GCSPF e-Newsletter # 53 – May 2021

e-GCSPF # 53 - May 2021

Civil society’s recommendations to the G7       On April 2021 the Civil Society 7 Summit released the “Civil society’s recommendations to the G7” that include the Global Fund for Social Protection under “Global sustainable economic recovery after the pandemic” and link back to the Global Coalicion Concept. Read more           US letter for a Global Fund for Social Protection     The US Coalition of the GCSPF sent a letter and a briefing on “Expanding social protection: benefits for workers, businesses, and communities” to the US government to support the global fund at both the G7 and G20. Read more           Inclusive Digital Technologies and a Global Fund for Social Protection       The side event “Building Roofs and Raising Floors Through Inclusive Digital Technologies and a Global Fund for Social Protection” organised by the GCSPF and GCAP was chosen by UN DESA to post and promote on their platform. High level speakers from Governments, United Nations, civil society and academia considered the value and urgency of the proposal for a Global Fund for Social Protection to deliver to all the right to social protection, in the context of the impact of Covid 19, diverse and interconnecting perspectives on social protection, homelessness and how digital technology can extend social protection floors to those who are living without roofs. You can watch the full event recording online here. Read more           109th Session of the International Labour Conference       For the first time in its history the International Labour Conference is taking place virtually, and it will be divided into two segments during the course of the year. Items on the agenda in June include a special outcome document on the ILO response to COVID-19 , the discussion of the reports of the Chairperson of the Governing Body and the Director-General, the ILO’s programme and budget for 2022-23 , the recurrent discussion on social protection , and consideration of the reports on the application of labour standards during the pandemic and related country case discussions. The second segment of the Conference will take place from 25 November to 11 December, with an agenda that includes thematic discussions on inequalities and the world of work, as well as skills and life-long learning. Read more           Global fund for social protection: international solidarity in the service of poverty eradication       Report of the Special Rapporteur on extreme poverty and human rights, Olivier De Schutter A global fund for social protection should be set up to increase the level of support to low-income countries, thus helping them both to establish and maintain social protection floors in the form of legal entitlements, and to improve the resilience of social protection systems against shocks. Such a fund is affordable, whether funding comes from official development assistance or from other sources, including unused or new special drawing rights. Moreover, social protection should be seen as an investment with potentially high returns, since it leads to building human capital, has significant multiplier effects in the local economy, and contributes to inclusive growth and to resilience in times of crisis. International support, therefore, should be seen as launching a process that will allow recipient countries to gradually increase the levels of domestic resource mobilization: rather than creating a new form of dependency, it would ensure a predictable level of support to countries that are committed to establishing social protection floors and whose ability to finance social protection would improve in time. Read more           What’s next for USP2030?       On March 2, 2021, USP2030 members and interested partners came together for the 2nd Membership Assembly. It took place at a critical moment allowing for a reflection on the unprecedented developments over the past year. The debates focused on two key issues for USP2030 and universal social protection – financing and delivery mechanisms – that have gained considerable traction during the crisis, and were also reflected in the discussions on the USP2030’s next steps. Read more

JOIN US TO ACHIEVE SOCIAL PROTECTION FOR ALL GLOBAL COALITION FOR SOCIAL PROTECTION FLOORS - GCSPF For comments, suggestions, collaborations contact us at: info@socialprotectionfloorscoalition.org To stop receiving this newsletter send a message with the subject "unsubscribe" to: info@socialprotectionfloorscoalition.org

Download PDF version

June 2021

CONTENT

1. MAIN QUESTIONS

What is social protection?

Social protection consists of public policies and programmes that provide financial and in-kind support to individuals or households – including through the provision of income support and essential services. Social protection aims to help people cope with shocks, reduce and prevent poverty and vulnerability throughout people’s life-course and ensure income security to people who are facing contingencies such as unemployment, sickness, unpaid care work, maternity, widowhood and old age.

Social protection is a right enshrined in several international legal instruments, such as the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, the International Covenant for Economic, Social and Cultural Rights and the International Covenant on the Rights of the Child. The documents adopted by regional organisations also attach great importance to this human right.¹ International labour standards set out a number of basic principles for the design of social protection systems.

What is a social protection floor?

