II.

 The Definition
of Social Protection

A.  ADB’s Definition of Social Protection

The definition of social protection has both conceptual and practical
implications for this study:
• What is social protection and how should it be distinguished from
the more all-embracing concepts of poverty reduction and social
development?
• How can social protection be defined in such a way that the primary
objective of this study—the creation of a Social Protection Index
(SPI)—can be achieved? In this regard, key considerations are
the need for quantification and ensuring a similar approach for all
participating countries.

The starting point for this study was the Asian Development Bank’s
(ADB’s) definition of social protection. ADB has defined it as “the set of policies
and programs designed to reduce poverty and vulnerability by promoting efficient labor
markets, diminishing people’s exposure to risks, and enhancing their capacity to protect
themselves against hazards and the interruption/loss of income.”17 Furthermore, social
protection is defined as comprising five major kinds of activities: labor market
policies and programs, social insurance, social assistance, micro/area-based
schemes, and child protection.18 Table 2.1 lists the types of programs and
activities that are considered to fall into each of these components.

17 Ortiz, 2001, p.41.

18 ADB, Social Protection Strategy, p. 13, Manila, 2001

1colorSocial Protection Index Vo7 7 3/28/2008 2:57:57 PM

  SOCIAL Protection Index for Committed Poverty Reduction vol. 2

The wide-ranging nature of this definition is immediately apparent when

one considers the different types of activity that are deemed to fall into each
of the components listed above. While the traditional components of social
protection are included—e.g., social assistance and social insurance along
with labor market policies—so, too, are aspects of early child development
such as immunization and nutrition, which are more usually classified as
falling within health policies. Similarly, area-based projects such as social
funds involve activities as those found in many integrated rural, urban, and
community development projects, e.g., community-based infrastructure
development. The variety of activities that ADB includes as falling within
social protection is shown in Appendix 3 of the ADB Social Protection Strategy:
Progress Report to the Board of Directors (Manila, 2002). This appendix includes
projects such as rural health (Viet Nam), coastal community development
and fisheries (Indonesia), fisheries resource management (the Philippines),
agriculture sector development (Mongolia), basic education (Lao People’s
Democratic Republic [Lao PDR]), microfinance in several countries, and
health and nutrition sector development (Indonesia). These programs not
only involve a much wider range of activities but also appear to extend the
definition of social protection cited above.
On the other hand, the footnotes to the tables imply a more
restrictive approach. For instance, under Child Protection Programs (Table
5, Appendix 3), the footnote states that “basic education… projects are
normally excluded,” yet the table includes the Lao PDR Basic Education
(girls) project. Furthermore, the reported social protection activities
undertaken by ADB reveal an emphasis on labor and vulnerability issues, as
well as the targeting of vulnerable groups. Social protection training provided
has also been targeted at topics such as labor standards/legislation and social
security and assistance. The implication is that ADB’s actual social protection
activities cover a narrower and more traditional range than is implied by the
definition it has adopted. Clearly, the definition of social protection is by no
means cut and dry, or noncontroversial.
Social protection programs identified in Table 2.1 fall into four general
types:
• Programs that bring direct and tangible benefits to subgroups of
the poor and the vulnerable through cash or in-kind transfers—e.g.,
most social assistance payments, scholarships or other educational
assistance, health subsidies, food/disaster aid, and food for work
programs.
• Programs, especially insurance, that provide coverage to a group far
larger than actually direct benefit from the service.

1colorSocial Protection Index Vo8 8 3/28/2008 2:57:57 PM

 The Definition of Social Protection 

Table 2.1: ADB’s Components and Subcomponents of Social Protection

Component/Subcomponent of Social Protection

Labor Market Programs
Direct employment generation (microenterprise development and public works)
Labor exchanges and other employment services
Skills development and training
Labor legislation (including minimum age, wage levels, health, and safety, etc.)

