Social policy and religion are intertwined at many levels and in ways that are changing rapidly. Religious (and other) non-government organisations have stepped in to fill the vacuum left by declining or inadequate state provision, giving rise to new tensions and social dynamics. In Western countries, the increased emphasis on personal responsibility reflects the priority given to the role of values and behaviour in the formulation of social policy. This has given rise to a moral questioning of the role of the state and other actors in welfare provision, broadly defined. At the same time, growing economic prosperity has not delivered the anticipated increase in well‑being, leading to a shift in thinking about the determinants of human well-being away from the material towards the social, the subjective and the spiritual. Religious values and practice are also playing an increasingly important role in providing members of ethnic minority and immigrant communities with an opportunity to strengthen community ties and improve their social standing and identity. These trends both reflect and have resulted in a shift of welfare service provision from the government to non-government sectors, particularly to long‑standing religious organisations that promote the idea that religious belief should form the basis for action.

Social policy and religion are intertwined at many levels and in ways that are changing rapidly. Religious (and other) non-government organisations have stepped in to fill the vacuum left by declining or inadequate state provision, giving rise to new tensions and social dynamics. In Western countries, the increased emphasis on personal responsibility reflects the priority given to the role of values and behaviour in the formulation of social policy. This has given rise to a moral questioning of the role of the state and other actors in welfare provision, broadly defined. At the same time, growing economic prosperity has not delivered the anticipated increase in well‑being, leading to a shift in thinking about the determinants of human well-being away from the material towards the social, the subjective and the spiritual. Religious values and practice are also playing an increasingly important role in providing members of ethnic minority and immigrant communities with an opportunity to strengthen community ties and improve their social standing and identity. These trends both reflect and have resulted in a shift of welfare service provision from the government to non-government sectors, particularly to long‑standing religious organisations that promote the idea that religious belief should form the basis for action.

The increase in religious diversity produced by the global movement of people and cultures and the proliferation of internal difference within religious communities raises social policy issues. Consideration of these issues is facilitated by understanding that religious groups intersect with social policy in four basic ways: as objects, sources, critics and implementers of policy. A major issue is the challenge societies face in respecting freedoms of religion and belief on the one hand and providing services to all citizens on the other. Resolving these issues requires an awareness of the religious profile of a society and sensitivity to its religious diversity and to the ways services are delivered. Research into the current status of freedom of religion and belief in Australia is used as a case study to identify issues and potential ways to address them. This research reveals that there is a lack of mechanisms for considering and resolving these issues.

The increase in religious diversity produced by the global movement of people and cultures and the proliferation of internal difference within religious communities raises social policy issues. Consideration of these issues is facilitated by understanding that religious groups intersect with social policy in four basic ways: as objects, sources, critics and implementers of policy. A major issue is the challenge societies face in respecting freedoms of religion and belief on the one hand and providing services to all citizens on the other. Resolving these issues requires an awareness of the religious profile of a society and sensitivity to its religious diversity and to the ways services are delivered. Research into the current status of freedom of religion and belief in Australia is used as a case study to identify issues and potential ways to address them. This research reveals that there is a lack of mechanisms for considering and resolving these issues.

The parties contributing to the Freedom of Religion and Belief in Australia Inquiry had a strong interest in the role of religion in society. Those making submissions were parochial about the status and importance of their own faith, less positive about religious diversity, more likely to be culturally supremacist, and more likely to independently express anti‑Islamic sentiment than the general population. A large proportion of submissions (40 per cent) included the religio-centric assertion that Australia is a Christian nation. Alternative voices - that Australia is a multi-faith country or those that saw Australia as secular - were much less 'present' in the submissions. Most submissions argued for the retention of religious exemptions from anti‑discrimination laws and against anti-religious-vilification legislation that would protect religious minorities. Christian-centric voices purposefully undermined movement towards more inclusive social policy and protection of rights. The Christian majority insisted that their position of dominance be affirmed in Australia. The failure of the inquiry to advocate for policy and legislative change to expand religious freedoms (especially to minorities) was a performance of professed 'state neutrality' that reproduced substantive inequality. The public submission process was an effective mechanism for reinforcing a privileged relation between the state and Christian organisations, and fails the tests of both fairness and more substantively equality.

