Social protection and coloniality: linking past, present and future

By Keetie Roelen in collaboration with Roosa Lambin, Arsène Brice Bado, Thaís de Carvalho, Julia Chukwuma, Kevin Deane and Winnie C. Muangi

January 2026

Social protection is often framed as a forward-looking policy agenda: a mechanism to reduce poverty, protect citizens from shocks, and build inclusive societies. Yet to truly understand why systems and policies look and function the way they do today, we must consider the past and present and how they interact.

This blog post is the first in a series on the role of colonial continuities in social protection, and how the echoes of colonialism and imperialism continue to leave their mark.

In this post, we discuss findings from a recent study about how colonial legacies, post-colonial influence, and domestic political economy dynamics continue to shape social protection systems in Africa today (see Roelen et al, 2025). Based on a review of literature and policy documentation, case studies in mainland Tanzania and Côte d’Ivoire, and interviews with international stakeholders, we examine how these forces play out, how they interact, and why recognising them is essential to designing fairer, more effective systems for the future.

The research was undertaken in 2024 – 25 at the Centre for the Study of Global Development (CSGD) at the Open University, UK in collaboration with the German Institute of Development and Sustainability (IDOS) and supported by the German Federal Ministry for Economic Cooperation and Development (BMZ).

Why adopting a coloniality lens matters

In our research, we use the term coloniality to denote patterns of power and oppression that resulted from colonialism and continue to exist long after the dissolution of colonial administrations. Adopting a coloniality lens matters because social protection policies and systems aren’t technical exercises; they determine who is entitled to support, who is excluded, what risks are pooled collectively, and what forms of social solidarity are legitimised or sidelined. These decisions are deeply political—and historically situated.

Many African countries gained independence in the 1960s. Yet, the roots of their social protection systems can be traced back to long before. They evolved through – often – centuries of resource extraction, imported bureaucratic systems, labour hierarchies, externally financed safety nets, and Northern knowledge dominance. As a result, many systems today carry colonial footprints without colonial presence, shaped as much by what was imported or imposed as by what was ignored or suppressed.

To help unpack the role of coloniality in social protection, we break this term down into two components, namely (i) colonial legacy, to refer to the institutional, legal and policy arrangements that were put in place during colonial times, that were maintained post-independence and that are still in place – in part or in full – at present, and (ii) postcolonial influence, to denote persistent power imbalances between Western countries and former colonies, which continue to shape social protection arrangements in African countries and across the Global South, even decades after independence. We consider the role of these two aspects of coloniality alongside domestic political economy dynamics.

Colonial legacies leave deep footprints

We find that the footprint of colonial legacies – that is, the institutional, legal and policy arrangements that were put in place during colonial times – remains visible across contemporary social protection in Africa. This is with the caveat that it does so in a highly contextual manner. There is considerable variation across countries, with some displaying significant divergence from social protection as established in their colonial pasts.

With this caveat in mind, we observe the footprint of colonial legacies in a variety of ways:

First, economic dependency persists. This is especially apparent in Francophone West Africa, where monetary policy is shaped within the confines of the CFA franc. This continues to constrain countries’ economic autonomy and thereby their ability to invest in and shape their social protection systems.

Second, institutional and legislative frameworks established during the colonial era remain deeply embedded in current social protection systems, often reflecting the priorities of colonial administrations rather than the needs of local populations. As a result, social protection instruments established during colonial times, such as social insurance schemes, exclude large segments of the population who do not have formal employment.

Third, and relatedly, traditional informal support networks and anticolonial social compacts have been consistently marginalised in favour of foreign models, resulting in a disconnect between formal social protection systems and the lived experiences and needs of the local populations.

The dominant nature of postcolonial influence

Our research shows that postcolonial influences – that is, continued patterns of power imbalances – have a sizeable impact on social protection arrangements across the region. In fact, on balance, they are considered more important than colonial legacies. While arrangements put in place during colonial times still echo through today’s social protection systems, their influence is outweighed by enduring influence wielded by Global North power holders in shaping African countries’ social protection.

