1 REFORMING SOCIAL PROTECTION SYSTEM AND BASIC INCOME ANDRAS UTHOFF 13th International Conference of the Basic Income Earth Network Basic Income as an instrument for justice and peace

2 CONTENT ADDRESSING INEQUALITY: IN SEARCH OF A NEW PARADIGM FOR SOCIAL PROTECTION IMPROVING FINANCING: THE INCREASING IMPORTANCE OF THE FISCAL SPACE ACKNOWLEDING RIGHTS: SOCIAL DIALOGUE, GRADUALISM AND SOLIDARITY CONCLUSIONS

3 TWO PARADIGMS… T wo paradigms that have marked the history of social protection: 1.Old assistance for the neediest (non contributive financing of low magnitude) 2.Social security for formal workers (contributive financing with universal coverage expectations)

4 … THAT HAVE LIMITED ACCESS AND GOALS NON CONTRIBUTIVE COVERAGE (PUBLIC FINANCE) – LOW TAX BASE – LOW TAX BURDEN – HIGH LEVEL OF EVASION AND ELUSION – REGRESIVE STRUCTURE (LARGELY VALUE ADDED TAXES) CONTRIBUTIVE COVERAGE (LABOR CONTRACTS) – ROLE INCOMPATIBILITY – LOW EMPLOYMENT GENERATION – HIGH LEVELS OF UNDEREMPLOYMENT – INFORMALITY AND UNEMPLOYMENT – PRECARIOUS FORMAL JOB CREATION  These problems are systemic and have worsen during the crisis  These problems are similar across countries but involve ad hoc strategies on the basis of historical, cultural and institutional developments

5 LIMITING CONTRIBUTIVE COVERAGE. AMÉRICA LATINA (16 PAÍSES): OCUPADOS a AFILIADOS A LA SEGURIDAD SOCIAL, ALREDEDOR DE 2006 Fuente: Comisión Económica para América Latina y el Caribe (CEPAL), sobre la base de encuestas de hogares de los respectivos países. a Trabajadores ocupados de 15 años y más que declararon ingresos laborales. En el caso de Argentina y República Bolivariana de Venezuela, asalariados. Promedio simple.

6 A NEW PARADIGM… New social protection paradigm Moving from a labor based society to a rights based society integrating sources of financing to accomplish the normative horizon of social protection

7 …. THAT FACES SEVERE CHALLENGES  Informality  Low contributive coverage  Limits social cohesión and equity.  Low tax collection  Insufficient fiscal resources  Limited non contributive programs  Segmented society  Those with stable formal jobs  Those with precarious unstable and informal job  Those with incompatibilities to join the labor market

8 … AND IMPLIES A CAREFULL DESIGN OF FINANCING Financing design is crucial and depends on policy aims:  Pensions:  Consumptions smoothing => contributive  Poverty relief => non contributive.  Health:  Risk pooling => solidarity: integrating financing schemes  Basic income:  Transfers to poor households => non contributive

9 THE FISCAL SPACE FOR SOCIAL PROTECTION AND BASIC INCOME FISCAL SPACE EFICIENCYSOCIAL JUSTICE MACROMICROLIVING STANDARDSDISTRIBUTION PORCENTAGE OF GDP ALLOCATED TO SOCIAL PROTECTION

10 AMÉRICA LATINA (21 PAÍSES): GASTO PÚBLICO SOCIAL, COMO PORCENTAJE DEL PIB, 1990-1991 A 2004-2005 Fuente: CEPAL, sobre la base información proveniente de la base de datos sobre gasto social de la Comisión. ….. SHARE OF GDP ON SOCIAL SPENDING IS STILL VERY LOW Promedio regional 1990-1991: 12,8% Promedio regional 2004-2005: 15,9% 2002-2003: 15,8% 2000-2001: 15,7%

