Page 66 - ePaper
P. 66
Employment and Social Developments in Europe 2014
Factors such as the evolution of the protection and stabilisation — specific • Section 4.4 considers the develop-
policies may be more oriented towards
unemployment rate across the EU ments of social protection as auto-
countries, appear to be closely related one or other of these functions. For matic stabiliser.
to these changes (Fabian, 2014) with example, policies on childcare, labour
•
increases in unemployment being related market activation, rehabilitation, Section 4.5 discusses whether
with lower levels of institutional trust, education or training are particularly changes in the financing of social
less favourable attitudes towards immi- related to the social investment func- protection can have an impact on
grants, and lower life satisfaction (also tion, while healthcare provision is the coverage of social protection.
when controlling for other variables). related to both protection and invest-
ment (including the prevention of 4.2. The developments
Within the population as a whole, the disease). On the other hand, pension of government
unemployed have the least trust in systems and unemployment benefit and social expenditure
institutions, whether at EU or national systems may address all three social during the crisis
level, with trust levels in the EU having functions (European Commission,
fallen much further over the course of 2013e). The development of social
the recession for them. Qualitative evi- spending is not fully explained
dence demonstrates the extent to which Box 2: Government by cyclical factors
unemployed people feel ignored by their and social protection data
representatives. It also illustrates the Social spending, including for edu-
fact that, while public services are often At European level, there are two dif- cation, health and social protection,
seen as a source of support, they are ferent accounting frameworks for the accounts for two-thirds of total gov-
sometimes rejected along with other monitoring of social spending: ernment expenditure, with social
-
institutions in some Member States (see protection being the largest compo
Annex 3, Extracts 6 and 7). The European System of Inte- nent (Chart 42). During the current
grated Social Protection Statistics recession, the share of total EU GDP
4. The impact of the (ESSPROS) covers social protection, absorbed by government expendi-
recession on welfare defined as all interventions from ture increased from 46 % in 2007 to
systems public and private bodies intended almost 50 % in 2012 with social spend-
to relieve households and individuals
4.1. The three functions of the burden of a defined set of risks ing increasing by 11 % while overall
government expenditure increased by
1
of social spending: and needs ( ). 8 % at EU level (Chart 43). Within these
investment, stabilisation The Classification of the Functions average EU figures, however, the bal-
and protection of Government (COFOG) covers all ance and development of government
transactions undertaken by units in expenditure between different cate-
Social spending covers three broad functions: the general government sector ( ), gories can vary considerably between
2
investment, protection and stabilisation. including government spending Member States.
for the three functions discussed
• Social investment means investing in above (included under the COFOG The counter-cyclical nature of social
people, rather than simply compensat - functions of health, education and protection — rising in periods of reces-
ing them, with a view to future returns social protection). sion and falling in periods of recov-
in terms of employment and social ery — largely explains its contribution
participation. Expenditure in policy ( ) Provided that there is neither to increased government spending in
1
areas such as education, quality child - simultaneous reciprocal nor an the first phase of the crisis. However,
care, healthcare, training, job-search individual arrangement involved this cannot explain its contribution
(see Eurostat, ESSPROS Manual, 2011).
assistance and rehabilitation is seen as ( ) These transactions included in COFOG (together with education and health
2
a productive factor for strengthening correspond to those defined and expenditure) to the fall in the second
recorded in national accounts under
people’s skills and capacities in order ESA95 (see Eurostat, Manual on sources phase, from 2011 to 2012 (Chart 44).
to prepare them for working life over and methods for the compilation In some Member States social protec-
of COFOG statistics, 2007).
the longer term (Van Kersbergen and tion was reduced proportionally more
Hemerijck, 2012). than total government expenditure,
Within this framework: while biases towards specific catego-
• Social protection seeks to support and ries of expenditure were not addressed
protect people against life-cycle and • Section 4.2 presents the develop- (as in Greece and the Netherlands) or
income risks. ment of government spending and introduced (as in Spain for economic
75
benchmarks the evolution of social affairs ( )).
• The overall objective in terms of sta- spending (including social protec-
bilisation is to sustain households’ tion, health and education) against
incomes (and, consequently, aggregate other categories of expenditure. ( ) Economic affairs corresponds to expenditure
75
demand), notably during recessions. for General economic, commercial and
• Section 4.3 presents the changes labour affairs, Agriculture, forestry, fishing
and hunting, Fuel and energy, Mining,
While there is no unique relationship in social investment for different manufacturing and construction, Transport,
between specific social policies and population groups (children and Communication, Other industries, R&D,
Economic affairs, including expenditure for
these three functions — investment, families, youth, working age). the bailout of banks.
