Each year, almost £100 billion is spent on social security for working-age people and children. Decision-making by public bodies, such as the Department for Work and Pensions and local authorities, around the awarding and ongoing management (including sanctioning) of social security benefits is a significant task. These decisions have huge implications for individuals, families, and wider society, underlining the need for decision-making systems which produce fair outcomes.
Existing research has proposed various models of administrative fairness, featuring key themes such as: participation, accuracy, formality, speed, and justification. However, these models often fail to account for the digital transformation which has automated parts of the social security decision-making process and the perspectives of people who are most likely to be impacted by these decisions.
Simon Halliday, is part of a research team at the Administrative Fairness Lab examining the following questions:
- What does the public conceive of as administratively fair in frontline social security decision-making and what effect does the use of digital technologies have on perceptions of administrative fairness?
- How might the research inform the design and development of social security systems?
- How can the research empower civil society actors scrutinising social security decision-making systems?
- Funder: Nuffield Foundation
- Law School researcher: Prof Simon Halliday