeping the social assistance funds. In addition, persons who are either homeless or who have no income whatsoever, but who do not receive social assistance or whose assistance has been discontinued were identified. Neither special services, nor care is extended to persons with disabilities. Children, especially female children seem to be off the State’s radar. No care is taken over their position, the conditions in which they mature, no effort is made to assist parents in their child-rearing activities. Moreover, in some of the cases parents or caretakers went to incredible lengths to protect and bring up their children; yet, not only are they not assisted by the State, but they face additional obstacles. A predominant single axis approach was identified. In Macedonia there seems to be a stronger equality and non-discrimination legal and policy framework. Its comprehensive equality law includes a provision on multiple discrimination, declaring it an outlawed grave form of discrimination. This is not the case in BiH where, although the draft-law contained such a provision, it was later taken out from the text and the law was adopted without outlawing multiple discrimination. In both countries the social protection laws fail to outlaw intersectional discrimination but also multiple discrimination – in more general terms. On grounds of this, a joint recommendation for both countries is that a study needs to be conducted on possibilities for introducing intersectionality to policy making which would include lessons learned from other national process with well assessed potential for policy transplants’ success or failure. |
| Method description | In order to identify categories of inequality, the multi-level intersectional analysis model of Gabriele Winker and Nina Degele was put to practice. This model proposes using eight steps for analysing the data, which can be repeated as many times as needed; the order is not prescriptive. It offers a possibility for looking into the individual, symbolic and structural level, as well as at the intersections of these three levels. First, a diverse group of persons with disabilities, carers of persons with disabilities, single parents, homeless persons, LGBTIQ persons, and domestic violence survivors was interviewed. Secondly, through the narratives of the interviewees, the researchers seek to gain insight in the norms, values and ideologies they embody, perpetuate or reject. Since these symbolic representations do not exist in a vacuum, they also analysed media articles covering the topic of interest and they conducted a focus group discussion with non-users of the social protection system to reveal dominant norms, ideologies and representations that operate in the respective societies. Thirdly, in order to understand how the interviewees relate to social structures, the experiences and perspectives on the system of social protection by its users or ought to be users were evaluated against existing policy documents, and primarily social protection laws, policies and strategies. To answer the question: Whether inequalities at the intersections are targeted in social protection, and how, the researcher analysed laws and policies through Lombardo and Agustin’s quality criteria for assessing intersectionality in European Union (EU) gender policies, which we complemented with Lomardo and Verloo’s suggestion for looking at whether the policy applies a transformative approach to intersectionality, how “gendered” policies are, as well as whether the policy at stake avoids stigmatization of people and groups at different points of intersections. |
| Publications | Kotevska, Biljana. 2016. The Art of Survival: Intersectionality in Social Protection in Macedonia and Bosnia and Herzegovina – Collection of Working Papers. Skopje: European Policy Institute. Online: http://www.epi.org.mk/docs/[EN]The_Art_of_Survival[DTP](1).pdf Malkić, Aida; Hadziristić, Tea. 2016. Intersecting Inequalities in Social Protection in Macedonia – Results from an Empirical Inquiry. Analitika. BHS version available at: http://www.analitika.ba/sites/default/files/publikacije/intersekcijske_nejednakosti_u_sistemu_socijalne_pomoci_u_bih.pdf. Online: http://www.analitika.ba/sites/default/files/publikacije/inequality_eng_-_izvjestaj_3003_0.pdf Kotevska, Biljana; Anchevska, Elena; Kacarska, Simonida. 2016. The Art of Survival: Intersecting Inequalities in Social Protection in Macedonia – Results from an Empirical Inquiry. Skopje: European Policy Institute. MK version available at: MK: http://epi.org.mk/docs/Country_paper[MK][DTP].pdf , ISBN: 978-608-4702-22-1. Online: http://www.epi.org.mk/docs/Country_paper[EN][DTP].pdf Center for Social Research Analitika, . 2016. Social Assistance System In BiH: The Neglected Potential of Active Social Policies. Analitika. BHS version available at: BHS: http://www.analitika.ba/sites/default/files/publikacije/zanemareni_potencijal_-_brief_web_0.pdf. Online: http://www.analitika.ba/sites/default/files/publikacije/zanemareni_potencijal_-_brief_3003.pdf European Policy Institute – Skopje, . 