IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/wly/intssr/v73y2020i1p65-97.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The cross‐border portability of social security benefits: Status and progress?

Author

Listed:
  • Robert Holzmann
  • Jacques Wels

Abstract

The importance of the cross‐border portability of social benefits is increasing in parallel with the rise in the absolute number of international migrants and their share of the world population, and perhaps more importantly with the much higher and rising share of the world population that for some part of their life is working and/or retiring abroad. This article estimates how the rising stock of migrants is distributed over four key portability regimes ranging from portability through bilateral social security arrangements to undocumented workers with no access to any scheme. The comparison of estimates for 2000 and 2013 indicate a modest but noticeable increase in the share of migrants under regime I (full portability) by 1.4 per cent, but the biggest change occurred under regime III (no access to social security but also no contributions required), which almost doubled to 9.4 per cent. Regime II (potential exportability without totalization) reduced by 3.0 percentage points but remains the dominant scheme (at 53.2 per cent). The estimates suggest that the scope of regime IV (informality) reduced by 2.9 percentage points, accounting for 14.0 per cent of all migrants in 2013. This trend is positive, but more will need to be done to progress on benefit portability and various potential solutions lie outside bilateral agreements that are difficult to establish. L'importance de la portabilité transfrontalière des prestations sociales croît avec l'augmentation du nombre absolu des migrants internationaux et de leur part dans la population mondiale, et peut‐être même davantage avec la part bien plus grande et croissante de la population mondiale qui travaille à l'étranger pendant une partie de sa vie ou y prend sa retraite. Cet article présente une estimation de la répartition du nombre croissant de migrants sur quatre modèles de portabilité principaux, allant de la portabilité au moyen d'accords de sécurité sociale bilatéraux à des travailleurs clandestins n'ayant accès à aucun régime. En comparant les estimations pour 2000 et 2013, on distingue une augmentation faible, mais perceptible, de la part des migrants soumis au modèle I (portabilité complète) de 1,4 pour cent, alors que le changement le plus important est survenu dans le modèle III (aucun accès à la sécurité sociale, mais aucune cotisation requise) qui a presque doublé pour atteindre 9,4 pour cent. Le modèle II (exportabilité potentielle sans totalisation) a connu une baisse de 3,0 points de pourcentage, mais reste le régime principal (à 53,2 pour cent). Les estimations indiquent que l'importance du modèle IV (caractère informel) a diminué de 2,9 points de pourcentage, ce dernier représentant 14,0 pour cent de l'ensemble des migrants en 2013. Bien que cette tendance soit positive, davantage d'efforts devront être fournis pour progresser en matière de portabilité des prestations. En outre, plusieurs solutions possibles ne peuvent être apportées par des accords bilatéraux difficiles à conclure. La importancia de la portabilidad transfronteriza de las prestaciones sociales aumenta paralelamente al incremento del número absoluto de migrantes internacionales y de su proporción dentro de la población mundial, y, lo que es tal vez más importante aún, a la creciente y mayor proporción de la población mundial que en algún momento de su vida trabaja o se jubila en el extranjero. En este artículo se presenta una estimación de la distribución de la creciente población de migrantes en cuatro regímenes de portabilidad principales, que van desde la portabilidad estipulada en acuerdos bilaterales de seguridad social hasta el caso de los trabajadores indocumentados sin acceso a ningún régimen. La comparación de las estimaciones de 2000 y 2013 muestra un aumento, ligero pero notable, del 1,4 por ciento en la proporción de migrantes dentro del régimen I (portabilidad total), aunque el mayor cambio se haya producido en el régimen III (sin acceso a la seguridad social, pero sin pago de cotizaciones), que se ha multiplicado casi por dos para llegar al 9,4 por ciento. El régimen II (exportabilidad potencial sin totalización) se redujo en 3,0 puntos porcentuales, pero sigue siendo el régimen predominante (53,2 por ciento). Las estimaciones sugieren