Social protection systems protect people against poverty, vulnerability, and social exclusion.
They do this through a combination of:
Including:
Including:
Including:
Including
Thank you for visiting the site.
The experience is tailored for desktop-only. Please visit the site from a computer in maximised window or full screen.
To know about our program please visit our website
For a social protection system to function well, each of the inter-connected elements within these building blocks must work together.
But what are these elements and how do they relate to each other?
three building blocks
World Bank (2012) ‘2012–2022 Social Protection and Labour Strategy: Resilience, Equity and Opportunity’, and its accompanying background paper
Robalino, D.A., Rawlings, L. and Walker, I. (2012) ‘Building social protection and labor systems: Concepts and operational limitations’;
UNICEF and World Bank (2013) ‘Common Ground: UNICEF and World Bank Approaches to Building Social Protection Systems’;
ISPA (2014) Inter-Agency Social Protection Assessments - Core Diagnostic Instrument (CODI);
TRANSFORM learning initiative for building social protection floors in Africa; OECD (2018) Social Protection System Review: a toolkit;
UNICEF (2019) Global social protection programme framework;
Schüring, E., and Loewe, M. (2021) Handbook on Social Protection Systems.
Social Protection as a ‘Solar’ System – visualised by Valentina Barca and Juan Gonzalo Jaramillo Mejia.
(Also referred to as beneficiary operations management)
To manage the complexity of individuals’ multidimensional needs (e.g. providing tailored guidance/ information/ support while addressing case-specific issues) while also supporting recipients in their interactions with programmes/services along the delivery chain (e.g. supporting compliance with conditionality/ co-responsibility, ensuring information updates and possible programme exit, etc.) and facilitating referrals and linkages across programmes.
To measure – and iteratively improve – performance against agreed delivery standards and intended outcomes.
To enable people to hold the state and service/benefit providers accountable. May include channels to complain, provide feedback, or appeal service/benefit provider’s decisions, as well as processes for these to be responded to and addressed.
To deliver benefits or services to recipients via channels and processes that cater to their different needs and preferences, while curbing potential for fraud.
To determine eligibility for different programmes based on each programme’s different qualifying conditions and eligibility criteria. And to formalise the enrolment of eligible recipients via notification and onboarding
To gather information on people’s characteristics, needs, and conditions – ideally via continuous and on-demand processes.
To promote awareness of entitlements and procedures – on an ongoing basis and inclusive manner.
The functions through which social protection is targeted, provided, and managed. Different programmes often work through the same functions.
The elements that determine the scope and shape of programmes. Decisions relating to these elements not only inform individual programme design, but also how the range of programmes within a system can best work together.
Strong systems for data-informed analysis to inform decision-making, which capture gender dynamics and other disaggregated data and include an understanding of changing patterns of poverty, vulnerability, and emerging risks over time.
Choice of programmes that best address different vulnerabilities and needs of different groups.
Targeting design decisions which are likely to differ across programmes and should encompass a focus on inclusion of those facing the highest barriers and most complex vulnerabilities.
The shape of a programme’s support is influenced by a range of factors including that programme’s objectives (e.g. poverty reduction), financial and political constraints, and the maturity of the programme.
The elements that institutionalise social protection – including how it is financed and governed.
Sustainable and domestic financing sources, including secure future budget commitments in place.
Clarity of strategic vision in terms of social protection’s objectives, functions, internal coherence and linkages with other sectors, ideally embedded in legal and policy frameworks.
Strong technical and functional capacities at all levels of administration – including the social worker workforce.
Established governance arrangements and coordination mechanisms – including dedicated ministries and/or agencies with clear mandates, roles and responsibilities. And coordinating bodies across all relevant crosscutting stakeholders at policy and operational level –plus incentives for collaboration.
All delivery functions are increasingly underpinned by strong digital information systems. Managing social protection programmes involves the collection, processing, storing and use of data for decision-making and the support of operational delivery. Ensuring these processes are digitised can help to reduce errors and simplify and speed up processes.
Each element of a social protection system should consider the different needs of women and girls at different points in their lives, and anticipate the specific risks they face.
These risks are intensified when women and girls are also subject to other forms of discrimination, including on the basis of age, disability, race and ethnicity, sexual orientation and gender identity.
Gender-responsive social protection can:
Increasingly, social protection systems are being used to respond to crises, including those caused by conflict, COVID-19, and climate change.
People are better able to mitigate and cope with crises in countries where routine social protection systems already have good:
Strong systems are less likely to collapse when people need support the most.
And they can also flex, expand and adapt in response to adverse events – ensuring increases in peoples’ needs are anticipated and met.
No coordinated response can meet all these standards equally – planning involves trade-offs!
This decision matrix is a helpful tool for visualising these compromises.
As set out in this paper on converging humanitarian and social protection responses to COVID-19, it is not usually possible (or preferable!) to align whole humanitarian and social protection programmes. It is often better to leverage certain parts of the social protection system (administrative processes, institutional capacities, or data) to deliver a humanitarian response. Or conversely, to draw upon elements of humanitarian systems and capabilities to strengthen a social protection response – with a view to longer term system strengthening.
In settings where social protection systems are less strong, crisis response often involves a patchwork of assistance from different sectors – including humanitarians and disaster risk management authorities, as well as social protection actors.
This patchwork will look different in every context. Each sector has comparative advantages, and these can be brought together in different ways to meet the specific needs of any crisis.
Critical factors to consider and weigh up when designing a coordinated response include:
Cost-effectiveness
Ensuring predictable funding for implementing agencies and of assistance to households
Predictability
Equity and inclusivity
Delivering responses to meet diverse needs, and promoting equality, inclusion and empowerment.
Delivering a more timely response. Avoiding interventions being too late to be useful.
Enabling cost efficiencies, eliminating duplicated delivery systems and processes, minimising gaps in provision and leveraging the most cost-effective systems.
Sustainability
Accountability
Leading to greater government ownership and strengthened government capacity over time.
Timeliness
Putting people at the centre, respecting human rights principles – as well as humanitarian principles where relevant, ensuring dignity and community involvement.
This page was developed as part of the STAAR Facility (Social Protection Technical Assistance, Advice and Resources) implemented by DAI Global UK Ltd and funded by the UK Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office.
STAAR is dedicated to expanding and improving the effectiveness of investments in both gender-responsive social protection and social protection approaches in crises.
For the latest updates and publications from the STAAR Facility, follow us on LinkedIn.
The views expressed in this page are entirely those of STAAR and do not necessarily represent FCDO’s own views or policies.