Literature Review: Experiences of the Scottish social security system among people for whom English is a second language

This rapid literature review examined barriers faced by people for whom English is a second language when accessing the Scottish social security system. It considered why people may choose not to take up benefits to which they are entitled and experiences with the system. Adopting a broad approach, given the lack of specific research on the topic, the literature considered issues faced by populations where some would be more likely to have English as a second language, notably those from minority ethnic communities.

Many diverse languages are used in Scotland, driven by migration over many years. Similarly, English proficiency varies considerably among those using English as a second language with English ability depending on factors such as age, length of time in the country and access to learning opportunities. Data on languages used by social security users was mostly gathered through information provided by the translation and interpreting service provider. The most common languages requested for translation were Arabic, Farsi, Gaelic, Polish, Romanian, Russian, Ukrainian, Urdu and Traditional Chinese.

Awareness of social security benefits was likely to be low among those with English as a second language, with information often received through informal sources or community resources. A lack of familiarity with official systems, complex eligibility criteria, digital exclusion, or not knowing where to find information were highlighted as issues people may face.

Various barriers and challenges exist for people with English as a second language when applying for benefits. These included challenges with forms, such as length and complexity that could lead to exhaustion or negative feelings, serving to put people off applying. Issues with translating and interpreting were identified, such as delays in receiving information, poor quality or lack of choice.

Similarly, many issues were identified that people who speak English could find difficult with the Scottish social security system, though it was noted that the system was generally highly rated. Barriers could include poor treatment by staff, complex systems and processes, denial of applications, institutional racism, structural disadvantage, a lack of documentation and personal or cultural factors, such as poverty or a lack of trust in public services.

While little is known about how Gaelic speakers experience the Scottish social security system, the Gaelic Language (Scotland) Act 2005 has increased attention among public services to ensure their services are accessible and welcoming to Gaelic speakers. Social Security Scotland has not yet produced a Gaelic Language Plan but has committed to doing so.

The lack of relevant literature to draw upon for the review was highlighted, with considerable gaps in most areas under investigation. While some relevant research on social security has been conducted, people with English as a second language are often included along with other groups. Further, it is unclear exactly what information Social Security Scotland hold on people with English as a second language, other than that obtained via user experience surveys.

Areas where pragmatic action could be taken or that impacted all client groups, such as efforts to streamline application processes appeared to be more likely to areas where work is ongoing to improve user experience. Even in these areas however, issues remain, such as the need to review translating and interpreting support and benefits denied. There was less evidence to suggest more challenging issues were being addressed or that any action being taken was making an impact, such as affecting change in structural issues such as poverty, institutional or intersectional disadvantage.