Reforming Algeria’s social protection system

Public policies, community participation and the potential for universal basic income

Research paper Updated 8 November 2023 ISBN: 978 1 78413 575 1 DOI: 10.55317/9781784135751

People stand in front of social housing apartment blocks at an event to launch the initiative.

Dr Walid Merouani

Economist, Research Center for Applied Economics for Development (CREAD)

Dr Hayat Messekher

Project consultant and professor, Ecole Normale Supérieure of Bouzaréah, Algiers

Adel Hamaizia

Former Associate Fellow, Middle East and North Africa Programme

Email Adel

Mahrez Ait Belkacem

Social protection project consultant, Member of the Cercle d'Action et de Réflexion sur l'Entreprise (CARE)

As demonstrated by the country’s constitution and its acceptance of the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), Algeria is committed to tackling inequality and social exclusion. However, the current social protection system – inclusive of social security, healthcare and pensions, among other aspects – is struggling under increasing financial strain.

The lack of a strategic approach to social protection policies is impacting Algeria’s citizens. This paper assesses the country’s current social protection space and explores the options for improving outcomes and funding, including universal basic income, raising contributory revenues through the expansion of social security coverage, and combating illicit financial flows.

This research paper provides the first comprehensive mapping of the social protection space in Algeria, highlighting the broad activities led by government entities and the important role of homegrown civil society organizations (CSOs) and community-based organizations. The paper also provides a snapshot of public opinion on key social protection issues. With increasing demand for social protection across the region, the assessment here illustrates a range of issues and solutions that are applicable not only to Algeria but across the Middle East.

Download PDF

02 An overview of the welfare state in Algeria

The Algerian social protection system has significantly changed since its creation in 1945. Today, it is comprised of various components such as social assistance, social insurance, employment programmes and community-based social protection.

The history of social spending in Algeria

The Algerian social security system was created in 1945, shortly after the establishment of the French social protection system. During the colonial period, the system focused on the local French population while only limited benefits were available to Algerian citizens. After independence in 1962, Algeria made numerous reforms to the system it had inherited from France, including the expansion of coverage to vulnerable populations and the introduction of numerous social welfare laws. As a result, Algerian citizens now benefit from several non-contributory social protection programmes, some of which are universal while others are targeted programmes.

However, at no point has a government implemented an overall social protection strategy. Instead, governments have largely established policies reactively and as emergency measures. With health and education being the priorities of the Algerian population after independence, the government introduced two major laws: the free healthcare law of 1974, which provides all citizens with free healthcare in public hospitals,17 and the education law of 1976.18 At the time of Algeria’s independence, only 20 per cent of school-age children (between 6 and 16 years old) were enrolled in schools. This rate increased to 47.2 per cent in 1966, to 70.4 per cent in 1977 and to 80 per cent in 1987.19

Today, the Algerian government also provides its citizens with food and energy subsidies. While time-series data on subsidies are not available, some sources estimate that the total budget for subsidies was 3.2 trillion Algerian dinar (DZD) in 2021, or $23.7 billion.20 Of this figure, 85 per cent went towards energy, 13 per cent to food and 2 per cent to water.21 Since 2010, the government has been incrementally reducing energy subsidies, which has in turn gradually raised fuel prices. There is an ongoing debate on subsidy reform taking place inside Algeria. The Office of National Statistics conducted a ‘light’ household budget survey in 2021 to inform the analysis of the subsidies reform working group:

In Algeria, there are two types of subsidies and social transfers: implicit subsidies and explicit subsidies. Implicit subsidies represent, on the one hand, the difference between the average unit cost of production and the average selling price of certain products and, on the other hand, the waiver by the state of certain internal and external duties and taxes. These subsidies do not appear in the state budget and are not expenditure items in the budget. Unlike explicit subsidies, also known as social transfers, which appear as budgetary expenditure (being a direct financial cost) made directly by the state for the benefit of households or companies.22

After independence, the social insurance system extended coverage of work-related risks to Algerian workers and their families. In 1983, the country passed a social security law to unify the social insurance schemes and ensure that all Algerian workers equally benefited.23 Today, affiliated workers are covered against sickness, work injury, maternity, invalidity and death, and also receive state pensions.24 While all categories of workers are included in legislation, the effective coverage remains low and, in 2019, was estimated at only 58 per cent of the population, according to available data.25 As mentioned earlier, this means that 42 per cent of workers are not affiliated with social security and are at risk of losing their income if any social risks were to occur.

