Introduction: Groups in focus

While there is a standard set of instruments that can be used in social protection systems, this needs to be adapted and combined in different ways in order to serve different groups in society best. The needs of a young person who is just starting life and should not be trapped from birth in unfavourable socio-economic conditions are different from the social protection requirements of a retired person who has finished the active part of life and requires income and care security for an indefinite time period. While women and men both incur similar life-cycle risks, there are also gender-specific risks and vulnerabilities that social protection systems need to be cognizant of. Last but not least, some groups in society often remain below the social protection radar such as people with disability, workers in the informal sector or refugees. Part IV of this handbook therefore discusses how social protection systems need to be designed so that they pay respect to the different risk profiles, needs and challenges in access of different groups. Needs and challenges change over time, which requires social protection systems to be flexible and responsive to new societal trends. When initially designed, social protection systems in today’s high-income countries were based on the male breadwinner model. As norms and defined roles in society have changed quite dramatically, Chapter 18 by Jones argues that gender-sensitive social protection needs to go beyond a narrow focus on women in their capacity as mothers and also empower girls and women. The understanding of disability has equally changed over time as Côte demonstrates in Chapter 19. It has shifted from no longer viewing people with disability as incapacitated members of society but exploring ways that barriers restricting participation can be lowered. This calls for a different social protection approach. Similar to children (discussed in Chapter 20 by Roelen) and the elderly (discussed by Vargas Faulbaum in Chapter 21), people with disability often require care services. This calls for a different social protection package and careful considerations of how care is being organized without putting the person in need of care as well as the (family) carer in a vulnerable position. While social protection systems often explicitly include the groups mentioned above, even in lowand middle-income countries, the informal sector (discussed in Chapter 22 by Miti, Perkiö, Metteri and Atkins) and refugees (discussed in Chapter 23 by Kool and Nimeh) have been largely excluded from (national) social protection systems. The informal sector is often called the missing middle, too poor to participate in formal insurance mechanisms and not poor enough to qualify for social transfers. Refugees that flee to neighbouring countries mostly benefit from international rather than national support, which risks intensifying conflicts with host communities who might equally fall through the cracks of national protection. A social protection system that is sensitive to the needs and constraints of these various groups requires that issues are mainstreamed and properly monitored throughout the system, that group-specific interventions are offered and that groups themselves are regularly consulted. Mainstreaming goes beyond just determining that women are the recipients of cash transfers, that disability is an additional qualifier for a social grant and that households