The video of the webinar “Progressive realisation: Building inclusive social protection systems in low- and middle-income countries using the principle of universality” is now online. The webinar was held on Tuesday, November 22, 2022.
Speakers
Daisy Sibun, Social Policy Specialist at Development Pathways, author of ‘Can a leopard change its spots? A critical analysis of the World Bank’s ‘progressive universalism’ approach to social protection (download the presentation)
Marion Ouma, Postdoctoral Research Fellow, Nordic Africa Institute
Stephen Kidd, Principal Social Policy Specialist at Development Pathways
Moderator: Lena Simet, Senior Researcher and Advocate, Human Rights Watch
Background
There is broad consensus that expansion of social protection is a necessary response to the global food and economic crises. But an immediate reaction when universal social protection is proposed is often that “it is impossible, because it is too expensive!” or perhaps “we agree that universal social protection is the ultimate goal, but we must see it as a long-term vision. For now, we must target the poorest”. At this webinar we show how, in actual fact, universal programmes are a feasible and far more effective policy alternative to poverty targeting available to low- and middle-income countries. And, critically, that universality can be affordable if programmes are gradually introduced but maintain the principle of universality in their approach from day one.
Daisy Sibun launched a new paper, ‘Can a leopard change its spots? A critical analysis of the World Bank’s ‘progressive universalism’ approach to social protection (Executive summary). The paper critically analyses the justification through which the World Bank continues to promote poverty targeted programmes, despite its more recent high-level support for the idea of universal social protection, and contrasts it with the human rights-based approach to social protection as promoted by the ILO.
Stephen Kidd presented evidence on how countries can implement universal social protection schemes progressively in an affordable way through the reports Building universal social security systems using the principle of universality and Taking stock of progress: A compilation of inclusive social security programmes in low- and middle-income countries.
This event was co-organised by Act Church of Sweden, Action Against Hunger France, Development Pathways and Human Rights Watch, with the support of the Global Coalition for Social Protection Floors (GCSPF).
Response from the Global Coalition for Social Protection Floors to the World Bank’s new Strategy for Social Protection.
With this statement, the Global Coalition for Social Protection Floors (GCSPF), representing more than 120 civil society organisations and trade unions from all over the world, intends to react to the World Bank’s new strategy for social protection, published under the title “Charting a Course Towards Universal Social Protection: Resilience, Equity, and Opportunity for all”.
Recognising the human right to social security, as well as the central role that social protection plays in ensuring adequate standards of living, promoting inclusive and sustainable growth, enhancing resilience, and achieving the Sustainable Development Goal (SDGs), the GCSPF promotes the right of all people to social security and universal Social Protection Floors (SPF).
The GCSPF therefore welcomes the explicit commitment by the World Bank to Universal Social Protection (USP). We further appreciate the strategy’s systems approach to social protection, emphasising that comprehensive and effective coverage requires expansions of interconnected social insurance, social assistance, economic inclusion programmes, and care services. The recognition that social protection is not just an effective tool to fight poverty, but also vital to help people face a wider range of challenges and vulnerabilities throughout their lives, is likewise important. The emphasis that social protection, as well as tax systems, can reduce inequality is also crucial. While ambitious plans to expand coverage are necessary to close the large coverage gaps, the World Bank’s strategy rightly highlights the importance of ensuring the adequacy of benefits and the inclusion of marginalised and vulnerable groups that may face barriers to access. Given the widespread exclusion of informal workers from social protection systems, it is encouraging that efforts to extend coverage to the ‘missing majority’ are central to the World Bank’s new strategy.
The GCSPF also agrees that social spending is a necessary and effective investment in human development, as well as inclusive and sustainable growth. We hope that the new World Bank strategy represents a step up of support from International Financial Institutions on social protection, enabling in particular low-income countries to put in place adequate and comprehensive social protection systems in line with people’s rights. Increased investment in social protection is particularly important in the wake of the COVID-19 pandemic, which has decimated the incomes of the world’s poorest people and left low-income countries exposed to the current social, economic and ecological ‘polycrises’.
While the GCSPF appreciates the overall direction of the World Bank’s new social protection strategy, we have a number of serious concerns. Primarily, we are surprised by the lack of references and alignment with human rights and international labour standards. It thus appears as though the World Bank’s vision of universal social protection deviates from internationally agreed commitments and definitions, in particular social security minimum standards set out in ILO Convention 102 and Recommendation 202.