Social Insurance Programs

Programs to cover the risks associated with unemployment, sickness, maternity,
disability, industrial injury, and old age

Social Assistance and Welfare Programs

Welfare and social services targeted at the sick, the indigent, orphans,
and other vulnerable groups
Cash/in-kind transfers (e.g., food stamps)
Temporary subsidies for utilities and staple foods

Micro and Area-Based Schemes (community-based)

Microinsurance schemes
Agricultural insurance
Social funds (usually involving the construction, operation, and maintenance
of small-scale physical and social infrastructure)
Disaster preparedness and management

Child Protection
Early child development activities—e.g., basic nutrition, preventative health,
and educational programs
Educational assistance (e.g., school-feeding, scholarships, fee waivers)
Health assistance (e.g., reduced fees for vulnerable groups)
Street children initiatives
Child rights and advocacy/awareness programs against child abuse, child labor etc,
Youth programs to reduce health risks (especially HIV/AIDS and drugs) and
anti-social behaviour.
Family allowances (e.g., in-kind or cash transfers to assist families with young
children to meet part of their basic needs).

Source: Derived from I. Ortiz (ed.), Defining an Agenda for Poverty Reduction—Proceedings of the First
Asia and Pacific Forum on Poverty, Volume 2, p. 57, ADB, Manila, 2002; ADB, Social Protection Strategy,
pp. 14–22, Manila, 2001.

1colorSocial Protection Index Vo9 9 3/28/2008 2:57:57 PM

 10 SOCIAL Protection Index for Committed Poverty Reduction vol. 2

• Programs that benefit communities as a whole rather than individual

households—e.g., social funds, area-based schemes.
• Legal and legislative measures covering sections of the poor and the
vulnerable but which do not bring directly measurable benefits—
e.g., labor codes, child protection laws.

The feasibility of quantifying expenditures and beneficiaries—the

critical variables as far as the formulation of an SPI is concerned—will vary
considerably between each category of social protection activities. Overall,
if all types of programs listed in Table 2.1 and the appendices to the above-
mentioned Progress Report on the Social Protection Study were included as
part of this study, then:
• Few development projects not involving major infrastructure would
be excluded;
• Expenditure and beneficiaries from traditional social protection
activities such as social welfare and social assistance would, in many
cases, only represent a small minority of total social protection
expenditure and beneficiaries. This would considerably weaken
the usefulness of the results especially given that ADB's current
emphasis as regards social protection is on topics such as social
and health insurance; job creation programs; and improving labor
legislation, standards, and safeguards;
• The difficult issues relating to estimating beneficiaries from projects
not targeted at individual households and with impacts lasting
several years would have to be resolved; and
• The data collection task would be monumental and would never be
easily replicable without considerable resources.

B.  Country Definitions of Social Protection

Local consultants were asked, as part of their work, to investigate how social
protection was defined in their country and what types of programs fell within
this definition. The principal findings were:
• The term “social protection” is rarely used in Asian countries. This
is not altogether surprising as the term “social protection” has only
been adopted by multilateral and bilateral development agencies
in recent years; it is also not commonly used in many developed
countries. The terms more commonly used were social security,
social welfare, and social safety nets.

1colorSocial Protection Index Vo10 10 3/28/2008 2:57:58 PM

 The Definition of Social Protection 11

• Virtually every country had a formal social insurance system. In

the great majority of cases, this was limited to the government and
formal employment sectors. These systems, therefore, had little
relevance to the informal and rural sectors who constituted the
majority of the population, and within which the majority of the
poor were concentrated. Exceptions were Japan and Korea, which are
highly developed, and some of the Central Asian countries formerly
part of the Soviet Union. The People’s Republic of China has a
comprehensive system for its “legal” urban population, but is only
now extending this system to the much larger rural population.
• Similarly, almost every country had some traditional social welfare
programs targeted at vulnerable groups, e.g., the poor, the elderly,
the disabled, single and abused women, widows, etc. In general,
beneficiaries of these groups were limited to the poorest of the poor.
Much more prevalent were larger-scale targeted social assistance
programs involving cash or in-kind (i.e., food) assistance, some of
which were associated with job creation (e.g., food for work), or
schooling (e.g., food for education).
• Many countries also had targeted programs to improve educational
attendance, e.g., free or subsidized uniforms/textbooks. Several
countries, especially those without comprehensive directly funded
health systems or health insurance schemes, had also introduced
various programs to improve access to health services of the poor.
• Most countries also had some labor market programs, although
these varied considerably both in their nature and their coverage.
Examples included subsidies to employers, direct unemployment
benefits, employment services, loans to small businesses and food
for work programs.

