POVERTYAND MODELS OF SOCIAL PROTECTION IN THE SEE COUNTRIES

Prof. Dr. Jovan Pejkovski,

Head of the Institute for social work and social policy “Mother Teresa”, Faculty of Philosophy, University “Ss Cyril and Methodius” Skopje

1

Introduction

Poverty as a phenomenon is found in almost all countries.

The question is whether poverty and inequality can only be solved with the systems of social protection and social security, or they must be changed and supplemented with innovative solutions that will prevent the potential social conflicts.

2

Also the countries of South-eastern Europe have faced this problem.

The processes of transition, or the introduction of the capitalist system of regulation, and transformation of ownership from the state into private, created a large number of unemployed and poor people.

3

Models of Social Europe

The analysis of the established systems and models of social influence can be based on different grounds.

In order to emphasize the diversity of the established models the analysis starts from the systems which are arranged on the principles that are operational.

4

These models are not only different in conceptions of the role and place of the social values that they should have them in the realization of the project of European integration.

They various decision-making processes are founded in terms of social values in the European Union, and these processes in turn provided the different levels of participation of different social groups.

5

Poverty in Europe

The differences that exist in Europe of cultural, social and political grounds affect on the economic and social development.

Most Western European countries followed the models of social policy and social protection that allow comparison given the capitalist systems, political democracy and the introduction of the welfare state.

6

In European countries they have created schemes of policies to combat poverty, which allows relatively easy to make comparisons between trends and achievements of these structures based on free EU market.

Statistical comparisons between countries reveal similar patterns of poverty, although their extent and size varies and also the measures and models for its elimination.

7

In 2015, 118.7 million people, or 23.7% of the population in the EU-28 were at risk of poverty or social exclusion (AROPE), compared with 24.4% in 2014.

This means that these people are at least one of the following conditions: the risk of poverty after social transfers (poverty); severely materially deprived or living in households with very low work intensity.

8

9

It is obvious that without social transfer or without adequate social policy protection the social systems in these states will be at risk.

That is the reason that large amount of money is transferring from the state budget toward people at risk.

10

Situation in South-eastern Europe

Country Population

total millions

in 2015

GDP

growth

(annual)

2015

GNI per

capita in

2015

УС$

Unemployment

rate in 2015

Percent

Poverty

rate at

US$5/day

PPP

percent of

population

Population

below

poverty line

The World

Fact book

CIA

Albania 2,9 2,9% 4.280 17,1 46,2 25

Bosnia and

Herzegovina

3,8 3% 4.670 27,7 n/a 25

Kosovo 1,8 3,9% 3.970 32,9 n/a 35

Macedonia 2,1 3,7% 5.140 26,1 17,3 28,7

Montenegro 0,6 3,2% 7.220 17,6 11,9 7

Serbia 7,1 0,8% 5.540 17,7 n/a 7,9

11

From the table can be seen the similarities and differences that characterized the economies and level of development of these SEE countries.

Their situation shows still presence of the factors affecting the low growth rates in the gross domestic product.

This in turn is followed by high rates of unemployment and associated with the level of poverty.

12

The problems of poverty and social exclusion constitute a serious obstacle to economic and social development of these countries.

The efforts to overcome them must be based on the comprehensive research and analysis of population and countries affected by this type of problems.

13

However, the identification and treatment of these problems is not always an easy task due to the complexity of their definition and implementation.

The consequences of transition and transformation are not exceeded and it imposes a task for new developmental philosophy and for dynamic growth and development in which social problems should be incorporated.

14

Poverty in the Republic of Macedonia

The establishment of common indicators at EU level is an important shift in the fight against poverty and social exclusion.

State Statistical Office of the Republic of Macedonia in line with the European Union, calculate Laeken indicators of poverty. Source of the calculations of income poverty and the poverty threshold is defined at 60% of median equivalent income.

According official data from the State Statistical Office, in 2015, the rate of poor people in the country amounted to 21.5%.

15

16

Indicators of Poverty and Social Exclusion in the Republic

of Macedonia for 2013-2015 are:

Laeken poverty indicators

2013 2014 2015 At-risk-of-poverty rate, % of population 24,2 22,1 21,5

Number of persons below at-risk-of-poverty

threshold, in thousand persons

500,4 457,2 445,2

At-risk-of-poverty threshold of single-person

household - annual equivalent income in

denars

70 275 71 925 78 362

At-risk-of-poverty threshold of four-person

household (2 adults and 2 children aged less

than 14) - annual equivalent income in denars

147 578 151 043 164 560

At-risk-of-poverty rate before social transfers

and before pensions, % of population

41,0 41,7 40,5

Inequality of income distribution S80/S20 8,4 7,2 6,6

Inequality of income distribution Gini

coefficient

37,0 35,2 33,7

Sources: State Statistical Office of the Republic of Macedonia

Based on the data it can be concluded that in the Republic of Macedonia as a result of numerous adopted and implemented measures and activities in the social sphere, the poverty rate tends to its continuous reduction.

That does not mean that soon could disappear, given that it is high above the level of the compared countries from EU and SEE.

17

Discussion

The launching of a number of actions to reduce poverty has some common characteristics. The dominant model is the state intervention based on the transfer and redistribution of budget funds.

The neoliberal model and the welfare state are increasingly acknowledged as unrealistic idealized models that cannot solve the problems of poverty. It follows that poverty is immanent to the capitalist system and he will further maintained poverty but that in itself will be reproduced as a generational phenomenon, or etc. vicious circle of poverty.

18

Therefore are louder the demands for a new contract in the society that would ensure not only social protection but also a higher level of social security. Some calls it that could be an income for every citizen, whether employed or not.

The opponents of this idea are seen that it do not creates motivational basis for work and entrepreneurship as a factor without which there no growth and development.

19

The strongest way to reduce the poverty is opening new jobs or employment and investments.

Countries that implement measures from a wide range of activation of labour and employment especially for the youth deserve respect.

In the area of macroeconomic policy requires funds, institutions with influence, education and many other elements that will increase the awareness of the citizens for accepting these redistributive measures.

20

In this context social protection as a policy in the long run remains only as corrective, while investment and employment, also in the long term, are sustainable solutions to reduce poverty. It is very hard that the poverty would be eliminated.

The measures of the social protection systems should be complemented with the arsenal of measures of social security systems and encouraging macroeconomic development.

In synergy with action and social investment can be achieved positive effects.

21

Conclusion

It can be concluded that the systems of social protection in the existing shape and size require adjustments and guarantee for the distribution of income which will be socially righteous and dignified. Only then can the individual to meet their and family needs and have a level of security.

The systems of organizing on a state-level and local community assume modern social management function of effective social and overall development.

It requires the use of strategies to reduce poverty and new model of social transfers that will cover the necessary needs of citizens. 22

Social protection and social security system is necessary to be shaped and regulated allowing whole society to use the benefits of the achieved level of development and to maintain the stability of the systems.

The defined rights in each country are raising the interest among the population and the institutions how to change the system and to improve the living conditions and standard of the people.

23

Thank you for your attention

24