11 … AND FINANCED UNDER A NON OPTIMAL STRUCTURE OF TAXATION LOW (BASES AND BURDENS) REGRESIVE SUBJET TO EVASION AND ELUSION LARGELY DEPENDENT ON VALUE ADDED

12 LOW LEVELS OF TAXATION (% GDP, 2004)

13 AMÉRICA LATINA Y EL CARIBE (21 PAÍSES): VARIACIÓN ANUAL DEL GASTO SOCIAL TOTAL Y EL PRODUCTO INTERNO BRUTO a (En porcentajes) Fuente: CEPAL, sobre la base de información proveniente de la base de datos sobre gasto social de la Comisión y de cuentas nacionales. a Promedio ponderado de los países. … USED IN A PROCYCLICAL WAY

14 … CONTINGENT LIABILITIES INCREASE AS DEMOGRAPHIC DIVIDEND ENDS Cociente de sustentabilidad

15 Regla de saldo País Fecha de implementación CoberturaTipoReglas AdicionalesEstatuto Argentina2004 Federal y subnacional Crecimiento nominal del gasto primario no podrá superar la tasa de aumento nominal del PIB Legal Brasil2001 Federal y Subnacional Equilibrio corriente (subnacional); superávit primario (federal) ímites de gasto salarial (porcentaje del total ) Legal Chile2000Central Superávit global estructural (1% del PIB) Fondo de Compensación del Cobre (FCC); Fondo de Estabilización Económica y Social (FEES) Política Colombia2001 Gobiernos Subnacionales Equilibrio corriente Fondo Nacional del Café (FNC); Fondo de Ahorro y Estabilización Petrolera (FAEP) Legal Ecuador2005 Central y subnacional Crecimiento real del gasto corriente no podrá superar el 3,5% Fondo de Estabilización Petrolera (FEP); Fondo de Ahorro y Contingencias (FAC) Legal México1917 Gobiernos Subnacionales Equilibrio corriente Fondo de Estabilización de los Ingresos Petroleros (FEIP) Legal Perú2003Nacional Déficit inferior a 1% del PIB; crecimiento real del gasto primario no superior a 3% por año Fondo de Estabilización FiscalLegal Venezuela2000NacionalEquilibrio Corriente Fondo de Estabilización Macroeconómica (FEM) Legal Regla de deuda Argentina2004 Gobiernos Subnacionales Límites anuales de endeuda- miento, de manera tal que los servicios no superen el 15% de los recursos corrientes Legal Brasil2001 Gobiernos Subnacionales Límites anuales de endeudamiento Legal Colombia1997 Gobiernos Subnacionales Límite al endeudamiento, de acuerdo con indicadores de solvencia y liquidez Legal Ecuador2005Central y subnacional Cronograma de reducción de deuda, hasta alcanzar 40% del PIB Límites al endeudamiento de gobiernos subnacionales (acervo, flujo y garantías) Legal

16 THE FISCAL SPACE FOR SOCIAL PROTECTION AND BASIC INCOME FISCAL SPACE EFICIENCYSOCIAL JUSTICE MACROMICROLIVING STANDARDSDISTRIBUTION PORCENTAGE OF GDP ALLOCATED TO SOCIAL PROTECTION

17 THE FISCAL SPACE FOR SOCIAL PROTECTION AND BASIC INCOME FISCAL SPACE EFICIENCYSOCIAL JUSTICE MACROMICROLIVING STANDARDSDISTRIBUTION PORCENTAGE OF GDP ALLOCATED TO SOCIAL PROTECTION EFFICIENT ALLOCATION

18 SOCIAL SECURITY AND ASSISTANCE: INCREASING PRIORITIES AMÉRICA LATINA Y EL CARIBE (21 PAÍSES): EVOLUCIÓN DEL GASTO PÚBLICO SOCIAL, COMO PORCENTAJE DEL PIB, SEGÚN SECTORES, 1990-1991 A 2004-2005 a Fuente: CEPAL, sobre la base de información proveniente de la base de datos sobre gasto social de la Comisión. a Promedio ponderado de los países, excluida Nicaragua. b La información disponible no permite separar ambas partidas de gasto. Según antecedentes de estudios nacionales, la seguridad social representaría alrededor de 78% del monto de recursos aquí consignados. b