Figure 1. Public expenditure on social protection excluding health (latest available data for each country) (% of GDP)

— Source: International Labour Organization (2023), ‘World Social Protection Data Dashboards’, https://www.social-protection.org/gimi/WSPDB.action?id=19 (accessed 17 Feb. 2023).

Figure 1 shows that Algeria spent 8.9 per cent of its GDP on social protection in 2016. This figure is higher than Saudi Arabia, the world’s largest oil exporting country, and also higher than the average for the Arab states (4.6 per cent). However, Algeria spends less than Egypt and the global average, at 11.2 per cent and 12.9 per cent of GDP, respectively. Given the unmet needs of vulnerable populations, there is room for improvement in Algeria to increase social protection expenditure and investment in human well-being and development.

Figure 2. Health expenditure (% of GDP) since 2006

— Source: World Bank (2022), ‘World Bank Open Data > Current health expenditure (% of GDP) – Algeria’, 30 January 2022, https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/SH.XPD.CHEX.GD.ZS?locations=DZ.

Figure 2 shows that Algeria’s current health expenditure represented around 5 per cent to 6 per cent of GDP in the decade up to 2018. This estimate is higher than the average expenditure in the Middle East and North Africa (MENA) region. Although compared to Saudi Arabia and Tunisia, for example, Algeria spent less on health in 2017 and 2018. Algeria spent more than Morocco during the same period. The level of expenditure may reflect the Algerian government’s priorities in terms of social policy budgets. However, it is possible that Algeria may increase its investment in the healthcare system in order to improve population health and well-being in accordance with SDG 3.

Algeria’s spending on education, as a percentage of GDP, is high compared to other countries and regions, including the average for the MENA region and for middle-income countries (see Figure 3). Algeria’s education expenditure as a share of GDP is lower than Saudi Arabia’s in 2017 and 2019, while Algeria’s spending is higher than Morocco for the same period.

Figure 3. Total government expenditure on education (% of GDP)

— Source: World Bank (2022), ‘World Bank Open Data > Government expenditure on education, total (% of government expenditure) – Algeria’, 24 October 2022, https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/SE.XPD.TOTL.GB.ZS?locations=DZ.

In addition to those introduced in the health and education sectors, Algeria has launched a number of other social assistance programmes and employment policies. In the early 1990s – the beginning of Algeria’s so-called ‘black decade’ – the country faced a difficult economic situation where numerous firms were forced to close or went bankrupt. This dramatically increased the unemployment rate and the vulnerability-to-poverty ratio among the general population. Under the guidance of the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund’s structural adjustment programmes, the government implemented cash transfers, cash-for-work and employment programmes, as well as entrepreneurship support programmes as measures to support unemployed people to enter the labour market or to prevent people already employed from losing their jobs. These included various measures, from training to job search assistance programmes, subsidies, supported employment opportunities and programmes to support entrepreneurial activities.26 The Social Development Agency (ADS), supervised by the Ministry of Solidarity, Family and Women’s Affairs, administered the majority of these measures. The Ministry of Labour, Employment and Social Security also administered some programmes through its National Employment Agency (ANEM). While data are not available for the cost of all of these programmes, the statistics in Table 1 highlight the evolution of the budgets of the ADS’s employment programmes:

Table 1. Budgets for ADS employment programmes ($ million)