The parties contributing to the Freedom of Religion and Belief in Australia Inquiry had a strong interest in the role of religion in society. Those making submissions were parochial about the status and importance of their own faith, less positive about religious diversity, more likely to be culturally supremacist, and more likely to independently express anti‑Islamic sentiment than the general population. A large proportion of submissions (40 per cent) included the religio-centric assertion that Australia is a Christian nation. Alternative voices - that Australia is a multi-faith country or those that saw Australia as secular - were much less 'present' in the submissions. Most submissions argued for the retention of religious exemptions from anti‑discrimination laws and against anti-religious-vilification legislation that would protect religious minorities. Christian-centric voices purposefully undermined movement towards more inclusive social policy and protection of rights. The Christian majority insisted that their position of dominance be affirmed in Australia. The failure of the inquiry to advocate for policy and legislative change to expand religious freedoms (especially to minorities) was a performance of professed 'state neutrality' that reproduced substantive inequality. The public submission process was an effective mechanism for reinforcing a privileged relation between the state and Christian organisations, and fails the tests of both fairness and more substantively equality.

This historical overview explores the crucial and changing relationships between faith-based organisations and governments, not only in the implementation of social services but also in the formation of social policy. Historically Australian governments have left large areas of social provision to the non-government sector. For example, income support for the unemployed was not taken up by governments until World War II and income support for sole parents remained largely a responsibility for non-government organisations (NGOs) until the 1970s. Prior to governments taking responsibility for income support, most of these NGOs were religious organisations surviving on donations, philanthropic support and limited government funding. It is argued that the dominant, semi-public role of religious organisations in service delivery and social policy formation is an important but largely overlooked aspect of the Australian historical experience.

This historical overview explores the crucial and changing relationships between faith-based organisations and governments, not only in the implementation of social services but also in the formation of social policy. Historically Australian governments have left large areas of social provision to the non-government sector. For example, income support for the unemployed was not taken up by governments until World War II and income support for sole parents remained largely a responsibility for non-government organisations (NGOs) until the 1970s. Prior to governments taking responsibility for income support, most of these NGOs were religious organisations surviving on donations, philanthropic support and limited government funding. It is argued that the dominant, semi-public role of religious organisations in service delivery and social policy formation is an important but largely overlooked aspect of the Australian historical experience.

Many social policy objectives align with religious beliefs - poverty alleviation, compassion for the poor and addressing more generally the needs of the vulnerable and disadvantaged in society. Yet there are also conflicting views about means, including the role of the state in redistributing resources from the rich and powerful to the poor and powerless. Redistribution and poverty alleviation are central goals of the welfare state, although ideological and other differences mean that views about the need for, as well as the design, delivery and impact of social programs vary. Against this background, this paper reviews existing national and international studies that have examined how religious belief and practice are associated with the attitudes that underpin the welfare state: compassion, altruism, redistribution and egalitarianism, and the activities that are assumed to align with modern conceptions of 'a good civic citizen': participation and engagement. The analysis draws on recent Australian survey data to examine whether the attitudes of those who actively practice their religious beliefs differ from other groups in society and, if so, whether those differences are consistent with the underlying goals of social policy.

Many social policy objectives align with religious beliefs - poverty alleviation, compassion for the poor and addressing more generally the needs of the vulnerable and disadvantaged in society. Yet there are also conflicting views about means, including the role of the state in redistributing resources from the rich and powerful to the poor and powerless. Redistribution and poverty alleviation are central goals of the welfare state, although ideological and other differences mean that views about the need for, as well as the design, delivery and impact of social programs vary. Against this background, this paper reviews existing national and international studies that have examined how religious belief and practice are associated with the attitudes that underpin the welfare state: compassion, altruism, redistribution and egalitarianism, and the activities that are assumed to align with modern conceptions of 'a good civic citizen': participation and engagement. The analysis draws on recent Australian survey data to examine whether the attitudes of those who actively practice their religious beliefs differ from other groups in society and, if so, whether those differences are consistent with the underlying goals of social policy.

The impact of religion on social policies and its role in the development, structuring and functioning of welfare states has only recently attracted significant attention. Studies of the relationship between religion and the welfare state have given little consideration to whether the religious precepts and values of the major religions, and the ways of life which they have shaped, are consistent with the idea of the welfare state. This paper shows that the elements of the definition of the modern welfare state were reflected in Jewish communal life as either prescribed by Jewish law (halakha) or lived during both ancient and medieval times, and that communal life was 'welfare-state-like'. In doing so this paper demonstrates that the idea of the welfare state is consistent with Judaism.

The impact of religion on social policies and its role in the development, structuring and functioning of welfare states has only recently attracted significant attention. Studies of the relationship between religion and the welfare state have given little consideration to whether the religious precepts and values of the major religions, and the ways of life which they have shaped, are consistent with the idea of the welfare state. This paper shows that the elements of the definition of the modern welfare state were reflected in Jewish communal life as either prescribed by Jewish law (halakha) or lived during both ancient and medieval times, and that communal life was 'welfare-state-like'. In doing so this paper demonstrates that the idea of the welfare state is consistent with Judaism.