Postcolonial influence manifests in various ways:

First, global economic structures perpetuate patterns of economic exploitation and dependency, limiting the capacity of countries to design and implement autonomous and context-specific social protection solutions. Unfavourable trade policies, fiscal rules, and debt architecture reinforce and trap countries into economic disadvantage.

Second, donor priorities and international development agendas have promoted more narrowly targeted social protection measures and support consumption over production. This is especially visible through the emphasis on cash transfers rather than production subsidies, despite the latter being preferred by some national governments. Funding modalities and aid conditionalities serve as powerful policy levers to push approaches preferred by the Global North.

Third, models of and ideas for social protection that originate from the Global North continue to dominate the design and implementation of social protection systems. Widely promoted through trainings and technical assistance – also known as policy pollination – these models commonly overlook local or indigenous knowledge and context-specific solutions that may be better suited to address the unique challenges faced by each country.

Domestic political economy: reinforcement and resistance

Domestic political economy factors are vital in shaping social protection. They include the prevailing political ideology, the role of elites in governance, and the engagement of civil society and workers’ movements. Our findings show that these factors can counteract or reinforce colonial legacies and postcolonial influences in strategic and practical ways, often culminating in a complex interplay between domestic political factors and external influences.

First, while some governments’ priorities align with international donor preferences, there are many examples of resistance, with governments ultimately prioritising domestic interests and ideological preferences. Ethiopia was highlighted by multiple stakeholders for successfully pushing back against requests and conditions from donors and moving forward with their own priorities for social protection.

Second, political elites – sometimes influenced by historical ties to former colonial powers or international institutions – often steer the direction of these policies. Ethiopia once more emerged as an example here, where the ideological orientation of a strong political elite underpinned the commitment to a vision of social protection and its implementation. In this case in contravention to donor preferences. The role of political elites in shaping social protection also leads into concerns over elite capture and solutions that favour a small but powerful segment of society.

Third, civil society and workers’ movements have historically played a significant role in advocating for welfare reforms, particularly during the colonial era and early independence movements, and they continue to be vital actors in shaping systems that better address the needs of local populations. In Tanzania, for example, a feminist domestic organisation pushed back against oppressive gender practices.

Disrupting patterns of coloniality

Our study gives rise to several strategies to disrupt patterns of coloniality, especially in relation to postcolonial influence:

First, social protection actors reflecting more critically on the enduring influence of coloniality in the design of social protection systems and policies, their role in perpetuating these patterns of coloniality, and how these play out in the impacts of social protection on the ground.

Second, paying greater attention to knowledge and ideas from the Global South and include them in knowledge exchange and training about social protection. This includes both historical knowledge that has been largely overlooked and ignored, and newly produced knowledge.

Third, engaging national governments more meaningfully in global platforms is vital to enhance the ownership and sustainability of national social protection systems. Mechanisms may include the provision of adequate resources, a clear articulation of the benefits to partner countries, and more accessible use of language.

Fourth, building on and furthering South-South learning in a way that challenges the hegemony of Western ideas and knowledge, rather than reinforces it.

Fifth, firmly placing countries in Africa and across the Global South in the driver’s seat when choosing, developing and implementing social protection arrangements, with international organisations following their lead rather than the other way around.

Finally, strengthening domestic financing capacity to decrease reliance on and counter external influences, and enhance domestic ownership of social protection.

This is the first blog in the open series The Long Shadows of Colonialism on Social Protection. This series explores how colonial legacies and continuities shape today’s social protection systems. It aims to deepen the conversation around what must change to achieve social protection for everyone, everywhere and to inspire political action towards this goal. The first blogs are based on the publications Colonial Continuities in the Area of Social Protection by IDOS/BMZ and Change Course Now! Only International Justice Can Create Social Security by Brot für die Welt. If you would like to contribute a blog to the series, please contact us.

References

Roelen, K., Lambin, R., Bardo, A. B., de Carvalho, T., Chukwuma, J., Deane, K., & Muangi, W. C. (2025). Social protection and coloniality: Learning from the past and present. Framework paper (IDOS Discussion Paper 21/2025). German Institute of Development and Sustainability (IDOS).

Acknowledgement

This blog was first posted by socialprotection.org