Year	IAIG	ESIL/DAIS	CPE/PID	TUP-HIMO	Blanche Algérie (White Algeria)
1997	31.24	0	0	8.61	0
1998	36.43	0	2.04	9.78	0
1999	37.96	17.52	11.83	11.53	0
2000	36.79	14.60	6.64	0.29	0
2001	42.34	17.52	3.29	19.13	0
2002	49.13	15.99	2.19	27.89	0
2003	53.58	16.42	4.45	23.21	0
2004	57.96	16.50	56.72	20.59	0
2005	59.06	14.67	60.88	11.97	2.85
2006	69.93	24.46	42.49	27.81	10.80
2007	84.68	29.57	69.42	28.84	15.84
2008	87.52	32.34	64.46	21.97	11.17
2009	85.48	33.58	23.80	23.65	13.50
2010	89.28	113.88	76.14	22.48	15.77
2011	89.35	79.13	66.58	42.49	55.92
2013		289.45
2014		289.45	65.63	24.16	117.68
2015		290.03
2016		208.93	36.65	107.60	45.99
2017		142.79			0
2018		163.01		7.42	0

Source: Agency of Social Development and Office of National Statistics (2018), unpublished internal documents.

Note: IAIG = indemnity of participating to general activities (l’indemnité pour participation aux activités d’intérêt général); ESIL/DAIS = seasonal employment of local initiative/programme of activity and social insertion (emploi saisonniers d’initiative locale/dispositif d’activité et d’insertion sociale); CPE/PID = pre-employment contract/programme of graduate placement (contrat pre-emploi/programme d’insertion des diplomés); TUP-HIMO = work of public utility with high employment intensity (travaux d’utilité publique à haute intensité de main d’œuvre); Blanche Algérie is a programme of cash for work that focuses on public infrastructure cleaning activities. Table 1 uses the exchange rate of 17 February 2023, where DZD 1 equals $0.0073.

Expenditure has increased for all programmes. While no impact evaluation has been completed for these programmes, the data show the creation of a considerable number of jobs.27 For instance, the number of jobs created by the programme for graduate placement (PID)28 grew from 7,054 in 1998 to 44,626 in 2011 and 54,000 in 2014, before decreasing again to 33,879 in 2016.29 However, since 2019, all employment programmes ceased, and were replaced by unemployment cash transfers in 2022. While the government aimed to facilitate current beneficiaries to find permanent jobs, today the country faces the problem of a skills mismatch – a problem that has not been solved.30 Employment programmes did not evaluate beneficiaries’ skills and the suitability of their education to new jobs. As a result, beneficiaries of employment programmes often do not possess the specific skills required by employers.

While figures show that Algeria has achieved considerable progress in social protection, by some indicators Algeria’s welfare state system is insufficient compared to the global average.

In summary, while figures show that Algeria has achieved considerable progress in social protection, by some indicators Algeria’s welfare state system is insufficient compared to the global average (see for instance social protection expenditure as a percentage of GDP in Figure 1). Moreover, such a macro-overview of the welfare state obfuscates inefficiencies across social protection programmes.

Mapping social protection in Algeria

Today, the Algerian social protection system encompasses several fragmented programmes that are administered by different institutions. Since Algeria’s independence, successive governments have implemented various social protection policies with the aim of responding to Algeria’s social and socio-economic problems such as poverty, unemployment and food security. But, as mentioned earlier, no government to date has implemented a forward-looking and long-term social protection strategy. As a result, Algeria’s social protection system has become incoherent and disjointed. In order to provide a comprehensive picture, Table 2 maps the Algerian social protection system with all its components. The table also provides an overview of the three main components of social protection, namely social insurance, social assistance, and informal and community-based social protection. Financial data are not available for all programmes.

