The name 'social policy' is used to apply

1. to the policies which governments use for welfare and social protection
2. to the ways in which welfare is developed in a society, and
3. to the academic study of the subject.
In the first sense, social policy is particularly concerned with social services and the
welfare state. In the second, broader sense, it stands for a range of issues extending far
beyond the actions of government - the means by which welfare is promoted, and the
social and economic conditions which shape the development of welfare.

It may also be clarified that the term 'policy' is not being used here in the sense of what is
expedient or advantageous for the time being. In other words sometimes what is pragmatic is
called policy and what is based on principles is referred to as doctrinaire. Therefore, it is better to
say that social policy is designed to specify social objectives, the manner of harnessing the
available resources and the pattern of their, deployment for achieving those objectives. The
social objectives themselves are set out in or are derived from formal national consensus as
reflected in the constitution of the country.

elements of Social Policy

The nature and scope of social policy as described in earlier paragraphs covers at least four
elements as follows: (i) social objectives of national development plans; (ii) social service
programmes in successive five year plans; (iii) concern for the protection and promotion of the
interests of the weaker sections of the population; and (iv) peoples' own involvement in the
formulation and implementation of policies and plans at various levels.

As against this, social welfare policy, as it deals with a particular sector of national endeavour ,
is something more specific and limited. It cover those purposeful and organised interventions
necessary to protect and rehabilitate such segments of the population which are unable to cope
with the demands of life on their own. In their case the family cannot by itself find an adequate
solution nor can it 'buy' the requisite service(s) in the market. They are the people who need
purposefully organised intervention by the community or state to provide need-based differential
care. Thus, one may generalise that while the underlying spirit in social policy is the concern for

social justice, the principle behind social welfare policy is the urge to provide enabling measures
for those who are unable on account of some innate or acquired social disability to benefit from
the general programmes of social services available to the rest of the population. Of late, there is
a growing awareness that even social welfare policy could shift its focus from relief and charity
to prevention and development.
Social Policy and Economic Policy
Since social policy is now expected to influence national development plans, a question is
often asked as to the precise difference between economic policy and social policy. In the first
place, a policy designed almost exclusively in terms of economic objectives, like raising the
national GNP and per capita incomes, and sophistication and diversification of science and
technology in order to make the economy modern and prosperous are facets of economic policy.
Models of development plans based on such economic policies have been found to be one sided
and not very successful. They are conceived in purely material terms relying on the input/output
equations of material resources. Economic policy can be supplemented and complemented by the
objectives and operations designed to bring about equality of opportunity and narrowing the
differences of wealth and income. Such a social policy may also help bring about institutional or
systemic change. This is relfected in the rather simple definition of development which was at
one time recorded in the U.N. documents. It speaks of development as growth plus change or
more elaborately economic growth with social change. That is why there is the well known
finding both on theoretical considerations and practical experience that economic growth is a
necessary but not a sufficient condition for development. One might note that the case for
reinforcing economic growth with social policy came towards the end of the fifties when the
sixties were declared as the first United Nations Development Decade. Taking that experience
into consideration, the international strategy adopted by the U.N. for the Second Development
Decade referred to it as 'integrated development'. The integration sought to be achieved was not
just of social change with economic growth but social justice in its protective, promotive and
distributive sense. This was reflected in preambles to the official documents on five year plans
with phrases like 'growth with justice'. In fact, in some instances, it went further to advocate
growth for justice. In extreme cases it has even been referred to as 'justice with or without
growth'. In any case, the difference of emphasis and approach is sufficiently indicative to bring
out the difference between economic and social policy.

Constitutional Base
Most writings on social policy in India have drawn heavily upon the Indian Constitution
drafted, debated and adopted in the Constituent Assembly of India set up specifically for the
purpose shortly before the attainment of political independence in 1947. The second equally, if
not more, important source of social policy in India has been the series of official documents on
five year plans which have outlined policies, social and economic, in considerable detail.

