Search

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.

While there is a standard set of instruments that can be used in social protection systems, this needs to be adapted and combined in different ways in order to serve different groups in society best. The needs of a young person who is just starting life and should not be trapped from birth in unfavourable socio-economic conditions are different from the social protection requirements of a retired person who has finished the active part of life and requires income and care security for an indefinite time period.

Designing a social protection system is of course not only a technical exercise but a very political affair. A systems approach to social protection is shaped by the political elites and the respective coalitions of change, the political institutions as well as the political system of a country. This explains why also seemingly similar countries in terms of their risk profile, poverty situation and economic situation can adopt very different social protection systems or make very different progress with respect to social protection expansion. Not only are the established welfare states of the Global North but also the nascent social protection systems in the Global South a testimony of this variety.

Policy analysis is the cornerstone of evidence-based policy making. The complexity of the political and socio-economic web in which social protection operates makes it a daunting task to deduce its impact or outcomes. Hence, indicators, databases and data sources used to measure and analyse the impact of social protection interventions have to reflect this complexity to effectively convey their impact. This chapter takes stock of conceptual frameworks, methods, databases and indicators used to evaluate social protection performance. It establishes the role of performance measurement in social protection taking and discusses the challenges of current databases and indicators in effectively measuring the performance of social protection systems.

Set out under SDG 1, social protection is a right enshrined in international human right law; yet, it is often state-backed and citizenship-based. This means that refugees and other ʼnon-citizens’ groups are excluded from access to benefits. In this chapter, we discuss how and why meeting the social protection needs of refugees must be viewed as a critical item on policy agendas, and how it would be a crucial step to establish a long-term strategy that assists refugees (especially those in protracted situations) to have productive lives and accomplish an adequate level of well-being. The chapter specifically delineates between the contexts of low and middle income countries versus Europe. It illustrates that the access for refugees to social protection varies and depends on a multiplicity of factors, including the host country’s legal framework, the maturity of the social protection system in place, and the ability to incorporate shock-responsive social protection mechanisms within social protection programming.

Social transfers are on the rise in the Global South but they have also been in the centre of discussion in the Global North as an attractive instrument to buffer new risks and uncertainties in a changing world. They have experienced a dramatic change since the beginning of the new century, starting off as a revolutionary programmatic intervention in countries such as Mexico and Brazil or as a fledgling pilot programme in countries such as Zambia, Kenya and Malawi. They have now become a standard intervention across the globe, a truly global social policy as Hickey and Seekings (2019, 249) coined it. This global trend has been facilitated by donors’ strive to move away from ever recurring humanitarian actions, by increased pressure on donors to show aid effectiveness with the money finally reaching the most vulnerable as well as by international concerted actions such as the United Nations initiative of a global social protection floor.

This paper analyzes the complex effects and risks of social protection programmes in Ghana and Kenya on poor people’s human wellbeing, voice and empowerment and interactions with the social protection regulatory framework and policy instruments. For this purpose, it adopts a comprehensive Inclusive Development framework to systematically explore the complex effects of cash transfers and health insurance at the individual, household and community level. The findings highlight the positive provisionary and preventive effects of social protection, but also illustrate that the poorest are still excluded and that promotive effects, in the form of enhanced productivity, manifest themselves mainly for the people who are less resource poor. They can build more effectively upon an existing asset base, capabilities, power and social relations to counter the exclusionary mechanisms of the system, address inequity concerns and offset the transaction costs of accessing and benefitting from social protection. The inclusive development framework enables to lay these complex effects and interactions bear, and points to areas that require more longitudinal and mixed methodology research., IZNE Working Paper Series, 18/3

Political economic analyses of recent social protection reforms in Asian, African or Latin American countries have increased throughout the last few years. Yet, most contributions focus on one social protection mechanism only and do not provide a comparative approach across policy areas. In addition, most studies are empirical studies, with no or very limited theoretical linkages. The paper aims to explain multiple trajectories of social protection reform processes looking at cash transfers and social health protection policies in Kenya. It develops a taxonomy and suggest a conceptual framework to assess and explain reform dynamics across different social protection pillars. In order to allow for a more differentiated typology and enable us to understand different reform dynamics, the article uses the approach on gradual institutional change. While existing approaches to institutional change mostly focus on institutional change prompted by exogenous shocks or environmental shifts, this approach takes account of both, exogenous and endogenous sources of change., IZNE Working Paper Series; Nr 17/6