Social Protection Floors are a set of minimum guarantees, endorsed in ILO recommendation 202 (2012) which provide for

(a) access to a nationally defined set of goods and services, constituting essential health care, including maternity care, that meets the criteria of availability, accessibility, acceptability and quality;

(b) basic income security for children, at least at a nationally defined minimum level, providing access to nutrition, education, care and any other necessary goods and services;

(c) basic income security, at least at a nationally defined minimum level, for persons in active age who are unable to earn sufficient income, in particular in cases of sickness, unemployment, maternity and disability; and

(d) basic income security, at least at a nationally defined minimum level, for older persons.

Goal 1 target 3 of the Sustainable Development Goals contains a specific commitment to universal social protection floors. SDG 1.3 provides for all countries to “implement nationally appropriate social protection systems and measures for all, including floors, and by 2030 achieve substantial coverage of the poor and the vulnerable.” Regional instruments also reflect the concept of social protection floors.²

What would a Global Social Protection Fund do?

A Global Social Protection Fund would ensure the necessary technical and financial support to enable all countries to put in place national social protection floors for all residents (including the undocumented, stateless, migrants and refugees), and develop the capacity of their national social protection systems to be resilient to and to respond to crises.

The key principle of the Global Social Protection Fund is that of solidarity between all countries both in the provision of funding and that of advisory and technical support. The Fund will enable and catalyze from global inputs the requirements for social protection system development. It will leverage coordination of national actors and bring about consistency and synergies of international support from all regions.

Any financial support would be accompanied by technical and advisory support for social protection system development. This can include putting in place accountable, transparent and participative public finance management modalities which are a key dimension of a sustainably financed social protection policy.

It will also include engaging with and providing financial, advisory and technical support to civil society to bridge knowledge gaps and to help them perform their multiple roles in the planning, implementation and monitoring of social protection systems and thus support inclusive system building and enable universal implementation of social protection in their country.

Why is a fund needed?

The current pandemic and economic crises have both spotlighted the urgency for and put to test social protection structures and systems around the world. Governments have scrambled to ramp up and respond to the dynamic expansion of the virus, putting in place social and economic measures to meet the health, economic, educational, and social needs that have resulted from the crisis. Those with systems in place have done best in their response to Covid 19.

This crisis has illustrated the relatively limited capacity for some countries – particularly low-income countries – to respond to the social and economic consequences of COVID-19, despite the proven impact of the extension of social protection responses to the crisis. Countries with underdeveloped social protection systems may have limited fiscal space to expand social spending. Financing constraints have meant they have not developed social protection systems enough to support social and economic development and create resilient systems to protect against future crises.

Astonishingly, international funding for social protection is still extremely low, despite the universal right to social protection and the vast scientific evidence on the effectiveness of investing in social protection to prevent and reduce poverty.³

The ILO has estimated that the amount needed to finance social protection floors in the world’s lowest income countries would amount to around 78 billion USD. While this is just a fraction of a percent (0,25%) of global GDP, it represents around 15% of those countries’ collective GDP, which is an unsurmountable burden without support.

International solidarity, global cooperation, peer learning and pooled expertise and funding is urgently required to bridge the gaps in social protection systems to realize their universal guarantees for all.

Why support this proposal at this moment?

The pandemic has brutally revealed the case for expanding social protection. Indeed, social protection has been identified by many international organisations, governments and stakeholders as a key element of “building back better” from this pandemic. The importance of income support and essential services including healthcare were highlighted alongside the massive job loss and health demands of this crisis. The crisis has also demonstrated the uneven capacity of governments to enact and finance emergency measures to deliver income and health support to vulnerable people, as well as to continue to stimulate aggregate demand.

While the proposal for a Global Fund has existed for nearly a decade, there is renewed political momentum due to the crisis. A number of governments, including France, social partners and civil society organisations accross the world⁴ have signaled their support for the Global Fund. The French government convened an experts’ conference in 2020 to discuss the potential of the fund, and stakeholders have raised the Fund on the agenda of a number of international fora, including the World Economic Forum, the World Social Forum, the UN Commission for Social Development, the High-level Policitcal Forum (HLPF) and the G20.  The UN Special rapporteur for Extreme Poverty and Human Rights, Olivier De Schutter will present a report to the UN Human Rights Council on the possible governance and funding modalities of the Fund in June 2021.

