Neoliberalizm ve İslam Ekonomisinin Sosyal Refah Yaklaşımlarının Karşılaştırılması

Öz

Ekonomik gelişimin temel göstergelerinden biri refah düzeyidir. Refah düzeyi, bir toplumda devlet tarafından uygulanan politikaların sosyal adalet bağlamında olmasını simgelemektedir. Sosyal adalet insanlar arasında vuku bulan sosyal eşitsizlikleri azaltma amacı gütmektedir. Bu çerçevede, devletler bireylere vergiler yoluyla sosyal transferler sağlamakta ve gelirin yeniden dağılımında aracı rol üstlenmektedir. Bu anlamda, refah devletlerinin rolü yalnızca sosyal transferler yoluyla fayda sağlamak olmamaktadır. Bunun ötesinde, devletler yaptıkları düzenlemelerle diğer refah paydaşları olan piyasa ve sivil toplum aktörlerini de sürece dahil ederek sosyal refahı sağlamaktadır. Ancak, ülkelerin refah anlayışları bütüncül sosyal refah açısından farklılık göstermektedir. Bu açıdan, İslam ekonomisinin refah yaklaşımı temelde ahlaki değerleri önceleyen, ekonomik refahı toplumsal dengeyi gözeterek sağlamayı amaçlayan bir yaklaşımdır. Bu minvalde, insanların temel ihtiyaçlarının sağlanması ve sosyal yardımın ötesinde gelir ve servet eşitsizliğini azaltıcı ekonomi politikalarının iktisadi yapının dönüşümü adına uygulanması öngörülmektedir. Bununla birlikte, İslam ekonomisiyle neoliberal ekonomik anlayış pek çok açıdan farklılık gösterdiği gibi, benzer şekilde neoliberal temelli sosyal yatırım ve İslam ekonomisinin refah yaklaşımı da farklılık göstermektedir. Bu bağlamda çalışmanın amacı, İslâm ekonomisinin sosyal refah anlayışı ve neoliberalizm temelli sosyal yatırım anlayışı, sosyal refah ve muhafazakâr yaklaşımları ile birlikte teorik yönden tartışmak ve perspektiflerini ayrıntılı bir şekilde ortaya koymaktır.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• İslâm Ekonomisi
• Sosyal Refah
• Neoliberalizm
• Sosyal Yatırım
• Ekonomik Eşitlilik
• Yeniden Dağılım

Comparison of the Economically-Based Social Investment Approach of Neoliberalism and the Moral-Based Social Welfare Approach of the Islamic Economics

Öz

One of the main indicators of economic development is the welfare level. The welfare level symbolizes that the policies implemented by the state in a society are in the context of social justice. Social justice aims to reduce social inequalities between people. In this framework, states provide social transfers to individuals through taxes and play an intermediary role in the redistribution of income. In this sense, the role of welfare states is not merely to benefit through social transfers. Further to that, states ensure social welfare by including other welfare stakeholders, market and non-governmental actors, through its regulations. However, the welfare understandings of countries differ in terms of holistic social welfare. In this respect, the welfare approach of Islamic economics is an approach that essentially prioritizes moral values and aims to ensure economic prosperity by considering social balance. In this regard, beyond social assistance and meeting the basic needs of people, it is envisaged that economic policies that reduce income and wealth inequality will be implemented for the transformation of the economic structure. However, as the Islamic economics and the neoliberal economic understanding differ in many respects, similarly, the neoliberal-based social investment and the welfare approach of Islamic economics also differ. In this context, the study aims to discuss theoretically the social welfare understanding of Islamic economics and neoliberalism-based social investment approach together with social welfare, and conservative approaches and to reveal their perspectives in detail.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Islamic Economics
• Social Welfare
• Neoliberalism
• Social Investment
• Economic Equality
• Redistribution

