Development Pathways' Senior Social Policy Specialist Alexandra Barrantes, speaking at the University of Oxford, set out the case for applying a human rights-based approach to social protection. She also explored narratives around poverty, and the implications for the design and implementation of schemes of pursuing an approach that has no shame or stigma attached. Alexandra Barrantes is leading new training on Inclusive Social Protection: Making the Case. More details: inclusivesocialprotection.com

1. Human Rights-Based Approach to Social Protection,
narratives around poverty, and policy implications
Alexandra Barrantes
Senior Social Policy Specialist
Chile Seminar
University of Oxford
Oxford
25 May 2019

2. 1
INDEX
HRBA TO
SOCIAL
PROTECTION
NARRATIVES
AROUND
POVERTY
POLICY
IMPLICATIONS

3. 2
Social security as a human right to address
lifecycle challenges
Universal Declaration of Human Rights (1948)
Article 22: “Everyone, as a member of society, has the right to social security”.
Article 25: “(1) Everyone has the right to a standard of living adequate for the health and well-
being of himself and of his family, including food, clothing, housing and medical care and necessary
social services, and the right to security in the event of unemployment, sickness, disability,
widowhood, old age or other lack of livelihood in circumstances beyond his control. (2)
Motherhood and childhood are entitled to special care and assistance. All children, whether born in
or out of wedlock, shall enjoy the same social protection.”
HRBA TO SOCIAL
PROTECTION

4. 3
• Enshrined in universal and regional human rights systems, and some
constitutions: legally binding.
• Adequate legal and institutional framework
• Individuals as right holders and agents of change, shift from passive agents
from the receiving end.
• Lifecycle perspective, individuals of all ages as right holders and as vulnerable to
shocks.
• Principles: universality, sustainability, equality, inclusion, shared responsibility,
solidarity.
• Need for comprehensive and integrated social protection systems, and inter-
sectoral coordination vs. fragmentation
• DIGNITY at the core
Human-rights based approach to social
protection

5. 4
Beyond the ends, the process is also
important
Process Outcome
Human Rights Principles
Rights-based approach
Process Outcome
Efficiency and Rationing
Principles
Commonly-used approach
Maximum resources available /
progressive realisation
Scare resources / fiscal
austerity

6. 5
Human rights standards & principles for the
design and implementation of SP programmes
08 02
01
05
0406
07 03 Adaptability
Adecuacy of the benefit
provided
Right to privacy
Participation Accesibility
Accountability
Dignity and autnomy of
individuals
Equality and non-
discrimination

7. 6
NARRATIVES
AROUND
POVERTY

8. 7
Poor
Bad Vulnerable
“Poor quality” “Poor”
The Poor are
the Others

9. 8
• Able-bodied, deserving poor/ deservingness (Poor Laws England SXVII & SXIX;
Watkis-Hayes et al, 2016; Cooke et al, 2012; Bruening, 2018; Gans, 1995)
• Culture of Poverty (Lewis, 1966), poverty as a consequence of personal failings
(Walker, 2014), individual responsibility
• Stigma as rationing benefits (Walker, 2014), Conditionalities, co-responsibilities
• Population in deficit (Patrick, 2017), deviant (Gans, 1995)
• Laziness-dependency (Banerjee et al, 2017; Sturge, 2017; Harman et al, 2016;
Handa et al, 2017; Lindert et al, 2010; Myamingo et al, 2014; Davis, 2015; Thompson,
2018)
• Spending behaviour, temptation goods (Gerrison, 2009; Devereux, 2002; Popova,
2014; Cheng et al, 2016; Evans et al, 2014; FAO, 2017)
• Takers, double-dipping, welfare queen, benefit skivers, othering

10. 9
Artist:TrentonDoyleHancock/
Photography:AlexandraBarrantes

11. 10
• These conceptions & perceptions around poverty do not
incorporate HUMAN DIGNITY, nor a HRBA, nor the idea of a
social contract
• Static vision around who “the poor” are
• Shame at the absolutist core of poverty (Sen, 1983)
• Shame and stigma: increases misery and possibly
persistence of poverty by adding discrimination (Walker, 2014)
• Labelling “the poor”: generalisations and erroneous
conceptualisation / “bureaucratised shame” (Walker, 2014)

12. 11
• Chile Survey (CEP, 2015): 41% believe poor is caused by
laziness and lack of initiative.
• Chile survey on perceptions around poverty (Hogar de Cristo &
Adimark, 2017):
- poverty as violation of rights only 17%, poverty as lack of
access to basic rights 50%, poverty as lack of access to a
dignified life 33%, laziness 18%
- who is responsible for “the poor”: the State 54%, all
Chileans 52%
- But, how do you help the poor: I do not discriminate 48%, I
donate things I no longer use 32%

13. 12
IV National Human Rights Survey (INDH, ClioDinamica, 2018)
• 39,7% responded that the rights of the poor are not respected
• Key reasons to be discriminated against: 17.1% colour of their
skin, 15% poor
Social
protection?

14. 13
Right to
social security /
contributory
schemes for formal
sectors
Poor laws/
“the others”
Austerity and residual
social protection
targeted at the deserving poor
POLICY
IMPLICATIONS

15. 14
Negative
narratives
around
poverty
Lack of a
rights-based
approach
Efficiency
approach,
lack of
HRBA
Impacts policy
design &
implementation
Amartya Sen:
“Benefits targeted at the
poorest tend to be poor
poor benefits”

16. 15
Conceptualisation, narratives & approaches
Social protection for “us” – as citizens – or for “the
other”?

17. 16
Old AgeChildhood
Child benefit
Unemployment benefit
Old Age Pension
Maternity benefit Survivors’ benefit
Disability benefit
Poor Relief
Working Age
If this is an ideal inclusive social protection system….

18. 17
• Advances in defining poverty and determinants, less time
thinking about how existing approaches and narratives
impact policy and programmers’ design & implementation
• Austerity/residual policies & miss-understanding around
poverty: shift focus to individuals’ responsibilities, conditions,
sanctions, shaming, lack of dignity
• The evolution of European welfare systems and demise of
poor relief, tells a story: inclusive lifecycle social protection
systems strengthen the social contract, no shame or stigma
attached
Conclusions

19. 18
• Fragmented social protection systems (contributory SP, non-
contributory SP schemes, care) / othering
• Technical / technocratic decisions around solving poverty:
also have human rights (and political) implications. Poverty
is a political choice (Philip Alston)
• CCTs in LAC: some of the most evaluated policies in terms
of their outcomes and human capital, but what about:
• Poverty targeting tools: overzealous focus on inclusion
errors ( and not exclusion errors) and on “deservingness”
• How do current CCTs (such as the Subsistema Seguridades
y Oportunidades in Chile) fare vis a vis a HRBA?

20. THANKYOU
More of our work at Development Pathways:
http://www.developmentpathways.co.uk/