Social Policy Model for Improving the Demographic Situation in Kazakhstan

Among the long-term factors in developing the country’s economy and its regions is the development of human capital. However, the country’s human capital has a different level of physical and mental development. In this regard, the study of social policy is most relevant to improve the demographic situation in the country. The article considers the main tasks of the demographic development of Kazakhstan in recent years in connection with the level of social policy development. The issue of the effectiveness of social policy is particularly important for Kazakhstan, which is associated with the inevitability of population aging and the rapid increase in the burden on the ablebodied population, as well as a decrease in the number of young people and the number of women at the peak of fertility. This entails a decrease in the population in the future. The purpose of this article is to develop social policy mechanisms to improve the demographic situation in the country. The development of social infrastructure— education, healthcare, culture, sports, and other similar systems—could improve the demographic situation in Kazakhstan. The research method is a systematic and integrated approach that can develop recommendations in social policy to increase the population. The results of the study cover recommendations for social services and the development of social infrastructure. The theoretical significance of the study lies in the use of this material in textbooks, and the practical significance lies in the use of recommendations by authorities. 

1. Duckett, J. (2020). Neoliberalism, authoritarian politics and social policy in China. Development and Change, 51(2), 523-539. https://doi. org/10.1111/dech.12568

2. Esping-Andersen, G. (1990). The three worlds of welfare capitalism. New Jersey, Princeton University Press.

3. Etzerodt, S. F., & Eriksen, J. (2017). Varieties of capitalism and varieties of welfare state capitalism: An empirical assessment of economic growth. https://vbn.aau.dk/ws/files/263372910/ Varieties_of_Capitalism_and_Varieties_oof_Welfare_ State_Capitalism.pdf

4. Frericks, P., & Höppner, J. (2019). Self-responsibility readdressed: Shifts in financial responsibility for social security between the public realm, the individual, and the family in Europe. American Behavioral Scientist, 63(1), 65-84.

5. Grigorieva, I. A. (2003). Social policy: basic concepts. Journal of Social Policy Research, 1(1), 29-44.

6. Hall, P. A., & Gingerich, D. W. (2009). Varieties of capitalism and institutional complementarities in the political economy: An empirical analysis. British journal of political science, 39(3), 449- 482. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0007123409000672

7. Hall, S. M. (2020). Social reproduction as social infrastructure. Soundings, 76(76), 82-94. https:// doi.org/10.3898/SOUN.76.06.2020

8. Kaufmann, F. X. (1997). Herausforderungen des Sozialstaates. Suhrkamp.

9. Knijn, T., & Kremer, M. (1997). Gender and the caring dimension of welfare states: toward inclusive citizenship. Social Politics: International Studies in Gender, State & Society, 4(3), 328-361. https://doi. org/10.1093/oxfordjournals.sp.a034270

10. Latham, A., & Layton, J. (2019). Social infrastructure and the public life of cities: Studying urban sociality and public spaces. Geography Compass, 13(7), e12444. https://doi.org/10.1111/ gec3.12444

11. McFarlane, C., & Silver, J. (2017). The political city:“Seeing sanitation” and making the urban political in Cape Town. Antipode, 49(1), 125-148. https://doi.org/10.1111/anti.12264

12. McFarlane, C., & Silver, J. (2017). Navigating the city: Dialectics of everyday urbanism. Transactions of the Institute of British Geographers, 42(3), 458-471. https://doi.org/10.1111/ tran. 12175

13. Penny, J. (2020). ‘Defend the Ten’: Everyday dissensus against the slow spoiling of Lambeth’s libraries. Environment and Planning D: Society and Space, 38(5), 923-940. https://doi. org/10.1177/0263775819893685

14. Schröder, M. (2019). Varieties of Capitalism and Welfare Regime Theories: Assumptions, Accomplishments, and the Need for Different Methods. Kölner Zeitschrift für Soziologie & Sozialpsychologie, 71, 53-73 https://doi.org/10.1007/ S11577-019-00609-7

15. Shaw, I. G. (2019). Worlding austerity: The spatial violence of poverty. Environment and Planning D: Society and Space, 37(6), 971-989. https:// doi.org/10.1177/0263775819857102

16. Simone, A. (2004). People as Infrastructure: Intersecting fragments in Johannesburg. Public Culture, 16(3), 407-429. https://doi. org/10.1215/08992363-16-3-407

17. Simone, A. (2021). Ritornello:“people as infrastructure”. Urban Geography, 42(9), 1341-1348. https://doi.org/10.1080/02723638.2021.1894397

18. Strauss, K. (2020). Labour geography III: Precarity, racial capitalisms and infrastructure. Progress in Human Geography, 44(6), 1212-1224. https://doi.org/10.1177/0309132519895308