Social exclusion and social security: the case of 
Zimbabwe 
EDWIN KASEKE1 
ABSTRACT 
The paper examines the problem of social exclusion in the provision 
of social security in Zimbabwe. After sketching a historical perspective 
of the problem of social exclusion in Zimbabwe, it is argued 
that social exclusion emanates largely from the orientation of social 
security which places emphasis on protecting persons employed in 
the formal sector. The reality in Zimbabwe, however, is that those 
employed in the formal sector constitute a small percentage of the 
population. Consequently, the majority are excluded from social 
security coverage. The paper also observes that there is a gender 
dimension to social exclusion as women are largely excluded from 
contributory social security schemes. The paper ends by calling for 
appropriate interventions in order to achieve inclusiveness in 
social security coverage. 
Introduction 
Zimbabwe is a fairly young developing country with a population of 
about 13 million people. It gained its Independence from Britain in April 
1980 after a prolonged war of liberation. The country is characterized by 
growing levels of poverty and unemployment. A poverty assessment 
study undertaken by the government in 1995 revealed that 62 per cent 
of the population were from poor households, that is, hoaseholds which 
were unable to meet their basic needs (Government of Zimbabwe 19%). 
The implementation of the controversial fast-track land redistribution 
1 School of Social Work, Harare, Zimbabwe 
VOL 18 NO 1 JANUARY 2003 JOURNAL OF SOCIAL DEVELOPMENT IN AFRICA 33
programme in 2000 led to the withdrawal of aid by most donors, including 
the International Monetary Fund and the World Bank. This has impacted 
negatively on the economy. Unemployment has also been rising at a 
frightening pace and is currently estimated to be around 50 per cent. 
The downturn in the economy has resulted in company closures and 
the massive retrenchment of workers, thus further worsening 
unemployment. This has heightened the problem of income insecurity, 
underscoring the need for comprehensive social protection. 
The concept of social exclusion/inclusion has become topical in the 
study of social policy as a result of the realization that some citizens do 
not benefit from national development efforts. According to Holzmann 
and Jorgensen (2000:21) there are five dimensions of social exclusion in 
society, namely: 
.. .exclusion from goods and services.. .labour market exclusion...; 
exclusion from land, a specific aspect of social exclusion in 
developing countries; exclusion from security which covers 
material and physical security; Social exclusion from human 
rights.... 
Social exclusion denotes a situation where some people benefit from a 
policy or programme whilst others, due to circumstances beyond their 
control, do not. In this paper social exclusion refers to exclusion from 
the material security provided by existing social security schemes. 
Access to social security is also a human rights issue and, therefore, 
exclusion from social security is, in fact, a denial of human rights. Social 
exclusion heightens the problem of income insecurity and undermines 
the capacity of some citizens to meet their basic needs. Thus social 
exclusion impacts negatively on human welfare and weakens the feeling 
of solidarity and togetherness in society. 
Overview of social security schemes in Zimbabwe 
In order to understand the problem of social exclusion in social security, 
it is necessary to give an overview of the major social security schemes 
that exist in Zimbabwe. The schemes include the Pensions and Other 
Benefits Scheme, the Accident Prevention and Workers Compensation 
Scheme, occupational pension schemes and the public assistance 
34 JOURNAL OF SOCIAL DEVELOPMENT IN AFRICA VOL 18 NO 1 JANUARY 2003
Kaseke/SOCIAL EXCLUSION IN ZIMBABWE 
programme. The Pensions and Other Benefits Scheme is a social 
insurance scheme that was introduced in October 1994. This scheme, 
which provides protection against the contingencies of the retirement, 
invalidity and death of the breadwinner, is administered by the National 
Social Security Authority. Coverage is extended to all those employed 
in the formal sector, excluding civil servants and the military. Domestic 
workers, the self-employed and those employed in the informal sector 
are also not covered. Both the employee and the employer contribute 3 
per cent of the employee's monthly insurable earnings up to a ceiling of 
$7000. The ceiling for insurable earnings remained pegged at $4000 for 
seven years and it was only changed to $7000 towards the end of 2001. 
The ceiling is still low, given hyper-inflation in the country. 