Table 2. Mapping of the social protection system in Algeria

Category/ instruments	Benefits	Targeted population	Financing	Institution	Budget/expenditure (latest available data)	Additional information/ challenges
1. Social insurance
Social insurance for salaried workers	Sickness, maternity, invalidity, death, work injury	Salaried workers	Worker contributions and state subsidies	National Social Insurance Fund for Salaried Workers (CNAS)	Income: estimated at DZD 440 billion ($3.2 billion). Expenditure: DZD 414 billion ($3.06 billion) in 201831	42 per cent of workers were not covered in 2019 (Labour Force Survey); 5 million workers were insured in 201332
Social insurance for non-salaried workers	Sickness, invalidity, death and pension	Self-employed and employers	Worker contributions	National Social Insurance Fund for Non-Employees (CASNOS)	Income: DZD 35.5 billion ($262 million) in 2013. Expenditure: DZD 31.6 ($233 million) billion in 201333	Coverage is low and estimated at 24.4 per cent in 2014 (Labour Force Survey); 1.2 million workers enrolled in 201334
Retirement/ pension	Subsidies to pension and survivor pension	Salaried retirees	Worker contributions and state subsidies	National Fund for Retirement		Maximum replacement rate of 80 per cent
Unemployment insurance	Unemployment benefit	Unemployed person	Worker contributions	National Fund for Unemployment Insurance (CNAC)	Income: DZD 24 billion ($177million) in 2013. Expenditure: DZD 20 billion ($147 million) in 201335	Restricted access: only workers with permanent contracts are eligible for unemployment insurance; 1 million workers enrolled in 201336
Bad weather leave/unemployment programme	Leave and unemployment allowance	Employees in the building, public works and hydraulic sectors		National Fund for Paid Leave and Unemployment due to bad weather in the building, public works and hydraulic sectors (CACOBATH)		Very low coverage of workers due to the high informality in those target sectors
2. Social assistance
2.1. Inactive social policy
Unconditional cash transfers
Cash transfer: allocation forfaitaire de solidarité (AFS)	Cash transfer of DZD 3,000 ($22.15)/month	Elderly and people with chronic diseases	State budget	Social Development Agency (ADS)		959,000 beneficiaries in 201937
Ramadan allowance	Lump sum of DZD 10,000 ($73.85)	Poor households	State budget	Ministry of Solidarity, Family and Women Conditions
Disability benefits
Cash transfer: AFS	Cash transfer of DZD 10,000 ($73.85)/month	People with 100 per cent disability rating (as decided by a doctor)	State budget	ADS		200,000 beneficiaries in 2018;38 334,000 in 201939
Disability allowance	Cash transfer DZD 4,000 ($29.54)/month	People with disabilities	State budget	Ministry of Solidarity, Family and Women Conditions
In-kind social assistance	Equipment for disabled people	People with disabilities	State budget	Ministry of Solidarity, Family and Women Conditions
Child and orphan protection
School allowance	Cash transfer	Children in schools	State budget	Ministry of Education
Free education and free books	In-kind benefit	Children in school	Ministry of Education	Ministry of Education
Childcare for orphans	Childcare	Orphans under 18 years	State budget	Ministry of Solidarity, Family and Women Conditions
Mujahideen pension	Pension	Mujahideen	State budget	Ministry of Mujahideen	While it was DZD 196 billion ($1.45 billion) in 2021, the state budget allocated to social transfers in support of the Mujahideen increased slightly to DZD 196.05 billion ($1.45 billion) in 202240
Programmes for the protection of women
In-kind social assistance	Legal and social aid	Women victims of gender violence	State budget	Ministry of Solidarity, Family and Women Conditions
Healthcare
Free healthcare	Healthcare (general and specialized) in public hospitals	Universal	State budget	Ministry of Health, Population and Hospital Reforms		Low supply pushes people to go to private hospitals that are not covered by social insurance
2.2. Active social policy
Active labour market policies for employees
Programme of graduate placement (PID)	Temporary job and cash for work	Young graduate	State budget	ADS		Programme cancelled
Programme of social integration (DAIS)	Temporary job and cash for work	Young people with and without qualification	State budget	ADS		Programme cancelled
Work of public utility with high employment intensity (TUP-HIMO)	Temporary job and cash for work	Unemployed persons regardless of age	State budget	ADS	DZD 4 billion ($29.54 million) in 201841
Blanch Algérie (White Algeria)	Temporary job and cash for work	Unemployed persons regardless of age	State budget	ADS
Community Development programme	Temporary job and cash for work	Targeting regions with need for infrastructure	State budget	ADS
National Employment Agency (ANEM) employment programme	Temporary job and cash for work	Young unemployed (there is a sub programme for each education level)	State budget	Ministry of Labour, Employment and Social Security		Programme cancelled
Unemployment allowance	Unemployment allowance: DZD 15,000 ($108) per month42	Youth unemployed	State budget	Ministry of Labour, Employment and Social Security		A new policy was implemented in 2022, offering a monthly amount of DZD 13,000 ($96) to eligible beneficiaries. Since January 2023, more than 1.9 million people are benefiting from the unemployment benefit revised upwards to DZD 15,000 ($110.78) per month43
Microcredit programmes
Entrepreneurship promotion and enterprise creation	Microcredit and technical support for young entrepreneurs	Vulnerable young unemployed	States budget, beneficiaries and banks	National Agency of Microcredit (ANGEM)
Enterprise creations/programmes for entrepreneurship
Entrepreneurship promotion & enterprise creation	Microcredit	Youth unemployed		ANAD (National Agency for Support and Development of Entrepreneurship)		This programme was previously administered by the Ministry of Labour through its National Agency of Support for Youth Employment (ANSEJ)
Entrepreneurship promotion & enterprise creation	Microcredit	Unemployed		CNAC
Education
Free education	Education at all levels	Universal	State budget	Ministry of Education, Ministry of Higher Education and Scientific Research and the Ministry of Vocational and Educational Training
Subsidies
Food subsidies		Universal	State budget		Total budget of subsidies estimated at DZD 3.2 billion ($23.6 million) in 2021; 85 per cent of the subsidies go to energy, 13 per cent to food and 2 per cent to water44
Energy subsidies		Universal	State budget
3. Informal and community based social protection
3.1. Zakat
The Zakat programme	Support for enterprise creations and cash transfer		Community	Zakat fund
Informal/community Zakat	Lump sum for poor population		Community	Community
3.2. Associations and humanitarian programmes
CSOs and associations	Assistance to vulnerable population (people with disabilities, chronic disease)		States and donors