Kaynakça

1. Adema, W., & Ladaique, M. (2005). Net social expenditure, 2005 edition: More comprehensive measures of social support (No. 29). OECD Publishing.
2. Al-Sadr, M.B. (1961). Our Economics. 4 vols. Tehran: World Organization for Islamic Services.
3. Alkire, S. (2008). Using the capability approach: prospective and evaluative analyses.The Capability Approach: Concepts, Measures and Applications, (26-50). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Aust, A., & Bönker, F. (2004). New social risks in a Conservative welfare state: the Case of Germany. New risks, new welfare: The Transformation of the European Welfare State. 29-53. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
4. Avlijas, S. (2017). Revisiting the Baltic growth model: From neoliberalism to the social investment welfare state. Sciences Po LIEPP.
5. Aysan, M. F. (2020). Rethinking the Welfare State: Social Policies during the COVID-19 Pandemic and in the Post-pandemic Period. Reflections on the Pandemic (679- 697). Ankara: Turkısh Academy of Sciences Publications.
6. Ayub, M. (2015). Distinguishing Features of the Islamic Economic System. In M. Ayub (Ed.), Understanding Islamic Finance (21–42). John Wiley & Sons Ltd. https://doi. org/10.1002/9781119209096.ch2
7. Aziz, M.N., & Mohamad, O.B. (2016). Islamic social business to alleviate poverty and social inequality. International Journal of Social Economics, 43(6), 573-592. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJSE-06-2014-0129
8. Bakker, V., & Van Vliet, O. (2019). Social investment, employment outcomes and policy and institutional complementarities: A comparative analysis across 26 OECD countries. Employment Outcomes and Policy and Institutional Complementarities: A Comparative Analysis across, 26.