The second scheme is the Accident Prevention and Workers' 
Compensation Scheme, which provides protection against the 
contingencies of injury and death occurring at the work place. The 
scheme does not cover civil servants, domestic workers, casual workers 
and those employed in the informal sector. It is funded entirely from 
employer contributions at rates determined from time to time by the 
National Social Security Authority. The benefits payable include a 
disability pension, a widow or widower's pension and children's 
allowances. In addition, the scheme covers the costs for medical 
treatment and rehabilitation. The scheme also promotes health and 
safety at work as a way of reducing accidents at the workplace. Lastly 
among the contributory schemes, there are occupational pension 
schemes which are operated by employers and underwritten by private 
insurance companies. These schemes provide protection against 
retirement in the main, although some schemes cover the contingencies 
of disability and invalidity as well. 
The government also operates a non-contributory public assistance 
programme which provides assistance in cash or kind to destitute 
persons. The programme is primarily targetted at vulnerable groups 
such as the elderly, persons with disabilities, the chronically ill and 
dependants of indigent persons. The scheme is means-tested and is 
administered by the Department of Social Welfare. Applicants apply at 
their district office and usually home visits ate made by officials in order 
VOL 18 NO 1 JANUARY 2003 JOURNAL OF SOCIAL DEVELOPMENT IN AFRICA 35
to get a true picture of the applicant's circumstances. The programme is 
poorly funded and, as a result, only a few needy persons are assisted 
each year. 
There is also a non-contributory old age pension scheme for non- 
Africans over the age of 60 years which was introduced in 1936 (Clarke 
1977). However, the Oid Age Act was repealed in 1980 and no new 
benefits have been paid since then. Only those who were receiving 
benefits before April 1980 continue to receive them (Kaseke 1993). The 
number of those still receiving old age pension is now negligible as 
most have died. 
The problem of social exclusion contextualized 
Social exclusion in formal social security systems emanates from the 
fact that these systems are designed specifically to meet the needs of 
people employed in the formal sector. This has remained the major 
orientation of formal social security the world over. Early definitions of 
social security reflect this orientation. For instance, Walley (1972:9) 
defines social security as "the protection of standards which the worker 
has secured for himself and his family in his employment". The emphasis 
is, therefore, on protecting workers and their families and this is, in 
itself, exclusionary, as those who are not in formal employment are not 
covered. In the case of Zimbabwe those excluded include domestic 
workers, casual workers and those operating in the informal sector. 
Also excluded are the rural people who constitute 69 per cent of the 
country's population. The ILO (2000:29), however, has a more inclusive 
definition. It defines social security "as the protection which society 
provides for its members through a series of public measures: 
* to offset the absence or substantial reduction of income from work 
resulting from various contingencies (notably sickness, maternity, 
employment injury, unemployment, invalidity, old age and death of 
the breadwinner); 
* to provide people with health care and 
* to provide benefits for families with children. 
Despite the inclusiveness of this definition, programmatic intervention 
by the ILO or its member states still reflects the orientation of protecting 
36 JOURNAL OF SOCIAL DEVELOPMENT IN AFRICA VOL 18 NO 1 JANUARY 2003
Kaseke/SOCIAL EXCLUSION IN ZIMBABWE 
persons in formal employment. It is also apparent that the reference by 
the ILO to "income from work" is interpreted to mean income from 
formal employment. As a result, social security administrators have 
developed a particular mindset that is focused on developing social 
security systems for formal sector workers, notwithstanding the fact 
that only a minority of the labour force is in formal employment in 
developing countries. 
The rationale for excluding these groups is that they do not have 
regular or stable incomes, which makes it too risky to extend coverage 
to them. The problem is compounded by the fact that these groups 
would not have an employer component in their contributions. 
Consequently they would have to pay higher and unduly burdensome 
contributions in order to make the schemes viable. Alternatively, their 
contributions have to be subsidized by government if meaningful social 
protection is to be achieved. 
In examining the problem of social exclusion in social security in 
Zimbabwe, it is necessary to do so from a historical perspective. 
Examples of social exclusion can be cited in both colonial and postcolonial 
periods, as the following discussion will show. 
Colonial period (1890-1979) 
Social exclusion in social security during the colonial period was clearly 
evident and can be attributed to the policy of racial discrimination 
adoDted by successive colonial governments. Racial discrimination was 
based on the notion that the indigenous people were inferior and did 
not require social protection in the same way the white, settler 
community did. Consequently, social security schemes which were 
introduced during the colonial period were developed specifically for 
the benefit of the small white settler community. For example, only the 
non-African population was eligible for a means-tested old age pension 
which was provided for under the Old Age Pension Act of 1936 (Clarke 
1977). The scheme, therefore, excluded Africans purely on racial grounds. 