Within the Constitution, Part IV on the Directive Principles of State Policy is usually cited as
the main source of India's social policy. Specific Articles like 38 and 46 are often cited as
relevant sources of social policy. Most of the legislation that has been enacted during the last
thirty years whether for institutional changes like land reforms or for the protection of the weaker
sections of the population (e.g. removal of untouchability) is also regarded as indicative of social
policy in operation.

One chronic myth that has been exploded in the light of experience is the implicit assumption
that India is a Welfare Stateat least one in the making. This is altogether unsubstantiated either
by the textual provisions of the Constitution or by the laws enacted under it. Social security
measures for the bulk of the population against the major contingencies of life are not only nonexistent on the statute book but there is no possibility of providing them, economically speaking,
in the foreseeable future. A low-income country having between forty to sixty per cent people
below the poverty line, a mixed economy with a commitment to socialist objectives cannot claim
to be a Welfare State as well. The reason why we have assumed India to be a Welfare State is
found in the language of the Directive Principles of State Policy which is -very much influenced
by 'welfare state' that was thick in the air at the time when India's constitution was being
formulated. In fact, however, if one were to refer to the Seventh Schedule of the Constitution
which gives the Union, Concurrent and State Lists of legislative subjects, one finds no evidence
at all of any substantial or significant content of a Welfare State programme assigned to the
Government at any of the three levels.

The following items listed variously give an indication of the nature and extent of social
welfare responsibilities assigned to various levels in the government under the Constitution.
These are; reformatories, borstal institutions and other institutions of a like nature (item 4 of the
State List); relief of the disabled and unemployable appear under item 9 of the same list. As
against this, the Concurrent List provides for programmes for the regulation of vagrancy and for
the relief and rehabilitation of nomadic and migratory tribes (item 15), places for the reception
and treatment of 'lunatics' and mentally deficient (item 16), welfare of labour including
conditions of work, provident fund, employers' liability, workmen's compensation, pensions for
the invalid and the aged and maternity benefits (item 24), charities and charitable institutions,
charitable and religious endowments and religious institutions (item 28), and relief and
rehabilitation of displaced persons (item 27).

Certain other items in the State List do have a bearing on the wider aspects of social needs and
problems. These, for instance, cover administration of justice, local governments, public health
and sanitation, intoxicating liquors and drugs, etc. Only item 20 of the Concurrent List provides
for a broad cover for other aspects of social policy under the omnibus term 'economic and social
planning'.

Although social security and social insurance are listed under item 3 of the Concurrent List,
progress in the provision and enlargement of benefits under social security/social insurance has
been very tardy and fragmentary. In a country where unemployment and underemployment are
chronically high, where self-employed persons far outnumber those who are employed and
where the bulk of the people do not pay income tax, the idea of social security/social insurance
remains only notional. Over the years except for a sizeable proportion of the industrial working
class and the core of personnel in Government agencies, social security benefits have scarcely
touched the bulk of the population.

Social Policy in Development Plans

Since national Planning was chosen as the main instrument of development, the working of the
various consitutional provisions on social policy can best be seen in the actual programmes
planned and in their implementation. This may be examined under certain broad heads. In the
first place, ,there are the social objectives of a development plan such as eradication of poverty,
promotion of employment, narrowing the disparities of wealth, income and opportunities
(conversely prevention of concentration of economic power in the hands of a few), development
of human resources, bringing about the necessary attitudinal and institutional changes, ensuring
peoples" participation in the formulation of policies and plans and in their implementation at
various levels, protection and promotion of the interests of the weaker sections of the population
and creating conditions in which they could develop in accordance with their own cultural
genius.

Among the weaker sections, there are either those who are yet not sufficiently integrated with
the mainstream of the economy like tribal communities or others who suffer from the double
disability of social discrimination compounding and perpetuating poverty like in the case of the
scheduled castes. Other backward classes suffer from a lag in development arising from
traditional social stratification and chronic poverty. Besides, there are the other handicapped or
maladjusted sections of the population who have been traditionally special clients of social
workers. These are the other groups who are in need of special care owing to some physical or
mental handicap or a condition of economic deprivation and social neglect.