Many countries have in fact expanded social protection programmes during the pandemic – is there really a need for a Global Fund?

Despite the increase and scale of social protection responses taken since the pandemic, the measures taken are uneven between countries and in many cases, merely temporary. Temporary measures are insufficient in creating the kind of resilience needed to embed social protection systems and to protect different population groups in future crises. In a study of emergency responses between April and September 2020 in 126 low- and middle-income countries it was found that:

• In 81% of the countries, emergency responses cover less than half their population. In 29% of the countries, fewer than one in 10 people have been protected. In particular, programs have failed to protect those formerly not integrated into the social protection system, as for instance workers in the informal economy.

• All the benefits analysed provided to families are short-lived and too low to pay even for basic needs. Across all low- and middle-income countries that have introduced emergency social protection measures, the average investment has been just 0.46% of GDP. Just two of these countries have reached 2%, the rule-of-thumb benchmark for avoiding deep recessions (“Shelter from the storm”, Oxfam). Most programmes set up during the pandemic do not provide for long-term measures.

• 1,3 billion people are included in the new or expanded (mostly temporary) programmes. This means 2,7 billion people still have absolutely no access to social protection.

Overall, performance of emergency programmes varied strongly, depending on the pre-existence of social protection systems, institutions and procedures. Building sustainable and rights-based social protection system worldwide is a high priority for crisis preparedness.

How can we know that the money will be used for the intended purpose?

The Fund will support the building of national social protection systems, in line with the International Covenant for Economic, Social and Cultural Rights as well as international labour standards including ILO Convention 102 and Recommendation 202. The GFSP’s expenditure will be publicly accountable and subject to regular external audits and evaluations.

The Global Coalition for Social Protection Floors is fully supportive of sound financial management, transparency and accountability and recommends full and effective engagement of social partners, civil society organisations and other relevant organisations in all phases, including planning of social protection reforms, implementation and monitoring.

Social protection is a responsibility of national governments. Is a Global Fund needed?

Indeed, social protection is primarily a responsibility of national governments as set out in ILO recommendation 202. Accordingly, governments can expand the fiscal space for social protection through various methods such as domestic resource mobilization, budget reprioritization and fighting illicit financial flows.

However, major financing gaps for social protection persist with challenges for some governments to invest in adequate national social protection systems. And alongside the national responsibility, there is also a need for and duty of international solidarity. Through the Fund, this solidarity will take the form of sharing of financial resources as well as knowledge and experiences, to the mutual benefit of the participating countries.

The fund will have a catalytic role in kick starting financing of social protection systems. This kick-starting role will take the form of technical and advisory assistance and co-financing of social protection systems: i.e. joint financial contribution of governments and the fund.

Additionally, to ensure governments’ commitment to domestic resource mobilization and investment in social protection, necessary for sustainable social protection systems, the fund will work in a coordinated manner with international fora, including the Addis Tax Initiative and the Platform for Collaboration on Tax.

2. SPECIFIC QUESTIONS FOR DECISION MAKERS

Why is it important that political leaders support this proposal?

Social Protection is a human right. The gap is still large between those that can claim this right and those that are denied it. Decisive action is required by national governments and the international community.

Political will is needed to implement the universal right to social protection. The Global Fund is an expression of that will. The finance and all the evidence needed is in the hands of decision makers. It is time to give social protection a high-profile, political forum where all stakeholders can be involved.

International aid only covers about 3% of the social protection sector financing gap in low-income countries (Manuel et al., 2020) and social protection currently makes uponly a small portion of Official Development Assistance.

Social protection gaps leave individuals and societies vulnerable to health, social and economic impacts of COVID-19. A Global Fund for Social Protection could accelerate progress in building social protection floors worldwide and be a key element in a global effort to “build back better” and strengthen crisis resilience.

As a mechanism of global governance, the Fund would transcend national politics and the geopolitical interests tied to bilateral aid and decrease the fragmentation of aid.

Why create a new bureaucracy? We already have too many international organisations, whose mandates are often overlapping.

