Social Policy and Social Protection
All "policies and programs designed to reduce poverty and vulnerability by promoting efficient labor markets, reducing people's exposure to risks, and improving their capacity to manage economic and social risks, such as unemployment, exclusion, sickness, disability, and old age," essentially have social protection as their central theme. This is the foundation of all social policies and initiatives, and it's frequently used as a catch-all phrase to describe the necessity for societal cohesion on all fronts, including social, political, and economic.
The reader will be able to comprehend the following by the end of this blog post:
- Conceptual Frameworks of Social Protection
- Revolutionary Social Protection
- The social protection agendas now in place are still relevant
Content
- What is Social Protection?
- Why Social Protection?
- Transformative Social Protection
What is Social Protection?
Social protection can be understood as
“all public and private initiatives that provide income orconsumption transfers to the poor, protect the vulnerable against livelihood risks and enhance the socialstatus and rights of the marginalised; with the overall objective of reducing the economic and socialvulnerability of poor, vulnerable and marginalised groupsand private initiatives that provide income or consumption transfers to the poor, protect the vulnerable against livelihood risks and enhance the social status and rights of the marginalised; with the overall objective of reducing the economic and social vulnerability of poor, vulnerable and marginalised groups”.(Browne, 2015)
Additionally, it refers to safety nets, which are typically put in place to assist individuals in surviving a structural or situational disaster. Depending on the need and cause it is intended to solve, social protection may be both short-term and long-term. This is fundamentally given by the State and is conceptualized as a state-citizen contract that outlines the rights and obligations of both the State and the Citizens. To enable individuals to escape poverty with the assistance of the State is one of the main goals of social protection policies. And is gradually becoming a core component of development initiatives that attempt to eradicate poverty. But the goal isn't just to reduce poverty; it's also to address the fundamental sociopolitical conditions that contribute to it.
Therefore, social protection tries to change the fundamental causes of poverty and deprivation, i.e., lowering vulnerabilities of the populace, in addition to providing safety-nets to give a springboard out of poverty. For this reason, Social Protection must adopt a radical program centered on redistribution, acknowledgment, and representation of the society's most disadvantaged members.
This essential aspect of social protection is frequently presented as the Growth Agenda's antithesis. As it supports transformative policy practices that challenge the socio-political environment that has long supported societal inequality. However, it seems inevitable that it will be needed to maintain growth levels as time goes on. It is pro-inclusive development of all members of society, not anti-growth. When supporting social policy, one is frequently forced to make a basic decision between long-term solutions that address the causes of poverty and short-term solutions that address it.
In times of crisis, the individualized-direct strategy will only offer temporary assistance as opposed to the socially-led redistributive approach. Therefore, while the social protection agenda seeks long-term answers, the traditional growth agenda promoted such individualized instruments that have short-term benefits. For instance, in the current socioeconomic system, conditional cash transfers sometimes result in stigmatization of recipients. The issue at hand is how Social Protection can guarantee fundamental changes in the sociopolitical environment that sustains and encourages ages-old inequality. What are the strategies used by Social Protection that promote these pervasive inequalities? To rebalance society, social protection must be a means of redistribution. But it's not a particularly well-liked approach to promoting social justice and equity in society. For a variety of reasons, including an obsession with growth-induced policies and a tendency toward a free labor market for higher growth rates, redistribution has dropped off the global development agenda. Due to its tendency to displeased few while placating many, redistribution has frequently been referred to as an unsustainable political instrument.
To solve the current disparities, redistribution must be combined with representation, acknowledgment, and social inclusion. Visioning, planning, and thoughtful decision-making that tackle vulnerability and poverty at their root should be integrated with it. (2011) Koehler, R. S.-W.
With a joint effort for redistribution, social protection must address inequality based on gender, caste, race, religion, and ethnicity. Additionally, it calls for citizen-led planning to guarantee that innovative redistribution tactics are incorporated into the country's growth plans. Understanding how Social Protection was created through numerous frameworks, philosophies, and arguments is necessary for these significant changes.
Why Social Protection?
Social protection is not merely a means of reducing poverty; it also deals with the root causes of poverty and the vulnerabilities that result from it. In addition to developing strategies to directly combat poverty, social protection has been extending its remit to include addressing the needs and aspirations of society's different disadvantaged communities.
Due to the increased sensitivity around social protection, it now covers disadvantaged groups based on caste, gender, religion, ethnicity, and similar factors. This strategy for social protection attempts to satisfy the requirements of the populace on both a tactical and strategic level. Practical needs are defined as those that result from people's actual circumstances. Strategic needs, however, result from their perceptions of a lack of autonomy and social visibility. The effectiveness of the Social Protection programs is, however, sometimes constrained by political obligations and practical considerations. A number of the challenges in creating comprehensive social protection programs include the target group's lack of institutional visibility, poor representation, and highly disaggregated data. Additionally, it must ensure that the methods and tools chosen do not reinforce stigmatization of the most vulnerable communities. For instance, assistance programs for HIV-positive individuals must also take into account the sensitivity of HIV-positive individuals among other members of society. Social protection can work to lessen people's susceptibility in such crises, but it cannot directly change or alter their current crisis condition. The unfavorable perceptions of cash transfers and other targeted social programs, which breed stigma and ultimately have an impact on political and social obligations, must be addressed by social protection. Therefore, the goal of social protection should be to alter social norms and structural realities for the most vulnerable members of society. (2011) Roelen
Since its precursor, the safety net, social protection has advanced significantly. Today, conceptual frameworks, empirical evidence, analytical tools, and a global development agenda are all included in the conceptual understanding of social protection. It emphasizes the change from dependence to self-sufficiency. Social protection differs from other constrictive welfare-state programs and policies according to the concept of transition.