Even though the scheme was exclusively for non-Africans, not every 
non-African was eligible. As Clarke (1977) observes, non-Africans who 
VOL 18 NO 1 JANUARY 2003 JOURNAL OF SOCIAL DEVELOPMENT IN AFRICA 37
had lived in the country for less than 15 years were not eligible for an 
old age pension. 
The exclusionary nature of social security was also evident in 
occupational pensions. Like the old age pension scheme, occupational 
pensions were also introduced for the benefit of the non-African 
population. Africans were excluded because they were seen as temporary 
urban residents who were expected to retire to their rural homes. The 
underlying assumption was that Africans did not require pensions in 
order to meet their post-retirement consumption needs as they could 
fall back on traditional support systems. Occupational pensions for 
African workers were introduced gradually, particularly after World War 
II (Clarke 1977). However, because occupational pensions were not 
compulsory, many employers did not find it necessary to provide 
occupational pensions to their African workers. It is therefore not 
surprising that the Whitsun Foundation (1979) observes that less the 
50 per cent of African workers in the wage sector were covered by 
occupational pensions in 1976. Instead of receiving occupational 
pensions upon retirement, many African workers often received 
gratuities in cash or in kind. It is, therefore, apparent that the policy of 
racial discrimination led to social exclusion in social security. 
As if racial discrimination was not bad enough, African women 
experienced high levels of sexual discrimination resulting in their being 
marginalized. Riddell (1981:43) observes that the "demand for male 
workers in the wage sector, coupled with the belief that a woman's role 
lies in childbearing, has led to the extreme imbalance in access to 
schooling for African men and women." This explains why there were 
few African women in formal employment. The women who were in 
formal employment were rarely considered permanent workers because 
they had to break service in order to go on maternity leave. Consequently, 
many women could not be members of occupational pension schemes. 
Post-Independence period (1980 to date) 
At Independence the government outlawed the policy of racial 
discrimination which was the basis of social exclusion during the colonial 
period. Because the past has a bearing on the present, however, the 
38 JOURNAL OF SOCIAL DEVELOPMENT IN AFRICA VOL 18 NO 1 JANUARY 2003
Kaseke/SOCIAL EXCLUSION IN ZIMBABWE 
impact of the policy is still being felt 21 years after Independence. The 
government moved swiftly to repeal the Old Age Pension Act because 
of its discriminatory provisions but, in so doing, denied Africans the 
opportunity to benefit from the scheme. The argument for repealing the 
Act was that government did not have resources to finance an inclusive 
old age pension scheme. This was a hasty decision as this was a 
legitimate area to spend public resources on and should have constituted 
one of the key priority areas for funding. As pointed out earlier on, 
whites who were receiving old age pensions before April 1980 continue 
to receive them. Thus the exclusionary nature of the Old Age Pension 
Scheme has not been totally eliminated. 
Occupational pensions have remained largely exclusionary for two 
major reasons. First, there is still no law that makes it mandatory for 
employers to provide occupational pensions for their employees. 
Consequently some employers, particularly those operating small 
enterprises, do not have occupational pension schemes for their workers. 
Some employers provide occupational pension schemes only for certain 
categories of their employees, usually salaried staff. Shopfloor workers 
tend to be excluded yet these are the ones who need the social protection 
most. 
Secondly, occupational pension schemes have been established 
almost exclusively for workers in formal employment. Consequently, 
informal sector workers and the self-employed, including small-scale 
farmers, tend to be excluded. Although a recent innovation has resulted 
in some small-scale farmers affiliated to the Zimbabwe Farmers Union 
being covered by a pension scheme which is underwritten by a private 
insurance company, the membership, however, constitutes a very small 
percentage of the small-scale farmers. Thus, occupational pension 
schemes remain a preserve of those employed in the formal sector. The 
lack of portability of occupational pensions also disadvantages those 
who change employers. Upon retirement, such workers have no 
meaningful social protection. In essence, they are excluded from material 
security. 