Thus, even in the absence of a formal definition of social protection,

most countries were implementing many of the types of programs shown
targeted at most of these groups. As an example, Viet Nam’s adopted
Comprehensive Poverty Reduction and Growth Strategy19 includes a chapter
entitled Development of Safety Nets for the Poor and for Victims of Natural
Disasters, which includes policies to:
• provide subsidies/exemptions to the poor for their health and
education costs;

19 Socialist Republic of Viet Nam, 2003, Comprehensive Poverty Reduction and Growth Strategy. 
Ha Noi.

1colorSocial Protection Index Vo11 11 3/28/2008 2:57:58 PM

 12 SOCIAL Protection Index for Committed Poverty Reduction vol. 2

• help disabled and vulnerable people to be more self-sufficient and

integrated into mainstream society;
• expand the coverage of social insurance policies, including
community-based schemes;
• expand social protection and safety-net schemes for the poor,
the hungry, and those unable to work and with no other means of
support;
• protect and educate vulnerable children and those with special
needs, such as orphans, child workers and street kids, disabled
children (including victims of HIV/AIDS and Agent Orange);
• improve labor market access for the poor and the vulnerable;
• enhance labor legislation to protect rights of workers and increase
safety at work;
• develop an effective system of emergency social relief solutions;
and
• expand the participation and role of nongovernment organizations
(NGOs) in developing and implementing safety net policies.

The overall conclusion is that Asian countries, even if they do not use
the term “social protection,” implicitly see it as constituting a narrower range
of programs than contained in ADB’s definition, primarily consisting of: the
more traditional components of social protection, i.e., social welfare/assistance
to vulnerable groups (including targeted pro-poor schemes), social insurance,
and labor market programs; and targeted poverty reduction programs.

C. The Study’s Definition of Social Protection

The above issues were raised during the local workshops held during the
earlier study.20 The focus in these discussions was on the types of programs
that should and should not be included in this study. Workshop participants
generally felt that including some components implied by ADB’s definition—
e.g., health education, general immunization programs, local infrastructure
development, integrated rural/community development programs—would
lead to a definition of social protection that would:
• include types of programs generally associated with other sectors
such as health, education, and rural development;

20 See Halcrow, 2005, op. cit, Main Report, Volume 1, Chapter 2 and Viet Nam Country Report
in Weber, 2006, op. cit.

1colorSocial Protection Index Vo12 12 3/28/2008 2:57:58 PM

 The Definition of Social Protection 13

• create difficulties in terms of quantification, especially for projects

targeted at communities where, often, implementation and
expenditure are phased over a number of years. The population
will also continue to benefit from the resulting infrastructure and
technical assistance (e.g., agricultural extension services) for many
years despite the formal completion of the project. How could the
beneficiaries from these programs be related to the annual numbers
of recipients of direct social assistance, pensions, etc.?
• divert attention away from the traditional social insurance and
welfare aspects of social protection; and
• require a level of resources for data collection and analysis not
available to the study.

The conclusion was that a narrower definition of social protection had to

be adopted to achieve the prime objective of this study, i.e., the formulation
of an SPI. After considerable discussion, the definition of social protection
adopted was as follows:
The set of policies and programs that enable vulnerable groups to prevent, reduce,
and/or cope with risks, and that:
• are targeted at the vulnerable groups;
• involve cash or in-kind transfers; and
• are not activities that are usually associated with other sectors such as rural
development, basic infrastructure, health, and education.

Table 2.2 contains a schedule of the types of programs that are considered
to fall within the definition above. The table also indicates those programs
falling within ADB’s categorization of social protection activities that will
not be considered in this study. The latter mainly includes programs that
either involve the construction of physical or social infrastructure, integrated
community development schemes and programs that traditionally fall within
the education and health sectors, such as primary and preschool education,
immunization, health and nutrition education, and pre- and postnatal care.

