Older‐Age Social Pensions and Poverty: Revisiting Assumptions on Targeting and Universalism

Abstract

Whether social protection benefits should be assigned to all (universal) or kept only for those who meet specific criteria (targeting) remains one of the most contentious questions in social policy research. The purpose of this article is to revisit three assumptions on the two main social policy options for the provision of social benefits to older persons. Each assumption is assessed through counterfactual reasoning using a combination of literature review and statistical analysis with a global perspective. The study finds that (i) 79 countries would be economically able to shift from targeted noncontributory pensions to basic universal noncontributory pensions with less than 1.2 percent of the respective national gross domestic products; (ii) 16 countries have means-tested/region-tested noncontributory pensions more expensive than a hypothetical basic universal social pension; (iii) an arbitrary threshold of "economic development" is not a limitation for implementing social pensions; and (iv) at least 17 countries with relatively low economic development have successfully implemented social pensions without means targeting. Therefore, contrary to what several international organizations and scholars have argued, universal social pensions are politically and economically viable and efficient strategies to alleviate income poverty.KEY WORDS: social protection, social policy, development, social assistance, cash transfersLa pregunta de si los beneficios de la protección social deben asignarse a todos (universales) o solo para aquellos que cumplen con criterios específicos (focalización) sigue siendo una de las más polémicas en la investigación de políticas sociales. El propósito de este documento es revisar tres supuestos sobre las dos opciones principales de política social para la provisión de beneficios sociales para las personas mayores. Cada suposición se evalúa mediante un razonamiento contrafactual utilizando una combinación de revisión de la literatura y análisis estadístico con una perspectiva global. El estudio concluye que (1) 79 países podrían cambiar económicamente de pensiones no contributivas específicas a pensiones universales básicas no contributivas con menos del 1,2 por ciento de los respectivos PIB nacionales; (2) 16 países tienen pensiones no contributivas probadas por medios / regionales, más caras que una pensión universal básica hipotética; (3) Un umbral arbitrario de "desarrollo económico" no es una limitación para implementar las pensiones sociales. (4) Al menos, 17 países con un desarrollo económico relativamente bajo han implementado con éxito pensiones sociales sin focalización de recursos. Por lo tanto, contrariamente a lo que han argumentado varias organizaciones internacionales y académicos, las pensiones sociales universales son estrategias viables y eficientes política y económicamente para aliviar la pobreza de ingresos.

Expansion of Thailand’s social pension policy and its implications for family support for older persons

“…In 2009, the Thai government changed the Old‐Age Allowance (OAA) scheme from a means‐tested program to a near‐universal social pension program for adults aged 60 and above. The OAA scheme, along with Thailand's universal healthcare policy, has been regarded as a notable example of how developing countries can improve social protection for their older populations (Cruz‐Martínez, 2019; Knox‐Vydmanov, 2016). The policy, while widely popular in Thailand, has received a fair share of skepticism (Suwanrada et al, 2018).…”