Why is Lived Experience Absent from Social Security Policymaking?

Abstract Processes of public engagement in decision-making and research are increasingly discussed as ways addressing democratic deficits high-income countries. In this paper, we explore why these processes involvement the UK have been less successfully incorporated into social security policymaking aimed at out-of-work by drawing a comparison with health policy, sphere which now become orthodox (albeit imperfect). There is, for example, no formal or institutionalised imperative to involve people lived experience benefits policy development. Government departments might focus group new policies members hold periodic discussions beneficiaries but recent years there number major reforms developed almost entirely without involving those affected. This would unacceptable arena. We argue that difference is rooted structural differences how field power form organised, different imaginaries construct patients beneficiaries, limited scope solidarity collective action around resisting stigmatisation beneficiaries.