The introduction of the Pension and Other Benefits Scheme provided 
an opportunity to achieve inclusiveness in social security coverage. At 
VOL 18 NO 1 JANUARY 2003 JOURNAL OF SOCIAL DEVELOPMENT IN AFRICA 39
its inception, it was envisaged that the scheme would be introduced in 
phases. In the first phase, coverage was extended to all employed in the 
formal sector, excluding civil servants and the military. In the second 
phase, coverage is to be extended to civil servants, the military and 
domestic workers whilst the self-employed will be covered in the third 
phase. Unfortunately, as at the end of February, 2002, the scheme was 
still in phase one, seven years after its establishment. Although plans 
are underway to extend coverage to civil servants, it appears, however, 
that the self-employed and informal sector workers will remain excluded 
for a long time as there are no concrete plans in place to cover them. 
Currently, the scheme has a total membership of about 1.4 million (Mbanje 
2001). This represents about 26 per cent of the country's labour force. 
It can be argued that the exclusion of public servants in phase one 
was motivated by the government's desire to keep its wages bill low. 
The government did not want to worsen its growing budget deficit, 
given the imperatives of the structural adjustment programme it was 
implementing. Although public servants have a reliable occupational 
pension scheme it does not, however, provide adequate protection 
against the contingency of retirement, given their low salaries. The 
government has therefore, compromised the social protection of its 
public servants by delaying their participation in the Pensions and 
Other Benefits Scheme. 
Some workers who are supposed to be covered by the Pensions and 
Other Benefits Scheme are not being covered because of noncompliance 
by their employers. Such employers, usually in new small 
businesses, have deliberately not registered their employees with the 
National Soci al Security Authority in order to avoid paying their portion 
of the contributions. Furthermore, some employers deduct contributions 
from their employees but fail to remit the funds to the National Social 
Security Authority. The employers use the contributions as operating 
capital and employees realise that there are not covered only when they 
attempt to claim benefits. A combination of the effects of the harsh 
economic climate and pure greed is making some employers default on 
their payments to the National Social Security Authority. Thus, noncompliance 
by employers creates social exclusion in social security. 
40 JOURNAL OF SOCIAL DEVELOPMENT IN AFRICA VOL 18 NO 1 JANUARY 2003
Kaseke/SOCIAL EXCLUSION IN ZIMBABWE 
There is also social exclusion inherent in the Accident Prevention and 
Workers Compensation Scheme. Apart from the fact that the scheme 
restricts coverage to persons employed in the formal sector (excluding 
civil servants) its design promotes the exclusion of some of the intended 
beneficiaries. This arises from the fact that the responsibility for notifying 
the National Social Security Authority of an accident that has occurred 
at the workplace rests with employers, some of whom do not report all 
injuries occurring at their workplaces. Often only fatal and very bad 
accidents are reported. Some employers are reluctant to report every 
accident because they are penalized by the National Social Security 
Authority for a poor safety record. The penalty is in the form of increased 
contributions. Workers are also reluctant to report such cases for fear 
of reprisals from their employers. Therefore, they suffer in silence as 
their employers can easily replace them, given the high unemployment 
rate (Kaseke 1995). 
Inequality in society invariably leads to social exclusion. The gender 
dimension in the problem of social exclusion in social security bears 
testimony to this. This stems largely from the fact that women constitute 
the majority among the groups that are currently excluded from coverage. 
Historically, women have always been under-represented in formal 
employment owing to lack of equal opportunities in education. 
Consequently, there are fewer women than men with marketable skills, a 
situation which precludes women from participating meaningfully in 
the formal sector. Failure to participate in the formal sector means they 
cannot be covered by contributory formal social security schemes. 
Although the situation has been improving since the mid 1980s, there 
are still more men than women in formal employment. According to the 
Government of Zimbabwe (2000) there were only 526,331 female 
employees compared to 1,309,295 male employees in 1999. This is not 
withstanding the fact that women constitute about 51 per cent of the 
country's total population. 
Apart from the issue of coverage, social exclusion can also be seen 
in the scope of social security in Zimbabwe. An analysis of existing 
social security schemes in Zimbabwe shows that only a few selected 
contingencies are covered. Of particular concern is the fact that the 
VOL 18 NO 1 JANUARY 2003 JOURNAL OF SOCIAL DEVELOPMENT IN AFRICA 41
social security system does not protect women against the contingency 
of maternity, apart from a statutory provision which makes it mandatory 
for employers to allow women employees to go on maternity leave. No 
maternity benefits are payable. Furthermore, there is a tendency among 
some employers to discriminate against women in the childb$aring age 
in order to avoid the disruptions associated with maternity leave. As 
Kawewe (2001:470) observes "women experiencedefacto discrimination 
when employers hire them under the assumption that they will eventually 
become pregnant and take maternity leave and so are a bad investment" 
This marginalizes women and contributes to their exclusion from social 
security coverage. 