19 BUT LARGE WELFARE STATE GAPS HIGH GAP MEDIUM GAP LOW GAP

20 WITH DIVERSE NEEDS AND LIMITED ACCESS DOORS GRUPO IGRUPO IIGRUPO III DEPENDIENTES/ POR TRABAJADOR FORMAL 1.Menores 2.Inactivos 3.Desempleados 4.Informales 5.Adultos mayores PIB pc GS pc GS (%PIB) INFORMALIDAD ASALARIADOS pobres DESEMPLEO COBERTURA (cotizantes/ocupados) 1.Total 2.Formales 3.Informales 4.Asalariados 7.29 40.6 19.8 3.0 27.1 9.5 1766 137 9,2 67.3 37.5 6.1 20.8 53.5 4.0 37.7 4.39 37.7 23,4 3.8 23.8 11.3 5710 508 10.0 52.6 17.5 7.1 44.6 75.3 10.6 61.0 3.28 37.8 21.8 5.0 20.2 17.6 6047 994 17.9 41.1 11.6 8.6 57.6 78.9 27.3 71.2 Grupo I. Bolivia, Ecuador, El Salvador, Guatemala, Honduras, Nicaragua, Paraguay Perú, República Dominicana Grupo II, México, Panamá, Venezuela Grupo III. Argentina, Brasil. Chile, Costa Rica, Uruguay Capacidad de entrada no contributiva Capacidad de entrada contributiva

21 THE FISCAL SPACE FOR SOCIAL PROTECTION AND BASIC INCOME FISCAL SPACE EFICIENCYSOCIAL JUSTICE MACROMICROLIVING STANDARDSDISTRIBUTION PORCENTAGE OF GDP ALLOCATED TO SOCIAL PROTECTION EFFICIENT ALLOCATION

22 THE FISCAL SPACE FOR SOCIAL PROTECTION AND BASIC INCOME FISCAL SPACE EFICIENCYSOCIAL JUSTICE MACROMICROLIVING STANDARDSDISTRIBUTION PORCENTAGE OF GDP ALLOCATED TO SOCIAL PROTECTION EFFICIENT ALLOCATION FAMILY MARKET STATE

23 FINANCIAL CRISIS HAVE RETARDED POVERTY ALLEVIATION Fuente: Comisión Económica para América Latina y el Caribe (CEPAL), estimaciones y proyecciones a partir de las encuestas de hogares y cifras oficiales de los países. a/ Proyecciones.

24 THERE HAVE BEEN IMPORTANT RECOVERIES (MDGs) Porcentaje de avance en la reducción de la pobreza extrema y la pobreza total, 1990-2007 a/ Pobreza extremaPobreza total 0102030405060708090100 Venezuela (Rep.Bol. de) Uruguay b Perú Paraguay Panamá Nicaragua México Honduras Guatemala El Salvador Ecuador b Costa Rica Colombia Chile Brasil Bolivia Argentina b América Latina 0102030405060708090100 Venezuela (Rep.Bol. de) Uruguay b Perú Paraguay Panamá Nicaragua México Honduras Guatemala El Salvador Ecuador b Costa Rica Colombia Chile Brasil Bolivia Argentina b América Latina Fuente: CEPAL, sobre la base de tabulaciones especiales de las encuestas de hogares de los respectivos países. a El porcentaje de avance se calcula dividiendo la reducción (o aumento) de la indigencia en puntos porcentuales observada en el período por la mitad de la tasa de indigencia de 1990. La línea punteada representa el porcentaje de avance esperado para 2007 (68%). b Áreas urbanas.