There are two main groups that advocate for social protection: instrumentalists and activists.
- Instrumentalists: They concentrate on the dysfunction brought on by poverty, inequality, risk, and vulnerability. They demand the implementation of a risk management system to counteract this dysfunction. This enables the private insurance industry companies to take the lead.
- Activists: They contend that social injustice and inequity are the root causes of poverty, inequality, and vulnerability. They want the universalism of welfare programs and other citizenship-focused social safety measures.
The main areas of disagreement between these two schools of thought are the tools to be used for social security, such as social pensions or public works, or the choice of design, such as targeted or universal coverage.
Moving ahead, one of the few social protection frameworks created by a variety of organizations and academics is transformative social protection. There are five frameworks in total that define distinct strategies for social protection.
- Social Risk Management: The World Bank established Social Risk Management (SRM), which emphasizes that poverty and vulnerability are results of uninsured risk; therefore, by insuring the risk, we ultimately contribute to poverty reduction. It prioritizes risk and effectiveness over equity and needs. SRM focuses more on mitigating income shocks than tackling the structural causes of poverty. This is entirely a method based on evidence (Sabates-Wheeler, 2007).
- Transformational Social Protection: The transformative social protection (TSP), which was developed in response to the Social Risk Asset Thresholds Five Conceptual Frameworks Management by the World Bank, is the most well-liked among development practitioners. While TSP concentrated on supplying, preventive, and promotional actions, which add social to the economic risk management, SRM was overly concerned with hedging the economic risk. This strategy seeks to reframe the idea of vulnerability as a byproduct of the current sociopolitical environment. This will be covered in more detail in the section that follows.
- Asset Threshold: This third framework is similar to India's poverty benchmarking. According to this theory, there is a specific threshold for asset ownership below which people are trapped in poverty and unable to "invest productively, create wealth, or advance." The uni-focal definition of vulnerability in this paradigm, which ignores the significance of structural inequities present in this society, has drawn harsh criticism. This framework's central tenet was that "it's easier to prevent individuals from going down a ravine than it is to assist them in climbing out."
- PovNet Approach: The PovNet team developed this framework with a focus on techniques for reducing poverty that are founded on Nordic ideals. The fundamental foundation of these ideals was a multifaceted perspective of poverty and vulnerability that collaborated with social protection, economic opportunity, and inclusion. This strategy places a greater emphasis on citizenship.
- Universal Social Minimum: Although the final structure is not a politically popular choice, it is rather straightforward. The Universal Social Minimum, created by Koy Thomson, is defined as "the resources, opportunities, rights, and power to lead a life that is sufficiently decent and dignified, and to participate in and grow as a free and equal member of society." This necessitates a more comprehensive understanding of poverty along the lines of Sen's capabilities approach. The main conceptual frameworks for Social Protection Programs are listed above. We shall now go into greater detail on transformative social protection.
Transformative Social Protection
The structural realities at the center of transformative social protection are what have a variety of effects on peoples' well-being. This strategy addresses structural disparities by creating policies that not only manage risks but also attempt to reduce the level of vulnerability people experience. It reframes the vulnerability as an outcome of the current socio-political situation rather than an exogenous issue. As a result, it focuses on altering the circumstances that lead to such shocks and crises rather than formulating policies to reduce the probability of them.
The term "Transformative" refers to a combination of policies that enable the marginalized to assert their rights while simultaneously working to ensure that everyone is equally included into society and has the opportunity to benefit from growth. Thus, "all initiatives that transfer income or assets to the poor, protect the vulnerable from risks to their way of life, and enhance the social status and rights of the marginalized; with the overall objectives of extending the benefits of economic growth and reducing the economic or social vulnerability of poor, vulnerable, and marginalized people" can be defined as "transformative social protection."
As per the definition above we can split it into four parts:
- Provision Measure: Providing relief from deprivation, including social assistance for the chronic poor or meeting immediate need
- Preventive Measure: Seeking to prevent deprivation through poverty alleviation programs, including social insurance schemes hedging the risk factor of economic shocks and crisis.
- Promotive Measure: Focuses on enhancing well-being and income capabilities of people to stay out of poverty on their own, including livelihood promoting schemes to help people stay above poverty.
- Transformative Measure: Aims at addressing the issues of social justice and inequity, including collective action or regulatory action against exploitation of workers.
References
- Browne, E. (2015). Social Protection Topic Guide. UK: GSDRC, University of Birmingham.
- Devereux, R. S.-W. (2007, May). Social Protection for. IDS Bulletin Volume 38.
- Koehler, G. (2011, November). Transformative Social Protection: Reflections on South Asian Policy Experiences. IDS Bulletin Volume 42.
- Koehler, R. S.-W. (2011, November). (Re)distribution and Growth: What is the Role of Social Protection? IDS Bulletin Volume 42.
- Roelen, K. (2011, November). Social Protection to Address the Drivers of Vulnerability: A Bridge too Far? IDS Bulletin Volume 42.
- Sabates-Wheeler, S. D. (2007, May). Editorial Introduction: Debating Social Protection. IDS Bulletin Volume 38
Comments