ETHIOPIAN CIVIL SERVICE UNIVERSITY

College of Business and Economics

Department of Social Protection Management

Individual assignment on: - main factors for a

proposal of a social protection floor

By: Elama Erase Elaya: ID.NO, ECSU

2302065

Submitted to: D/r Zerihun Doda

submision
day:_________

0
 Addiss
Ababa,Ethiopia

Main factors for a proposal of a social protection floor

Introduction

Social security is enshrined as a human right in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights

(1948), Article 25 of which states as follows: ‘‘Everyone has the right to a standard of

living adequate for the health and well-being of himself/herself and of his/her family,

including food, clothing, housing and medical care and necessary social services, and the

right to security in the event of unemployment, sickness, disability, widowhood, old age or

other lack of livelihood in circumstances beyond his/her control’’.

In fact, this issue is of great interest to national governments (Nelson 2010). All states

have sought to reduce poverty and improve the welfare of their citizens. Welfare systems

in Europe have a long history: they originated in 1889 when Germany adopted a social

insurance program for the elderly. That program was designed by Otto von Bismarck to

promote the welfare of workers (ILO 2009). Later, in 1942, during the Second World War,

the UK Government published the Beveridge Plan, which actually resulted in the creation

of the first unified social security system. This plan set out to build ‘‘a welfare system

capable of protecting citizens from the cradle to the grave and attack the five giant evils of

modern society: squalor, ignorance, want, idleness and disease’’ (Beveridge 1942). Six

years later, a minimum income guarantee was incorporated via the National Assistance Act

(Barr 2004).

1
The above idea states that all members of society must have the right to get social security.
Therefore, these rights are seen from different perspectives including providing individuals
or family to have income, health, well-being, and rights to security in the event of the bade
events due to many states’ non-government organizations like Europe, the UK, ILO, and
others started to reduce poverty and improve the welfare of their citizens

Order to improve freedom, autonomy, and security of persons (Van Parijs 1992a;1992b).
Moreover, this income should be sufficient to cover personal basic needs and should not be
subject to any other condition than citizenship or residency (BIEN 2012).

Therefore, from the above views we understand social protection is a fundamental part of
bringing social wale far this is why many agencies are assigned to design programs to serve
society especially people in need.

Purpose:

The purpose of this article is to propose to improve basic social security for all individuals and
families. So it can determine to quartette socio-economic basic social security to all individuals
and households to earn income and different benefits. This proposal seeks to address the gaps
in existing social protection systems and promote social justice and inclusivity.

Scope:

The scope of this article is to provide a general overview of the concept of a social protection
floor and its relevance in addressing social inequalities. It will also outline the steps involved in
undertaking the task of implementing a social protection floor and highlight the major
arguments in favor of this proposal.

Relevance:

The relevance of implementing a social protection floor cannot be overstated. In many

countries, a significant portion of the population lacks access to essential services such as
healthcare, education, and income support. This exacerbates poverty, inequality, and social
exclusion. By establishing a social protection floor, governments can ensure that every
individual has access to a minimum level of social security, promoting social cohesion and
reducing inequalities.

General Overview:

A social protection floor is a basic level of social security that guarantees access to essential
services and income support for all individuals and families. It provides a safety net for those

2
who are unable to meet their basic needs due to unemployment, illness, disability, or other
vulnerabilities. The concept of a social protection floor was endorsed by the International
Labour Organization (ILO) and the United Nations (UN) as a key component of social
development.

The objective of Task:

The objective of implementing a social protection floor is to ensure that all individuals and
families have access to essential services and income support, regardless of their socio-
economic status or circumstances. It aims to alleviate poverty, reduce inequality, and promote
social inclusion.

Steps Involved in Undertaking the Task:

 Assessing the existing social protection system and identifying gaps and shortcomings.
 Conducting research and analysis to determine the appropriate level of social security
for the social protection floor.
 Developing policies and programs to address the identified gaps and shortcomings.
 Allocating sufficient resources and funding to implement the social protection floor.
 Establishing mechanisms for monitoring and evaluating the effectiveness of the social
protection floor.

Main Purpose of the Article:

The main purpose of this article is to advocate for the implementation of a social protection
floor as a means to address social inequalities and promote social justice. It aims to raise
awareness about the importance of social protection and provide arguments in favor of this
proposal.