The rural poor 
The rural poor are excluded from contributory social security schemes 
because they operate outside formal employment. They are also excluded 
from non-contributory social security schemes meant to assist the poor 
because of poor targetting. The public assistance scheme restricts 
assistance to specific target groups, namely older persons, the 
chronically ill, those with disabilities and dependants of the indigent. 
Those falling outside these target groups are not the primary focus and 
can only be assisted in exceptional circumstances and at the discretion 
of the officials. For instance, young and able-bodied persons are 
discriminated against on the grounds that giving them assistance will 
create dependency. Furthermore, it is assumed that opportunities for 
self-reliance exist and consequently, there is, no need for state assistance. 
The reality, however, is that there is growing poverty and unemployment 
and opportunities for self-reliance are diminishing by the day. It is 
therefore unrealistic to assume that the young and the able-bodied do 
not require state assistance. They also need social protection. 
The public assistance scheme also marginalizes the rural poor in that 
assistance is biased in favour of urban residents. Destitution is largely 
seen as an urban phenomenon and this becomes the basis for their 
exclusion. Furthermore, the rural poor have difficulty in accessing 
benefits because their homes are not located within easy reach of the 
offices (Kaseke 1998). Potential beneficiaries have to travel long 
42 JOURNAL OF SOCIAL DEVELOPMENT IN AFRICA VOL 18 NO 1 JANUARY 2003
Kaseke/SOCIAL EXCLUSION IN ZIMBABWE 
distances in order to access benefits (Kaseke 2001). However, because 
of poverty, many are unable to raise the bas fare needed and are therefore 
unable to benefit. Walking to the workplace is not an option for many of 
the intended beneficiaries such as the elderly or the disabled. 
Although the intention is not to exclude the rural poor, the design of 
the programme renders it exclusionary. The problem is compounded by 
shortages of staff and other resources which preclude the officials from 
attending to applications for assistance in time. One of the serious 
consequences of resource constraints is that officials are forced to 
provide benefits selectively and as a result most of the intended 
beneficiaries do not benefit. Thus, the failure by government to allocate 
adequate resources to finance the non-contributory social security 
scheme makes the scheme exclusionary. 
The problem of social exclusion in formal social security forces 
excluded groups to turn to non-formal social security systems for their 
social protection. These include both traditional kinship-based networks 
and neighbourhood-based mutual aid arrangements. Whilst these are 
more inclusive than formal social security systems, they offer only the 
most rudimentary social protection. Most contingencies today call for 
the mobilization of resources which most non-formal social security 
systems do not have. Thus, non-formal social security systems represent 
a second-best option for social protection and most people would ideally 
want to be covered by formal social security systems. 
Hie way forward 
The existence of social exclusion undermines the pursuit of social justice 
and egalitarian ideals. The challenge for the government is, therefore, 
to achieve inclusiveness in social security provision. Government should 
reject the notion that social security should be confined to those in the 
formal sector only. It should accept a mixed system of social protection 
(that is, the co-existence of contributory and non-contributory 
schemes). First, in line with notion of social justice, the government 
should introduce a means-tested or universal social pension for people 
aged over 60 years funded from general government revenues. This 
would be similar to the universal social pension schemes in Botswana 
VOL 18 NO 1 JANUARY 2003 JOURNAL OF SOCIAL DEVELOPMENT IN AFRICA 43
and Mauritius and the means-tested pension in South Africa (Fultz and 
Pieris 1999). 
As pointed out earlier on, Zimbabwe used to operate a means-tested 
old age pension for non-Africans over the age of 60 years. This old age 
pension should be reintroduced under new legislation that promotes 
inclusiveness. The definition of old age, however, to be revisited in 
view of the declining life expectancy as a result of the AIDS pandemic. 
The age threshold should, for the time being, be reduced to 55 years, 
because by keeping it at 60 years means that only the few who are lucky 
enough to reach that age will benefit. This would defeat the purpose of 
an old age pension. Furthermore, it is noted that the impact of the 
current unfavourable economic environment will be felt for a long time, 
even after political stability has been achieved. Consequently, the 
government may find it more appealing (from a direct cost perspective) 
to opt for a means-tested old age pension scheme as opposed to a 
universal pension. 