Contrary to the secularisation processes in modernisation theory, religions and faith‑based organisations (FBOs) are thriving in contemporary Indonesia. Strongly supported by community members, religious organisations have begun to extend their services beyond the traditional areas of education and health to operate in disaster relief and poverty alleviation programmes. These FBOs have been offering assistance to the disadvantaged whose needs have not been adequately met by the state. Social programmes run by the FBOs are an important safety net at the grass‑roots level in Indonesia; how to effectively coordinate and offer such services are important social policy issues. This paper will show that the Indonesian Government is keen to remain the key provider of social services and often perceives the services of FBOs as a threat. Some recent state policies to regulate the funding sources of Islamic organisations have posed a significant logistical challenge for their future operation. In addition, theological differences across various religious groups have made it difficult to form inclusive and extensive partnerships among the FBOs, who tend to compete with each another resulting in rivalry. These socio-political contexts have limited the formation of effective partnerships for offering coordinated social services.

Contrary to the secularisation processes in modernisation theory, religions and faith‑based organisations (FBOs) are thriving in contemporary Indonesia. Strongly supported by community members, religious organisations have begun to extend their services beyond the traditional areas of education and health to operate in disaster relief and poverty alleviation programmes. These FBOs have been offering assistance to the disadvantaged whose needs have not been adequately met by the state. Social programmes run by the FBOs are an important safety net at the grass‑roots level in Indonesia; how to effectively coordinate and offer such services are important social policy issues. This paper will show that the Indonesian Government is keen to remain the key provider of social services and often perceives the services of FBOs as a threat. Some recent state policies to regulate the funding sources of Islamic organisations have posed a significant logistical challenge for their future operation. In addition, theological differences across various religious groups have made it difficult to form inclusive and extensive partnerships among the FBOs, who tend to compete with each another resulting in rivalry. These socio-political contexts have limited the formation of effective partnerships for offering coordinated social services.

This paper examines the contribution that faith‑based organisations (FBOs) make to social policy in Papua New Guinea, the Solomon Islands, Vanuatu and Fiji. The paper sets contemporary relationships between church and state in these independent states of Melanesia in their individual historical contexts of missionisation, colonisation and decolonisation. Since independence these sovereign nations have relied on the networks and social capital of faith‑based communities and organisations in policy implementation in critical areas such as health and education. FBOs, for their part, have endeavoured to participate in policy and programme implementation without losing their autonomy. This pattern of selective cooperation has produced a unique policy environment, in which policy coordination continues to challenge government officials. Despite close association between FBOs and social policy in the Melanesian states, the slow progress with human development indicators and the Millennium Development Goals highlights the need to find more effective approaches to agenda-setting, policy articulation and implementation.

This paper examines the contribution that faith‑based organisations (FBOs) make to social policy in Papua New Guinea, the Solomon Islands, Vanuatu and Fiji. The paper sets contemporary relationships between church and state in these independent states of Melanesia in their individual historical contexts of missionisation, colonisation and decolonisation. Since independence these sovereign nations have relied on the networks and social capital of faith‑based communities and organisations in policy implementation in critical areas such as health and education. FBOs, for their part, have endeavoured to participate in policy and programme implementation without losing their autonomy. This pattern of selective cooperation has produced a unique policy environment, in which policy coordination continues to challenge government officials. Despite close association between FBOs and social policy in the Melanesian states, the slow progress with human development indicators and the Millennium Development Goals highlights the need to find more effective approaches to agenda-setting, policy articulation and implementation.

This paper locates the study of Jamat-ud-Da'wa (JUD) within the context of global political developments. Premised on the nexus between the local and the global developments, it discusses how changes in the domestic or international arena shaped the policies of JUD after 9/11. It argues that, as a successor to the Lashker-e-Toiba in Pakistan, the JUD has been active in the social welfare space. It has moved into roles that reside in the domain of the state's responsibility but have passed to the private sector due to the state's failure to meet the needs of its citizens, including the provision of education and relief and rescue efforts after natural disasters. Though not categorically identified as being part of the jihadi agenda, this activism increases the appeal of the JUD among Pakistani citizens, with a possibility of increasing their declared and/or active support for JUD's views on Pakistan's foreign policy.

This paper locates the study of Jamat-ud-Da'wa (JUD) within the context of global political developments. Premised on the nexus between the local and the global developments, it discusses how changes in the domestic or international arena shaped the policies of JUD after 9/11. It argues that, as a successor to the Lashker-e-Toiba in Pakistan, the JUD has been active in the social welfare space. It has moved into roles that reside in the domain of the state's responsibility but have passed to the private sector due to the state's failure to meet the needs of its citizens, including the provision of education and relief and rescue efforts after natural disasters. Though not categorically identified as being part of the jihadi agenda, this activism increases the appeal of the JUD among Pakistani citizens, with a possibility of increasing their declared and/or active support for JUD's views on Pakistan's foreign policy.