Source: Based on various sources (see references inside Table 2).

Note: Table 2 uses the exchange rate of 17 February 2023, where DZD 1 equals $0.0073.

While Table 2 shows the existence of different types of social protection programmes targeting all categories of the vulnerable population, many of these programmes leave behind a considerable number of people. The main challenge identified in the above programmes is their low level of coverage, in terms of the general population as well as geographically, inadequacy and unsustainable financing.45 This creates inequalities of opportunities, the exclusion of vulnerable populations and a lack of social cohesion. Data on the proportion of the population that is covered by the social protection system is scarce, as exemplified by the International Labour Organization’s Social Protection Inquiry Database, which shows low coverage in Algeria as well as in other Arab countries.46

Figure 4. Share of population covered by social protection (%)

Figure 4 shows that social protection across different categories of the population in Algeria is relatively low. Indeed, only 63 per cent of the elderly population is covered by contributory and non-contributory pension provision – lower than in neighbouring countries Tunisia and Libya, but higher than in other countries listed in the figure. Additionally, the share of employed workers covered for injury at work is estimated at 53 per cent – lower than the coverage rate in Jordan but higher than that of other countries. Unfortunately, only 3.6 per cent of people in Algeria with severe disabilities are collecting disability social protection benefits, which is remarkably low compared to other countries with available data.

In addition to these low levels of coverage, observers have also questioned the adequacy of the benefits. One method to evaluate these social benefits is to compare them to the national minimum wage. Another approach, used by the World Bank, is to evaluate the proportion of social benefits in the total welfare of beneficiaries, measured by income or expenditure. In the absence of data on population income and expenditure, the former method is more feasible. For instance, the Allocation Forfaitaire de Solidarité (AFS) – a cash transfer programme targeting the poor and vulnerable – provides a benefit of DZD 3,000 ($22.15) per month, representing merely 15 per cent of the minimum wage.47 In addition, social insurance benefits are also low. For instance, there is a high number of medicines that are not reimbursed by the social insurance fund.

