The reaction of the social security systems of the European Union and the united states of America to financial crises: proposals for using the experience in Russia

In the context of accelerated transformation of the domestic economy, attempts at economic and socio-political isolation of the Russian Federation (hereinafter referred to as RF, Russia), the question of rethinking the role of social protection in the development of the RF arises. The purpose of the work is to develop recommendations for increasing the adaptability of the domestic social protection system to future possible shocks, with consideration to modern practices used in developed economies. The object of the study is social protection systems. The subject is measures of adaption of these systems to consequences of financial crises. When conducting the study, the following methods have been used: analysis, induction, measurement, comparison, computational and constructive, statistical and economic. The main results of the study include identification of the basic channels for the transition of a financial crisis into a social one, and assessment of the fiscal impulses of the European Union countries, United States of America, and Russia in order to mitigate the negative shocks of financial crises. The practical significance of the work is due to the possibility of using the results in the activities of government bodies as part of improving the domestic social protection system. The similar nature of consequences of global financial crises has allowed us to draw a number of conclusions. Firstly, job retention schemes and social support measures for the unemployed population make it possible to create an effective system of income support for workers, especially for vulnerable groups. Secondly, increasing the targeting of social support measures will lead to the performance growth of social protection system, allowing for a more rational distribution of limited budget resources. Finally, this social system can effectively reach the target segment of beneficiaries only if means-testing information systems are of high quality.

1. Balynin I.V. Factors of development of non-state social security. The Review of Economy, the Law and Sociology. 2023;3:12–15. (In Russian).

2. Balynin I.V. Management of conditions and factors hindering the development of non-state social security. Financial Life. 2023;3:63–66. (In Russian).

3. Giupponi G., Landais С., Lapeyre А. Should we insure workers or jobs during recessions? Journal of Economic Perspectives. 2022;2(36):29–54. http://dx.doi.org/10.1257/jep.36.2.29

4. Barrientos A., Niño-Zarazúa M. Financing social protection for children in crisis contexts. Development Policy Review. 2011;5(29):603–620. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-7679.2011.00549.x

5. Bitler M., Hoynes H. The more things change, the more they stay the same? The safety net and poverty in the great recession. Journal of Labor Economics. 2016;1(34):S403–S444. http://dx.doi.org/10.1086/683096

6. Kersbergen K. van, Vis B., Hemerijck A. The great recession and welfare state reform: is retrenchment really the only game left in town? Social Policy & Administration. 2014;7(48):883–904. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/spol.12063

7. Blanchard O.J., Dell’Ariccia G., Mauro Р. Rethinking macroeconomic policy. Washington: International Monetary Fund; 2010. 19 р.

8. Sinyavskaya O.V., Omelchuk T.G. Consequences of demographic aging for the pension system in the medium term: forecasting experience for Russia. SPERO. Social policy: expertise, recommendations, overviews. 2014;19:7–30. (In Russian).

9. Sinyavskaya O.V., Yakushev E.L., Chervyakova A.A. Russian pension system in the context of long-term challenges and national development goals. Moscow: Higher School of Economics; 2021. 120 p. (In Russian).

10. Romer Ch.D., Romer D.H. The macroeconomic effects of tax changes: estimates based on a new measure of fiscal shocks. American Economic Review. 2010;3(100):763–801. http://dx.doi.org/10.1257/aer.100.3.763

11. Blinder A.S. Fiscal policy reconsidered. Washington: Brookings Institution; 2016. 32 p.

12. Auerbach A., Gorodnichenko Yu., McCrory P.B., Murphy D. Fiscal multipliers in the COVID-19 recession. Journal of International Money and Finance. 2022;126:102669. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jimonfin.2022.102669

13. Chetty R., Friedman J.N., Hendren N., Stepner M., the Opportunity Insights Team. The economic impacts of COVID-19: evidence from a new public database built using private sector data. NBER Working Papers. 2020;w27431.

14. Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development. Opportunities for all. A framework for policy action on inclusive growth. Paris: OECD Publishing; 2018. 200 p.

15. Ovcharova L.N., Sinyavskaya O.V., Biryukova S.S., Gorina E.A., Nagernyak M.A., Pishnyak A.I. Social protection in Russia: choices of the future. Voprosy Ekonomiki. 2022;8:5–31. (In Russian). https://doi.org/10.32609/0042-8736-2022-8-5-31

16. Andreeva E.A., Biryukova S.S., Voronina N.D., Gorvat E.S., Gorina E.A., Goryajnova A.R. et al. Social protection in Russia before and after the pandemic: forks of the future. Moscow: Higher School of Economics; 2022. 184 p. (In Russian).

17. Assimaidou K., Kiendrebeogo Y., Tall A. Social protection for poverty reduction in times of crisis. Journal of Policy Modeling. 2017;6(39):1163–1183. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jpolmod.2017.09.003