There has been an ongoing debate among researchers, policy-makers and development partners in low-income countries on whether and to what degree non-contributory social transfers should be targeted to the poor or paid out universally to every citizen or to all citizens in a particular category. This paper critically discusses the assumptions behind the political economy arguments of targeting and tests whether a universal mechanism is bound to politically excel in a lowincome country context. A number of authors have argued that going universal is a win-win situation, both for the poor, the middle class as well as those who are in power. We would therefore expect broad-based support behind a universal scheme, in particular in countries where poverty is widespread and targeting also proves administratively challenging. On the basis of attitudinal surveys with the urban, rural and student population in Zambia, we actually detect more support for targeting the poor than the political economy models would predict. These findings are corroborated by experimental evidence from rural Zambia. We discuss the assumptions of the political economy models in the light of these findings and contemplate on potentially decisive parameters that the models currently do not incorporate.

In Latin America, the most unequal region in the world, informality is the way of life for many Micro and Small Enterprises (MSEs) and for workers who hold informal employment arrangements within these businesses. In order to reduce informality and increase revenue, most countries in the region have implemented simplified tax regimes for MSEs in recent decades. Given that there is a difference between formalizing business and formalizing employment arrangements, this research investigate whether simplified tax schemes for MSEs affect formalization of employment arrangements within MSEs. By analysing the Uruguayan case from 2006 to 2016, the study shows that many MSE workers may remain informal despite working within formal MSEs. Therefore, this investigation points out that simplified tax regimes might not have the envisioned impact on formalization of employment arrangements, hampering the access of these workers to social insurance schemes.

In this paper, we present evidence that indicates that democratization has had a positive and significant effect on the current expansion of social transfers in low- and middle income countries. Overall, we find that electoral democracies seem to have favoured the expansion of conditional cash transfer (CCTs) programmes and social pensions, whereas autocracies and infant electoral democracies seem to have favoured pure cash transfers and public works, which are, on average, smaller in scale and more prone to political clientelism. Our findings also show that consumption taxes, and natural resource rents in particular, have contributed to the expansion of social transfers over the past two decades, although at the cost of delaying tax reforms that are necessary to guarantee the survival of welfare benefits. The current tax structure has also exposed net resource-exporting countries to the vagaries of commodity markets and reduced the fiscal space that these countries enjoyed just a decade ago. The policy implications of our findings are threefold: first, a strong technical approach to the formulation of social transfers is clearly desirable to maximize the poverty-reducing and welfare-enhancing effects of these programmes. However, a narrow focus on technical considerations can miss out wider implications of certain policy choices, especially in contexts characterized by electoral autocratic regimes. Second, state capabilities matter for an effective distribution of welfare benefits. However, without strong institutional settings and effective checks and balances, pro-poor redistribution can be subject to the capture of opportunistic clientelistic regimes. Third, any effort to expand social protection systems without parallel reforms to tax systems risks the long-term sustainability of transfer programmes. However, attempts to introduce more progressive forms of taxation would be destinated to fail without a good understanding of the strength and upfront position of elites.

Zambia embarked on an ambitious plan to extend pension schemes to informal economy workers, including small scale farmers, who are traditionally excluded from pension schemes. The extension of coverage is aided by enactment of statutory instrument that enables design of a scheme with peculiar financing such as reduced contribution rates, and benefit package including short-term benefits such as maternity benefits, family funeral grant, and access to credit. Administratively a mixed approach of public-private model has been embraced through partnerships between the National Pension Scheme Authority (NAPSA) and informal economy worker associations, and the private sector. This chapter presents considerations for the implementation of pension schemes to small scale farmers. publishedVersion

In recent years, there has been growing interest to extend social protection coverage to people working in the informal economy. Informal economy workers constitute substantial workforce in most countries and form a base for most economies. However, they are largely excluded from formal social protection coverage. Reasons for exclusion include inadequate legal coverage, lack of compliance and adequate monitoring mechanisms, lack of knowledge about social protection, high contribution rates, unattractive benefit package and mistrust. There are a range of policy options and modes of delivery that can be used to extend coverage. Coverage for informal economy workers in social protection is important. Contributions, benefit package and vesting period should all be tailored to attract people in the informal economy, according to each country setting, in order to protect people from social and economic risks. publishedVersion