The international financial architecture does not provide global support for social protection. Key agencies are required to work according to their mandates: The ILO is setting standards and provides advisory support and technical advice but lacks a large scale funding mechanism. The World Food Programme mandate is on humanitarian contexts and short-term funding cycles. UNICEF’s mandate is to focus mainly on children. UNDP supports development and the WHO is focused on health, etc. Nevertheless, external and donor government institutions fund many types of social protection programmes, often without coordination, reinforcing fragmentation and partial coverage. Despite knowledge that the right to social protection is being denied to billions, building systems to ensure statutory mechanisms are in place for the right to social protection for all is under-developed and underfunded.

Given the cross-cutting nature of social protection, the Global Fund will support existing forms of cooperation between donors and partner countries. The Global Fund for Social Protection will lead to a consolidation of existing financing mechanisms and enable domestic financing over the long term.

What lessons can be drawn from other Global Funds?

Many times, pooling funds globally for high priority issues has been the instrument of choice to engage for common goals and coordinated progress in various specific sectors. Examples include health (the Global Fund for AIDS, Tuberculosis and Malaria), education (Global Partnership for Education and Education Cannot Wait), and climate (Green Climate Fund) as well as the cross-sectoral Agenda 2030 (Joint SDG Fund).

There are important lessons to learn from the earlier experiences of global funds. Among them is the observation that global funds were able to mobilize political commitment on national and on international level. Global funds came with a stronger focus on data, results and joint learning and have led to more effective collective donor effort.⁵

In the context of social protection, donor coordination is particularly important, as social protection systems need to be integrated and coherent: “Fragmented aid and associated advice embodies the risk that systems become or remain un-coordinated and fragmented” (Michael Cichon, 2020).⁶

Earlier experiences of global funds also have been subject to strong criticism relating to donor dominance and additional bureaucracy. Therefore, specific design features – mandate, governance structure and procedures – are extremely important. See question on governance below.

Source: Marcus Manuel, webinar 7 October 2020.

Please don’t create a new vertical fund!

Some global funds have been criticized for having a narrow, “vertical” focus on interventions that operate in silos rather than being integrated in national systems. That is particularly the case with the Global Fund against HIV-AIDS, Malaria and Tuberculosis, which, as its name indicates, targets specific diseases instead of supporting health systems holistically.

However, as social protection is by definition a horizontal set of policies to address a broad range of rights and needs, it is a good basis for creating a global fund that will adopt a holistic approach to each country’s national plans for right based social protection to deliver universal social security guarantees, including floors, that all countries are signed up to.

How to ensure that the Global Fund for Social Protection complement, but not compete with, existing initiatives in this area?

(Existing initiatives are in particular the coordination made through SPIAC-B (Social Protection Inter-Agency Cooperation Board), USP2030 (Universal Social Protection 2030 Partnership), and the ILO Flagship Programme on “Building Social Protection for All”)

A number of initiatives at the international level to support the expansion of social protection are already in place, including USP 2030 and SPIAC-B. However, these initiatives mainly seek to ensure the coordination of policy positions and activities between different international institutions, rather than coordinating advisory and technicola support and financing. The Global Fund for Social Protection would thus be distinctly different from existing international initiatives as it would allow for joining up financial, advisory and technical resources from different international-level institutions with the aim of supporting joined up and universal social protection expansion.

For donor countries: what is the best argument for ensuring social protection support to a developing country through a Global Fund rather than through bilateral programmes?

As a global fund would support better coordination of support towards social protection, it would be more efficient than existing bilateral ODA, as the risk of duplication will be minimised, and standards and requirements will be coordinated/unified. Harmonization is a core principle of aid effectiveness. A global fund would also be able to make long term commitments in a way that bilateral agencies may not be able to. The pooling of several, therefore bigger, sources of funding can be expected to result in greater impact that countries can show for in their ODA’s effectiveness.

3. SPECIFIC QUESTIONS TO DEVELOPMENT PRACTITIONERS AND ORGANISATIONS

Why so much focus on social protection – there are other important issues to focus on during and after the pandemic, such as health, food security, and inequality

Social protection is a human right currently denied to billions. Its purpose is to prevent and reduce poverty throughout the life course and it is key to health, food security, and reducing inequality.

