Social Protection Research Paper

Since the burden is not only for the state to carry, why have we not seen more significant improvements in the social protection sector especially with regard to health? Which stakeholder is not playing their part? Too often the cry is that governments are not doing enough for their citizens and is usually the first to be blamed. It is beneficial to have social health protection provisions in place as it can save lives, shield people against poverty but also act as a tool for investment towards productivity and development. This is important especially for international competitiveness. Jamaica having recognised this has committed to having a healthy and stable population by 2030 given national goal #1 via Jamaica’s National Development

This is, perhaps one of the reasons why it is considered a human right. Since good health is an underpinning aspect of human capital development , a provision for social health protection needs to be in place for all, especially the vulnerable groups. Jamaica in its social protection strategy looks at three (3) main life-cycle segment groups: 0-18 years (children), 15-24 years (youth) and 65 years and older (elderly) where a series of transformative, preventive, promotive, protective and mitigative strategies have been put forward . These life cycle groups are seen as the most vulnerable groups for which social protection and social health protection heavily applies. It seems common place for the working class, in any country, to put the necessary plans in place to take care of themselves. However, much facilitation at is relates to mitigative strategies are necessary for the government to provide through schemes which sees the working class participating in cost-sharing: co-payments, co-insurance and deductibles. This gave rise to the informal mantra – ‘who can pay, should pay’. In a report from the Jamaican delegation to the academy on social security, it was expressed that people should contribute according to their ability to pay for health care services as this is equitable . The report when on further to caution against inequity where there is a large informal

While it can be agreed that achieving social health protection is possible, it cannot be overlooked as a costly venture. However, its gains are long lasting and far-reaching as social health protection is not only expected to improve the population’s health status but also to offer some protection against the impoverishing or catastrophic effects of the direct and most of the indirect financial costs of illness. The incidence of catastrophic spending on health is reported on the basis of out-of-pocket expenditures exceeding 10% and 25% of household total income or consumption . For Germany as a developed country, records show that with 100% coverage in social protection, they have enjoyed a gross domestic product per capita at $32,860 per person while Democratic Republic of the Congo has a gross domestic product per capita of $120 and sadly, social health protection is very scant. Cambodia despite supporting efforts from Germany, still struggles with the provision of basic health care to its people though 19% in 2012 of the population were living below the poverty line compared to 48% in 2007. Records also show that about one fifth of Cambodians have social health insurance . A similar number of Jamaicans are living below the