“If You Are Able to Work, You Must Work”

In recent decades, social policy in many countries has progressively evolved from social protection to the “activation” of benefit recipients and pushing them into labour market participation, representing a marked shift away from traditional social welfare to what is called “workfare”. Workfare policies make government’s assistance selective through the introduction of tight eligibility criteria, and conditional upon the recipient’s active participation in paid work, job searching, training, or business creation. Workfare policies are integral to the “active” welfare state, which fosters individuals’ personal responsibility, self-management, and an entrepreneurial mindset in those who receive social assistance.

When the Soviet Union collapsed, its universal, “cradle-to-grave” welfare system was blamed for having developed a “dependency mentality” in citizens, deemed too reliant on a paternalistic welfare state and unable to cope with hardships on their own. These perceived obstacles to adapt to a market logic rested upon fundamental ideological differences concerning the nature of the social contract between the state and its citizens. The Soviet understanding of social rights was based on the idea of collective social protection and saw the socialist state as the ultimate guarantor of social justice. In contrast to this, activation policies promoted a new type of social contract, one based on mutual obligations between the state and citizens, where the latter had to become responsible for his/her own wellbeing and, if assistance was needed, had to demonstrate his/her deservingness.

Between 1991 and the mid-2000s, most countries transitioning from state socialism to market capitalism began shifting away from the Soviet-era welfare model based on categorical entitlements towards a targeted approach based on means testing. If an adult was deemed able to work, benefits began to be made conditional not only upon the person’s financial situation, but also on active participation in retraining programs, paid public works, or other work-related activities, adding behavioural and moral requirements to state support. Official discourse began to emphasize the need to make people less dependent on social benefits and change their behaviour vis-à-vis their economic, social, and employment situations. This represented a decisive move away from the Soviet-era principles of solidarity and universal welfare.

The transition to a market economy came with high social costs for the population. Because, at least on paper, poverty did not exist and employment was guaranteed by the state, poverty-related income support did not exist, either. Post-socialist countries thus had to put in place new institutions to counter a massive rise in poverty and unemployment, necessitating profound changes in social policy. The welfare systems in post-Soviet Central Asia were not exempt from these transformations.

Kazakhstan and Kyrgyzstan adopted some of the most drastic approaches to liberal market reforms, aimed at opening their economies to foreign investments and trade, and at stimulating the rise of a new entrepreneurial class. Both countries, despite their differences in political and economic conditions, have progressively reduced the role of the state in social policy by replacing the “cradle-to-grave” state-guaranteed system of universal welfare with contributory programmes and targeted social assistance through means testing, fostering the image of the family as the main sphere of welfare provision. By looking at the changes in policy discourse and development of targeted social assistance programs in both countries, one can notice an increasing emphasis on the contractual nature of social assistance, where the recipient’s willingness to work and motivation to get out of poverty are central.

Changing Discourse in Central Asia

Kazakhstan’s shift towards workfare through targeting, means testing, and activation can be traced back to early governmental documents. The “Kazakhstan 2030” strategy, published in 1997, stated that the state should commit to assist only the most vulnerable groups, while creating favourable conditions for the rest of society to take care of themselves. The “Kazakhstan 2050” strategy drafted in 2012 stressed this trend by introducing the idea of deservingness, meaning that social assistance would go to those who proactively seek ways to improve their socio-economic situation. In an article, then-President Nursultan Nazarbayev wrote that the state, from an “endless donor”, should become a partner, creating conditions for building a “society of universal labour” where only work ensures well-being. He envisioned a new model of welfare state, whose core function should be not social protection, but what he called “social progress”.

Since taking office in 2019, President Kassym-Jomart Tokayev has followed Nazarbayev’s idea of a universal labour society, emphasizing the importance of waged labour to reduce poverty. He repeatedly pointed out the need to “reset” social policy by increasing its targeting and has been overtly criticizing the current targeted social assistance programme for creating a “psychology of dependency”, calling for an adjustment in the mechanism for its allocation and for motivating people to work.

After the January 2022 riots, in an effort to re-establish trust within society, Tokayev launched a new direction of social policy, centred around the ideas of justice, responsibility, and hard work. Hard and honest work are at the basis of Tokayev’s concept of “responsible person” (Adal Azamat). This new social policy led to the adoption of the Social Code in 2023, which outlines the principles of a new social contract based on individual responsibility. Tokayev himself explained: “Its essence is that the state takes on the guaranteed fulfilment of renewed social obligations. However, for their part, all Kazakhstanis must begin to think about their future, take on responsibilities and obligations”.

With the adoption of the Social Code, the transition from passive social assistance to activation was completed: the aim of social assistance in Kazakhstan is now mainly to strengthen the motivation of low-income individuals to work and shape a more responsible and entrepreneurial subject.