64
Factors such as the evolution of the protection and stabilisation — specific • Section 4.4 considers the develop-
policies may be more oriented towards
unemployment rate across the EU ments of social protection as auto-
countries, appear to be closely related one or other of these functions. For matic stabiliser.
to these changes (Fabian, 2014) with example, policies on childcare, labour
•
increases in unemployment being related market activation, rehabilitation, Section 4.5 discusses whether
with lower levels of institutional trust, education or training are particularly changes in the financing of social
less favourable attitudes towards immi- related to the social investment func- protection can have an impact on
grants, and lower life satisfaction (also tion, while healthcare provision is the coverage of social protection.
when controlling for other variables). related to both protection and invest-
ment (including the prevention of 4.2. The developments
Within the population as a whole, the disease). On the other hand, pension of government
unemployed have the least trust in systems and unemployment benefit and social expenditure
institutions, whether at EU or national systems may address all three social during the crisis
level, with trust levels in the EU having functions (European Commission,
fallen much further over the course of 2013e). The development of social
the recession for them. Qualitative evi- spending is not fully explained
dence demonstrates the extent to which Box 2: Government by cyclical factors
unemployed people feel ignored by their and social protection data
representatives. It also illustrates the Social spending, including for edu-
fact that, while public services are often At European level, there are two dif- cation, health and social protection,
seen as a source of support, they are ferent accounting frameworks for the accounts for two-thirds of total gov-
sometimes rejected along with other monitoring of social spending: ernment expenditure, with social
-
institutions in some Member States (see protection being the largest compo
Annex 3, Extracts 6 and 7). The European System of Inte- nent (Chart 42). During the current
grated Social Protection Statistics recession, the share of total EU GDP
4. The impact of the (ESSPROS) covers social protection, absorbed by government expendi-
recession on welfare defined as all interventions from ture increased from 46 % in 2007 to
systems public and private bodies intended almost 50 % in 2012 with social spend-
to relieve households and individuals
4.1. The three functions of the burden of a defined set of risks ing increasing by 11 % while overall
government expenditure increased by
1
of social spending: and needs ( ). 8 % at EU level (Chart 43). Within these
investment, stabilisation The Classification of the Functions average EU figures, however, the bal-
and protection of Government (COFOG) covers all ance and development of government
transactions undertaken by units in expenditure between different cate-
Social spending covers three broad functions: the general government sector ( ), gories can vary considerably between
2
investment, protection and stabilisation. including government spending Member States.
for the three functions discussed
• Social investment means investing in above (included under the COFOG The counter-cyclical nature of social
people, rather than simply compensat - functions of health, education and protection — rising in periods of reces-
ing them, with a view to future returns social protection). sion and falling in periods of recov-
in terms of employment and social ery — largely explains its contribution
participation. Expenditure in policy ( ) Provided that there is neither to increased government spending in
1
areas such as education, quality child - simultaneous reciprocal nor an the first phase of the crisis. However,
care, healthcare, training, job-search individual arrangement involved this cannot explain its contribution
(see Eurostat, ESSPROS Manual, 2011).
assistance and rehabilitation is seen as ( ) These transactions included in COFOG (together with education and health
2
a productive factor for strengthening correspond to those defined and expenditure) to the fall in the second
recorded in national accounts under
people’s skills and capacities in order ESA95 (see Eurostat, Manual on sources phase, from 2011 to 2012 (Chart 44).
to prepare them for working life over and methods for the compilation In some Member States social protec-
of COFOG statistics, 2007).
the longer term (Van Kersbergen and tion was reduced proportionally more
Hemerijck, 2012). than total government expenditure,
Within this framework: while biases towards specific catego-
• Social protection seeks to support and ries of expenditure were not addressed
protect people against life-cycle and • Section 4.2 presents the develop- (as in Greece and the Netherlands) or
income risks. ment of government spending and introduced (as in Spain for economic
75
benchmarks the evolution of social affairs ( )).
• The overall objective in terms of sta- spending (including social protec-
bilisation is to sustain households’ tion, health and education) against
incomes (and, consequently, aggregate other categories of expenditure. ( ) Economic affairs corresponds to expenditure
75
demand), notably during recessions. for General economic, commercial and
• Section 4.3 presents the changes labour affairs, Agriculture, forestry, fishing
and hunting, Fuel and energy, Mining,
While there is no unique relationship in social investment for different manufacturing and construction, Transport,
between specific social policies and population groups (children and Communication, Other industries, R&D,
Economic affairs, including expenditure for
these three functions — investment, families, youth, working age). the bailout of banks.
64