Although Zimbabwe does not have the kind of resources that 
Botswana, Mauritius and South Africa have, it is still possible to do so 
if it renegotiates its priorities and improves the management of its 
resources. Whilst Fultz and Pieris (1999:50) observe that this can not be 
a short-term goal for the majority of the countries in southern Africa, 
they however point out that "it would be useful for long-term planning 
purposes to accept it in principle as the primary form of social protection 
for those with no earnings". It should be noted that Zimbabwe has a lot 
of potential and the current economic malaise should be seen as 
temporary. An improvement in the economic climate would attract 
investment back in the country. Improved governance and accountability 
will ensure that the scarce resources are used primarily on programmes 
that improve the quality of life of the majority. 
Second, the Pension and Other Benefits Scheme should provide 
basic protection to workers in formal employment. However, there is a 
need to enforce the provisions of the Pensions and Other Benefits 
Scheme so that all eligible employers register with the National Social 
Security Authority and remit contributions as per schedule. The National 
Social Security Authority should employ an adequate number of 
44 JOURNAL OF SOCIAL DEVELOPMENT IN AFRICA VOL 18 NO 1 JANUARY 2003
Kaseke/SOCIAL EXCLUSION IN ZIMBABWE 
inspectors who should make contact with all employers. Currently, the 
National Social Security Authority personnel is very thin on the ground 
as inspectors who have resigned in the last two years have not all been 
replaced. Furthermore, there is a need to educate workers on their rights 
and on the negative impact of non-compliance by employers. This would 
encourage workers to become whistle blowers in order to protect their 
welfare. 
Government should also make it possible for persons operating 
outside the formal sector to join contributory formal social security 
schemes. This can be achieved by introducing voluntary membership 
to existing schemes. However, because incomes for people operating 
outside the formal sector are often low, their contributions would not be 
sufficient to guarantee meaningful social protection or even the viability 
of the schemes. Consequently, there would be need for cross-subsidies. 
This would also facilitate the redistribution of income and therefore 
narrow the divide between the rich and the poor. 
There is a need to extend coverage to other contingencies such as 
maternity and sickness so as to make social security schemes more 
relevant to the needs of women. This would address the major concerns 
of women workers. Where it is not possible for women working in the 
informal sector to participate in mainstream schemes, micro-insurance 
would be the answer. Important lessons can be drawn from the United 
Medical Aid Schemes in Dar es Salaam (UMASIDA) which provide 
primary health care and preventive services to those in the informal 
sector (Fultz and Pieris 1999). Under these schemes, informal-sector 
workers have organized themselves into associations which are 
responsible for collecting contributions and negotiating with doctors 
(Fultz and Pieris 1999). Administrative costs in this scheme are lower 
and the services are more responsive to the needs of informal sector 
workers. Government needs to,create growth paths for informal mutual 
aid arrangements so that they can be transformed into formal social 
security schemes. This route offers the greatest potential for achieving 
inclusiveness in the coverage of social security. 
The government also needs to redesign its public assistance 
programme so that it becomes more inclusive in its targetting. Whilst it 
VOL 18 NO 1 JANUARY 2003 JOURNAL OF SOCIAL DEVELOPMENT IN AFRICA 45
is not disputable that vulnerable groups require special protection there 
is, however, a need to ensure that every person enjoys a reasonable 
level of social protection. The government should accept that it has an 
obligation to assist needy individuals. This should provide sufficient 
justification for the government to allocate adequate resource for the 
public assistance programme. In order to make the programme more 
effective, it should be designed in such a way that it enables beneficiaries 
toexit from poverty. Thus, public assistance should be seen as a means 
towards poverty reduction. 
Conclusion 
The discussion has shown that social security schemes in Zimbabwe 
are exclusionary and that the problem of social exclusion dates back to 
the colonial period. During the colonial period, social security was 
deliberately made exclusionary on grounds of race and this contributed 
to the marginalization of the African population. However, the source 
of social exclusion in social security today is the orientation of social 
security itself which places the emphasis on protecting workers in formal 
employment who constitute a small percentage of the country's labour 
force. The majority of the population is without any formal social 
protection. This has made social security elitist in that it protects those 
who are better off. Given the fact that Zimbabwe's economy is agrobased, 
the majority will continue to operate outside formal sector 
employment for a long-time to come. Social exclusion in social security 
will therefore remain in force unless a mixed system of social protection 
is developed. 