While the law stipulates that out-of-pocket costs for the price of medicine should only be 20 per cent, insured people often pay more than this percentage. This is because the social insurance system reimburses 80 per cent of the reference price, which is lower than the real sale price.48 This process of basing compensation on reference prices allows the social insurance fund to reduce its health insurance expenditure and instead potentially allocate more resources to the pension fund. The contribution rate to pension schemes has increased several times in the last two decades.49 This view was supported in an interview with Nacer Haddad from the Algerian Social Insurance Fund for Non-Salaried Workers:

While we want to stay fair, we need to qualify [Table 2], as in terms of medical acts and services related to healthcare, in particular with respect to ear and dental care, the level of reimbursement is certainly 80 per cent. However, this number is calculated on the basis of an evaluation of these acts and has not been updated for almost 40 years. Efforts to reassess these acts have been made as part of a contractual mechanism between social security and care providers and acts related to care, unfortunately, have not had the desired effect. With the rate of inflation experienced by the country during this long period, in other words, with regard to acts of care, the level of reimbursement is insignificant.

Furthermore, there exists a long list of non-reimbursable medicines. While the social insurance fund aims to make savings in the short term on health insurance by limiting benefits, this can have an unforeseen negative effect on the system as a whole. For example, when patients are not financially supported, they are more likely to relapse and spend more time in public hospitals, which costs the social insurance fund more money overall, thereby making the social insurance system inefficient and less able to respond to shocks.50

Another way to evaluate social protection programmes is through population and opinion surveys. Figure 5 uses the Arab Barometer surveys to compare the performance of the Algerian government with that of other governments.51 The Arab Barometer surveys thus offer a unique opportunity for cross-country comparison by asking respondents various questions relating to their socio-demographic and -economic characteristics.

Figure 5. Percentage of people reporting that government performance is good or very good in different areas

— Source: Arab Barometers surveys (2022), ‘Data downloads > Arab Barometer Surveys > Wave 5 (2018–2019)
and Wave 6 (2020–2021)’, https://www.arabbarometer.org/survey-data/data-downloads.

Note: Data on government performance were only available for narrowing gaps, keeping the prices down and creating employment. In 2020, data on government performance in creating employment were not available.

Figure 5 shows that government performance has improved between 2018 and 2020. For instance, in the 2018/2019 period only 9.73 per cent of respondents in Algeria reported that the government’s performance in narrowing the gap between rich and poor was ‘good’ or ‘very good’ – that figure increased to 53 per cent in 2020. Meanwhile, the percentage of respondents who reported that the government had performed well in keeping prices down increased from 9.86 per cent in the 2018/2019 period to 54 per cent in 2020, which shows that Algeria is doing better than other countries in the region. However, the government could still improve its performance by expanding social protection coverage and increasing the adequacy of benefits.

In late 2022, Chatham House conducted an online survey in Algeria with 300 respondents sharing their level of satisfaction and perception of the country’s social protection services. The survey primarily focused on individual views on social protection services, including a test question to gauge whether the population would be in favour of the removal of energy and food subsidies. The results show that 33 per cent of respondents were indifferent, while 28 per cent reported that the social protection services were ‘poor’ or ‘very poor’ (see Figure 6).

Figure 6. Public satisfaction with the level of social protection services

— Source: Unpublished Chatham House survey (late 2022).

While Algeria has a broad and relatively comprehensive social protection system – made up of several programmes that target a wide proportion of the vulnerable population – the analysis in this chapter shows that there is room for all programmes to improve in terms of coverage and adequacy of benefits. Further research would be critical in order to analyse both the effectiveness of social protection programmes as well as their impact on beneficiaries.

Algerian government (1974), ‘Journal Officiel de la République Algérienne Démocratique et Populaire’ [Official Journal of the People’s Democratic Republic of Algeria], 25 January 1974, https://www.joradp.dz/FTP/jo-francais/1974/F1974008.PDF.

Ordonnance N° 76–35 du 16 avril 1976 portant organisation de l’éducation et de la formation [Ordinance No. 76-35 of April 16 1976 on the organisation of education and training] (1976), 16 April 1976, https://www.axl.cefan.ulaval.ca/afrique/algerie_ordonnance-76-35-1976.htm.

Sadeg, M. (2018), ‘Evolution du système éducatif de l’Algérie de 1830 à 2012 : Origines historiques des disparités régionales’ [Evolution of the Algerian education system from 1830-2012: Historical origins of regional disparities], Revue des Sciences Commerciales et de Gestion, 10(1), pp. 15–59, https://www.asjp.cerist.dz/en/downArticle/716/10/1/155550.

