ArticleSocial science & medicine (1982)2025
The constructive power of informality? Relationships, emotion, and empathy in the administration of social assistance for childhood disability in South Africa.
Article in Social science & medicine (1982), 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- A reinforcement learning framework for modeling cultural inertia in public welfare resource allocation.Scientific reports · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Social assistance cash transfers, known locally as grants, are the only regular financial support available to low-income families in South Africa. There are two broad categories: poverty alleviation and disability-related grants. All disability-related grants are linked with the public sector health system, because only medical doctors are permitted to conduct the required assessments. This article reflects on a three-year qualitative study of the perspectives of stakeholders around the central focus of the Care Dependency Grant for primary caregivers of disabled children. In this article, various framings of disability-related grants are unpacked, with a specific focus on the gatekeeping practices of frontline social security officials in South Africa. I situate their behaviours within local and global conversations about systems for disability benefits assessment and distribution, which increasingly aim to suppress bureaucratic "emotionality" for fear that this produces subjective - and thus, unfair - decision-making. The latter imperative is intensified in South Africa because of justified concerns about corruption. In an under-resourced bureaucracy catering to a large population, however, high levels of informality are likely to persist. Building on Rupert Hodder's concept of positive informality, I share examples of "constructive" informality from the abovementioned study and argue for the importance of closely examining and learning from these instances. I conclude by suggesting that instead of trying to suppress their humanity, public servants' engagement with the populace could be enhanced by investing in their professional development toward increased empathy and relationship-building. This might be an untapped complementary approach to improving social justice in redistributive efforts.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.