9. Bambra, C. (2007). Going beyond The three worlds of welfare capitalism: regime theory and public health research. Journal of Epidemiology & Community Health, 61(12), 1098-1102.
10. Barkan, J. (2018). Corporate power and neoliberalism. The Sage handbook of neoliberalism (446-456). London: Sage.
11. Beblavý, M., & Hájková, A. (2016). Social Investment and State Capacity. CEPS Working Document No. 419/February 2016.
12. Benassi, D. (2010). “Father of the Welfare State”? Beveridge and the Emergence of the Welfare State. Sociologica, 4(3), 64-72.
13. Benda, L., Fenger, M., Koster, F., & Van der Veen, R. (2017). Social investment risks?: An explorative analysis of new social risks in the social investment state. Corvinus Journal of Sociology and Social Policy, 8(2), 25-42.
14. Blau, J., & Abramovitz, M. (2003). Social Welfare Policy. New York: Oxford University Press,
15. Briggs, A. (1961). The welfare state in historical perspective. European Journal of Sociology/Archives Européennes de Sociologie/Europäisches Archiv für Soziologie, 2(2), 221-258.
16. Buhr, D., & Stoy, V. (2015). More than just welfare transfers? A review of the scope of Esping-Andersen’s welfare regime typology. Social Policy and Society, 14(2), 271- 285.
17. Cantillon, B., & Van Lancker, W. (2013). Three shortcomings of the social investment perspective. Social Policy and Society, 12(4), 553-564.
18. Chapra, M. (1979). The Islamic welfare state and its role in the economy. Leicester: The Islamic Foundation.
19. Choi, Y. J., Huber, E., Kim, W. S., Kwon, H. Y., & Shi, S. J. (2020). Social investment in the knowledge-based economy: new politics and policies. Policy and Society, 39(2), 147-170.
20. Claassen, R. (2014). Human dignity in the capability approach. The Cambridge Handbook of Human Dignity: Interdisciplinary Perspectives (240-249). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
21. Coase, R. (1937). The Nature of the Firm. Economica, November, 4, 386- 405.
22. Coase, R. (1998). The New Institutional Economics. The American Economic Review, 88(2), 72-74. http://www.jstor.org/stable/116895 [04.02.2021].
23. Comim, F. (2018). Sen’s Capability Approach, Social Choice Theory and the Use of Rankings. New Frontiers of the Capability Approach (179-197). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
24. Deeming, C., & Smyth, P. (2015). Social investment after neoliberalism: Policy paradigms and political platforms. Journal of social policy, 44(2), 297-318.
25. Duménil, G., & Lévy, D. (2005). The neoliberal (counter-) revolution. Neoliberalism: A critical reader (9-19). London: Pluto.
26. Ellison, N. (2006). The transformation of welfare states?. New York, Routledge.
27. Esping-Andersen, G. (1990). The three worlds of welfare capitalism. New Jersey: Princeton University Press.
28. Esping-Andersen, G. (1994). After the golden age: the future of the welfare state in the new global order (No. 7). UNRISD Occasional Paper: World Summit for Social Development.
29. Ferguson, J. (2010). The Uses of Neoliberalism. Antipode, 41, 166–184. https://doi. org/10.1111/j.1467-8330.2009.00721.x
30. Ferrera, M. (1996). The’Southern model’of welfare in social Europe. Journal of European social policy, 6(1), 17-37.
31. Foucault, M. (2008). The Birth of Biopolitics: Lectures at the Collège de France 1978–1979. Basingstoke: Palgrave.
32. Ganti, T. (2014). Neoliberalism. Annual Review of Anthropology, 43(1), 89–104. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-anthro-092412-155528
33. Gamble, A. (2013). Neo-liberalism and fiscal conservatism. Resilient Liberalism in Europe’s Political Economy (53–76). Cambridge University Press. https://doi. org/10.1017/CBO9781139857086.004
34. Gazier, B. (2009). The European employment strategy in the tempest: restoring a longterm perspective. What Future for Social Investment (153-164). Institute for Future Studies.
35. Goodin, R., Headey, B., Muffels, R., & Dirven, H. (1999). Germany as a corporatist welfare regime. The Real Worlds of Welfare Capitalism (253-258). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
36. Goodin, R., Rice, J., Parpo, A., & Eriksson, L. (2008). How welfare regimes differ. Discretionary Time: A New Measure of Freedom (115-130). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
37. Harvey, D. (2007). A Brief History of Neoliberalism. New York: Oxford University Press.
38. Harvie, D., & Ogman, R. (2019). The broken promises of the social investment market. Environment and Planning A: Economy and Space, 51(4), 980-1004.
39. Häusermann, S. (2018). The multidimensional politics of social investment in conservative welfare regimes: family policy reform between social transfers and social investment. Journal of European Public Policy, 25(6), 862-877.
40. Hick, R. (2012). The capability approach: insights for a new poverty focus. Journal of social policy, 41(2), 291-308.
41. Jan, S., Ullah, K., & Asutay, M. (2015). Knowledge, Work, and Social Welfare as Islamic Socioeconomic Development Goals. Journal of Islamic Banking and Finance, 32(3), 9-19. https://ssrn.com/abstract=2836305 [04.02.2021].
42. Kahf, M. (2014). Notes on Islamic Economics: Theory and Institutions. CreateSpace Independent Publishing Platform.
43. Kalkavan, H. (2020). The Relation Between Corporate Social Responsibility and Financial Performance: Reviewing Empirical Studies and Discussing the Ethical Aspect. Strategic Outlook for Innovative Work Behaviours: Interdisciplinary and Multidimensional Perspectives (179–191). Cham: Springer International Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-50131-0_10
44. Kiess, J., Norman, L., Temple, L., & Uba, K. (2017). Path dependency and convergence of three worlds of welfare policy during the Great Recession: UK, Germany and Sweden. Journal of International and Comparative Social Policy, 33(1), 1-17. 166
