{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.02956989247311828, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0, 'mean_word_length': 5.588495575221239, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Options of public income support for the unemployed in the Philippines and social protection

How can the income support for the unemployed Filipino workers be improved? The study analyzes both arguments in favor of, and against each of the following programs: unemployment insurance, unemployment assistance, severance pay, unemployment insurance savings accounts, public works, and self-employment programs. In doing so, it addresses the following questions: How does a candidate program interact with other labor market institutions? Does the program respond to a country's income shocks such as recessions, and natural disasters? Does the country have sufficient administrative capacity to carry out a program? Does the program fit into existing formal, and informal mechanisms of social risk management? Is there a risk of disrupting, or displacing existing mechanisms, such as transfers between family members? Is the program attuned to the prevailing norms, and culture? The study concludes that all programs have certain advantages, and disadvantages - an argument for the multiplicity of programs and flexibility of their use. Nonetheless, to enhance income protection, the paper proposes a two-prong approach: a) the expansion of public works, and b) the introduction of a new program - individual savings accounts, i.e., either as unemployment insurance savings accounts, or comprehensive savings accounts covering contingencies such as education, health, housing, and old age.