Home > Research > Publications & Outputs > Universal Credit

Links

Text available via DOI:

View graph of relations

Universal Credit: administrative burdens of automated welfare

Research output: Contribution to Journal/MagazineJournal articlepeer-review

E-pub ahead of print

Standard

Universal Credit: administrative burdens of automated welfare. / Bennett, Hayley; Currie, Morgan; Podoletz, Lena.
In: Journal of Social Policy, 18.09.2024.

Research output: Contribution to Journal/MagazineJournal articlepeer-review

Harvard

APA

Bennett, H., Currie, M., & Podoletz, L. (2024). Universal Credit: administrative burdens of automated welfare. Journal of Social Policy. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0047279424000175

Vancouver

Bennett H, Currie M, Podoletz L. Universal Credit: administrative burdens of automated welfare. Journal of Social Policy. 2024 Sept 18. Epub 2024 Sept 18. doi: 10.1017/S0047279424000175

Author

Bennett, Hayley ; Currie, Morgan ; Podoletz, Lena. / Universal Credit : administrative burdens of automated welfare. In: Journal of Social Policy. 2024.

Bibtex

@article{963aa1bb4783451abc522fcc0b1f5da4,
title = "Universal Credit: administrative burdens of automated welfare",
abstract = "Since 2010, the UK government has transformed social security administration using digital technology and automated instruments to create and deliver a single working-age benefit known as Universal Credit (UC). Social policy scholars have given much attention to the key policy tenets of UC but engaged less with leading aspects of automated and digital delivery and their relationship to different forms of administrative burdens for UC recipients. This article addresses this empirical and conceptual gap by drawing on administrative burdens literature to analyse empirical data from forty-four interviews with UC recipients. We conclude by highlighting three costs: temporal, financial, and emotional. These costs illustrate the political dimensions of technical features of UC, as they affect accountability procedures and paths to legal entitlements that have bearings on certain claimants{\textquoteright} rights.",
author = "Hayley Bennett and Morgan Currie and Lena Podoletz",
year = "2024",
month = sep,
day = "18",
doi = "10.1017/S0047279424000175",
language = "English",
journal = "Journal of Social Policy",
issn = "0047-2794",
publisher = "Cambridge University Press",

}

RIS

TY - JOUR

T1 - Universal Credit

T2 - administrative burdens of automated welfare

AU - Bennett, Hayley

AU - Currie, Morgan

AU - Podoletz, Lena

PY - 2024/9/18

Y1 - 2024/9/18

N2 - Since 2010, the UK government has transformed social security administration using digital technology and automated instruments to create and deliver a single working-age benefit known as Universal Credit (UC). Social policy scholars have given much attention to the key policy tenets of UC but engaged less with leading aspects of automated and digital delivery and their relationship to different forms of administrative burdens for UC recipients. This article addresses this empirical and conceptual gap by drawing on administrative burdens literature to analyse empirical data from forty-four interviews with UC recipients. We conclude by highlighting three costs: temporal, financial, and emotional. These costs illustrate the political dimensions of technical features of UC, as they affect accountability procedures and paths to legal entitlements that have bearings on certain claimants’ rights.

AB - Since 2010, the UK government has transformed social security administration using digital technology and automated instruments to create and deliver a single working-age benefit known as Universal Credit (UC). Social policy scholars have given much attention to the key policy tenets of UC but engaged less with leading aspects of automated and digital delivery and their relationship to different forms of administrative burdens for UC recipients. This article addresses this empirical and conceptual gap by drawing on administrative burdens literature to analyse empirical data from forty-four interviews with UC recipients. We conclude by highlighting three costs: temporal, financial, and emotional. These costs illustrate the political dimensions of technical features of UC, as they affect accountability procedures and paths to legal entitlements that have bearings on certain claimants’ rights.

U2 - 10.1017/S0047279424000175

DO - 10.1017/S0047279424000175

M3 - Journal article

JO - Journal of Social Policy

JF - Journal of Social Policy

SN - 0047-2794

ER -