A review of most of these aspects yields the following general observations which have been
fairly well documented both in the official evaluation reports and in non-official studies.

Social Objectives
As for the redistributive objective of social policy, the report of the Committee on Distribution
of Income and Levels of Living (Mahalanobis, 1964) came up with an equivocal finding. It
pointed out that income dispartiy in the urban areas had widened more than those of rural areas.
It was not until the beginning of the Fourth Five Year Plan that the twin objective of 'growth with
justice' was officially incorporated in the preamble to the plan. Even so, it was made out that the
claims of distributive justice often clashed with economic imperatives, in the short run at any
rate, and it was hoped that complex issue and needs deeper and more detailed analysis. From the
policy point of view, however, it may suffice to mention that certain legislative and executive
measures were introduced to prevent concentration of economic power in the hands of a few and
for curbing undue and unearned incomes and consequent ostentatious expenditure. These were
introduced in pursuance of a socialist policy to promote egaltarianism. However, when such
attempts are made in a low-income country, with a small class of the rich and a large mass of the
poor (below the proverty line), the result is only levelling down'. The converse process of
'levelling up' may take a much longer time and could only be the cumulative result of the total
developmental process. In the interim, such a policy only belies the principles of distributive
justice in the context of development, which is that it should distribute wealth and not poverty.

Institutional Change
Social policy implications of technological change also became evident both on empirical
grounds as well as on doctrinaire considerations. It was found that modem technology, whether
adopted wholesale from the more advanced countries or adapted to suit local conditions, was
itself not enough for the modernistion of the economy. Certain institutional changes were
gradually but surely recognised as the necessary concomitant of the transfer of technology. Take
for instance, the so-called green revolution. With a qualitative and quantitative improvement in
the agricultural inputs, it was possible to bring about a certain increase in the output. This
produced spectacular results over a short period of timea season or two, given suitable
weather, even a year or twobut sustaining such an increase and the improvement of production
on an enduring basis required much more than mere material inputWhile modernisation of the
implements and inputs is essential for increased production, it is not by itself enough to sustain it.
This could be done only by bringing about side by side a suitable institutional change, for
instance, land reforms to match with the green revolution. This is another example of the
relevance of social policy to economic growth and its impact on the social aspects of
development.

Employment Promotion
During the earlier periods of planning, it was assumed that with progressively larger investment,
employment would automatically be generated. In fact, by working out some kind of a ratio
between investment and employment, the employment potential of each plan was announced at
the beginning of each plan period. Very often, it was found that this employment potential failed
to materialise to the extent estimated. Here again, although the correlation between investment
and employment was admitted, it was discovered that the actual extent of employment potential
depended on several factors in addition to investment, e.g., the backlog of employment and
underemployment, the rate of growth of population, the number of entrants into labour market
year after year, rural-urban migration, and the choice of technologyall these have vital impact
on the employment potential of a project. It needed considerable modification in the strategy of
development planning, the choice and adaptation of the technology, and balancing the claims of
modernisation and 'economies of scale' with human needs. Concern for more and better
employment became evident in the revised strategies of development. The equal importance of
employment with the growth in the GNP has come to be regarded as much a concern of social
policy as of sound economic growth. This is yet another area which clearly brings out the
indivisible nature of the develop ment process wherein the social and the economic elements
must fuse together to produce the desired impact.

The Weaker Sections

The most important single element of social policy relates to the special Constitutional
safeguards and provisions made for the protection and promotion of the interests of those
segments of the population which had traditionally suffered from discrimination, isolation or
alienation. The special measures for the weaker sections fall broadly in three categories. First,
there is abolition of discrimination or segregation in the public places (Article 17abolition of
untouchability). This was further backed up by appropriate Central and State enactments. The
second category of measures provided reservation of a certain percentage of places in
educational and training institutions as also in employment in government organisations and
public undertakings. This was initially stipulated for a period of 10 years which has been
extended till 1990. The third category of programmes comprise development and welfare
projects as part of successive five year plans. These include a wide range of schemes and projects
for settlement on land, grants for subsidiary occupations, credit for economic projects in
agriculture and industry, provision of house sites and assistance for housing, a massive and
mounting programme of freeships and scholarships at all stages of education and a series of other
measures to suit the specific needs of different sections of the backward classes.

