This special issue selectively addresses the relationship linking social security systems, inclusive growth and social cohesion. Inclusive growth and social cohesion are viewed as political expedient and necessary goals for national economies. The desirability of their attainment reflects political pragmatism, the “social contract”, as much as it does a commitment to the wider emancipative goal of social justice. The International Social Security Association (ISSA) has often paraphrased these assertions to argue that there can be “no social justice without social security”. Of course, progress achieved towards the realization of the goals of inclusive growth and social cohesion should be equally beneficial for the adequacy, sustainability and coverage of social security systems. The aim of this special issue is to unpack and better understand the nature of this relationship.

Social protection and revenue collection are often regarded as potential drivers of social cohesion. The article joins this debate, providing three main contributions. First, we carefully discuss the concept of social cohesion and endorse one specific definition. Second, we propose using the concept of the “fiscal contract” as the key theoretical lens to understand the often neglected potential joint effects of social protection and revenue collection policies on social cohesion. Third, we illustrate three main mechanisms through which these policies can have positive or negative impacts on the different components of social cohesion and highlight how relevant it is for policy-makers to carefully think about these.

China has adopted an array of special social security measures in response to the spread of the COVID-19 virus, to mitigate the downside social and economic impacts caused by the pandemic. Measures include the reduction, exemption and deferral of social security contributions by employers, the extension of benefits coverage for employees, and the provision of more accessible e-services by social insurance agencies. The article points out that a preliminary assessment of those measures would suggest that they have played a key role in supporting social cohesion and in stabilising the economy. In a critical manner, the article compares the measures adopted in China with those of other countries, and identifies how China could learn from international practice and experience. Finally, and based on recent Chinese experience, the article presents proposals that seek to improve the longer-term contribution made by the Chinese social security system to realise the goals of social cohesion and inclusive economic development. As set out in China’s Social Insurance Law of 2010, the social security system should not only support a fair sharing of benefits of development, but also promote social harmony and stability.

The expansion of social assistance in low- and middle-income countries raises important issues for inclusive growth. Labour is by far the principal asset of low-income groups. Changes in the quantity, quality, and allocation of labour associated with social assistance will impact on the productive capacity of low-income groups and therefore on inclusive growth. The article re-assesses the findings reported by impact evaluations of social assistance in low- and middle-income countries to address this issue. Most studies have tested for potentially adverse labour supply incentive effects from transfers but have failed to find supportive evidence. The article highlights findings from this literature on the effects of social assistance on human capital accumulation and labour reallocation. They point to the conclusion that well-designed and well-implemented social assistance contributes to inclusive growth.

The COVID-19 pandemic has exposed the vulnerability of those who are inadequately covered by social protection in more and less developed countries alike, and has exacerbated the fragility of a social contract that was already under strain in many countries. A weak social contract in the context of an exceptional crisis poses a very real risk to social cohesion. Nevertheless, many States have reasserted themselves as the guarantor of rights by protecting public health and incomes. By sustaining these measures, economic recovery will be supported which will help minimize risks that may weaken social cohesion. However, this is a fast-moving, inherently unstable and protracted crisis. Social protection stands at a critical juncture. Decisive policy action will be required to strengthen social protection systems, including floors, as one of the cornerstones of a reinvigorated social contract.