25 BASED ON THREE MECHANISMS FAMILY INCOME – AFFECTED BY THREE DETERMINANTS PRODUCTIVITY OF THEIR EMPLOYED MEMBERS EMPLOYABILITY OF ITS ACTIVE MEMBERS ELEGIBILITY FOR TRANSFERS OF ITS MEMBERS

26 0.0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1.0 I II III IV V VI VIIVIII IX Variación ingreso per cápita (en múltiplos de la línea de pobreza) 0 1 2 3 4 5 Ingreso per cápita (en múltiplos de la línea de pobreza) Línea de pobreza Deciles de ingreso Población pobre (1990) Distribución del ingreso per cápita por deciles 1990 Variación del ingreso per cápita por cambios en el ingreso laboral por ocupado (1990-2003/05) Variación del ingreso per cápita por cambios en la tasa global de ocupación (1990-2003/05) Variación del ingreso per cápita por cambios en el ingreso no laboral per cápita (1990-2003/05) Ingreso per cápita 1990 Ingreso per cápita 2003/05 Población pobre (2003/05) Distribución del ingreso per cápita por deciles 2003/05 ALL THREE SHOULD BE OPERATIVE

27 -0.3 -0.2 -0.1 0.0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 I II III IV V VI VIIVIII Variación ingreso per cápita (en múltiplos de la línea de pobreza) 1 2 3 Ingreso per cápita (en múltiplos de la línea de pobreza) Variación del ingreso per cápita por cambios en el ingreso laboral por ocupado (1989/90-2004/05) Variación del ingreso per cápita por cambios en la tasa global de ocupación (1989/90-2004/05) Variación del ingreso per cápita por cambios en el ingreso no laboral per cápita (1989/90-2004/05) Ingreso per cápita 1989/90 Ingreso per cápita 2004/05 Línea de pobreza Distribución del ingreso per cápita por deciles 1989/90 IX Deciles de ingreso Población pobre (2004/05) Distribución del ingreso per cápita por deciles 2004/05 Población pobre (1989/90) ALL THREE SHOULD BE OPERATIVE

28 THE FISCAL SPACE FOR SOCIAL PROTECTION AND BASIC INCOME FISCAL SPACE EFICIENCYSOCIAL JUSTICE MACROMICROLIVING STANDARDSDISTRIBUTION PORCENTAGE OF GDP ALLOCATED TO SOCIAL PROTECTION EFFICIENT ALLOCATION FAMILY MARKET STATE

29 THE FISCAL SPACE FOR SOCIAL PROTECTION AND BASIC INCOME FISCAL SPACE EFICIENCYSOCIAL JUSTICE MACROMICROLIVING STANDARDSDISTRIBUTION PORCENTAGE OF GDP ALLOCATED TO SOCIAL PROTECTION EFFICIENT ALLOCATION FAMILY MARKET STATE LARGE BENEFITS DEFINED BENEFITS PROGRESSIVE FINANCING

30 ALTERNATIVE OPTIONS FOR SOCIAL PROTECTION AND BASIC INCOME ALTERNATIVE OPTIONS FOR SOCIAL PROTECTION AND BASIC INCOME FINANCING BENEFITS FINANCING MANAGEMENT ADMINISTRATION PARTICIPATION CONTRIBUTIVE OR NOT DEFINED CONTRIBUTIONS OR BENEFITS PAYG OR FUNDED PUBLIC OR PRIVATE MANDATORY OR VOLUNTARY MULTIPLE COMBINATIONS TO IMPLEMENT SCHEMES BASED ON ACQUIRED RIGHTS OR CITIZENS RIGHTS