que el alcance del régimen IV (informal) disminuyó en 2,9 puntos porcentuales, lo que representa el 14,0 por ciento de todos los migrantes en 2013. Esta tendencia es positiva, pero será necesario tomar más medidas para hacer progresar la portabilidad de las prestaciones. Existen varias soluciones potenciales aparte de los acuerdos bilaterales, que son difíciles de establecer. Die Bedeutung der grenzüberschreitenden Übertragbarkeit von Leistungen der sozialen Sicherheit hat zugenommen, da die Zahl internationaler Migranten und ihr Anteil an der Weltbevölkerung gestiegen sind und es – was wahrscheinlich noch folgenreicher ist – einen größeren und weiter zunehmenden Teil der Weltbevölkerung gibt, der für eine Lebensphase im Ausland arbeitet und/oder dort den Ruhestand genießt. In diesem Artikel wird abgeschätzt, wie sich die zunehmende Migrantenbevölkerung auf die vier wichtigsten Übertragbarkeitsregelungen verteilt, von der Übertragbarkeit durch bilaterale Vereinbarungen der sozialen Sicherheit bis hin zu der fehlenden Übertragbarkeit nicht registrierter Erwerbstätiger, die zu gar keinem System Zugang haben. Vergleicht man Schätzungen für die Jahre 2000 und 2013, so zeigt sich ein mäßiger, aber doch merklicher Anstieg des Anteils der Migranten mit Regelung I (volle Übertragbarkeit) um 1,4 Prozent. Die größte Veränderung gab es hingegen unter Regelung III (kein Zugang zu sozialer Sicherheit, aber auch keine Beitragszahlung), wo der Anteil sich fast verdoppelt hat und 9,4 Prozent erreichte. Der Anteil unter Regelung II (mögliche Ausführbarkeit ohne Gesamtanrechnung) sank um 3,0 Prozentpunkte, bleibt jedoch mit 53,2 Prozent nach wie vor der größte. Gemäß den Schätzungen sank der Anteil unter Regelung IV (informell Beschäftigte) um 2,9 Prozent auf 14,0 Prozent aller Migranten im Jahr 2013. Dieser Trend ist positiv zu werten, doch es muss mehr getan werden, um die Übertragbarkeit von Ansprüchen zu verbessern, und es gibt verschiedene Lösungen, die ohne aufwendige bilaterale Vereinbarungen auskommen. Важность переноса прав на социальные пособия между странами возрастает одновременно с ростом абсолютного числа международных мигрантов, увеличением их доли в населении земного шара и, возможно, что ещё важнее, значительным и продолжающимся ростом численности лиц в мире, которые в течение части своей жизни работают и/или выходят на пенсию за рубежом. В статье оценивается, как растущий поток мигрантов распределяется по четырём основным режимам переноса прав на пособия – от двусторонних соглашений о социальном обеспечении до работников, не оформивших документов и не имеющих доступа к какой‐либо программе. Сравнивая оценки за 2000 и 2013 годы, авторы отмечают скромное, хотя и заметное, увеличение доли мигрантов в режиме I (полный перенос) на 1,4%, хотя наибольшее изменение произошло в режиме III (без доступа к социальному обеспечению и без требований об уплате взносов) – рост почти вдвое до 9,4%. В режиме II (потенциальная возможность переноса права на пособия без суммирования) отмечается сокращение на 3,0 процентных пункта, хотя он остаётся доминирующим (53,2%). Как показывают оценки, состав участников в режиме IV (неформальность) сократился на 2,9 процентных пункта до 14,0% всех мигрантов в 2013 году. Тенденция носит положительный характер, однако для достижения большого объёма переноса прав на пособия необходимо будет прилагать дальнейшие усилия, и при этом различные потенциальные решения выходят за рамки двусторонних соглашений, которые заключаются с трудом. 随着国际移民绝对数量及其在世界人口中比重的增加, 社会福利跨境转移接续的重要性正在凸显, 对于比重已经很高且仍在增长的这一群体而言也许更为重要, 因为他们一生中将有相当一部分时间在国外工作和/或退休。本文预估了不断增长的移民存量如何分布于四个主要转移接续制度中, 从通过双边社保协定实现转移接续到而没有登记在册的工人无法加入任何制度。通过对比2000年和2013年预估数字, 说明第一制度 (完全可转移接续)下移民的比重略有增加(1.4%), 但幅度不大;最大的变化发生在第三制度 (无法获得社会保障但也无需缴费)下, 这一比重几乎翻了一番, 达到9.4%。第二制度 (可能转出但无法加权合并)下的比重下降了3个百分点, 但仍是最主要的制度(53.2%)。预估表明, 第四制度 (非正规)比重下降了2.9个百分点, 占2013年所有移民的14%。这一趋势是积极的, 但在待遇转移接续方面还有很多工作要做, 而很多可能的解决方案存在于难以达成的双边协定之外。 