Major Arguments for a Proposal of a Social Protection Floor:

 Social Justice: A social protection floor ensures that every individual has access to
essential services and income support, promoting social justice and equal
opportunities.
 Poverty Reduction: By providing a safety net for those in need, a social protection floor
helps to alleviate poverty and improve living conditions.
 Inequality Reduction: A social protection floor reduces inequalities by providing equal
access to essential services and support, regardless of socio-economic status.
 Social Cohesion: By ensuring that no one is left behind, a social protection floor
promotes social cohesion and solidarity within communities and societies.

3
  Economic Stability: A social protection floor can contribute to economic stability by
reducing the negative impact of economic crises on individuals and families.

In conclusion, the proposal of a social protection floor is a crucial step towards creating a more
equitable and inclusive society. By guaranteeing access to essential services and income
support, it aims to alleviate poverty, reduce inequality, and promote social justice. The
implementation of a social protection floor requires a comprehensive assessment of existing
systems, policy development, resource allocation, and monitoring mechanisms to ensure its
effectiveness.

Theme of the Paper:

The theme of the paper is the proposal of a social protection floor as a means to address social
inequalities and promote social justice.

Relevance to the Course:

The assigned article/book chapter is highly relevant to the course as it addresses the
fundamental principles and concepts of social protection. It provides insights into the
importance of establishing a social protection floor and its impact on poverty reduction,
inequality reduction, and social cohesion. The article/book chapter contributes to the
understanding of how social protection plays a crucial role in creating a more equitable and
inclusive society.

Strengths of the Paper:

 Comprehensive Analysis: The paper provides a comprehensive analysis of the concept of

a social protection floor, its objectives, and the steps involved in implementing it. It
covers various aspects such as assessing existing systems, policy development, resource
allocation, and monitoring mechanisms.
 Well-structured arguments The paper presents well-structured arguments in favor of a
social protection floor, highlighting the major factors that support this proposal. The
arguments are backed by evidence and research, strengthening the validity of the
paper's claims.
 Relevance to Global Agenda: The paper aligns with the global agenda of promoting
social development and reducing inequalities. It emphasizes the importance of social
protection as a key component of social justice and sustainable development.

Limitations of the Paper:

4
 Limited Discussion of Challenges: The paper does not extensively discuss the challenges
and limitations associated with implementing a social protection floor. It would be
beneficial to address potential obstacles such as financial constraints, political
resistance, and the need for international cooperation.
Lack of Country-Specific Examples: The paper does not provide specific examples of
countries that have successfully implemented a social protection floor. Including such
examples would enhance the practical understanding of the proposal and its potential
impact.
Narrow Scope of Relevance: The paper focuses primarily on the proposal of a social
protection floor and does not delve into other aspects of social protection or alternative
approaches. Expanding the scope to include a broader discussion would provide a more
comprehensive analysis of the topic.

Overall, the paper's strengths lie in its comprehensive analysis, well-structured arguments, and
relevance to the global agenda of social development. However, it could be strengthened by
addressing challenges, incorporating country-specific examples, and broadening the scope of
relevance.

References
Adema, W. (2006). Social assistance policy development and the provision of a decent level of
incomes in
selected OECD countries. OECD social employment and migration working papers, 38. Paris:
OECD.
Albert, C., & Davia, M. (2011). Pobreza monetaria, exclusio´n educativa y privacio´n material de
los jo´venes.
Revista de Economı´a Aplicada, 56(XIX), 59–88.
Alco´n, E. M., Quin˜ones, P. G., & Bermejo, L. R. (2002). Household services in Spain: Some key
explanatory factors. The Service Industries Journal, 22(1), 26–31.
Ando, A., & Modigliani, F. (1957). Test of the life-cycle hypothesis of savings: comments and
suggestions.
Bulletin of the Oxford University Institute of Statistics, 19, 106.

5
APFC. (2009). An Alaskan´s guide to the Permanent Fund.
http://www.apfc.org/home/Media/publications/
2009AlaskansGuide.pdf. Visited on June 12, 2014.
Arcarons, J., Lo Vuolo, R., Ravento´ s, D., Rey, J. L., Soriano, R., Yanes, P., et al. (2010). La Renta
Ba´sica:
>una propuesta justa, razonable y posible? Revista Internacional de Pensamiento Polı´tico n85.
Atkinson, A. B. (1991). The Social Safety Net’’, Welfare State Program, number WSP/66,
STICERD.
(London School of Economics).
Atkinson, A. B. (1995a). Public economics in action. The basic income/flat tax proposal. Oxford:
Clarendon
Press.
Atkinson, A. B. (1995b). Incomes and the welfare state. Essays on Britain and Europe.
Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press.
Atkinson, A. B., & Brandolini, A. (2001). Promise and pitfalls in the use of ‘‘secondary’’ data-sets:
Income
inequality in OECD countries as a case study. Journal of Economic Literature, 39(3), 771–799.
Ayala, L. (2009). Inequality and welfare in intra-territorial income distribution (with Antonio
Jurado and
Francisco Pedraja). In J. R. Cuadrado-Roura (Ed.), Regional policy, economic growth and
convergence.
Heidelberg: Springer.