Mansouri, N. (2022), ‘Subvention des produits énergétiques : 85% du budget consacrés au soutien des prix en 2021’ [Subsidies for energy products: 85% of the budget devoted to price support in 2021], Maghreb Emergent, 19 June 2022, https://maghrebemergent.net/subvention-des-produits-energetiques-85-du-budget-consacres-au-soutien-des-prix-en-2021.

Ibid.

Research interview, under the condition of anonymity, with a professor of economics at an Algerian university, 22 April 2022.

Before 1983, the Algerian social security system was supervised by several departments, such as the Ministry of Health, the Ministry of Agriculture and the Ministry of Finance. This was mainly due to the plurality of funds, which resulted in the fragmented nature of social security.

Regarding the issue of maternity, only salaried workers are eligible for maternity leave, while self-employed women cannot benefit from this provision.

Office of National Statistics (unpublished), Labour Force Survey 2019.

For more details, see Merouani, W. (2021), ‘The Three Worlds of Welfare Capitalism: A Lesson from Algeria’, in Tajmazinani, A. A. (ed.) (2021), Social Policy in the Islamic World, London: Palgrave Macmillan.

Agency of Social Development (unpublished), ‘Annual Activity Reports, 1997–2016’, internal document.

Programme d’Insertion Sociale des Jeunes Diplômés (PID).

For more details about the evolution of jobs created see Merouani (2021), ‘The Three Worlds of Welfare Capitalism’.

Research interview, under the condition of anonymity, with a representative of the Ministry of Labour, Employment and Social Security, April 2022.

Algeria Press Service (2019), ‘Les arrets de travail ont coute 16 milliards de dinars en 2018’ [Work stoppages cost the fund 16 billion dinars in 2018], 17 January 2019, https://www.reporters.dz/cnas-les-arrets-de-travail-ont-coute-16-milliards-de-dinars-en-2018.

Office of National Statistics (2014), ‘Statistical Yearbook of Algeria no. 31, Chapter X: Social Security’, https://www.ons.dz/IMG/pdf/securite_sociale.pdf.

Ibid.

Algeria Press Service (2019), ‘L’allocation forfaitaire de solidarite une enveloppe de plus de 47 milliards de dinars pour 2019’ [The flat-rate solidarity allowance envelope of more than 47 billion dinars for 2019], https://www.aps.dz/societe/84275-l-allocation-forfaitaire-de-solidarite-une-enveloppe-de-plus-de-47-milliards-de-dinars-pour-2019 (accessed 25 Oct. 2022).

Algeria Press Service (2018), ‘Actualisation des listes des personnes démunies: plus de 944.000 bénéficiaires de l’AFS’ [Updating the lists of deprived persons: More than 944,000 beneficiaries of the AFS], 24 May 2018, https://www.aps.dz/societe/74453-actualisation-des-listes-des-personnes-demunies-plus-de-944-000-beneficiaires-de-l-afs (accessed 25 Oct. 2022).

Algeria Press Service (2019), ‘Généralisation de l’allocation de 10 000 DA à tous les handicapés à 100% : Près de 32 milliards de dinars mobilisés annuellement’ [Generalisation of the allocation of 10,000 DA to all those disabled at 100%’: Nearly 32 billion dinars mobilised annually], 5 October 2019, https://www.aps.dz/algerie/95134-generalisation-de-l-allocation-de-10-000-da-a-tous-les-handicapes-a-100 (accessed 25 Oct. 2022).

Algeria-Watch (2021), ‘Transferts sociaux PLF 2022 : le budget des Moudjahidines en hausse, celui de l’habitat en baisse’ [Social transfers PLF 2022: The budget of the Mujahideen on the rise, while that of housing declines], 9 November 2021, https://algeria-watch.org/?p=80300.