تتزايد أهمية إمكانية نقل منافع الضمان الاجتماعي بالتوازي مع تنامي العدد المطلق للمهاجرين الدوليين وحصتهم من سكان العالم، وأهم من ذلك ربما مع الحصة الأكبر بكثير والمتزايدة لسكان العالم الذين عملوا لجزء من حياتهم و/ أو تقاعدوا في الخارج. ويعمد هذا التقرير على تقييم كيفية توزيع الرصيد المتزايد للمهاجرين على نظم إمكانية النقل الأربع التي تتراوح بين إمكانية النقل من خلال تدابير الضمان الاجتماعي الثنائية إلى العمال الذي لا يملكون وثائق ولا إمكانية النفاذ إلى أي من هذه الخطط. وتبيِّن المقارنة بين إحصائيات عامي 2000 و2013 تزايداً متواضعاً ولكنه ملحوظ في حصة المهاجرين من النظام الأول (إمكانية النقل بالكامل) بنسبة 1.4 في المائة، ولكن أكبر تغير طرأ في إطار النظام الثالث (انعدام النفاذ إلى الضمان الاجتماعي وعدم اشتراط الاشتراكات كذلك) إذ تضاعفت النسبة في إطاره لتبلغ قرابة 9.4 في المائة. أما النظام الثاني (إمكانية نقل المنافع المحتملة دون إجمال) فقد انخفضت النسبة في إطاره بـما يبلغ 3.0 نقطة مئوية ولكنه يظل النظام الطاغي (بنسبة 53.2 في المائة). وتُبيِّن التقديرات أن نطاق النظام الرابع (سوق العمل غير الرسمية) قد انخفضت النسبة فيه بـما يصل إلى 2.9 نقطة مئوية، ممثَّلة في نسبة 14.0 في المائة من جميع المهاجرين في عام 2013. وهذا التوجه إيجابي، ولكن ينبغي بذل جهود أكبر لإحراز التقدم بشأن إمكانية نقل المنافع، فالعديد من الحلول المحتملة موجودة خارج إطار الاتفاقات الثنائية صعبة التنفيذ. A importância da portabilidade transfronteiriça dos benefícios sociais está crescendo paralelamente ao aumento, em números absolutos, de migrantes internacionais e de sua parcela na população mundial. Talvez, mais importante ainda, seja o fato de que um segmento cada vez maior da população mundial trabalha em determinada fase da vida e/ou se aposenta no exterior. Este artigo avalia como o aumento do número de migrantes está distribuído em quatro regimes principais de portabilidade, que vão desde a portabilidade garantida por acordos bilaterais de seguridade social até trabalhadores sem documentos e sem acesso a qualquer tipo de regime. A comparação das estimativas para 2000 e 2013 indica um aumento modesto mas evidente de 1,4% na parcela de migrantes sob o regime I (portabilidade total), sendo que a maior mudança ocorreu no regime III (nenhum acesso à seguridade social mas também nenhuma exigência de contribuição), que praticamente dobrou para 9,4%. O regime II (exportabilidade potencial sem totalização) sofreu uma redução de três pontos percentuais, mas continua sendo o regime dominante (com 53,2%). As estimativas sugerem que o alcance do regime IV (informalidade), que sofreu uma redução de 2,9 pontos percentuais, representa 14% de todos os migrantes em 2013. Esta tendência é positiva, mas é preciso fazer mais para fazer avançar a portabilidade dos benefícios, várias soluções potenciais se encontrando fora dos acordos bilaterais, que são difíceis de estabelecer.

Suggested Citation

  • Robert Holzmann & Jacques Wels, 2020. "The cross‐border portability of social security benefits: Status and progress?," International Social Security Review, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 73(1), pages 65-97, January.
  • Handle: RePEc:wly:intssr:v:73:y:2020:i:1:p:65-97
    DOI: 10.1111/issr.12228
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/issr.12228
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/issr.12228?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Adams, Richard Jr. & Page, John, 2005. "Do international migration and remittances reduce poverty in developing countries?," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 33(10), pages 1645-1669, October.
    2. Panhuys, Clara van. & Kazi Aoul, Samia. & Binette, Geneviève., 2017. "Migrant access to social protection under Bilateral Labour Agreements a review of 120 countries and nine bilateral arrangements," ILO Working Papers 994955792602676, International Labour Organization.
    3. Holzmann, Robert & Koettl, Johannes & Chernetsky, Taras, 2005. "Portability regimes of pension and health care benefits for international migrants: an analysis of issues and good practices," Social Protection Discussion Papers and Notes 32750, The World Bank.
    4. Nurulsyahirah Taha & Karin Astrid Siegmann & Mahmood Messkoub, 2015. "How portable is social security for migrant workers? A review of the literature," International Social Security Review, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 68(1), pages 95-118, January.
    5. Robert Holzmann, 2016. "Do bilateral social security agreements deliver on the portability of pensions and health care benefits? A summary policy paper on four migration corridors between EU and non-EU member states," IZA Journal of European Labor Studies, Springer;Forschungsinstitut zur Zukunft der Arbeit GmbH (IZA), vol. 5(1), pages 1-35, December.
    6. Holzmann,Robert, 2016. "Do bilateral social security agreements deliver on the portability of pensions and health care benefits? A summary policy paper on four migration corridors between EU and non-EU member states," Policy Research Working Paper Series 106186, The World Bank.
    7. Drèze, Jean & Khera, Reetika, 2017. "Recent Social Security Initiatives in India," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 98(C), pages 555-572.
