Indian Journal of Human Development


Conceptualizing Social Security in a Human Development and Rights Perspective
K.P. Kannan and N. Vijayamohanan Pillai
The paper seeks to provide a comprehensive meaning to the notion of social security from two complementary perspectives: one, from a human development standpoint and the other, from that of human rights. The core concerns of social security are perceived in terms of deficiency or capability deprivation and adversity or shocks arising out of contingencies and eventualities. The human development perspective emphasizes the need to address poverty manifested in various forms of deprivations rather than a single measure of income or consumption deficiency. And this can be achieved only if the situation of poverty is interpreted as a failure of entitlements. The notion of “capability” therefore assumes critical importance in advancing human development. All measures to improve capabilities are brought under the notion of Basic Social Security. Conversely, all measures to address situations of adversity are categorized as Contingent Social Security. Viewed in this way, the human development paradigm stands on the premise that everyone has a right to development, where The paper seeks to provide a comprehensive meaning to the notion of social security from two complementary perspectives: one, from a human development standpoint and the other, from that of human rights. The core concerns of social security are perceived in terms of deficiency or capability deprivation and adversity or shocks arising out of contingencies and eventualities. The paper seeks to provide a comprehensive meaning to the notion of social security from two complementary perspectives: one, from a human development standpoint and the other, from that of human rights. The core concerns of social security are perceived in terms of deficiency or capability deprivation and adversity or shocks arising out of contingencies and eventualities. The human development perspective emphasizes the need to address poverty manifested in various forms of deprivations rather than a single measure of income or consumption deficiency. And this can be achieved only if the situation of poverty is interpreted as a failure of entitlements. The notion of “capability” therefore assumes critical importance in advancing human development. All measures to improve capabilities are brought under the notion of Basic Social Security. Conversely, all measures to address situations of adversity are categorized as Contingent Social Security. Viewed in this way, the human development paradigm stands on the premise that everyone has a right to development, where development is seen as removal of all “unfreedoms” from all possible vulnerabilities, and the rights involve non-negotiable correlative obligations on the part of the State as the highest epitome of collectivity. Hence any approach to, or analytical framework of, development in the above sense must be a rights-based one. human development. All measures to improve capabilities are brought under the notion of Basic Social Security. Conversely, all measures to address situations of adversity are categorized as Contingent Social Security. Viewed in this way, the human development paradigm stands on the premise that everyone has a right to development, where development is seen as removal of all “unfreedoms” from all possible vulnerabilities, and the rights involve non-negotiable correlative obligations on the part of the State as the highest epitome of collectivity. Hence any approach to, or analytical framework of, development in the above sense must be a rights-based one. The paper seeks to provide a comprehensive meaning to the notion of social security from two complementary perspectives: one, from a human development standpoint and the other, from that of human rights. The core concerns of social security are perceived in terms of deficiency or capability deprivation and adversity or shocks arising out of contingencies and eventualities. The human development perspective emphasizes the need to address poverty manifested in various forms of deprivations rather than a single measure of income or consumption deficiency. And this can be achieved only if the situation of poverty is interpreted as a failure of entitlements. The notion of “capability” therefore assumes critical importance in advancing human development. All measures to improve capabilities are brought under the notion of Basic Social Security. Conversely, all measures to address situations of adversity are categorized as Contingent Social Security. Viewed in this way, the human development paradigm stands on the premise that everyone has a right to development, where development is seen as removal of all “unfreedoms” from all possible vulnerabilities, and the rights involve non-negotiable correlative obligations on the part of the State as the highest epitome of collectivity. Hence any approach to, or analytical framework of, development in the above sense must be a rights-based one. The paper seeks to provide a comprehensive meaning to the notion of social security from two complementary perspectives: one, from a human development standpoint and the other, from that of human rights. The core concerns of social security are perceived in terms of deficiency or capability deprivation and adversity or shocks arising out of contingencies and eventualities. The human development perspective emphasizes the need to address poverty manifested in various forms of deprivations rather than a single measure of income or consumption deficiency. And this can be achieved only if the situation of poverty is interpreted as a failure of entitlements. The notion of “capability” therefore assumes critical importance in advancing human development. All measures to improve capabilities are brought under the notion of Basic Social Security. Conversely, all measures to address situations of adversity are categorized as Contingent Social Security. Viewed in this way, the human development paradigm stands on the premise that everyone has a right to development, where development is seen as removal of all “unfreedoms” from all possible vulnerabilities, and the rights involve non-negotiable correlative obligations on the part of the State as the highest epitome of collectivity. Hence any approach to, or analytical framework of, development in the above sense must be a rights-based one. The paper seeks to provide a comprehensive meaning to the notion of social security from two complementary perspectives: one, from a human development standpoint and the other, from that of human rights. The core concerns of social security are perceived in terms of deficiency or capability deprivation and adversity or shocks arising out of contingencies and eventualities. The human development perspective emphasizes the need to address poverty manifested in various forms of deprivations rather than a single measure of income or consumption deficiency. And this can be achieved only if the situation of poverty is interpreted as a failure of entitlements. The notion of “capability” therefore assumes critical importance in advancing human development. All measures to improve capabilities are brought under the notion of Basic Social Security. Conversely, all measures to address situations of adversity are categorized as Contingent Social Security. Viewed in this way, the human development paradigm stands on the premise that everyone has a right to development, where development is seen as removal of all “unfreedoms” from all possible vulnerabilities, and the rights involve non-negotiable correlative obligations on the part of the State as the highest epitome of collectivity. Hence any approach to, or analytical framework of, development in the above sense must be a rights-based one. The paper seeks to provide a comprehensive meaning to the notion of social security from two complementary perspectives: one, from a human development standpoint and the other, from that of human rights. The core concerns of social security are perceived in terms of deficiency or capability deprivation and adversity or shocks arising out of contingencies and eventualities. The human development perspective emphasizes the need to address poverty manifested in various forms of deprivations rather than a single measure of income or consumption deficiency. And this can be achieved only if the situation of poverty is interpreted as a failure of entitlements. The notion of “capability” therefore assumes critical importance in advancing human development. All measures to improve capabilities are brought under the notion of Basic Social Security. Conversely, all measures to address situations of adversity are categorized as Contingent Social Security. Viewed in this way, the human development paradigm stands on the premise that everyone has a right to development, where development is seen as removal of all “unfreedoms” from all possible vulnerabilities, and the rights involve non-negotiable correlative obligations on the part of the State as the highest epitome of collectivity. Hence any approach to, or analytical framework of, development in the above sense must be a rights-based one.