361 Soziale Probleme und Sozialhilfe im Allgemeinen
Refine
Departments, institutes and facilities
Document Type
- Part of a Book (22)
- Article (11)
- Book (monograph, edited volume) (2)
- Conference Object (1)
- Book review (1)
Year of publication
Keywords
- Kenya (3)
- Social Protection (3)
- Africa (2)
- political economy (2)
- Armutsbekämpfung (1)
- Comparative institutional analysis (1)
- Developing countries (1)
- Economic policy (1)
- Entwicklungsländer (1)
- Ghana (1)
Social protection refers to the entire system of protective measures that assist individuals, households, and communities to better manage risks and economic shocks and that provide support to the critically vulnerable. Among the major risks covered are illness, accident, death, unemployment, or old age. Social protection includes public as well as private approaches.
Providing universal access to social protection and health systems for all members of society, including the poor and vulnerable, is increasingly considered crucial to international development debates. This is the first book to explore from an interdisciplinary and global perspective the reforms of social protection systems introduced in recent years by many governments of low and middle-income countries.
The idea of a basic income grant (BIG) is not new and there are ongoing debates internationally as well as nationally in low- and middle-income countries just like in high-income countries of a BIG as a social protection policy option. The challenge is that there are different conceptualisations, which conflates and muddles the understanding. In the context of social assistance provision, a universal basic income grant (UBIG) is often compared and contrasted against targeted cash transfers (CTs). This case study systematically presents the arguments for targeted CTs and UBIGs. The value of the case study is that it systematically brings together these arguments, highlighting the variations in UBIG applications, including the evidence and actual impact of UBIG experiments. The structure of the case study is as follows: Section 2 simultaneously contrasts and compares the arguments for targeted CTs and UBIG. Section 3 discusses UBIG experiments, as well as presenting the evidence on the application of the UBIG idea, and Section 4 concludes.
In recent years, the basic income grant (BIG) discourse has gained attention worldwide as a potential policy option in social protection as testified by recent public debates, ongoing pilot projects, campaigning efforts,1 policy measures during Covid-19 and the surge in academic research. A BIG refers to regular cash transfers paid to all members of society irrespective of their socio-economic status, their capacity or willingness to participate in the labour market or having to meet pre-determined conditions (Offe 2008; Van Parijs 1995, 2003; Wright 2004, 2006). Despite the recent hype around BIG, Iran is the only country worldwide with a scaled-up BIG (Tabatabai 2011, 2012). Other programmes have never gone beyond pilot programmes. This raises the question why this is the case.
Policy analysis is the cornerstone of evidence-based policy making.1 It identifies the problems, informs programme design, supports the monitoring of policy implementation and is needed to evaluate programme impacts (Scott 2005). Rigorous and credible policy evidence is necessary to ensure the transparency and accountability of policy decisions, to secure political and public support and, hence, the allocation of financial resources. Sound policy analysis helps design effective and efficient programmes, thereby maximizing programme impact.
The future of work
(2021)
Driven by the exponential increase in the computational power of machines, data digitalization and scientific advancement in robotics and automation, the current wave of technological change is seemingly unprecedented in speed and scale. It transforms manufacturing and businesses making them more flexible, decentralized and efficient (Lasi et al. 2014). Even though technological change is nothing new, some argue that it is different this time. The new technologies have not only the potential to substitute labor (Nomaler and Verspagen 2018), they also change the way people work. The trend towards new forms of employment is no longer a marginal phenomenon.
Social services
(2021)
People are usually exposed to multiple economic and social risks, including discrimination, abuse, violence and social exclusion. While material support has a positive impact on the reduction of social risks and aspects of exclusion (WHO 2019), some situations require concrete, personal and guiding support on an individual basis. This type of service is commonly referred to as social services (Trukeschitz 2006).
With the roll out of social protection programmes to national scale, questions about implementation and delivery move more and more into the centre of debate (e.g. UNDP 2020; UNDP and UNCDF 2014; Kramon 2019). This concerns in particular the local level, where key processes of implementation are taking place, but where at the same time institutional, operational and financial capacities are often the weakest. While social protection programmes are usually based on a clearly defined set of operational rules and regulations – usually set out in a programme manual – in practice these processes often tend to look quite different. Although many social protection programmes have explicitly excluded traditional authorities from playing an active role in programme delivery, there is ample evidence from across countries that in many local contexts, these ‘informal institutions’ continue to play an important role in the delivery of social protection programmes.
The changing world poses many challenges to public policies, including social policies – among them social protection policies, which are the main focus of this handbook. Here, in this part of the handbook, we take on a number of these challenges: demographic changes and their interaction with social protection policies; roles of social protection in coping with the consequences of the COVID-19 pandemic (both topics discussed in Chapter 39 and 43 by Woodall); the challenges of globalisation (discussed in Chapter 40 by Betz) and the limitations it imposes on state sovereignty and its ability to decide on the size of publicly funded programmes, in particular social protection; challenges to labour markets and social effective protection coverage posed by automation and digitalisation of businesses (discussed in Chapter 41 by Gassmann) and, last but not least, potential roles of social protection in facilitating population’s adjustments to climate change (discussed in Chapter 42 by Malerba).
What does the right to social security mean if the majority of the world’s population still lives in overwhelming insecurity? What is the significance and role of international social security standards, developed by the International Labour Organization (ILO2) over decades? What are the economic, labour market and political factors determining differences between countries with respect to population coverage by social security schemes and systems? How can past and recent experiences of countries in the Global North and in the Global South be used to expand social security coverage, and what role can be played by the new standard in this area – the ILO Social Protection Floors Recommendation 202, adopted in 2012?
Social budgeting
(2021)
At the beginning of 2020 with the globally spreading pandemic of COVID-19 and all its social and economic consequences, the importance of having comprehensive, universal and effective social protection systems became once again – like during all the major economic and social crises before – very clear (Gentilini et al. 2020; Chapter 43 of this volume). Countries with strong social protection systems, although needing to enhance many benefit provisions and extend coverage to reach those in non-standard forms of employment, still were coping better with the pandemic and had better chances of cushioning the resulting economic downturn. However, we know from past experience that after the crisis is over, austerity measures may focus again on limiting social expenditure under all kinds of excuses.
While social protection has become an important policy field in many low- and middle-income countries (LICs and MICs), 55 per cent of the world’s population are still not even covered by one social protection benefit, with 87 per cent of people uncovered in Sub-Saharan Africa and 61 per cent in Asia and the Pacific (ILO 2017). Next to undercoverage, there are other factors that lower the efficiency, effectiveness and social justice of social protection in many countries, such as the lack of a joint vision and policy strategy, fragmented social protection programmes, duplication of administrative systems and efforts and irrational prioritisation in spending. These all call for a stronger systems approach to social protection. This handbook is therefore dedicated to social protection systems, highlighting the relevance but also the challenges that are related to a harmonised and coordinated approach across different social protection instruments, institutions, actors and delivery mechanisms. It takes the reader through all possible aspects of social protection systems.