Entitlement in Times of Crisis

Clicks: 1
ID: 314347
2026
Free PDF
Article Quality & Performance Metrics
Overall Quality
Not rated
Combines reader engagement with the AI quality analysis. This article has not been analysed, so there is no overall score — reader engagement is measured and shown alongside.
AI Quality Assessment
Not analyzed
Readership in this journal

Ranked #850 of 1,517 articles by views in Oxford University Press eBooks

Most read Least read

Bar heights use a square-root scale. Only the 120 most-read articles are drawn; the journal has 1,517 in total.

Mint this article as an NFT
Not yet minted

Create a permanent, verifiable on-chain record of this article on the Scimatic Network. The NFT is held in your Journament account, and you can withdraw it to your own wallet at any time.

5 SUSD one-off · no wallet required
Sign in to mint
Abstract
Abstract The COVID-19 pandemic has caused a state of crisis in many countries around the world. It has also highlighted existing inequalities in that economic challenges were disproportionate and often harsher for already disadvantaged members of societies. States of crisis also enabled extraordinary government measures and responses. These include expansions of social protection, enacting disaster-relief measures to prevent and combat individuals’ economic challenges. Policy frameworks which facilitate these ad hoc measures are often temporary and gain precedence while emergencies last. However, they are also based in an existing policy landscape. In other words, there may be conflicting views on which policy framework should take precedence in the design and allocation of disaster relief. This chapter seeks to understand those conflicting views by exploring the case of South Africa. It further links those views to concepts of entitlement and distributive justice. It explores the reasons behind arguments which seek to give precedence to the Disaster Management Relief Act over the Broad Based Black Economic Empowerment Act, South Africa’s framework of affirmative action. This has been recorded in three appeals against the South African government by different unions and civil society organizations. The case of South Africa shows how ad hoc expansions of social protection can cause political tensions which further reveal justifications of inequality in a society. Understanding these justifications matters in finding inclusive and sustainable pathways for social protection—particularly so during times of crisis and in an adaptive manner.
Reference Key
openalex_W7162003353 Use this key to autocite in the manuscript while using SciMatic Manuscript Manager or Thesis Manager
Authors Annalena Oppel
Journal Oxford University Press eBooks
Year 2026
DOI
10.1093/oxfordhb/9780197761465.013.0016
URL
https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordhb/9780197761465.013.0016
Keywords Keywords not found

Citations

No citations found. To add a citation, contact the admin at info@scimatic.org

Comments

No comments yet. Be the first to comment on this article.