Bahle, T., Pfeifer, M., & Wendt, C. (2010). Social assistance. In F. G. Castles, S. Leibfried, J. Lewis,
H.
Obinger, & C. Pierson (Eds.), The Oxford Handbook of welfare state (pp. 448–461). Oxford:
Oxford
University Press.
Baldwin, P. (1990). The politics of social solidarity: Class bases of the European Welfare state,
1875–1975.
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Barr, N. (2004). Economics of the welfare state (4th ed.). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Beveridge, W. H. (1942). Social insurance and allied services. Inter-departmental
Committee on Social
Insurance and Allied Services. Great Britain.
BIEN. (2012). Basic income network. http://www.basicincome.org/bien/. Visited on June 10,
2014.
Camacho, J., Herna´ndez, M. (2008). Deteccio´n e influencia de los principales factores
explicativos del
consumo familiar de servicios en Espan˜a y sus regiones. Revista de Estudios Regionales, n882.

6
Eide, E., & Showalter, M. (1998). The effect of school quality on student performance: A
quantile regression
approach. Economics Letters, 58, 345–350.
European Commission Regulation (EC) No 1749/1999 of 23 July 1999 amending Regulation (EC)
No
2214/96, concerning the sub-indices of the harmonized indices of consumer prices.
European Parliament (2010). Role of minimum income in combating poverty and promoting an
incrusive
society in Europe. European Parliament resolution 2010/2039 (INI).
Figari, F., Matsaganis, M., & Sutherland, H. (2013). Are European social safety nets tight
enough? Coverage
and adequacy of minimun income schemes in 14 EU countries. International Journal of Social
Welfare,
22, 3–14.
Freysson, L. (2011). General government expenditive trends 2005–2010: EU countries
compared. Eurostat,
statistics in focus 42/2011.
Gillion, C. (2000). The development and reform of social security pensions: The
approach of the International
Labour Office. International Social Security Review, 53(1), 35–63.
Gorz, A. (1992). On the difference between society and community, and Why basic income
cannot by itself
confer full membership of either. In P. van Parijs (Ed.), Arguing for basic income. Ethical
foundations
for a radical reform. London: Verso.
Gorz, A. (1994). Capitalism, socialism, ecology (pp. 102–117). Verso Books.
Guio, A. (2005). ‘‘Material deprivation in the EU’’. En EUROSTAT. Statistics in focus.
Luxembourg: Office
for Official Publications of the European Communities.
Haarmann, D. (2012). Pilot proyect of basic income grant implementation.
http://www.bignam.org. Visited
on June 11, 2014.
Hagerly, M. R., Cummins, R. A., Ferriss, A. L., Land, K., Michalos, A. C., Peterson, M., et al.
(2001).
Quality of life indexes for national policy: Review and agenda for research. Social Indicators
Research, 55, 1–96.
Harvey, P. (2005). The right to work and Basic Income Guarantees: Competing or
complementary goals?
Rutgers Journal of Law & Urban Policy, 2, 1.
Herce, J. A., Sosvilla-Rivero, S., & De Lucio, J. (2003). Convergence in social protection across EU
countries, 1970–1999. Ed. Public Finance, Vol. 53(1998):269–281.

7
Holzman, R., & Hinz, R. (2005). Old-age income support in the 21st century. An
international perspective
on pension systems and reform. Washington, CD: World Bank.
ILO. (1944). Declaration concerning the aims and purposes of the International Labour
Organisation,
(Philadelphia Declaration). In International Labour conference, record of proceedings, 26th
session,
Philadelphia (Montreal). pp. 621–623.
ILO. (2009). From bismarck to beveridge: Social security for all. Magazine World of Work 67.
December
2009.
ILO. (2012). Social protection floors for social justice and a fair globalization. In International
labour
conference, 101st session, 2012.
Immervoll, H. (2012). Minimum-income benefits uin OECD countries: Policy design,
effectiveness and
challenges. In D. J. Besharov & K. Couch (Eds.), Counting the poor: New thinking about
European
poverty measures and lessons for the Unites States (pp. 171–210). New York: Oxford University
Press.
Koenker, R. (2005). Quantile Regression. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Koenker, R., & Bassett, G, Jr. (1978). Regression quantiles. Econometrica, 46, 1.
Lo Vuolo, R. (2008). Why basic income is better than renewed policy promises for latin
american informal
security regimes. Paper presented in the 12th BIEN Congress 2008—Dublin, Ireland. June 20–
21,
2008. University College Dublin, Ireland.
Man˜as, E., Cuadrado, J. R., & Galbadon, P. (2002). El consumo de los servicios en los hogares
espan˜oles.
Instituto de Estudios Econo´micos. pp 325–332.
Marshall, T. H. (1950). Citizenship and social class and other essays. Cambridge: Cambridge
University
Press.