31 CONTRIBUTIVE ACQUIRED RIGHTS TEND TO REPRODUCE INEQUALITY AMÉRICA LATINA (18 PAÍSES): ESTRUCTURA DE LOS GASTOS, SEGÚN QUINTILES DE LA DISTRIBUCIÓN DEL INGRESO PRIMARIO, 1997-2004 a (En porcentajes) Fuente: CEPAL, sobre la base de estudios nacionales. a Promedio ponderado por la significación del gasto en el ingreso primario de cada país. (Gasto social total = 100) 7.4 6.5 6.3 5.9 5.8 5.1 4.7 4.2 4.0 3.7 2.0 2.8 4.3 6.3 16.5 0.8 0.9 1.1 1.4 0.9 3.3 2.1 1.6 1.3 1.1 0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30% Quintil IQuintil IIQuintil IIIQuintil IVQuintil V EducaciónSaludSeguridad socialViviendaAsistencia social

32 … AND INEQUALITY IS HARDLY CHANGED AMÉRICA LATINA (18 PAÍSES): EFECTO REDISTRIBUTIVO DEL GASTO PÚBLICO SOCIAL EN EL INGRESO, SEGÚN QUINTILES DE INGRESO PRIMARIO, 1997-2004 a (En porcentajes) Fuente: CEPAL, sobre la base de estudios nacionales. a/ Promedio ponderado por la significación del gasto en el ingreso primario de cada país.

33 BOTH FINANCING SCHEMES SHOULD ALLIGN THEIR INCENTIVES

34 SOCIAL DIALOGUE, GRADUALISM AND SOLIDARITY Technical componentes and Political Macro stability  Minimun guarantees  Tax burden and structure  Governability an productivity of public manages programs  Stabilization Funds and Contingent Liabilities  Counter cyclical policies Role of education  What level should be niversal  Closing gaps  rural-urban  socio- economic  Elite - públic  Pre-schooling for the poor  Learnin to learn  School insurance. Employment  Address structural heterogeneity  Pro-employment investment  Human resources policies  Reduce discrimination  Labor relation adapted to innvoation and economic cycle requirements  Re-training  Unemployment insurance Efficient, universal Social Security  Publico-private mixes  Integrate financing sources to incorporate solidaridaty without affecting insurance and savings  Riska rating mechanisms  Housing for the poor Social dialogue Institutions  Upper and middle classes  Rights and crtizenship  Promote citizens participation on issues of collective interest  Improve transparency and regulations and surveillance Fiscal Responsibility Opportunities Capacities SolidarityOwnership

35 SOCIAL DIALOGUE, GRADUALISM AND SOLIDARITY Technical componentes and Political Macro stability  Minimun guarantees  Tax burden and structure  Governability an productivity of public manages programs  Stabilization Funds and Contingent Liabilities  Counter cyclical policies Role of education  What level should be niversal  Closing gaps  rural-urban  socio- economic  Elite - públic  Pre-schooling for the poor  Learnin to learn  School insurance. Employment  Address structural heterogeneity  Pro-employment investment  Human resources policies  Reduce discrimination  Labor relation adapted to innvoation and economic cycle requirements  Re-training  Unemployment insurance Efficient, universal Social Security  Publico-private mixes  Integrate financing sources to incorporate solidaridaty without affecting insurance and savings  Riska rating mechanisms  Housing for the poor Social dialogue Institutions  Upper and middle classes  Rights and crtizenship  Promote citizens participation on issues of collective interest  Improve transparency and regulations and surveillance Fiscal Responsability Solidarity