2016. What stands at the crossroads? Inequalities at the Intersections in Social Protection in Macedonia – A User’s Perspective. Skopje: European Policy Institute. MK version available at: http://epi.org.mk/docs/[MK]Policy_Brief[DTP].pdf AL version available at: http://epi.org.mk/docs/[AL]Policy_Brief[DTP].pdf. Online: http://www.epi.org.mk/docs/[EN]Policy_Brief[DTP].pdf Regional Research Promotion Programme in the Western Balkans – RRPP,. Infographic No.4: How the social protection system should be?. Macedonian version: http://epi.org.mk/docs/Kakov%20treba%20da%20bide%20sistemot%20na%20socijalna%20zastita[MK].pdf Albanian version: http://epi.org.mk/docs/Kakov%20treba%20da%20bide%20sistemot%20na%20socijalna%20zastita[AL].pdf. Online: http://www.epi.org.mk/docs/Kakov%20treba%20da%20bide%20sistemot%20na%20socijalna%20zastita[EN].pdf Regional Research Promotion Programme in the Western Balkans – RRPP, . Infographic No.3: How the social protection system is?. Macedonian version: http://epi.org.mk/docs/Kakov_e_sistemot[MK].pdf Albanian version: http://epi.org.mk/docs/Kakov_e_sistemot[AL].pdf. Online: http://www.epi.org.mk/docs/Kakov_e_sistemot[EN].pdf Regional Research Promotion Programme in the Western Balkans – RRPP, . Infographic No.2: Coping strategies of persons that are or ought to be users of the social protection system. Macedonian version: http://epi.org.mk/docs/Strategii_za_spravuvanje[MK].pdf Albanian version: http://epi.org.mk/docs/Strategii_za_spravuvanje[AL].pdf. Online: http://www.epi.org.mk/docs/Strategii_za_spravuvanje[EN].pdf Regional Research Promotion Programme in the Western Balkans – RRPP, . Infographic No.1: Basic needs of persons that are or ought to be users of the social protection system. Macedonian version: http://epi.org.mk/docs/Osnovni_potrebi[MK].pdf Albanian version: http://epi.org.mk/docs/Osnovni_potrebi[AL].pdf. Online: http://www.epi.org.mk/docs/Osnovni_potrebi[EN].pdf Regional Research Promotion Programme in the Western Balkans – RRPP, . Infographic No.4: How the social protection system should be?. Bosnian version: http://epi.org.mk/docs/BiH_How%20the%20system%20should%20be[BHS].pdf. Online: http://www.epi.org.mk/docs/BiH_How%20the%20system%20should%20be[EN].pdf Regional Research Promotion Programme in the Western Balkans – RRPP, . Infographic No.3: How the social protection system is?. Bosnian version: http://epi.org.mk/docs/BiH_How%20the%20system%20is[BHS].pdf. Online: http://www.epi.org.mk/docs/BiH_How%20the%20system%20is[EN].pdf Regional Research Promotion Programme in the Western Balkans – RRPP, . Infographic No.2: Coping strategies of persons that are or ought to be users of the social protection system. Bosnian version: http://epi.org.mk/docs/BiH_Coping_Strategies[BHS].pdf. Online: http://www.epi.org.mk/docs/BiH_Coping_Strategies[EN].pdf Regional Research Promotion Programme in the Western Balkans – RRPP, . Infographic No.1: Basic needs of persons that are or ought to be users of the social protection system. Bosnian version: http://epi.org.mk/docs/BiH_Basic%20Needs[BHS].pdf. Online: http://www.epi.org.mk/docs/BiH_Basic%20Needs[EN].pdf |
| Secondary analyses | None |
| Study type | Research of the indicated institution(s) Mandated research |
| Financed by | Mandating institution |
| Mandating institution(s) | University of Fribourg, Interfaculty Institute for Central and Eastern Europe, Regional Research Promotion Programme in the Western Balkans – RRPP, Bd de Pérolles 90, 1700 Fribourg |
| Progress | Finished |
| Start – end date | 01.08.2014 – 15.03.2016 |
| Data type | Qualitative data |
| Media | Digitalized data file |
| Available document types | Collection
instruments Coding instructions Publications (final report, articles) Other |
| Linked to | Datafile 04_01-(In)equality in Social Protection_Focus group_transcript_MK_MK; Datafile 04_02-(In)equality in Social Protection_Focus group_1_transcript_BiH_BiH; Datafile 04_03-(In)equality in Social Protection_Focus group_2_transcript_BiH_BiH |
| Remarks | Transcripts are in Macedonian and Bosnian |
| Analysis unit | Group |
| Mode of data collection | Focus group |
| Data collection instruments | Questionnaire |
| Number of cases | – |
| Sampling description | – |
| Available versions | 1.0 |
| Bibliographical citation | 1. Biljana Kotevska, Simonida Kacarska, Elena Anchevska, Edin Hodžić, Mirna Jusić, Aida Malkić: 51_(In)equality in Social Protection_Focus group_MK_MK [Dataset]. European Policy Institute Skopje, Analitika – Center for Social Research. Distributed by DASS-BiH, Sarajevo. 2. Biljana Kotevska, Simonida Kacarska, Elena Anchevska, Edin Hodžić, Mirna Jusić, Aida Malkić: 51_(In)equality in Social Protection_Focus_groups_BiH_BiH [Dataset]. European Policy Institute Skopje, Analitika – Center for Social Research. Distributed by DASS-BiH, Sarajevo. |
| Access category | Restricted |
To access this dataset please read General terms and conditions of use, download, fill in the User request form and send it to dass@credi.ba.
The dataset is transferred from FORS Data Archive, Switzerland. Original dataset metadata file as received from FORS can be viewed here.
If you need any help, please contact us.