Social protection for all: But how?
| Author | Roger BEATTIE |
| DOI | http://doi.org/10.1111/j.1564-913X.2000.tb00407.x |
| Date | 01 June 2000 |
| Published date | 01 June 2000 |
Social protection for all: But how? 129
Copyright © International Labour Organization 2000
International Labour Review, Vol. 1 39 (200 0), No. 2
Social protection for all: But how?
Roger BEATTIE *
It is absolutely clear that a very large proportion of the population in most
regions of the world does not enjoy any social protection or is covered only
very partiall y. This is the case for the vast majo rity of people in developing
countries, and even in some o f th e ri chest industrialized countries there are
large gaps in social protection (ILO, 2000a).
Precise measurement of the problem is not easy. In some cases, for exam-
ple in health care, the most appropriate measure is the number of protected
persons as a percentage of the total population. In other cases, for contributory
benefits designed to replace earnings from work, the appropriate measure is the
number of contrib utors as a percentage of the labour force.
A further complication is that coverage often varies from one branch of
social protection to another. For example, unemployment and empl oyment in-
jury insurance usuall y covers a smaller proportion of the workforce t han old-
age, invalidity and survivors’ insurance; health care and family benefits, on the
other hand, of ten have wider coverage than pension insurance. Consideration
must also be given to the level of the protection provided. To cite a real exam-
ple, a country may have health care coverage for alm ost 100 per cent of the
population, but it may reimburse on average only about 50 per cent of the cost
of hospital care, leaving individual families to bear a large part of the risk.
Furthermore, health care coverage may be r elatively wi de, but t he quality of
the care provided woefully inadequate. Thus it could be quite misleading to
compare social protection coverage in different countries on the basis of any
single measure.1
What is clear fr om the figures available is that a high proportion of the
workforce (typically 80 per cent or more) is covered in industrialized coun-
tries, usually for a wide range of contingencies, while in many countries of
Africa and Asia a very small minority (less than 10 per cent) is covered, usually
for a more restricted range of contingencies. In Latin America coverage ranges
from more than 60 per cent to less t han 15 per cent. Coverage in many sub-
* Social Security Department, IL O, Geneva and Head of the Special Team for the prepa-
ration of the IL O’s World Labour Report 2000: Incom e security an d social protection in a
changing world.
1Given the paucity of r eliable data on coverage and the difficulty in interpreting them, it
is useful to look also at data on social security expenditure, which can help to indicate the extent
and quality of coverage provided (see ILO, 2000a, Statistical Annex).
International Labour Review130
Saharan African countries is estimat ed to be as low as 1 per cent of the labour
force, e.g. in the Gambia, Niger and Chad (Bailey, 2000). It attains moderate
levels in North Africa, namely 22 per cent in Egypt and 24 per cent in Tunisia,
although these figures are thought to reflect coverage under the law, rather than
actual compliance, which t ends to be very low among the self-em ployed.
The problem of low coverage is of course not new, especially in countries
where large numbers of p eople work in subsistence agriculture. However, in
recent years, prospects of resolving — or at least mitigating — it have taken a
dramatic t urn for the worse, as an increasing proportio n of the urban labou r
force has had to resort to working in the informal economy. The result is clearly
visible in t able 1.
Table 1. Informal sector employmen t
Country Year of survey Urban informal sector employment in per cent
of total urban employment
Total Male Female
AfricaAfrica
AfricaAfrica
Africa
Benin11992 47.9 52.5 41.4
Botswana21996 19 .3 12.3 27.6
Cameroon31993 57.3 ......
......
... ......
......
...
Côte d’ Ivoire41996 52.7 3 7.3 73.3
Ethiopia 1996 33.0 19.3 5 3.4
Gambia11993 72.4 66.1 8 2.7
Ghana 1997 78.5 ......
......
... ......
......
...
Kenya21995 58.1 ......
......
... ......
......
...
Madagascar11995 57 .5 ......
......
... ......
......
...
Mali11996 71.0 ......
......
... ......
......
...
Mauritius21992 24.0 ......
......
... ......
......
...
Morocco119 88 28.2 ......
......
... ......
......
...
South Africa 1995 17.4 11.1 26.4
Tunisia21981 38.6 ......
......
... ......
......
...
Uganda 19 93 83.7 67.6 80.5
United Republic of Tanzania51995 67.0 59.7 8 5.3
Zambia61993 80.7 ......
......
... ......
......
...
AsiaAsia
AsiaAsia
Asia
Bangladesh71993 10.0 10.0 1 6.0
Fiji61990 43.0 ......
......
... ......
......
...
India 1993 44.2 ......
......
... ......
......
...
Indonesia81995 20.6 19.1 22.7
Iran, Islamic Republic of11996 17.9 03.4 89.5
Kazakhstan 1996 17.3 ......
......
... ......
......
...
Kyrgyzstan 1994 11.9 ......
......
... ......
......
...
Myanmar91996 54.2 52.6 5 6.9
Pakistan11992 67.1 65.9 80.6
Philippines
10 1995 17.0 15.8 1 9.4
Sri Lanka 1985 ......
......
... ......
......
... ......
......
...
Thailand61994 76.8 75.3 78.6
Thailand 1994 47.6 46.1 4 9.4
Turkey11993 15.0 ......
......
... ......
......
...
To continue reading
Request your trial