1colorSocial Protection Index Vo13 13 3/28/2008 2:57:58 PM

 14 SOCIAL Protection Index for Committed Poverty Reduction vol. 2

Table 2.2: Inclusion/Exclusion of Social Protection Programs

Component/Subcomponent Included/ Comments

of Social Protection
Labor Market Programs
Direct employment generation
(microenterprise development and
public works)
Labor exchanges and other employment
services
Skills development and training
Labor legislation (including minimum
age, wage levels, health and safety, etc.)
Excluded
Included Includes loan-based programs to
support small businesses, etc.
Included Including retrenchment programs
Excluded Unless targeted at particular
groups, such as the unemployed or
disadvantaged children
Included Not amenable to quantification

Social Insurance Programs

Programs to cover the risks associated Included
with unemployment, sickness, maternity,
disability, industrial injury, and old age
Health insurance Included
Social Assistance and Welfare Programs
Welfare and social services targeted Included
at the disabled, the indigent, those
affected by disasters, and other
vulnerable groups.
Cash/in-kind transfers (e.g., food Included
stamps, health cost exemptions, or
subsidies)
Temporary subsidies for utilities, Included Only if targeted at particular
housing, etc. vulnerable groups. General
subsidies are excluded even if their
rationale is to assist the poor

Micro and Area-Based Schemes

Microinsurance/microfinance schemes Included Microfinance seen as an important
aspect of social protection.
Mainstream rural credit programs
will be excluded

Agricultural insurance Included Not very common

Social funds
Disaster preparedness and management
Excluded Except where direct transfers to
households occur
Included Reconstruction of physical
infrastructure is excluded; cash/in-
kind grants included; number of
beneficiaries not amenable to
quantification

1colorSocial Protection Index Vo14 14 3/28/2008 2:57:58 PM

 The Definition of Social Protection 15

Component/Subcomponent Included/ Comments

of Social Protection Excluded
Child Protection
Child rights and advocacy/awareness Included Not amenable to quantification
programs against child abuse, child
labor, etc.
Early child development activities Excluded Unless directly targeted to
particular groups, e.g., children of
single mothers, or involve handouts
such as child/maternity benefits
Educational assistance (e.g., school- Included Assistance for upper secondary and
feeding, scholarships, fee waivers)* tertiary education is excluded
Health assistance* (e.g., health cost Included Will generally be included under
reduced fees/ subsidized medicines for social assistance
vulnerable groups)
Family allowances Included Transfers through the tax system
are excluded
Street-children/child worker/orphan Included
initiatives
*  Basic education and health services are excluded.
Source: Authors adapted from I. Ortiz ed, Defining an Agenda for Poverty Reduction—Proceedings
of the First Asia and Pacific Forum on Poverty, Volume 2, p. 57, ADB, Manila, 2002; ADB, Social
Protection Strategy, pp. 14–22, Manila, 2001.

Regarding this table, the following should be noted:

• Programs that are generally seen as falling within the health or
education sectors, such as health education (including HIV/AIDS
and reproductive health), immunization, preschool education, and
general vocational and technical education are excluded.
• Programs that fall within the general category of rural/community
development are excluded along with those that concentrate on the
construction of physical assets or social infrastructure, e.g., schools
or clinics.
• Job creation programs are included whether or not they are based on
the provision of loans or subsidies to employers.
• Training and subsidy programs are only included if they are clearly
targeted at one or more of the identified target groups.
• Programs to improve the quality of teaching or health care in poor
areas are excluded.

1colorSocial Protection Index Vo15 15 3/28/2008 2:57:58 PM

 16 SOCIAL Protection Index for Committed Poverty Reduction vol. 2

Attention should also be drawn to the inclusion of microcredit programs.

ADB’s definition excludes these unless they include microinsurance (which
is not generally the case) or “promote community self help or other social protection
policies.” We accept that not all rural credit programs should be included;
however, we believe that programs that directly target poor households, are
based around lending groups of households and do not involve collateral should
be included. They represent one of the most prevalent forms of assistance
to the poor in several countries and evidence suggests that in many cases,
these programs contribute positively and directly to the general welfare of
recipients. Additionally, there seems little logic in excluding these programs
while including job creation programs based on loans to small businesses.
While this definition is open to debate, as are most social protection
definitions, we believe that it has several advantages:
• facilitates the acceptability of the results by national governments
and international financing institutions by excluding programs and
activities that are normally seen as falling within the ambit of other
sectors;
• enables social protection strategies and programming to concentrate
on a clearly defined set of activities and projects that fall outside the
scope of major sector development funding;
• does not prejudice the implementation or adoption of any policies
or programs that fall within wider definitions of social protection
or hamper ADB’s ability to achieve its current social protection
priorities;
• facilitates the development of a statistical database on social
protection and, hence, the derivation of national SPIs.

