Introduction
In the last few years, social protection has largely contributed to sustainable development in many countries worldwide. Initially, it was only associated with poverty reduction. Today, it is regarded as an instrument that largely fits into broader national policies. Social protection is premised on the principles of universal rights of social security for everyone, including a standard of living that is suited for their wellbeing and health (ESCAP, 2017). Additionally, it enhances equity, resilience, and a strong redistributive mechanism that fosters social and economic development.
The advocates for this policy include the local communities, private sector, non-governmental organizations, and bilateral and multilateral donors. The rationale behind this policy is that it not only helps in poverty reduction but also improves citizens’ quality of life and enhances social and economic development. On the other hand, the government is hesitant to adopt the policy because of the belief that it will drain its national expenditure and budget. However, I am in support of this policy because it can improve the living conditions of a majority of the population as it is people-centric.
Delegate your assignment to our experts and they will do the rest.
The Environment
Even though many governments have increased investments in social protection, more needs to be done to achieve the Sustainable Development Goals. Low investments in social protection can translate into poor public social services and minimal levels of social benefits. While the minimal requirements for investments in social protection might be significant, they are still feasible even for countries that are less developed. It is a matter of prioritizing and finding fiscal space. It is something that requires political will by the government and not the mere availability of resources.
Overview of the Policy
There is a need to base social protection on domestic public financing because it is the state’s responsibility to give a clear direction on establishing a sustainable long-term development environment. The political will will then ensure that both economic and social benefits of a well-funded social protection become a reality. In Spite of low tax revenues, social protection schemes can include a) income support schemes for the vulnerable; b) non-contributory healthcare services and pensions for the aged; c) and social protection programs for children, among others. Funding for such schemes can be obtained from government tax revenues and a combination of other taxations such as corporate tax and consumption tax, among others. For example, taxes for products like tobacco have been used in financing health care in many jurisdictions. It is a type of taxation that aims at reducing the negative effects of tobacco for other members of society who do not smoke. It is, therefore, the responsibility of the government to ensure that there are enough investments in social protection because it is the one that controls the agenda.
The matter of social protection has reached the alarming discovery and euphoric enthusiasm stage in the Issue Attention Cycle. The public, together with other interested stakeholders, have become aware of the need for increased investments in social protection owing to the poor quality of life of the citizenry. The citizenry is at a stage where they are anxious about the government’s ability to solve their social and economic problem due to a lack of appropriate and sufficient social protection. There is, therefore, a need for the government to do something effective in the shortest time possible to alleviate the suffering of the public.
The issue of social protection was recently brought to the fore when the Covid-19 pandemic struck. It was a focusing event that made the public aware of the need for social protection from the government. The issue of healthcare affordability and access has become a national issue since many people cannot afford healthcare. There is, therefore, an urgent need for the implementation of a universal health care system which can only be possible if there are increased investments in social protection (Knaul et al., 2012). The pandemic uncovered the need for affordable and accessible health care systems to avert future harm to the public.
Federalism has a greater role to play in controlling and disbursing funds for social protection. In the US, social welfare programs use federal funds to provide social benefits for poor families, retired workers, including families with dependent children. Currently, the programs are administered and funded by both the federal government and the states. However, there are proposals to the effect that such obligations and powers should be transferred to the states. Nonetheless, the federal government provides social security and Medicare to disabled and retired workers and their dependents and those of the deceased. These benefits are universal and contributory. Taxation on social security is mandatory for both employers and employees for a large population of workers. The funds account for a large percentage of the federal government. In this light, it is evident that federalism plays a greater role in administering and disbursing funds for social protection.
The policy originates from the federal government level and trickles down to the states. Under the law, the federal government is the institution that has the authority to administer and disburse social protection funds. The other actors in the Picket Fence system are states and local governments. These governments are involved in a chain of complex cooperation with the federal government and play the role of disbursing funds to solve local problems.
The iron triangle, which is a policy-making relationship between the various stakeholders in social protection, plays a greater role in this regard. It involves the bureaucracy, congressional committees, and other interest groups whose aim is to solve social problems. It offers a platform in which changes in social protection can be well-articulated and legislated.
