First published in 1948, the International Social Security Review is the principal international quarterly publication in the field of social security.
Social protection and revenue collection are often regarded as potential drivers of social cohesion. The article joins this debate, providing three main contributions. First, we carefully discuss the concept of social cohesion and endorse one specific definition. Second, we propose using the concept of the “fiscal contract” as the key theoretical lens to understand the often neglected potential joint effects of social protection and revenue collection policies on social cohesion. Third, we illustrate three main mechanisms through which these policies can have positive or negative impacts on the different components of social cohesion and highlight how relevant it is for policy-makers to carefully think about these.
China has adopted an array of special social security measures in response to the spread of the COVID-19 virus, to mitigate the downside social and economic impacts caused by the pandemic. Measures include the reduction, exemption and deferral of social security contributions by employers, the extension of benefits coverage for employees, and the provision of more accessible e-services by social insurance agencies. The article points out that a preliminary assessment of those measures would suggest that they have played a key role in supporting social cohesion and in stabilising the economy. In a critical manner, the article compares the measures adopted in China with those of other countries, and identifies how China could learn from international practice and experience. Finally, and based on recent Chinese experience, the article presents proposals that seek to improve the longer-term contribution made by the Chinese social security system to realise the goals of social cohesion and inclusive economic development. As set out in China’s Social Insurance Law of 2010, the social security system should not only support a fair sharing of benefits of development, but also promote social harmony and stability.
The expansion of social assistance in low- and middle-income countries raises important issues for inclusive growth. Labour is by far the principal asset of low-income groups. Changes in the quantity, quality, and allocation of labour associated with social assistance will impact on the productive capacity of low-income groups and therefore on inclusive growth. The article re-assesses the findings reported by impact evaluations of social assistance in low- and middle-income countries to address this issue. Most studies have tested for potentially adverse labour supply incentive effects from transfers but have failed to find supportive evidence. The article highlights findings from this literature on the effects of social assistance on human capital accumulation and labour reallocation. They point to the conclusion that well-designed and well-implemented social assistance contributes to inclusive growth.
This special issue selectively addresses the relationship linking social security systems, inclusive growth and social cohesion. Inclusive growth and social cohesion are viewed as political expedient and necessary goals for national economies. The desirability of their attainment reflects political pragmatism, the “social contract”, as much as it does a commitment to the wider emancipative goal of social justice. The International Social Security Association (ISSA) has often paraphrased these assertions to argue that there can be “no social justice without social security”. Of course, progress achieved towards the realization of the goals of inclusive growth and social cohesion should be equally beneficial for the adequacy, sustainability and coverage of social security systems. The aim of this special issue is to unpack and better understand the nature of this relationship.
This article reviews the findings of a major survey conducted in 2009 by the International Social Security Association (ISSA) on the impacts of the financial and economic crisis on social security administrations. The findings reveal that a majority of administrations have been negatively affected in terms of diminished investment returns on social security funds and reduced contribution income and are challenged by increased expenditure on benefits. In spite of all this, the findings indicate that administrations have reacted to the challenges presented in often proactive and innovative ways. However, challenges still remain. In this regard, the most preoccupying include the possibility of a slow economic recovery involving a protracted labour market crisis and the constraints of depleted financial reserves and reduced fiscal latitude.
The economic crisis has served to remind us that social protection is both a social buffer and an economic stabilizer that cushions the impacts of recession. Social benefits are being used by the countries of the European Union (EU) as well as by the Union itself as part of its recovery plan, to support those negatively effected by the crisis and to boost household consumption, thus providing support for business activities and employment. But the crisis could also represent an opportunity for the EU to strengthen its social protection systems, through seeking inspiration from the basic principles of international social law, to emphasize the legitimacy of high levels of social protection, to encourage upward convergence among the social protection systems of its Member States and to increase budget allocations for social protection.
To counter the negative social consequences of the present crisis, States must take measures to provide income support and new employment opportunities to affected workers and their families. This article reviews crisis responses in a number of countries with respect to support from unemployment programmes, the branch of social security most directly affected by economic downturn. It also discusses the trade offs that all social security schemes face during economic crises, when revenues from contributions or taxes earmarked to finance programmes fall and expenditures on benefits rise. In turn, concerns about pension policies receive special attention. The article concludes by discussing the initiative, launched by the United Nations, for a global “social protection floor”: to extend, at the very least, basic social protection to the large majority of the world's population who are currently without and who remain vulnerable to all economic and social risks.
The global financial crisis has had a devastating effect on poverty levels in developing countries, and the social protection response to date, in the form of social assistance, has been limited, constrained by the weak systems and low coverage of pre‐existing provision. Developing countries have struggled to honour pre‐crisis social protection policy commitments due to declining revenues, and in this context the potential for expanding coverage to assist those further impoverished and the “new poor” are remote. Despite the expansionary fiscal stance adopted by many developing countries, the focus of policy responses to the crisis has been on protecting and stimulating growth. The focus has not been on social protection provision to assist the poor directly. Where social protection interventions have been made they have, in many cases, been limited to ad hoc and often regressive interventions such as generalized food or fuel subsidies, rather than more systemic and pro‐poor interventions. However, there may be some scope for optimism, as the crisis has stimulated a number of initiatives to promote donor coordination and programming coherence, which may result in improvements in the efficiency and impact of future social protection programming.
Social security and pension funds were affected on an unparalleled scale by the recent financial crisis. They reported massive unrealized investment losses and their governance mechanisms have been challenged, therefore endangering their financial soundness and questioning their capacity to deliver adequate benefits. The year 2009 ended with financial markets recovering, but also with portfolio reallocations and traditional risk management approaches being revisited. Governments have reacted to the crisis and implemented recovery plans that could issue a warning about the mid‐term fiscal situation. Post‐crisis fiscal stress may generate a trade‐off between a re‐establishment of a sound fiscal situation and a reduction in social expenditure. This article analyses the impact of the crisis on social security and pension funds and address all the aforementioned issues.
The COVID-19 pandemic has exposed the vulnerability of those who are inadequately covered by social protection in more and less developed countries alike, and has exacerbated the fragility of a social contract that was already under strain in many countries. A weak social contract in the context of an exceptional crisis poses a very real risk to social cohesion. Nevertheless, many States have reasserted themselves as the guarantor of rights by protecting public health and incomes. By sustaining these measures, economic recovery will be supported which will help minimize risks that may weaken social cohesion. However, this is a fast-moving, inherently unstable and protracted crisis. Social protection stands at a critical juncture. Decisive policy action will be required to strengthen social protection systems, including floors, as one of the cornerstones of a reinvigorated social contract.