In order to address the problem of social exclusion, a tiered pension 
system is needed. According to Fultz and Pieris (1999) the first tier 
should provide a means-tested or universal benefit, with the second 
tier being based on a mandatory social insurance scheme. The third tier 
is a voluntary scheme designed to supplement the basic benefit. The 
benefits provided in the first tier are wholly funded from public revenues, 
which means that every year parliament has to debate and approve the 
al location for a basic means-tested or universal pension. The government 
will have to decide which of the two options (means-tested or universal) 
46 JOURNAL OF SOCIAL DEVELOPMENT IN AFRICA VOL 18 NO 1 JANUARY 2003
Kaseke/SOCIAL EXCLUSION IN ZIMBABWE 
is more cost-effective. A universal benefit is desirable as it will win the 
support of a cross-section of the population. This will help to develop 
political support for the programme. 
The second tier should promote solidarity and risk-sharing and this 
would be realized through a pay-as-you-go funding or a partial funding 
arrangement which promotes the redistribution of income from wellpaid 
workers to lowly-paid workers (Fultz and Pieris 1999). The advantage 
of the third tier is that it enables individuals to enjoy a reasonable 
standard of living. It also reduces dependence on the basic and noncontributory 
pension. The advantage of developing a tiered pension 
system is that it addresses the problem of social exclusion by ensuring 
that there is something for everyone in society. By so doing, it extends 
social protection to everyone, making it possible for individuals to meet 
their basic needs. Ultimately, this will promote national integration which 
is a prerequisite for peace and stability in society as well as laying the 
foundation for economic stability. 
References 
Clarke, D. 1977. The Economies of Old Age Subsistence in Rhodesia, 
Gwelo, Mambo Press 
Fultz, E. and Pieris, B. 1999. Social Security Schemes in Southern Africa, 
Harare, International Labour Office/S AM AT 
Holzmann, R. and Jorgensen, S. 2000. Social Risk Management: A New 
Conceptual Framework for Social Protection and Beyond, 
Washington, The World Bank 
ILO 2000. World Labour Report, Geneva, ILO 
Kaseke, E. 1993. Rural Social Security Needs in Zimbabwe, Harare, 
School of Social Work 
Kaseke, E. 1995. Social security. In N. Hall and R. Mupedziswa, (eds.) 
Social Policy and Administration in Zimbabwe. Harare, School of Social 
Work 
Kaseke, E. 1998. Zimbabwe. In J. Dixon and D. Macarov, (eds.) Poverty: 
A Persistent Global Reality. London, Routledge 
VOL 18 NO 1 JANUARY Z0O3 JOURNAL OF SOCIAL DEVELOPMENT IN AFRICA 47
Kaseke, E. 2001. Local Social Development in Zimbabwe. In: A. Kidanu 
and A. Kumssa, (eds.) Social Development Issues in Africa. Nairobi, 
United Nations Centre for Regional Development 
Kawewe, S. 2001. The impact of gender disempowerment on the welfare 
of Zimbabwean women. International Social Work, 44 4 471-485 
Mbanje, R.E. 2001. Social Security in Zimbabwe: Policy Priorities and 
Challenges (unpublished). Workshop on Social Security at Nyanga, 
17th-18th May, School of Social Work 
Riddell, R. 1981. Report of the Commission of Inquiry into Incomes, 
Prices and Conditions of Service, Harare, Government Printer 
Walley, J. 1972. Social Security: Another British Failure? London, 
Charles Knight and Company 
Whitsun Foundation 1979. Social Security Study. Harare, Whitsun 
Foundation 
Zimbabwe, Government of, 1988. Poverty in Zimbabwe, Harare, Central 
Statistical Office 
Zimbabwe, Government of, 1996. Poverty Assessment Study Survey: 
Preliminary Report, Harare, Ministry of Public Service, Labour and 
Social Welfare 
Zimbabwe, Government of, 2000,1999 Indicator Monitoring—Labour 
Force Survey. Harare, Central Statistical Office 
48 JOURNAL OF SOCIAL DEVELOPMENT IN AFRICA VOL 18 NO 1 JANUARY 20O3