D. How to Treat Basic Health Programs

However, one issue relating to health care needs to be mentioned. Based on
the definition of social protection adopted for this study (and by extension,
ADB’s), health services directly funded by the government out of general
revenues are excluded from consideration. Other reasons for adopting this
approach were: the study was foremost about social protection and it was
felt essential to clearly distinguish social protection activities from those
most usually associated with other sectors such as health, education and
community-based infrastructure development; most current definitions as
well as national perceptions hold that social protection consists primarily
of activities related to labor markets, social insurance, social assistance, and

1colorSocial Protection Index Vo16 16 3/28/2008 2:57:59 PM

 The Definition of Social Protection 17

child protection; it was feared that including all health care would overwhelm
the more traditional aspects of social protection, which were exactly those
which the study was designed to highlight. On the other hand, if health care
is primarily funded through health insurance schemes, it does fall within the
definition of social protection.
During the course of technical assistance (TA) 6120, it was realized
that this approach creates an anomaly whereby, depending on the funding
mechanism, expenditure on health may or may not be included in the
calculations for this study. This issue (which could also apply to expenditure
on basic education) was discussed during the concluding stages of the
previous study, but no conclusion was reached about how best to proceed.
Accordingly, the current study has proceeded using the same methodology as
for TA 6120. This issue was raised again in this study by the consultants in
Sri Lanka and Uzbekistan. Given the concern relating to this issue, we have
re-examined this issue in Annex 5 which contains an analysis of the impact of
including all health care in the definition of social protection.
This analysis21 showed that incorporating general health services into
the calculations would lead to a domination of the social protection summary
indicators (SPSIs), and the SPI in many countries by this sector and would
make it harder to identify issues relating to the traditional components of
social protection. This is particularly the case for countries where provision
is very low—in these countries, over 75% of the SPI value would relate
to health expenditure and coverage. Furthermore, the social protection
distribution (SPDIST) indicator would be redundant as it would be the same
for all countries and would thus say nothing about the coverage of the poor by
non-health social protection programs. SPDIST and the health target group
coverage rate would also say nothing about the quality of coverage of the
health system, i.e., how well does it provide for the needs of the population,
and the poor in particular.
Based on this analysis, incorporating health care into the current
formulation of the SPSIs and the SPI is not considered to be either feasible
or desirable. It is not feasible because the SPDIST indicator would become
redundant as it would have the same value for all countries and the health
target group coverage ratio would give little indication of the quality of the
health care provided as, again it would be the same for all countries; and not
desirable, because, in many cases, health services would dominate the SPSIs

21 Because this analysis replicates the methodology used to calculate the SPSIs and the SPIs
which will be described later in this report, it is not recommended that it be read until the
reader has been through the rest of the report.

1colorSocial Protection Index Vo17 17 3/28/2008 2:57:59 PM

 18 SOCIAL Protection Index for Committed Poverty Reduction vol. 2

and the SPIs, making it much more difficult to identify the characteristics
of, and variations in, the provision of the traditional components of social
protection, which were always the primary focus of this study. These
conclusions would still apply if a more sensitive approach could be devised
to assessing the coverage indicators for health care than has been possible in
this study.
In the future, a possible solution would be to exclude all health-related
programs from the current SPI formulation and create a parallel index
consisting of three or four component indicators relating only to health care
coverage and expenditure, i.e., a health protection index. This option is not,
however, achievable with the resources available to this study as it would
require additional data collection and analysis. Consultations and discussions
are also needed to achieve a consensus as to how such this index should be
formulated.
The overall conclusion is that the methodology used in this and the
previous study should be retained. As will be demonstrated, the results
from this study can be used to provide an initial assessment of the current
provision of social protection and give pointers to possible priorities for new
interventions. This would become much harder if all health care services
were to be included into the study (and implicitly ADB’s) definition of social
protection.

1colorSocial Protection Index Vo18 18 3/28/2008 2:57:59 PM