Algerie 360 (2018), ‘Prise en charge des catégories nécessiteuses: plus de 80 milliards DA pour créer de nouveaux projets’ [Support for needy categories: more than 80 billion DZD to create new projects], 15 April 2018, https://www.algerie360.com/prise-charge-categories-necessiteuses-plus-de-80-milliards-da-creer-de-nouveaux-projets.

Algerie 360 (2023), ‘Hausse allocation chômage à 15.000 DA : appliquée dès janvier 2023’ [Increase in unemployment benefit to 15,000 DZD: applied from January 2023], 26 January 2023, https://www.algerie360.com/hausse-allocation-chomage-a-15-000-da-appliquee-des-janvier-2023.

Ibid.

Ouest Tribune (2022), ‘Selon le directeur général du budget au ministère des finances: 5.000 milliards de DA ont été dépensés en subventions’ [According to the Director General of Budget at the Ministry of Finance: 5,000 billion DA were spent on subsidies], 20 June 2022, https://ouest-tribune.dz/103558-2.

Merouani (2021), ‘The Three Worlds of Welfare Capitalism’.

International Labour Organization (2022), ‘Social Protection Inquiry Database’, https://ilostat.ilo.org/topics/social-protection (accessed 29 Nov. 2022).

For more details on the criteria of eligibility, see ADS (undated), ‘Agence de Développement Social’ [Social Development Agency], http://www.ads.dz.

Merouani, W., Hammouda, N. E. and El Moudden, C. (2014), ‘Le système Algerien de protection sociale : entre bismarckien et beveredgien’ [The Algerian system of social protection: Between Bismarckian and Beveredgian], Les cahiers du Cread, 30(108), pp. 109–147, https://www.asjp.cerist.dz/en/article/2015.

Pension contribution rates increased to 18.25 per cent in 2015, up from 17.75 per cent previously.

The Social Insurance Fund (CNAS) finances are a part of the public hospitals’ expenditures through the ‘forfait hopitaux’.

For more details, see the Arab Barometer (2022), ‘Homepage’, https://www.arabbarometer.org.

Previous chapter Next chapter

Topic themes

Defence and security

Economics and trade

Environment

Health

Institutions

Major powers

Politics and law

Society

Technology

Regions

Africa

Americas

Asia-Pacific

Europe

Middle East and North Africa

Russia and Eurasia

Events

Publications

Become a member

The Queen Elizabeth II Academy for Leadership and the Next Generation

About us

Reforming Algeria’s social protection system

Dr Walid Merouani

Dr Hayat Messekher

Adel Hamaizia

Mahrez Ait Belkacem

02 An overview of the welfare state in Algeria

The history of social spending in Algeria

Figure 1. Public expenditure on social protection excluding health (latest available data for each country) (% of GDP)

Figure 2. Health expenditure (% of GDP) since 2006

Figure 3. Total government expenditure on education (% of GDP)

Table 1. Budgets for ADS employment programmes ($ million)

Mapping social protection in Algeria

Table 2. Mapping of the social protection system in Algeria

Figure 4. Share of population covered by social protection (%)

Figure 5. Percentage of people reporting that government performance is good or very good in different areas

Figure 6. Public satisfaction with the level of social protection services

Reforming Algeria’s social protection system

Show authors

02 An overview of the welfare state in Algeria

The history of social spending in Algeria

Figure 1. Public expenditure on social protection excluding health (latest available data for each country) (% of GDP)

Figure 1. Public expenditure on social protection excluding health (latest available data for each country) (% of GDP)

Figure 2. Health expenditure (% of GDP) since 2006

Figure 2. Health expenditure (% of GDP) since 2006

Figure 3. Total government expenditure on education (% of GDP)

Figure 3. Total government expenditure on education (% of GDP)

Table 1. Budgets for ADS employment programmes ($ million)

Mapping social protection in Algeria

Table 2. Mapping of the social protection system in Algeria

Figure 4. Share of population covered by social protection (%)

Figure 4. Share of population covered by social protection (%)

Figure 5. Percentage of people reporting that government performance is good or very good in different areas

Figure 5. Percentage of people reporting that government performance is good or very good in different areas

Figure 6. Public satisfaction with the level of social protection services

Figure 6. Public satisfaction with the level of social protection services