Indicator Name, Target and Goal
Definition and Rationale
Data Sources and Collection Method
Method of Computation and Other Methodological Considerations
Computation Method:
Proportion of population covered by social protection systems is calculated separately for each group in order to distinguish effective coverage for children, unemployed persons, older persons and persons with disabilities, women with newborns, workers protected in case of work injury, and the poor and the vulnerable. For each subgroup, coverage is expressed as a share of the respective reference population. See Data Disaggregation for further information.
Proportion of population covered by social protection systems (by subgroup) is calculated using the following formula:
For example, proportion of older persons receiving a pension: ratio of persons above statutory pensionable age receiving an old-age pension to the number of persons above statutory pensionable age.
The aggregate indicator is calculated as the ratio of the sum of persons protected by contributory schemes, recipients of contributory and non-contributory benefits to total population.
Comments and limitations:
Most of the data in the ILO World Social Protection Database are compiled through the ILO Social Security Inquiry (SSI), a questionnaire on administrative records regularly submitted to governments, complemented by existing international data. The 2016 edition of the SSI is an update of the earlier questionnaire, adapted to better reflect the newly adopted SDGs. The SSI questionnaires and manual are available online.[1]
The ILO World Social Protection Database complements the data received from the SSI, as far as possible on a consistent basis, with a number of other international and regional data sources, notably the International Social Security Association’s (ISSA) and other international organizations. The ILO World Social Protection Database also draws on national official reports and other sources, which are usually largely based on administrative data; and on survey data from a range of sources including national household income and expenditure surveys, labour force surveys and demographic and health surveys, to the extent that these include variables on social protection. When social protection coverage statistics are derived from administrative records, and especially when they are derived from various separate records put together, care should be taken to avoid double-counting of persons receiving more than one social protection benefit, or covered by more than one social protection scheme. In order to avoid double-counting when identifying the beneficiaries through the administrative records data, It is important to distinguish the recipients of basic and supplementary benefit in each sheme.
The countries usually are able to provide a complete set of information on persons protected and actual beneficiaries at little additional cost, as the information is collected by the national institutions for the regular functioning of the scheme/programme. Difficulties may occur due to fragmentation of sources, and when capturing information about smaller or less visible schemes, especially those not anchored in legislation. Administrative records’ coverage is not always totally comprehensive, in that it may exclude some geographic areas, or portions of the population, or economic activities.
For social protection coverage statistics derived from household surveys, two important issues must be noted (1) periodicity: in a large number of countires household surveys are not conducted on a regular basis, which makes them less sufficientfor monitoring purposes; and (2) the extent to which information on specific transfers and programs is captured in surveys can vary a lot across countries. Often, household surveys do not capture the universe of social protection programs in the country, but only the largest national programs. Many household surveys have limited information on social protection programs. Some surveys collect information only on participation without including the transfer amounts; and others include program information mixed with private transfers, making it difficult to isolate individual social protection programs. The reliability of the information is also greatly dependent on the respondents’ accuracy.
In addition, if the sample has not been designed to accommodate social protection coverage (especially when it comes to the number of beneficiaries), the survey may not produce reliable statistics in that respect. There is no guarantee that the sample size will be sufficiently large to allow for detailed disaggregation of beneficiaries from social security benefits.
Proxy, alternative and additional indicators: N/A