Mercader, M. (2004). La aritme´tica de una Renta Ba´sica Parcial para Espan˜a: una evaluacio´n
con EspaSim.
XI. Encuentro de Economı´a Pu´blica, Barcelona, en.
www.nodo50.org/redrentabasica/descargas/
mercader-prats2004.pdf. Visited on June, 16, 2014.
Meyer, B., Mok, W., & Sullivan, J. X. (2009). The under-reporting of transfers in household
surveys: its

8
nature and consequuences. NBER Working Paper, 1518. Massachusetts: National Bureau of
Economic
research.
Nektarios, M. (2012). Greece: The pension reforma of 2010. The Four Pillar Newsletter, 50, 7–9.
Nelson, K. (2010). Social assistance and minimum income benefits in old and new
democracies. International
Journal of Social Welfare, 19(4), 365–378.
Oliver, X., & Spadaro, A. (2007). Basic Income or Vital Minimun? A note on the distributive
effects of
possible reforms of the Spanish income tax. In Hardin, A., Gupta, A. (Eds.), Modelling our future:
Population ageing social security and taxation (International Symposia in Economic Theory and
Econometrics, vol. 15, Elsevier).
Pateman, C. (2006). Democratizing citizenship: Some advantages of a basic income. In K.
Dowding, J. de
Wispelaere, & S. White (Eds.), The ethics of stakeholding. Basingstoke: Palgrave.
Pe´rez, S. (2009). El estudio de la pobreza en Espan˜a desde una o´ptica econo´mica: medicio´n
y polı´ticas.
Estudios de Economı´a Aplicada, 27(2), 349–372.
Ravento´ s, D. (2007). The material conditions of (freedom ed.). London: Pluto Press.
Roemer, J. E., Aaberge, R., Colombino, U., Fritzell, J., Jenkins, S. P., Marx, I., et al. (2003). To
what extent
do fiscal regimes equalize opportunities for income acquisition among citizens? Journal of
Public
Economics, 87, 539–565.
SERVICE CANADA. (2012). http://www.servicecanada.gc.ca/eng/services/pensions/oas/gis/.
Visited on
June 2, 2014.
Standing, G. (2011). The precariat: The new dangerous class. Ed. Bloomsbury.

Universal Declaration of Human Rights. (1948). United Nations General Assembly. Article 25.
http://www.
un.org. Visited on May 31, 2014.
Van der Veer, R. (1998). Real freedom versus reciprocity: Competing views on the justice of
unconditional
basic income. Political Studies, 46(1), 140–163.
Van Parijs, P. (1992a). Competing justifications of basic income. In Philippe Van Parijs (Ed.),
Arguing for
basic income: Ethical foundations for a radical reform. London: Verso.
Van Parijs, P. (1992b). The second marriage of justice and efficiency. In Philippe Van Parijs (Ed.),
Arguing
for basic income: Ethical foundations for a radical reform. London: Verso.
Van Parijs, P. (1998). Basic income and the future of work. An internet Dialogue. Cathedra
Hover´s Working

9
Paper (DOCH). Universidad Cato´lica de Lovaina. September.
Van Parijs, P. (2006). Basic income: A simple and powerful idea for the twenty-first century. In
B.
Ackerman, et al. (Eds.), Redesigning distribution. London: Verso.
Vanderbrouke, F. (1997). A propos de l’instauration pragmatique d’une allocation universelle.
La Revue
nouvelle, 105, 161–166.
Whitehouse, E., D ´ Addio, A., Chonik, R., & Reilly, A. (2009). Two decades of pension reform:
What has
been archived and what remains to be done. The Geneva Papers on Risk and Insurance-Issues
and
Practice, 34(4), 515–535.
Wispelaere, J. (1999). Universal basic income: Reciprocity and the right to non-exclusion.
Citizen’s Income
Trust occasional paper. London: Citizen’s Income Trust.
Zoll, R. (1995). Un nuovo modello di redistribuzione del tempo. Sociologia del Lavoro, n8 56.

10