Social protection has been proven to be a very effective means of combating hunger and poverty, supporting skills development, education and employment, resilience and overall economic performance. Secure income protects against life-course risks as well as exogenous shocks, gives autonomy and dignity and promotes inclusive economic development. Secure income enables access to essential services, such as health care, education, water and housing.

Social protection for all distributes wealth and supports gender equality for all age groups as well as inclusive and socially cohesive societies.

Would social protection floors always be implemented by governments, or could there be parallel implementation systems?

Governments are the duty bearers for delivering on the right to social protection, in line with international human rights instruments and ILO standards. The Global Fund should focus support on building national systems.  However, there might be situations of failing states, where local non-governmental and even external actors might have to take an important role. The end objective of the fund should however always remain to build national social protection systems embedded in law. It is also possible that governments choose to involve local civil society organisations for the provision of social protection services, within their national systems.

How should the Global Fund be governed?

The governance must be based on the principles of the relevant ILO labour standards and recommendations, in particular Convention 102 on Social Security, Recommendation R202 on Social Protection Floors and R204 on Formalising the Informal Economy, as well as on the principles of development effectiveness (Paris Declaration, Busan Partnership agreement, Global Partnership for Effective Development Co-operation).

1. Democratic country ownership: Social protection floors are specific. The decision as to how their universal reach is to be accomplished is the responsibility of the governments who must answer to their rights holders, their inhabitants. Building on existing structures in each country is best for the administrative implementation of these programmes as it will contribute to strengthening domestic structures.

2. Representation and inclusivity: All stakeholders, including donors, governments and civil society need to be adequately represented in the highest decision-making body of the organisation. Civil society represents rights holders, to include trade unions and informal workers organisations, women, people with disabilities, minorities, older persons, refugees and displaced persons, migrants and those living in poverty.

3. Accountability and transparency: Accountability extends to all people who are to be covered by social protection. This must be ensured by representation, as well as effective control and monitoring procedures, including internal and external audits, evaluation and complaint & redress mechanisms. Public oversight of the management of funds will be achieved through multi-stakeholder bodies and accountable reporting. Transparency is the key to realise effective and participatory monitoring and accountability.

What is the role of the Global Fund for Social Protection in the face of humanitarian crises?

As it is a human right, social protection must be available to all people at all times. This means also during all shocks, whether household level shocks or large scale. The Global Fund must aspire to this if it is to realise people’s right to social protection. Public social protection systems must be able to flex in and out to meet additional caseloads in response to widespread shocks.

This means fundamentally, that delivering social protection, even during humanitarian shocks must be part of the basic social protection floor and so the Global Fund must help countries build in shock responsiveness as part of all social protection systems.

We recognise that not all countries have the capacity for this at this time, and we recognise too, that particularly in cases of conflict or state fragility, this will be difficult. The Global Fund will contribute to this in the following ways:

• Commit to – and therefore help build and fund – shock responsiveness as part of social protection systems.
• Support and advocate to the humanitarian community to engage with and support social protection systems where feasible during humanitarian crises, and where this is not possible to contribute to laying the foundations for future social protection in the affected country.
• Where this is not forthcoming from local governments, this needs to be delivered through the local civil society or the international system.

The funding for this shock responsiveness needs to be established through a separate allocation of the Global Fund for Social Protection which will provide for scaling up social protection during crises.

Notes:

The US Coalition of the GCSPF sent a letter and a briefing on “Expanding social protection: benefits for workers, businesses, and communities” to the US government to support the global fund at both the G7 and G20.

LETTER

Download pdf version

May 7, 2021

Mr. Jake Sullivan, National Security Adviser
The White House
1600 Pennsylvania Ave N.W.
Washington, D.C. 20500

Dear Mr. Sullivan:

We, the undersigned organizations, urge the United States government to endorse the establishment of a Global Social Protection Fund during the next G7 and G20 summits. Both provide a critical opportunity for the world’s largest economies to come together and coordinate a response to the pandemic and to meet future challenges.

Less than a third of the global population has access to comprehensive social protection systems. This leaves two-thirds of the world’s population unprotected in times of need, and from national or global economic shocks, such as that caused by the COVID-19 pandemic.

The current pandemic has demonstrated the value of policies such as income or unemployment support, allowing companies to retain workers and provide income for workers. Social protection systems also safeguard worker health and safety. Essentially, social protection systems offer flexibility and adaptability, allowing for workers and businesses to better withstand disruptions and changes to the economy.

