Comparative Analysis of Social Protection Systems and Policies

This assignment delves into a comprehensive analysis of social protection systems, beginning with a comparison of contributory and non-contributory schemes prevalent in Continental Europe, Latin America, and the Anglo-Saxon world, respectively. It then examines the socio-economic impact of the HIV and AIDS pandemic in Sub-Saharan Africa, evaluating the roles of various social protection actors and considering how the optimal mix of actors might change in a different geographical context. The assignment also explores the rationale for state engagement in social protection, highlighting the need for household support in risk management. Further, it presents an advocacy piece for the portability of social protection rights across a five-country region. Finally, it addresses a specific query from a Minister of Social Affairs regarding child grants in Bulgaria, confirming the information about family cash-benefits in OECD countries and offering information about family benefits in Germany, the Netherlands, and France.

Question 1
Please compare the strengths and weaknesses of contributory, risk-focused schemes of social
protection prevalent in Continental Europe and Latin America with the strengths and weaknesses
of non-contributory, needs-oriented schemes of social protection prevalent mainly in the
AngloSaxonian world.
Answer: Some strengths of contributory, risk-focused schemes of social protection prevalent in
Continental Europe and Latin America is the social funding provided to them by ‘cajas de
provision’ that provided protection from life course and work related contingencies. It however
led to crisis and contributed to extensive liberalization of trade and factor markets. While the
non-contributory, needs-oriented schemes of social protection prevalent mainly in the
AngloSaxonian are funded by the taxes and state revenues and only provide facility to those in
need. Weakness is it puts financial burden to poor families and people living in poverty and
cannot get access to this policy.
Reference: Social protection pdf.
Question 2
The HIV and AIDS pandemic had a huge socio-economic impact in many countries in Sub-
Saharan Africa. Please argue which social protection actors are in theory available, which actors
the individual / household can best rely on when it comes to managing the consequences of the
pandemic and which actors you expect to only play a marginal role. Would you expect the
optimal mix of actors to change if the HIV and AIDS pandemic had happened in continental
Europe? Please justify your opinion.

Answer: NGO’s play a very crucial and vital role in managing the consequences of the
pandemic. Government will play a marginal role. Yes, the optimal mix of actors will change
their approach towards this pandemic if it has happened in continental Europe as social
protection in developing countries involves multilateral and bilateral international organizations,
and international non‐governmental organizations.
Reference: social protection actors- part2
Question 3
Please discuss why the state should engage in social protection at all. Elaborate amongst others
why households might need support in their risk management efforts and why the state should be
the one who provides such support.
Answer: Social protection is concerned with protecting and helping those who are poor and
vulnerable, such as children, women, older people, and people living with disabilities, the
displaced, the unemployed, and the sick. The state should engage in social protection because it
is: Protective: providing relief from deprivation (e.g. income benefits, state pensions),
Preventative: averting deprivation (e.g. savings clubs, social insurance), Promotive: enhancing
incomes and capabilities (e.g. inputs), Transformative: social equity and inclusion, empowerment
and rights (e.g. labour laws). Household needs support from state as needs capital to gain access
to family, markets, social network, public authorities and membership institutions.
Reference: Social protection actors- part1 pdf.
Question 4
Imagine a region comprising 5 contiguous countries. You are a policy maker in the Cabinet of

one of the countries and you are in favour of portability of social protection in the areas of
pensions, unemployment benefits, and health insurance/access to health services. Please write a
short advocacy piece to present to your co-ministers, giving 5 arguments for introducing the
portability of these rights across the entire 5-country region. Base this on the various arguments
and policy approaches you have heard over the past week.
Answer: Arguments for introducing the portability of these rights across the entire 5-country
region Social insurance through NGOs and community organizations; Equal treatment and non-
discrimination including equal treatment in the field of social security between nationals and
non-nationals; Maintenance of acquired rights; Maintenance of rights in the course of
acquisition; and Payment of benefits to beneficiaries residing abroad.
Reference: Migration and social protection pdf.
Question 5
The Minister of Social Affairs in Bulgaria would like to invest in a child grant in her country.
She asks you for the following advice:
a) She has been informed that family cash-benefits in OECD countries equal up to round-about
5% of GDP. She would like to know whether she has been well-informed.
b) She would be interested in getting further information about the monthly amount and age
limits of family benefits in Germany, the Netherlands and France. She would like to know 1)
which database to consult and 2) whether you could quickly draw up a table with the relevant
information for her.
Answer: Yes she has been well informed that family cash-benefits in OECD countries equal up
to round-about 5% of GDP. It accounts for minimum 159 euros and maximum 836 euros per

month. This benefit is valid of child upto 18 yrs. of age and the family benefits are 11480 euros
per month.
Reference: comparative analysis scheuring pdf.