Benefits conditionality in the UK: is it common, and is it perceived to be reasonable?

Baumberg Geiger, Ben; Scullion, Lisa; Edmiston, Dan; de Vries, Rob; Summers, Kate; Ingold, Jo; Young, David

Abstract

Programme-level data suggests that increasing numbers of claimants are subject to work-related behavioural requirements in countries like the UK. Likewise, academic qualitative research has suggested that conditionality is pervasive within the benefits system, and often felt to be unreasonable. However, there is little quantitative evidence on the extent or experience of conditionality from claimants’ perspectives. We fill this gap drawing on a purpose-collected survey of UK benefit claimants (n=3,801). We find the stated application of conditionality was evident for a surprisingly small proportion of survey participants – even lower than programme-level data suggest. Unreasonable conditionality was perceived by many of those subject to conditionality but not a majority, with e.g. 26.2% believing that work coaches do not fully take health/care-related barriers into account. Yet alongside this, a substantial minority of claimants (22.4%) not currently subject to conditionality report that conditionality has negatively affected their mental health. We argue that reconciling this complex set of evidence requires a more nuanced understanding of conditionality, which is alert to methodological assumptions, the role of time and implementation, and the need to go beyond explicit requirements to consider implicit forms of conditionality. Concluding, we recommend a deeper mixed-methods agenda for conditionality research.

• Journal Article Type: Article
• Acceptance Date: Dec 17, 2024
• Online Publication Date: Feb 6, 2025
• Deposit Date: Mar 5, 2025
• Publicly Available Date: Mar 5, 2025
• Print ISSN: 0144-5596
• Electronic ISSN: 1467-9515
• Publisher: Wiley
• Peer Reviewed: Peer Reviewed
• DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/spol.13119