The utilitarianism theory is best suited to explain the policy-making process of the increased investments in social protection (Hanna and Karlan, 2016). This is because it deals with motivations to have lower levels of inequality. It is based on the understanding of the tradeoff between the consumption tendencies of the wealthy and that of the poor.
In this context, Policy evaluation deals with how increased investments in social protection can be examined, implemented, and its impact noted. On the other hand, policy change is how this policy can change the lives of the people and the government’s standing.
Features
Increased investments in social protection will create social protection floors which are sets of basic social security guarantees that provide all who are in need access to basic income security and essential healthcare (ILO). These provisions will ensure that individuals have access to goods and services which are necessary for their lives.
There is a need for the adoption of the Social Protection Floor, which will assist in the development of an effective financing framework that is in line with the aspirations of the Sustainable Development Goals (Peng, 2014). The adoption of this policy will help to a) meet the health, nutritional, and educational needs of children; b) ensure income security for the working population; c) help in the provision of pension for all, and d) help in the achievement of universal health coverage. All these features will go a long way in improving the standard and quality of living for the general populace.
However, this policy needs not to overburden the taxpayer to pay for the increased services. The government ought to devise ways and means of funding increased investments in social welfare using other alternatives.
Impact Statement
The policy will have a positive impact on the vulnerable members of society who are unable to meet the basic necessities such as food, shelter, clothing, and medical care. It will provide them with the means to meet their daily requirements.
Recommendations
It is recommended that the government blends user fees and grants to supplement its revenues from taxation for financing social protection. This is because high taxation can have a negative impact on living conditions. Financing that is based on household income and the number of dependents can provide a lighter burden. Also, philanthropy and corporate donations should also be used to this end.
The second recommendation is for the government to use microfinance mechanisms to develop programs that can cover victims in cases of disasters. This type of program can help vulnerable groups to recover from unfortunate incidents. Major stakeholders like insurance companies, NGOs, and donor communities can be incorporated into such schemes. A good example is the All India Disaster Mitigation Institute (AIDMI).
The third recommendation is for the government to establish a special fund from extractive industries such as the mining sector to help set up pension funds for the elderly, healthcare, educational facilities, and housing for the poor like it is done in Mongolia through the Housing Development Fund.
Concluding Remarks
Financing for social security is of considerable importance in ensuring that we not only eradicate poverty in society but also improve the standard of living for all. It involves transforming all spheres of life to ensure that people live in dignity with the full realization of shared prosperity, human rights, and social equality, among others. In this regard, social protection plays a critical role in contributing to sustainable development and growth. It, therefore, needs a wide spectrum of consensus and financing to achieve this goal. It needs domestic resource mobilization based on taxation reforms that are based on equity. Therefore, it is good to tax personal income and capital gains rather than increase domestic tax, which can hurt the general populace.
References
ESCAP. (2017). Financing social protection. United Nations Economic and Social Commission for Asia and the Pacific: Policy Briefs. https://www.unescap.org/sites/default/files/PB%20No.49%20Financing%20Social%20Protection_0.pdf
Hanna, R., & Karlan, D. (2016). Designing social protection programs: Using theory and experimentation to understand how to help combat poverty . https://www.theigc.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/06/HannaKarlan_revision_v7.pdf
International Labor Organization. (ILO). (n.d). Social Protection Floor (SOCPRO) . www.ilo.org/secsoc/areas-of-work/policy-development-and-applied-research/social-protection-floor/lang--en/index.htm .
Knaul, F. M., González-Pier, E., Gómez-Dantés, O., García-Junco, D., Arreola-Ornelas, H., Barraza-Lloréns, M., ... & Frenk, J. (2012). The quest for universal health coverage: achieving social protection for all in Mexico. The Lancet , 380 (9849), 1259-1279.
Peng, I. (2014). The social protection floor and the ‘New’social investment policies in Japan and South Korea. Global Social Policy , 14 (3), 389-405.