    8. John Bryant, 2005. "Children of International Migrants in Indonesia, Thailand, and the Philippines: A review of evidence and policies," Papers inwopa05/32, Innocenti Working Papers.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Holzmann, Robert & Wels, Jacques, 2018. "Status and Progress in Cross-Border Portability of Social Security Benefits," IZA Discussion Papers 11481, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    2. Robert Holzmann, 2018. "The portability of social benefits across borders," IZA World of Labor, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA), pages 452-452, October.
    3. Peter Huber & Doris A. Oberdabernig & Jesús Crespo Cuaresma & Anna Raggl, 2015. "Migration in an Ageing Europe: What are the Challenges? WWWforEurope Working Paper No. 79," WIFO Studies, WIFO, number 57886, April.
    4. Giulia Bettin & Eralba Cela & Tineke Fokkema, 2018. "Return intentions over the life course: Evidence on the effects of life events from a longitudinal sample of first- and second-generation Turkish migrants in Germany," Demographic Research, Max Planck Institute for Demographic Research, Rostock, Germany, vol. 39(38), pages 1009-1038.
    5. Perna, Roberta & Cruz-Martínez, Gibrán & Moreno Fuentes, Francisco Javier, 2022. "Patient mobility within national borders. Drivers and politics of cross-border healthcare agreements in the Spanish decentralized system," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 126(11), pages 1187-1193.
    6. Kristina A. Schapiro, 2009. "Migration and Educational Outcomes of Children," Human Development Research Papers (2009 to present) HDRP-2009-57, Human Development Report Office (HDRO), United Nations Development Programme (UNDP), revised Oct 2009.
    7. Mauro Testaverde & Harry Moroz & Claire H. Hollweg & Achim Schmillen, 2017. "Migrating to Opportunity," World Bank Publications - Books, The World Bank Group, number 28342, December.
    8. Hajer Habib, 2023. "Remittances and Labor Supply: Evidence from Tunisia," Journal of the Knowledge Economy, Springer;Portland International Center for Management of Engineering and Technology (PICMET), vol. 14(2), pages 1870-1899, June.
    9. Ziesemer, Thomas H.W., 2010. "The impact of the credit crisis on poor developing countries: Growth, worker remittances, accumulation and migration," Economic Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 27(5), pages 1230-1245, September.
    10. Michael E. Cummings & Alan Gamlen, 2019. "Diaspora engagement institutions and venture investment activity in developing countries," Journal of International Business Policy, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 2(4), pages 289-313, December.
    11. Christian Hubert Ebeke, 2011. "Does the dual-citizenship recognition determine the level and the utilization of international remittances? Cross-Country Evidence," CERDI Working papers halshs-00559528, HAL.
    12. Atiq Rehman, 2017. "Remittances for Growth: Initiatives for Remitters and Remittances," Working Papers id:12183, eSocialSciences.
    13. Kalaj, Ermira Hoxha, 2009. "Do Remittances Alter Labor Market Participation? A Study of Albania," MPRA Paper 48271, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    14. Cristian ÎNCALTARAU & Sorin-Stefan MAHA & Liviu-George MAHA, 2011. "A Broader Look on Migration: A Two Way Interaction Between Development and Migration in the Country Of Origin," Review of Economic and Business Studies, Alexandru Ioan Cuza University, Faculty of Economics and Business Administration, issue 8, pages 285-297, December.
    15. Michael Lokshin & Mikhail Bontch‐Osmolovski & Elena Glinskaya, 2010. "Work‐Related Migration and Poverty Reduction in Nepal," Review of Development Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 14(2), pages 323-332, May.
    16. Pfau, Wade Donald, 2008. "Determinants and Impacts of International Remittances on Household Welfare in Vietnam," MPRA Paper 19038, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    17. Konte, Maty, 2016. "The effects of remittances on support for democracy in Africa: Are remittances a curse or a blessing?," Journal of Comparative Economics, Elsevier, vol. 44(4), pages 1002-1022.
    18. Aggarwal, Reena & Demirgüç-Kunt, Asli & Pería, Maria Soledad Martínez, 2011. "Do remittances promote financial development?," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 96(2), pages 255-264, November.
    19. Ayadi, Rym & Arbak, Emrah & Ben-Naceur, Sami & De Groen, Willem Pieter, 2013. "Determinants of Financial Development across the Mediterranean," CEPS Papers 7770, Centre for European Policy Studies.
    20. Roland Craigwell & Mahalia Jackman & Winston Moore, 2010. "Economic volatility and remittances," International Journal of Development Issues, Emerald Group Publishing Limited, vol. 9(1), pages 25-42, April.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:wly:intssr:v:73:y:2020:i:1:p:65-97. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://doi.org/10.1111/(ISSN)1865-1674 .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.