The GCSPF also disagrees with the role that private finance is accorded, as well as the promotion of voluntary private schemes, which are promoted as key mechanisms to expand coverage, in particular for informal workers, and presented as ‘alternatives’ rather than complements to public social security. Given the often low and volatile earnings of informal workers, and following the devastating impacts of the COVID-19 crisis, it is questionable whether individual savings accounts alone will offer much protection. The continued promotion of individualised and privatised approaches to social protection is all the more disappointing as the strategy recognises that the previous wave of pension privatisations in Latin America and Eastern Europe “did not lead to the expansion in coverage that early reformers envisioned, and the systems are also increasingly failing to deliver adequate pensions” (page 36). It is therefore crucial that the World Bank re-considers these efforts to individualise and privatise social protection and recognizes that the responsibility to realise the human right to social security cannot fall entirely on individuals but is instead a responsibility of governments. The GCSPF disagrees with the World Bank’s dismissive stance towards public social insurance systems and their ability to include informal workers, which certainly requires adaptations of systems but is clearly possible, as a number of countries are showing.
Even though the strategy is framed around universal social protection, it underplays existing efforts of governments to provide universal protection. The strategy claims that governments “have played a role in increasing access to risk management tools, but only in limited ways. [...]. First, they provide social assistance to a limited portion of the population who are either income-poor or vulnerable” (page 18). This ignores the fact that numerous countries across the income spectrum have made significant progress towards USP and introduced universal child benefits and social pensions.
While rightly emphasising the importance of reaching excluded and hard-to-reach groups, the strategy fails to recognise that universal programs tend to be the most effective way to reach all and leave no one behind. More generally, the strategy lacks a clearly articulated and credible pathway for the progression from largely poverty-targeted to universal systems. Therefore, we call on the World Bank to develop, through meaningful consultation, concrete action plans at national levels to move towards universality. It is concerning that in the recent past, the World Bank has discouraged or opposed the introduction of universal programs in many contexts. Moreover, we are worried that the World Bank is blurring the conceptual distinction between means-tested and universal benefits in an effort to reconcile the discrepancy between its endorsement of USP and its continued operational focus on narrowly targeted ‘safety nets’. While the strategy is less explicitly advocating for poverty-targeting than previous documents and refers to ‘progressive realization’ rather than “progressive universalism” the World Bank’s approach still fails to live up to the principles of social protection standards. Indeed, the persistent focus on poverty-targeting is evident in the promotion of ‘social registries’. While recognising significant challenges in their design and implementation, the strategy does not present convincing arguments or evidence that “dynamic inclusion” can overcome these challenges.
Despite welcoming the necessity of addressing unpaid care and domestic work, it is concerning that the World Bank appears to assume that the default provider of care services should be the private sector, with the state merely regulating or providing financing. Indeed, public care services are presented as if they were needed only in case of particular difficulties in the household. The GCSPF reiterates that care and education services should be publicly organised and accessible to all. The strategy could offer a more critical framing of the burden of unpaid domestic work, recognising the role of patriarchy, and that the impact of austerity on households is often cushioned by women absorbing both paid employment and domestic responsibilities simultaneously.
Finally, while appreciating the opportunities to engage with the World Bank during the development of the strategy, we regret that it was shared only in its final form, with no possibility to react to it. In addition, the finalised version did not take on board the comments provided by civil society in the process.
The strategy closes by stressing the importance of partnerships and collaboration between governments, donors, civil society, labour unions, and the private sector to achieve universal protection. As civil society, we intend to do our part by holding duty bearers to account, amplifying the voices of the people, and supporting the realisation of universal and rights-based social protection for all. We call on the World Bank to ensure the meaningful participation of civil society, unions and workers’ organisations in the operationalisation of the strategy at all levels.
November 2022.
e-GCSPF #78 - November 2022 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
JOIN US TO ACHIEVE SOCIAL PROTECTION FOR ALL
GLOBAL COALITION FOR SOCIAL PROTECTION FLOORS - GCSPF |
The webinar will be held on Tuesday, November 22, 2022 from 1 to 2 pm UTC.