36 RESCUING SOLIDARITY FROM THE 1980 – 1990 WAVE OF REFORMS 1980 – 1990MAIN PROBLEMS1990.2010 CONTRIBUTIVE PENSIONS 1.DEFINED BENEFITS 1.PARAMETRIC 2.DEFINED CONTRIBUTION 1.NOTIONAL 2.FULLY FUNDED 1.SUBSTITUTIVE 2.MIXED 3.PARALLEL NON CONTRIBUTIVE PENSIONS Guarantees limited by public finance constraints TRANSITION COSTS MATTER Historical deficits Operative deficits Recognition bonds Explicit Rates REPLACEMENT RATES Political costs of param. reforms Density of contributions Pension Fund rates of return Administrative costs Economies of scale Insurance costs Weak institutional developments Macroeconomics Financial INTEGRATING NON CONTRIBUTIVE AND CONTRIBUTIVE FINANCING 1.BASIC SOLIDARITY BENEFITS 1.COMPLEMENTARY 2.ABSOLUT 2.CONTRIBUTORY SUBSIDIES 1.BY GENDER ROLES SUBSIDIES 2.BY AGE 3.BY LABOR CONTRACTS NON CONTRIBUTIVE 1.UNIVERSAL BENEFITS TO SPECIFIC GROUPS REGULATION AND SUPERVISION CONTRIBUTIVE HEALTH 1.SOCIAL INSURANCE 1.Private plans 2.Social Security 2.PUBLIC HEALTH 1.ADVERSE SELECTION 2.RISK SELECTION 3.MORAL HAZARD 4.CONSUMERS SOVEREIGNITY 5.PUBLIC GOODS 1.POOLING FINANCING SOURCES 2.RISK RATING 3.REGULATION AND SUPERVISION 4.EXPLICIT GURANTEED PACKAGES BASIC INCOME 1.EMERGENCY PROGRAMS 2.SOCIAL INVESTMENT FUNDS DEALING WITH CONSEQUENCES NOT CAUSES CONDITIONING CASH AND IN KIND TRANFERS

37 THE DESIGN OF FINANCING Social protection and basic income policies demand: – Increases in non contributive financing: tax reforms and reallocation policies – Integrate contributive and non contributive financing with a solidarity logic and aligned incentives.

38 SOCIAL DIALOGUE, GRADUALISM AND SOLIDARITY Technical componentes and Political Macro stability  Minimun guarantees  Tax burden and structure  Governability an productivity of public manages programs  Stabilization Funds and Contingent Liabilities  Counter cyclical policies Role of education  What level should be niversal  Closing gaps  rural-urban  socio- economic  Elite - públic  Pre-schooling for the poor  Learnin to learn  School insurance. Employment  Address structural heterogeneity  Pro-employment investment  Human resources policies  Reduce discrimination  Labor relation adapted to innvoation and economic cycle requirements  Re-training  Unemployment insurance Efficient, universal Social Security  Publico-private mixes  Integrate financing sources to incorporate solidaridaty without affecting insurance and savings  Riska rating mechanisms  Housing for the poor Social dialogue Institutions  Upper and middle classes  Rights and crtizenship  Promote citizens participation on issues of collective interest  Improve transparency and regulations and surveillance Fiscal Oportunities Capacities CCP

39 LAC CCPs PROGRAMMES PaísProgramaInicio% Población total paísGasto/ Pib ArgentinaFamilias Por la Inclusión Social2004 2.6% (2006)0.12% (2006) BrasilBolsa Familia2003 22.2% (2006) 0.43% (2006) ChileChile Solidario2002 6.45% (2005)0.10% (2005) ColombiaFamilias en Acción2001 4.2% (2006)0.3% (2006) Costa RicaSuperémonos2000 1.12% (2002)0.02% (2005) EcuadorBono de Desarrollo Humano2001 8.88% (2007)0.49% (2006) El SalvadorRed Solidaria2005 24106 fam. (2006)0.023% (2006) HondurasPrograma de asignación Familiar (PRAF)1990 8.55% (2005)0.022% (2006) JamaicaPATH20028.86% (2006)0.267% (2005) MéxicoOportunidades1997 25% (2005) 0.435% (2006) NicaraguaRed de Protección Social2000 2.7% (2005) 0.237% (2005) PanamáRed Oportunidades200612 mil fam. (2006) US mill. $ 46.9 (total proyecto) ParaguayTekoporâ2005 0.65% (2006) 0.0026% (2006) PerúJuntos2005 3.6% (2006)0.114% (2006) Rep. Dom.Tarjeta de Solidaridad2005 8% (2005)0.043% (2004) UruguayIngreso Ciudadano (PANES)2005 9.46% (2006) 0.394 (2006)

40 BACKGROUND Poverty limits the exercise of citizenships and legal rights. There are important intergenerational poverty transfer factors. Poverty is multidimensional and demands a wide range of interventions.

