IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/cog/socinc/v8y2020i1p90-102.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The Calls for Universal Social Protection by International Organizations: Constructing a New Global Consensus

Author

Listed:
  • Lutz Leisering

    (Department of Sociology, Institute for World Society Studies, Bielefeld University, Germany)

Abstract

Universalism has become a lead idea of global social politics, and of global social security in particular, first voiced in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights of 1948 and renewed in recent calls for “Social Security for All” and “Universal Health Coverage,” and in the Global Partnership for Universal Social Protection to Achieve the Sustainable Development Goals launched by the World Bank and the International Labour Organization in 2016. This article analyses the idea of a universal right to social protection, as recently articulated by international organizations. According to J. W. Meyer’s neo-institutionalist theory of world society (Krücken & Drori, 2009; Meyer, 2007), universalism is a world-cultural norm, and international organizations are proponents of world culture. This article is based on the assumption that the meaning of universalism is not fixed, but that international organizations construct the norm in changing ways to secure worldwide acceptance and applicability, considering that states have very diverse socio-economic conditions and socio-cultural backgrounds. Accordingly, the article analyses how international organizations construct the cultural idea of universalism as well as institutional models of universal social protection. The finding is that the recent calls for universalism represent a new interpretation of universalism that refers to individual entitlements to benefits rather than collective development, and that this global consensus was reached by constructing the norm in a way to leave room for interpretation and adaptation. However, the price of consensus is the attenuation of the norm, by allowing particularistic interpretations and by weakening the content of the right to social protection. The article also seeks to explain the rise of the new global consensus and identify its limitations.

Suggested Citation

  • Lutz Leisering, 2020. "The Calls for Universal Social Protection by International Organizations: Constructing a New Global Consensus," Social Inclusion, Cogitatio Press, vol. 8(1), pages 90-102.
    • Handle: RePEc:cog:socinc:v8:y:2020:i:1:p:90-102
    DOI: 10.17645/si.v8i1.2569
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.cogitatiopress.com/socialinclusion/article/view/2569
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.17645/si.v8i1.2569?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. Gough, Ian, 2019. "Universal Basic Services: a theoretical and moral framework," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 101051, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    2. World Bank, 2018. "The State of Social Safety Nets 2018," World Bank Publications - Books, The World Bank Group, number 29115, April.
    3. Joakim Palme & Walter Korpi, 1998. "The Paradox of Redistribution and Strategies of Equality: Welfare State Institutions, Inequality and Poverty in the Western Countries," LIS Working papers 174, LIS Cross-National Data Center in Luxembourg.
    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. Lutz Leisering, 2020. "The Calls for Universal Social Protection by International Organizations: Constructing a New Global Consensus," Social Inclusion, Cogitatio Press, vol. 8(1), pages 90-102.
    2. Paula Saikkonen & Minna Ylikännö, 2020. "Is There Room for Targeting within Universalism? Finnish Social Assistance Recipients as Social Citizens," Social Inclusion, Cogitatio Press, vol. 8(1), pages 145-154.
    3. Paula Saikkonen & Minna Ylikännö, 2020. "Is There Room for Targeting within Universalism? Finnish Social Assistance Recipients as Social Citizens," Social Inclusion, Cogitatio Press, vol. 8(1), pages 145-154.
    4. Mona Sandbæk, 2017. "European Policies to Promote Children’s Rights and Combat Child Poverty," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 14(8), pages 1-13, July.
    5. Jin Wook Kim & Young Jun Choi, 2008. "Private Transfers and Emerging Welfare States in East Asia: Comparative Perspectives," LIS Working papers 507, LIS Cross-National Data Center in Luxembourg.
    6. Cristiano Perugini & Gaetano Martino, 2008. "Income Inequality Within European Regions: Determinants And Effects On Growth," Review of Income and Wealth, International Association for Research in Income and Wealth, vol. 54(3), pages 373-406, September.
    7. Gough, Ian, 2020. "The case for Universal Basic Services," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 107815, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    8. Shapiro, Jeremy, 2019. "The impact of recipient choice on aid effectiveness," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 116(C), pages 137-149.
    9. Bruno, Bosco & Ambra, Poggi, 2016. "Government effectiveness, middle class and poverty in the EU: A dynamic multilevel analysis," Working Papers 344, University of Milano-Bicocca, Department of Economics, revised 27 Jun 2016.
    10. Brady, David, 2018. "Theories of the Causes of Poverty," SocArXiv jud53, Center for Open Science.
    11. World Bank, 2022. "Inequality in Southern Africa," World Bank Publications - Reports 37283, The World Bank Group.
    12. Bea Cantillon & Natascha Van Mechelen, 2013. "Poverty reduction and social security: Cracks in a policy paradigm," Working Papers 1304, Herman Deleeck Centre for Social Policy, University of Antwerp.
    13. Ben Spies-Butcher & Ben Phillips & Troy Henderson, 2020. "Between universalism and targeting: Exploring policy pathways for an Australian Basic Income," The Economic and Labour Relations Review, , vol. 31(4), pages 502-523, December.
    14. David Brady, 2003. "The Politics of Poverty: Left Political Institutions, the Welfare State and Poverty," LIS Working papers 352, LIS Cross-National Data Center in Luxembourg.
    15. Franziska Gassmann & Bruno Martorano & Jennifer Waidler, 2022. "How Social Assistance Affects Subjective Wellbeing: Lessons from Kyrgyzstan," Journal of Development Studies, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 58(4), pages 827-847, April.
    16. Stefan Traub & Tim Krieger, 2009. "Wie hat sich die intragenerationale Umverteilung in der staatlichen Säule des Rentensystems verändert? Ein internationaler Vergleich auf Basis von LIS-Daten," LIS Working papers 520, LIS Cross-National Data Center in Luxembourg.
    17. Daoud, Adel & Johansson, Fredrik, 2019. "Estimating Treatment Heterogeneity of International Monetary Fund Programs on Child Poverty with Generalized Random Forest," SocArXiv awfjt, Center for Open Science.
    18. Matthew Fisher-Post & Amory Gethin, 2023. "Government Redistribution and Development Global Estimates of Tax and Transfer Progressivity 1980-2019," Working Papers halshs-04423529, HAL.
    19. Hoy, Christopher & Toth, Russell & Merdikawati, Nurina, 2024. "How does information about inequality shape voting intentions and preferences for redistribution? Evidence from a randomized survey experiment in Indonesia," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 112(C).
    20. Lihi Lahat, 2011. "How can leaders’ perceptions guide policy analysis in an era of governance?," Policy Sciences, Springer;Society of Policy Sciences, vol. 44(2), pages 135-155, June.

    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:cog:socinc:v8:y:2020:i:1:p:90-102. 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: António Vieira or IT Department (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.cogitatiopress.com .

    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.