Several reviews have been attempted to evaluate the impact of all these measures. If one were
to judge them from the base line (position before the measures) these special programmes
provided for the weaker sections have cumulatively made a significant impact on awakening
consciousness of their rights and privileges under the constitution and in law, promoted
articulation of their demands and organisation on their part with the explicit intention of building
up pressure lobbies. The level of aspirations has certainly gone up very appreciably. However, in
terms of actual working and living conditions or in terms of the subjective satisfaction of the
concerned people, much remains to be done.

The problem is, however, not of 'how much' but whether this policy can ever achieve success
in the desired direction, namely, to make the weaker sections so self-reliant that they can emerge
from the dependency status and whether the need for special measures would cease. The trend
does not seem to be in that direction. It is a dilemma for policy makers whether the
developmental and welfare programmes for the weaker sections should be caste related or need
based. The decision is not easy because under adult suffrage law the weaker sections constitute a
very substantial proportion of voters. They constitute a political strength that cannot be easily
ignored. Secondly, it has been represented that even within the weaker sections, the slightly
better off groups and communities have benefited to a significantly greater extent, leaving the
weakest among them still further behind

Social Services
From the viewpoint of social policy, social service programmes in India's five year plans need
to be examined from two angles. First there is the relative importance of social services sectors
and major economic sectors of agriculture and industry; secondly, the inter se priorities and
relationships among social services themselves also need to be examined. As for the first, there
has been a standing grievance that social services as a whole have been given a rather secondary
place in the order of priorities. The assumption seems to have been as though the economic
sectors are autonomous and that once they generate enough resources, social services can expect
to get a better deal. The mutually reinforcing inter-relationship between the social and economic
sectors came to be appreciated after the unhappy experience in the earlier plans. Many of
economic projects remained unimplemented or under-implemented because of lack of right
attitudes, appropriate institutions and scientific base or technical know how. Alternatively, some
gains of economic growth were nullified because of ' population explosion'. The reordering of
priorities in the subsequent plans especially for education and health and of course for population
control came on the rebound, as it were.

As for the second point, it is noticed that education and health have received much greater
emphasis than other social sectors like housing or social welfare. In fact, at the end of thirty
years of planned development, the housing position is perhaps worse than it was at the
beginning. This is so because the bulk of the population cannot build for itself, the private
builders will not build for them because it is not profitable and the state cannot build enough
because of the substantial and perpetual subsidies required for low-income housing.
Social Welfare
Before the entry of the state in the welfare field, it had been primarily the operational area of
the voluntary organisations. Partly in recognition of the pioneering role of voluntary
organisations in social welfare, the policy has been to encourage them to continue to shoulder a
major responsibility for maintaining and developing welfare services. The fact that the voluntary
agencies alone could lend the human touch so essential in welfare work has also been cited as an
additional reason for the major role envisaged for them. The extreme paucity of resources
available for welfare work in the earlier stages of economic development was also responsible
for the reliance on voluntary organisations which could mobilise the resources directly at the
community level. Perhaps it would not be incorrect to infer that it was a combination of principle
and expediency that shaped the policy of dependence on the voluntary effort in social welfare.