45. Kersbergen, K., & Vis, B. (2013). The Welfare State. Comparative Welfare State Politics: Development, Opportunities, and Reform (10-30). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
46. Kersbergen, K. (1995). Social Capitalism A Study of Christian Democracy and The Welfare State. London: Routledge.
47. Kur’an-ı Kerim Meali. (2011). Ankara: Diyanet İşleri Başkanlığı.
48. Lapavitsas, C. (2005). Mainstream economics in the neoliberal era. Neoliberalism: A critical reader (30-40). London: Pluto.
49. Lawn, J., & Prentice, C. (2015). Introduction: Neoliberal culture/the cultures of neoliberalism. Sites: A journal of social anthropology and cultural studies, 12(1), 1-29. https://doi.org/10.11157/sites-vol12iss1id312
50. Lazzarato, M. (2012). The making of indebted man. Los Angles, CA: Semiotext.
51. Levent, A. (2016). Yönetişim ve Yeni Kurumsal İktisat. İktisat Politikası Araştırmaları Dergisi, 3(2), 17-32.
52. MacLeavy, J. (2011). A ‘new politics’ of austerity, workfare and gender? The UK coalition government’s welfare reform proposals. Cambridge Journal of Regions, Economy and Society, 4(3), 355–367. https://doi.org/10.1093/cjres/rsr023
53. MacLeavy, J. (2016). Neoliberalism and welfare. The handbook of neoliberalism (252–261). Abingdon: Routledge.
54. Madra, Y. M., & Adaman, F. (2014). Neoliberal Reason and Its Forms: De-Politicisation Through Economisation. Antipode, 46(3), 691–716. https://doi.org/10.1111/anti.12065
55. Morel, N., Palier, B., & Palme, J. (2009). What future for social investment? Institute For Futures Studies.
56. Munck, R. (2005). Neoliberalism and Politics, and the Politics of Neoliberalism. Neoliberalism: A critical reader (60-69). London: Pluto.
57. Naqvi, S. (1981). Individual freedom, social welfare and Islamic economic order. Islamabad: Pakistan Institute of Development Economics.
58. Naqvi, S.N.H. (2003). Perspective on Morality and Human Well-Being: A Contribution to Islamic Economics. Leicester: The Islamic Foundation.
59. North, D. (1986). The New Institutional Economics. Journal of Institutional and Theoretical Economics (JITE) / Zeitschrift Für Die Gesamte Staatswissenschaft,142(1),230-237. http://www.jstor.org/stable/40726723 [04.02.2021].
60. Olsaretti, S. (2005). Endorsement and freedom in Amartya Sen’s capability approach. Economics & Philosophy, 21(1), 89-108. Özdemir, S. (2009). Küreselleşme ve refah devletleri üzerindeki etkileri. Sosyal Siyaset Konferansları Dergisi, 57, 55-86.167
61. Palley, T.I. (2005). From Keynesianism to neoliberalism: shifting paradigms in economics. Neoliberalism: a critical reader (20-29). London: Pluto.
62. Peck, J., Brenner, N., & Theodore, N. (2018). Actually Existing Neoliberalism. The Sage handbook of neoliberalism (3-15). London: Sage.
63. Pogge, T. (2010). A critique of the capability approach. Measuring justice: Primary goods and capabilities (17-60). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
64. Prandini, R., Orlandini, M., & Guerra, A. (2016). Social investment in times of crisis: A quiet revolution or a shaken welfare capitalism. Overview Report, Bologna.
65. Qizilbash, M. (2001). Amartya Sen’s Capability View: Insightful Sketch Or Distorted Picture? Discussion Paper-University Of East Anglia Economics Research Centre. ss. 53-81.
66. Ronchi, S. (2018). Which roads (if any) to social investment? The recalibration of EU welfare states at the crisis crossroads (2000–2014). Journal of Social Policy, 47(3), 459-478.
67. Rosanvallon, P. (2000). The New Social Question Rethinking Welfare State. New Jersey: Princeton Press.
68. Salais, R. (2004). Incorporating the capability approach into social and employment policies. Europe and the Politics of Capabilities (490-532). New York: Cambridge University Press.
69. Salhi, S. (2009). The Welfare State From An Islamic Perspective. Encyclopaedia of Islamic Economics, 2, 295-306.
70. Schmidt, V. A., & Woll, C. (2013). The state: The bête noire of neo-liberalism or its reatest conquest? Resilient Liberalism in Europe’s Political Economy (112–142). Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139857086.006
71. Schwegler, T. A. (2009). The Bankrupt Framework of Neoliberalism: A Bailout of Anthropological Theory. Anthropology News, 50(4), 24. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1556-3502.2009.50424_1.x
72. Seeleib‐Kaiser, M. (2016). The end of the conservative German welfare state model. Social Policy & Administration, 50(2), ss. 219-240.
73. Sen, A. (1990). Development as capability expansion. The community development reader (319-328). New York: Routledge,
74. Sen, A. (1993). Capability and well-being. The quality of life (270-293). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
75. Sen, A. (1999). Develeopment as freedom. New York: Oxford Paperbacks.
76. Shaikh, A. (2005). The economic mythology of neoliberalism. Neoliberalism: A critical reader (41-49). London: Pluto. 168 Neoliberalizm ve İslam Ekonomisinin Sosyal Refah Yaklaşımlarının Karşılaştırılması
77. Smith, T. (2004). Corporatist welfare states: The residue of the past, or the wave of the future? France in Crisis: Welfare, Inequality, and Globalization since 1980 (19-53). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
78. Swank, D., & Duane, S. (2002). Global capital, political institutions, and policy change in developed welfare states. Cambridge University Press.
79. Titmuss, Richard (1974). Social Policy. London: Allen and Unwin Publ.
80. Van der Veen, R., & Van der Brug, W. (2013). Three Worlds of Social Insurance: On the Validity of Esping-Andersen’s Welfare Regime Dimensions. British Journal of Political Science, 43(2), 323-343.
81. Van Kersbergen, K., & Hemerijck, A. (2012). Two decades of change in Europe: the emergence of the social investment state. Journal of Social Policy, 41(3), 475-492.
82. Wang, S., Ha, J., Kalkavan, H., Yüksel, S., & Dinçer, H. (2020). IT2-Based Hybrid Approach for Sustainable Economic Equality: A Case of E7 Economies. SAGE Open, 10(2). https://doi.org/10.1177/2158244020924434