41 Main achievements Short term benefits Reduction of poverty gaps and alleviation of crisis social costs Long tern benefits Human capital:  Better registration and attendance; promotion by grades and schooling.  To a minor extend they reduce child work.  Better access to primary and preventive health care.  Better nutrition. Management Multidimensional: education, health nutrition, housing, income, employment y family structures. Inter-institutional coordination and implementation Use of diverse transfers (cash, in kind, tickets, etc.) Female roles are enhanced Evaluation and monitoring

42 Main challenges ahead Impact  Not clear that benefficiaries will stay above the poverty line for ever.  May induce large work burden on women. Management  Defining minimum benefits to be transferred (cash.  Low and hard to implement control of conditionality‘s  There is no clear theoretical and empirical grounds on graduation criteria.  Lack of complementary psychosocial interventions to change attitudes on education and child labor. Targeting  Largely centered on children and pregnant women without consideration of other vulnerable groups (disabled, old aged).

43 SOCIAL DIALOGUE, GRADUALISM AND SOLIDARITY Technical componentes and Political Macro stability  Minimun guarantees  Tax burden and structure  Governability an productivity of public manages programs  Stabilization Funds and Contingent Liabilities  Counter cyclical policies Role of education  What level should be niversal  Closing gaps  rural-urban  socio- economic  Elite - públic  Pre-schooling for the poor  Learnin to learn  School insurance. Employment  Address structural heterogeneity  Pro-employment investment  Human resources policies  Reduce discrimination  Labor relation adapted to innvoation and economic cycle requirements  Re-training  Unemployment insurance Efficient, universal Social Security  Publico-private mixes  Integrate financing sources to incorporate solidaridaty without affecting insurance and savings  Riska rating mechanisms  Housing for the poor Social dialogue Institutions  Upper and middle classes  Rights and crtizenship  Promote citizens participation on issues of collective interest  Improve transparency and regulations and surveillance Fiscal Responsability Ownership

44 ECONOMIC AND SOCIAL RIGHTS, SOCIAL PROTECTION AND BASIC INCOME Three dimensions: – ethics – procedural – content

45 CONCLUSIONS NEW PARADIGM – ACHIEVING THE NORMATIVE HORIZON OF SOCIAL PROTECTION AND BASIC INCOME POLICES IN UNEQUAL AND FINANCIALLY CONSTRAINT SOCIETIES DEMANDS INTEGRATION OF ALL SOURCES OF FUNDING. THE DEGREE OF INTEGRATION WILL DEPEND ON THE POLICY AIM. THE FISCAL SPACE – NON CONTRIBUTIVE FINANCING DEMANDS A PROGRESSIVE TAX REFORM, AND ACKNOWLEDGING THREEPUBLIC FINANCE GOALS: CONTRIBUTE TO MACROECONOMIC STABILITY CONTRIBUTE TO THE STABLE FINANCING OF SOCIAL PROTECTION AND BASIC INCOME POLICES PROMOTE INSTITUTIONAL DEVELOPMENTS ON SOCIAL POLICIES SOCIAL DIALOGUE – INCREASING NEED FOR CITIZENS PARTICIPATION TO AGREE ON FIVE COMPLEMENTARY POLICY AIMS FISCAL RESPONSABILITY CONTINUOUS CREATION OF CAPABILITES CONTINUOUS CREATON OF OPPORTUNITIES IMPLEMENT SOLIDARITY IFINANCING FOR SOCIAL POLICIES INCREASE OWNERSHIP AMONG CITIZENS

46 THANK YOU [email protected] Departamento de Economía Universidad de Chile