Both Kazakhstan and Kyrgyzstan, although using different terms and at different speeds, have been progressively shifting towards activation, stressing moral obligations of welfare recipients, and envisioning a new contractual relationship between the state and citizens.

As in Kazakhstan, the shift away from the universal welfare system inherited from the Soviet Union began in Kyrgyzstan at the end of the millennium with the introduction of means testing and targeting, aimed at providing social assistance to the neediest in a time of deep economic crisis and limited state capacity. In the following decade, the evolution towards better targeting was accompanied by an increasing emphasis on self-reliance and responsibilization of citizens vis-à-vis their economic situation. A vision for a renewed role of the state in social policy was being shaped, away from the paternalistic model of the Soviet state.

In the Social Protection Strategy for 2012–2014, the government articulated the importance of avoiding “state guardianship” in social policy, accused of limiting people’s economic freedom, and instead promoted a neoliberal subject, stating the principle that everyone who is able to work should do so as the primary condition to be assisted in getting out of poverty. The National Development Strategy 2018–2040 marked a significant shift in the role of the state in the social sector. It envisioned a society where every citizen understands that their well-being depends not only on the state, but also, and mainly, on their own efforts, stating: “The role of the state in the social sector is changing from the current dominant service provider to that of a regulator.”

The strategy also foresaw the widespread application of poverty relief programmes based on social contracts, thus reinforcing the primacy of individual responsibility in overcoming hardships and envisioning a contractual relationship between citizens and the state, based on mutual obligations. The National Development Programme until 2026 further develops the social contract mechanism for low-income households to become more independent in getting out of poverty, while advocating for better targeting of social assistance to the poorest citizens.

Both Kazakhstan and Kyrgyzstan, although using different terms and at different speeds, have been progressively shifting towards activation, stressing moral obligations of welfare recipients, and envisioning a new contractual relationship between the state and citizens, whereby the latter has limited responsibilities towards its citizens, mainly to those who cannot work (children, the disabled, and the elderly). For the rest, the state adopts workfare programmes and limits its assistance only to those who demonstrate their deservingness through a pro-active attitude towards work as the main remedy for poverty. This logic underlies the application of the “social contract” approach in social assistance found in both countries.

The Work-First Approach

Targeted social assistance (TSA) is one of the three primary forms of poverty alleviation programmes available in Kazakhstan. Since its introduction in 2002, TSA has targeted families whose per capita income does not exceed the poverty line, calculated as a percentage of the subsistence minimum, currently set at 43,407 tenge (roughly 81 euro). TSA payments are calculated for each family member as the difference between their per capita income and the poverty line. In 2023, the average monthly payment was 7,968 tenge (roughly 15 euro).

In 2019, following spontaneous protests by mothers with many children demanding increased social support, the poverty line for TSA eligibility was raised from 50 to 70 percent of the subsistence minimum. The increase in the eligibility threshold resulted in a significant increase in TSA beneficiaries. That year, there were more than 2 million TSA recipients, as opposed to almost 1 million in 2020 and 2021. This led the Ministry of Labour and Social Development to improve targeting and introduce a workfare element through the signing of a social contract with able-bodied family members, as the then-Minister of Labour explained: “You signed a social contract: if you are able to work, you must work, if you don’t work, you won’t receive benefits.”

In 2019, amendments to the law introduced two types of TSA: conditional and unconditional. For households with at least one able-bodied member, receiving TSA became conditional upon signing a six-month social contract foreseeing mandatory participation in active employment promotion measures, including training and retraining, participation in state employment programmes, or opening a small business. Failure to comply with the obligations contained in the social contract result in the denial of TSA not just to the able-bodied individual but to the entire family, regardless of the status and age of its members.

Despite the government showcasing the social contract as its most successful active measure to push people out of poverty, experts have expressed some concerns.

The reform of the social protection system in Kyrgyzstan took shape between 1995 and 1998 with the adoption of the law on social benefits, introducing the Single Monthly Benefit (SMB), known as ui-bologo komok, a targeted type of social assistance for families living below the guaranteed minimum income level. The ui-bologo komok is the largest social assistance programme in the country, targeting households with children under 16 whose average per capita total family income (excluding pensions and other benefits) is below the guaranteed minimum income of 1,000 som (roughly 12 dollars) per month. The average amount of the benefit in 2024 was 1,392 som per person per month. Compared to 2022, the number of children receiving the benefit has been decreasing and now stands at 278,000 children.

To apply for the benefit, households must provide detailed information about their income, household composition, and assets including land, cattle and cars. All family members of working age must be employed, registered unemployed, or must confirm their unfitness to work. If an able-bodied household member older than 16 is not working or studying, he/she is not considered in the average per capital total family income, which may exclude the family from the right to receive the benefits. As explained in the ministerial instructions, the reason of these conditions are to foster motivation for employment and self-employment among benefit recipients.