The state, however, took upon itself to help the voluntary organisations in maintaining and
developing welfare services. Isolated and sporadic action, widely differing standards in the
services, increasing difficulty in raising community resources to cope with greater demands for
welfare agencies and the paucity of trained personnel were regarded as some of the major shortcomings of voluntary action in the years immediately after independence. A special body with an
unorthodox status and a large measure of autonomy was set up in the form of the Central Social
Welfare Board for promoting voluntary action in the welfare field. The idea was to provide a
national perspective for welfare activities, to introduce an extensive system of grants-in-aid for
improvement and development of services, and to sponsor new programmes and 'services
through non-official effort, wherever such gaps were noticed. The Central Social Welfare Board
created a network of its own in the States and also at the district and block levels through which
they administered both aided and sponsored programmes. The Board's organisation consisted of
composite bodies of officials and non-official social workers.

In terms of programmes, the boundaries of social welfare field were slowly but perceptibly
being demarcated with some precision. As stated earlier, when the Constitution framed its
legislative lists for the Union and the States as also for concurrent jurisdiction, there was no such
clearly identified field as 'social welfare'. The Working Group for the Third Five Year Plan,
which for the first time drew up a comprehensive framework for planning social welfare
services, covered within its compass, subjects such as child welfare, women's welfare, welfare

of the handicapped social defence, youth welfare, welfare of slum dwellers and also training,
research and administration, the Fourth Five Year Plan Working Group made only a slight
modification in retaining the welfare of non-student youth in the welfare sector and included the
aged and infirm along with the handicapped. But the number and variety of schemes that were
formulated by the Central and State Governments and the voluntary organisations under these
broad heads were so many that the limited resources were spread too wide and thin.

In terms of priorities, emphasis has notionally been placed on child welfare. The categories of
children, the content of programmes and the manner of their organisation have, however,
changed considerably since the inception of these programmes in the First Plan. Preoccupation
with handicapped children has been reduced in preference to the needs of otherwise normal but
socio-economicaily deprived children. The nature of programmes has also changed from curative
to the positive and prorn-otive services. The priority for child welfare and development is being
canvassed on the grounds of importance of building up young human resources of the country. In
terms of finanical allocations, greater outlays are also being set apart especially for nutrition but
the organisational effort in the field is still not quite commensurate with the priority placed on it.

As regard social welfare services, a clear and rational policy has to be formulated. While certain
encouraging trends in terms of positive, promotive and integrated services have no doubt
emerged, in operational terms efforts continue to be dissipated over a large and fragmented area.
A schematic pattern of welfare services built from the community level upward has yet to be
evolved, extended and stabilised. It is such a schematic pattern of minimum welfare services that
will have to be the base of a pyramid supporting a graded structure of specialised services at the
appropriate levels. The administrative pattern needs to be rationalised and the partnership with
voluntary organisations has to be made real. Training of welfare personnel has to be standardised
in the context of clearly identified job positions at various levels of welfare agencies. In fact, a
composite and complex job of manpower assessment on the one hand, and standardisation and
gradation of training, on the other hand, has to be attempted in order to give effect to any rational
welfare policy
India the biggest democracy in the world is going through a lot of changes and
turmoil, both from within and due to forces outside. As a country, it is unparalleled in its
diversity cultural, religious, social, and economical as well as political. The way India
has evolved since departure of colonial British in 1947 is not at all inspiring. Despite the
celebration of August 15 as Independence Day and January 26 as Republic Day for past
six decades, it does not appear that India has really shaken off its colonial past. Contrary
to the expectation that Indians would rule themselves with their own thinking it turned

out that Nehru and his colleagues largely followed the demeanors of the White British
and failed to look at larger issues faced by the newly free state.
Today, India is known for just three things: high population, high poverty, and high
corruption. India has the largest number of poor in the world and is set to become the
most populous country by around 2028 beating China. Doing business honestly in India
is as tough as winning an Olympic medal, may be even harder!

The "success" of India's democracy is a feat that must not be underemphasized; this article by no
means will attempt to say otherwise. However, even within the most thriving of democratic societies
problems exist. In addition to the challenges mentioned above, India confronts other issues.
Corruption and bribery of politicians, police abuse, non-performance by and incompetence among
bureaucrats, and an inadequate infrastructure are just a smattering of troubles that burden the Indian
state.