Register here: https://us02web.zoom.us/meeting/register/tZMpduytrT4iHtbO32hiC4pBLg0g0sH4AkEy
Background
There is broad consensus that expansion of social protection is a necessary response to the global food and economic crises. But an immediate reaction when universal social protection is proposed is often that “it is impossible, because it is too expensive!” or perhaps “we agree that universal social protection is the ultimate goal, but we must see it as a long-term vision. For now, we must target the poorest”. At this webinar we show how, in actual fact, universal programmes are a feasible and far more effective policy alternative to poverty targeting available to low- and middle-income countries. And, critically, that universality can be affordable if programmes are gradually introduced but maintain the principle of universality in their approach from day one.
Daisy Sibun will be launching a new paper, ‘Can a leopard change its spots? A critical analysis of the World Bank’s ‘progressive universalism’ approach to social protection (Executive summary). The paper critically analyses the justification through which the World Bank continues to promote poverty targeted programmes, despite its more recent high-level support for the idea of universal social protection, and contrasts it with the human rights-based approach to social protection as promoted by the ILO.
Stephen Kidd will present evidence on how countries can implement universal social protection schemes progressively in an affordable way through the reports Building universal social security systems using the principle of universality and Taking stock of progress: A compilation of inclusive social security programmes in low- and middle-income countries.
Speakers
Daisy Sibun, Social Policy Specialist at Development Pathways, author of ‘Can a leopard change its spots? A critical analysis of the World Bank’s ‘progressive universalism’ approach to social protection
Marion Ouma, Postdoctoral Research Fellow, Nordic Africa Institute
Stephen Kidd, Principal Social Policy Specialist at Development Pathways
Moderator: Lena Simet, Senior Researcher and Advocate, Human Rights Watch
The flyer is here.
This event is co-organised by Act Church of Sweden, Action Against Hunger France, Development Pathways and Human Rights Watch, with the support of the Global Coalition for Social Protection Floors (GCSPF).
For more information: Gunnel Axelsson Nycander (Act Church of Sweden) and/or Pauline Pruvost-Czapek (Action Against Hunger France)
TALLER PRESENCIAL
FORTALECER LOS CUIDADOS Y LA SEGURIDAD SOCIAL
APORTES A LA DISCUSIÓN SOBRE PROTECCIÓN SOCIAL EN AMÉRICA DEL SUR
Como cierre de este ciclo realizaremos un Taller Regional presencial “Protección Social, Cuidados e Igualdad de Género: Desafíos frente a las Políticas de Austeridad” se realizará el miércoles 9 de noviembre de 2022 en Buenos Aires, Argentina. El taller se realizará paralelamente a la XV Conferencia Regional sobre la Mujer de América Latina y el Caribe de CEPAL.
El taller tiene por objetivo generar un espacio de reflexión para e intercambio de mejores prácticas internacionales, desafíos y oportunidades en la materia entre expertos/as, sindicalistas, integrantes de organizaciones feministas, académicos/as y activistas. En la reunión se examinarán las experiencias sobre nuestras luchas comunes por la justicia económica y de género, y sobre todo el rol del Estado y de las políticas públicas, así como el rol del monitoreo y los mecanismos de la rendición de cuentas.
El Taller Presencial “Protección Social, Cuidados e Igualdad de Género: Desafíos frente a las Políticas de Austeridad” se realizará el miércoles 9 de noviembre de 2022 en Buenos Aires, Argentina.
Participarán Dão Santos (Brasil), Ana Falú (Argentina), Verónica Serafini (Paraguay), Valeria Esquivel (Argentina), Lucía Cirmi (Argentina), Alma Espino (Uruguay). El taller se realizará en español.
La ponencia de Verónica Serafini (Paraguay) se encuentra aquí, la ponencia de Lucía Cirmi (Argentina) se encuentra aquí.
El enlace para registrarse es: https://bit.ly/InscripcionLink
Descargue el folleto en pdf y aquí, la agenda se encuentra aquí.
Para recibir más información visite aquí y/o envíe un mail a: info@socialprotectionfloorscoalition.org.
Las actividades son organizadas por Ciedur, Red de Género y Comercio, Social Watch y Global Coalition for Social Protection Floors.
Over 200 civil society organizations and trade unions unite to call for a Global Fund for Social Protection to protect the most vulnerable during COVID-19 and beyond.
The programme Improving Synergies Between Social Protection and Public Finance Management provides medium-term support to multiple countries aiming to strengthen their social protection systems at a national level and ensure sustainable financing. The programme aims to support countries in their efforts towards achieving universal social protection coverage.