The value of social protection systems, however, goes beyond times of crisis, providing broader economic benefits such as enabling greater workforce participation and allowing for entrepreneurial risk.

We believe that the United States government has a key role to play in promoting social protection systems – actively contributing to, exercising critical oversight of, and ensuring transparency with their development. We urge the U.S. government to join the French government in championing a Global Social Protection Fund based in multilateral and regional development banks. The U.S. government should also direct its own development assistance towards the creation of social protection programs in key developing countries.

The attached briefer provides a summary of our recommendations for creating social protection programs in the world’s poorest countries and certain priority middle income countries.

The U.S. government, supported by business, civil society and the labor community, can expand social protection to the world’s most vulnerable at a reasonable cost.

We hope to meet with an interagency team from the National Security Council (NSC), U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID), the State Department and the Department of Labor (DOL) to discuss how to build greater support for social protection programs.

Sincerely,

AFL-CIO
American Apparel and Footwear Association
Fair Labor Association
Fontheim International, LLC
HelpAge USA
Human Rights Watch
Oxfam America
Solidarity Center

Expanding social protection: benefits for workers, businesses, and communities

Download pdf version

May 7, 2021

Why support a global fund for social protection and increased funding for social protection programs?

Despite the benefits of social protection, less than a third of the world’s population are covered by comprehensive social protection systems and less than half have access to at least one social protection benefit. This leaves the vast majority of the world’s people unprotected in times of need, or from national or global economic shocks.

Expanding social protection is economically feasible for the vast majority of countries, and so governments need to work to ensure adequate social spending^[iv]. However major financing gaps exist for the world’s poorest countries^[v], inhibiting the extension of social protection systems. The International Labor Organization (ILO) has estimated that the amount needed to finance social protection floors in the world’s lowest income countries would amount to around 78 billion USD^[vi]. This amount represents around 16% of the collective GDP of the world’s lowest income countries, yet at the global level it represents less than 0.25% of the world’s GDP –highlighting the potential of global cooperation to support the financing of social protection.

What is the role of business?

While governments have the primary responsibility in setting up social protection systems, businesses also play an important role. Businesses already play a significant role by ensuring key social protections for workers in their supply chains. Businesses, along with governments and others, have provided ad hoc assistance to their workers in response to the pandemic. In addition, businesses significantly contribute to social protection financing, as social protection systems tend to be funded through a combination of social security contributions (generally funded through a mix of employer and worker contributions) and through taxation – which together can ensure a solid financing base for social protection.

Experience also shows that in countries with weak systems of social protection, businesses can also play a crucial and catalytic role by speaking up for the business case for setting up social protection and providing a positive signal to governments to set up social protection. Finally, businesses can raise public awareness on the importance of social protection and help generate broad public and political support for social protection reforms.

At the global level:

• Call on the US government to support the expansion of social protection by publicly endorsing the establishment of a Global Social Protection Fund in multilateral for a including the G7 and G20;
• Call on the US government to work with multilateral and regional development banks to shape and implement social protection programs.

In the US government:

• Create a National Security Council whole of government initiative to develop a social protection strategy across agencies;
• Increase funds dedicated to building social protection programs in development programs funded by USAID, State, ILAB and DFC.
• Improve indicators and reporting requirements in government reports, including the State Department Human Rights Report, on investment in social protection programs;
• Improve indicators around social protection for countries in assessments of countries before entering trade agreements;
• Integrate social protection into USAID country strategy documents; and
• Identify priority countries for increased US development assistance in social protection programs that may not benefit from the Global Social Protection Fund that targets the poorest 28 countries.

What is social protection?
Social protection is an internationally recognized human right. It provides critical support to people who are facing situations such as unemployment, sickness, maternity, widowhood or old age. Social protection policies include income support and essential services. In the US, social safety net programs is another term used to describe these same social protection programs that provide a “net” or protection for vulnerable and poor families.

What are the benefits?
Social protection has broad benefits for people and their communities. It supports and raises people’s incomes and living standards and prevents poverty, social insecurity and social exclusion. It has also been shown to reduce inequalities and promote social cohesion.