Recently, the Ministry of Labour, Social Assistance and Migration (MLSAM) announced a shift towards active measure in social assistance to reduce the number of ui-bologo komok recipients through the implementation of social contracts. Piloted with the support of World Food Programme in 2021 and extended to the whole country in 2022, the social contract is an agreement between a low-income family receiving the ui-bologo komok and the local MLSAM office. By concluding the contract, the household commits to the realization of a business project, while the state grants a lump sum of 100,000 som to open and develop a small business. As a condition, the recipient must agree to give up on the child benefits for three years. According to the description of the programme, the family must demonstrate “labour and property potential”, and the business plan must be approved by a territorial commission. Over two years, 12,800 families received 100,000 som, while an additional 20,000 contracts are planned for 2024.

According to government officials, the social contract is designed to increase personal responsibility, stimulate families to take active steps to overcome difficult life situations, motivate them to improve their standard of living, and become independent from the social security system. It is also aimed at promoting the development of small entrepreneurship and stimulating the creation of new jobs. Despite the government showcasing the social contract as its most successful active measure to push people out of poverty, experts have expressed some concerns, highlighting potential violations of laws that protect the rights of children from low-income families to receive state assistance. There is also criticism regarding the lack of transparency, as the project’s effectiveness is difficult to assess due to the absence of publicly available data.

Towards a New Social Contract?

The shifts in social policy in Kazakhstan and Kyrgyzstan reflect a shift towards activation and the adoption of workfare programs, where labour market participation is a key condition for deserving state assistance, and where individual responsibility, motivation, and hard work are considered essential qualities of the ideal citizen-worker.

Kazakhstan’s social protection embodies a decisive move towards reducing dependency on state support. The introduction of TSA and the enforcement of social contracts are central to this approach. These instruments aim to foster a work ethic and individual initiative among citizens, aligning with the idea of a Society of Universal Labour built by hard-working, responsible, and honest citizens.

Nevertheless, this shift has also led to the stigmatization of the poor, who are often labelled as lazy and dependent. Means tests, conditionality, increasing individual responsibility in managing social risks, and the stigma associated with receiving social assistance end up discouraging many people who may need it. The application process must be renewed quite often, which adds to the bureaucratic burden on recipients. According to a 2022 Human Rights Watch report, because of all this, many who need assistance are in fact excluded from it.

The emphasis on personal responsibility reflects an attempt to combat dependency, but also raises ethical concerns about the treatment of the poor.

In Kyrgyzstan, the implementation of the social contract programme is designed to motivate low-income families to become entrepreneurs. However, the limited funding provided, coupled with inadequate training and restricted market opportunities, particularly in rural areas, has led to a focus on low-risk activities such as animal husbandry. According to the Labour Minister, in 2023, 59 percent of approved business plans were in agriculture, predominantly livestock farming and crop production. Another 24 percent were in small-scale manufacturing, with a focus on sewing, while 10 percent of recipients started service-oriented businesses such as taxi services, beauty salons, and car repairs —only 7 percent ventured into trade.

President Sadyr Japarov highlighted that more than 77 percent of social contract participants earn up to 5,000 som (roughly 53 euro) weekly, while over 22 percent earn up to 10,000 som. He presented this as a positive outcome, yet considering that most recipients have several dependants, these amounts may not be enough to get these households out of poverty, let alone to expand their business. Moreover, the project does not adequately account for the lack of financial literacy or entrepreneurial skills among participants, increasing the risk of business failure and potentially worsening their financial situation. Lastly, the requirement to forgo child benefits for extended periods may negatively affect children’s wellbeing.

The emphasis on personal responsibility reflects an attempt to combat dependency, but also raises ethical concerns about the treatment of the poor. Recently, the government announced plans to give up on the World Bank method for measuring poverty and adopt a new methodology based on the Chinese model, which involves photographing all family members, their homes, and cars, and making this information public. For now, the MLSAM has started filling an interactive map of benefit recipients showing the home address, the number of children, duration and amount of benefits, and a picture of the recipient in front of his/her house. In both countries, blaming and shaming welfare recipients for their “dependency behaviour” and laziness can lead to social ostracization, exacerbate social divisions, and increase the stigma associated with poverty.

The social contract programmes in Kazakhstan and Kyrgyzstan, although different in their scope and functioning, represent a similar shift towards workfare models, where poverty is attributed to personal failings, and where deservingness through hard work becomes the main criterion for social assistance. This resonates with broader efforts to shift welfare policies from needs-based or rights-based approaches towards a deserving-based, work-first approach. The challenge lies in creating policies that empower individuals without stigmatizing or alienating them, thereby fostering a more inclusive society.