Social protection moreover has broad benefits for businesses and the wider economy. Investment in social protection and essential services – such as health, education and care services – has been shown to have positive effects on skills, employability, productivity and overall firm-level performance^[i]. Formal childcare and elder care arrangements also remove barriers for women to enter and remain in the labor market. In countries where adequate social protection systems exist, enterprises are more resilient to shocks, and this in turn reduces reputational and other risks. Setting up publicly organized social protection systems helps to ensure a fair floor of competition between companies, since social protection is afforded to all workers and not only to those in businesses with privately organized insurance schemes and benefits. Expanding social protection to all, including income support to small businesses owners and the self-employed, can also support entrepreneurship by reducing personal financial risks associated with setting up a business. Expanding social protection can moreover support the transition from the informal to formal economy by reducing the financial desperation that forces people to enter into informal, unregulated work arrangements.

During crises, social protection can also play a critical role in maintaining jobs, ensuring occupational health and safety protections and supporting workers’ incomes. The COVID-19 pandemic has illustrated how a number of countries have successfully managed to put in place temporary unemployment schemes and other income support measures that allowed companies to retain their workers and provided job and income security to the workers themselves. The current health pandemic underscores the importance of building and maintaining strong social protection systems that can provide the health care needs for families in the home and protections like personal protective equipment to keep workers safe in their workplaces.

There are also wider macroeconomic benefits to social protection, including increased overall employment and tax revenue, as well as strengthened aggregate demand. Studies have also shown that during the 2008 financial crisis, countries that had effective social protection systems were able to respond to the crisis better because such benefits cushioned consumption and prevented crises from getting worse; the cost of spending on social protection was typically half the economic cost of rising unemployment that could have happened^[ii]. In short, ensuring access to social protection is an investment that empowers people to adjust to changes and disruptions in the economy and in the labor market, and social protection systems act as automatic social and economic stabilizers. They help stimulate the economy in times of crisis and beyond and help support a transition to a more inclusive and sustainable economy.

Social protection is fundamental to mitigating the impact of climate change on working families. Climate change and the policies intended to mitigate it have a significant impact on people’s direct environments, lives, jobs, incomes and communities all across the globe. Estimates show that over 100 million people could be pushed into extreme poverty as a result of climate change by 2030. Investments in a strong social protection program could reduce this number drastically to 20 million. The phase-out of high-carbon industries requires a just transition1 process where workers at risk of losing their jobs receive social protection as well as other support to maintain their income and access to other well-paying jobs. Environmental and socio-economic risks are strongly interconnected and ensuring adequate universal social protection is an essential component of the just transition to a sustainable, zero-carbon economy.

Because of the numerous benefits of social protection, there is broad international consensus on the need to extend it, as underlined by international labor standards^[iii], UN Sustainable Development Goals Target 1.3, the Global Partnership for Universal Social Protection, and the International Labor Organization’s Centenary Declaration. The 2020 ITUC Global Poll of the general public in 16 countries shows near universal public support for social protection.

Notes:

e-GCSPF # 52 - May 2021

G20 TALKS South Africa must raise Africa’s voice for a social protection Global Fund       OP-ED - By Markus Kaltenborn and Letlhokwa George Mpedi The proposal to set up a Global Fund for Social Protection could be the subject of this year’s discussions at the G20. South Africa is the only African country in the G20, so the South African government should seize the opportunity to support the establishment of a Global Fund that will enable the economically weaker countries of the continent to pursue ambitious goals concerning the social protection coverage of their population. Read more           New Social Contract: ITUC report makes economic case for social protection       On the 1 May, workers across the world will be celebrating the achievements of nearly 200 years of trade union activity and putting forward their demands for decent work and sustainable development. A new report for the International Trade Union Confederation (ITUC) shows that there is a strong economic, as well as moral and public health, case for governments to introduce universal social protection. “Investments in social protection and their impacts on economic growth” shows that there is a healthy return on investing in social protection. By applying a robust assessment of the impact of investing the equivalent of just 1% of GDP in each of eight countries, the research shows that positive returns on the economy overall, stimulating growth; increased productivity and overall employment; increased tax revenues; more effective poverty alleviation; and reduced barriers to women entering or returning to work. In addition, the report shows that increased investments in social protection can yield between 0.7 and 1.9 times their value in economic returns. This means that the economic benefits of social spending increases can partially or completely offset the costs. Read more           The Triple Crisis: Impact of COVID-19 on Informal Workers’ Care Responsibilities, Paid Work and Earnings     The COVID-19 pandemic can be understood as a triple crisis. The publication by WIEGO (Ana Carolina Ogando, Michael Rogan and Rachel Moussié) shows that at its origin it is a public health crisis and government responses to contain the virus through lockdowns, border closures and social distancing have led to an inevitable economic crisis. Along with closing creches and schools, these measures contributed to a care crisis. Key findings: 1. Women informal workers who report an increase in their care responsibilities—including cooking, cleaning, child care and care for the ill and older persons—are working fewer days and earning less than other informal workers. 2. Men who report an increase in their care responsibilities work fewer days, but do not see a significant drop in earnings as compared to other men working in the informal economy. 3. Both women and men who report an increase in their care responsibilities have resorted to asset-depleting strategies that deepen intergenerational poverty. For women informal workers, this undermines their capabilities in the long term. Read more           The Jordanian Labor Watch Recommends Ways to Strengthen Women role in Economic Life       Jordan Labor Watch (JLW) has recommended reviewing various strategies and programs aimed at strengthening the women role in the Kingdom’s economic life and the labor market, whether issued by the relevant government, or civil society institutions, targeting women protection in the labor market. The JLW of the Phenix Center for Economics & Informatics Studies said in a position paper that women have paid a “greater” price in comparison to men in the labor market due to the Covid-19 pandemic as the unemployment rate among them increased by 6.1%, compared to 4.1% among men. Unemployment rates among women reached 33.6% during the third quarter of 2020, compared to 21.2% among males, warning this situation would lead to their poverty more than men, and thus the spread of the phenomenon of “feminization of poverty,” per the study. The paper showed that Jordan ranks 140 out of 142 countries on the global indicator of women’s economic participation, and the high unemployment rates for women in Jordan are associated with a very low economic engagement rate of 14.9%. Read more           Publication: “Digital Refugee Livelihoods and Decent Work - Towards inclusion in a fairer digital economy”       The digitization of the world of work is fundamentally transforming how refugees can make a livelihood and obtain employment. A rapidly expanding global digital economy harbours countless new opportunities but it also poses a range of challenges and risks. A new report by the International Labour Organization (ILO) now explores the growing role of digital economies for refugees, including case studies from Asia, Africa, the Middle East, and Europe. Efforts to integrate refugees into the online gig economy should be accompanied by a wider effort to improve conditions within this new form of work, so as not to exacerbate their existing marginalisation and economic precarity. Due to major challenges and risks, low payment levels, and insecurity, the gig economy can only be viewed as one element in a wider range of options, as a complementary form of livelihood provision rather than a stand-alone solution. Read more               WELCOME TO NEW MEMBER       Youth Mentoring Agents for Development Organization - YOMADO   The Youth Mentoring Agents for Development Organisation (YOMADO) is a non- government, non-profit organization that works at the grass roots level. It is a volunteer membership organization for young people. It was established in Rwanda in 2014, following the participation of (Young) founding members in a World Vision Rwanda Leadership and Governance program as beneficiaries. YOMADO was legally recognized by the Rwandan Government in 2015. YOMADO is a youth development Organisation in Rwanda that provides services and leadership to meet the emerging needs of young people and their families in our community. YOMADO provides an array of academic, social, and emotional development services that respond to the unmet needs of the young people we serve. Those services include academic assistance, life skills education, social skill development, recreational and athletic activities, cultural and artistic activities, parental support, crisis intervention, mentoring, case management, and individual, group, and family counseling. Contact information: Emmanuel Nshimiyimana (emmyfanfare@yahoo.com) https://yomado.org/ / Facebook: yomado

JOIN US TO ACHIEVE SOCIAL PROTECTION FOR ALL GLOBAL COALITION FOR SOCIAL PROTECTION FLOORS - GCSPF For comments, suggestions, collaborations contact us at: info@socialprotectionfloorscoalition.org To stop receiving this newsletter send a message with the subject "unsubscribe" to: info@socialprotectionfloorscoalition.org