This chapter introduces the conceptual and empirical basis of the project. The first section provides the project's definition of minimum income protection (MIP) and delineates the object of investigation. The second part gives an overview of the data sources and the structure of the database that forms the empirical foundation of the study.

Defining MIP

Each country's social security system is unique in its institutional architecture and in the relationships between its constituting elements. The design of MIP systems and their role within the welfare state vary both internationally and over time. The first major challenge is therefore to develop a common definition of MIP for all countries that is applicable to different contexts. As argued in the Introduction to this book, MIP is characterised by a twofold function: to provide the residual last safety net and to guarantee the social minimum below which no one in society should be allowed to fall.

From the residual character follows the first defining element of MIP schemes: the means test. MIP benefits are granted when all other social benefits are either not provided or exhausted, or if they do not satisfy basic needs. From the social minimum character follows the second defining element: the minimum income guarantee. MIP benefits can be distinguished from other kinds of social benefits on this basis as shown in Table 1.1.

MIP benefits provide a social minimum based on a means test. Tied benefits are different from MIP because they do not provide a social minimum. Examples of tied benefits include means-tested family allowances and housing benefits. These benefits do not qualify as MIP because they are provided for specific purposes and do not aim at covering all the basic needs of a person or household. However, tied benefits are often part of the MIP benefit package because they are provided in addition to MIP in specific situations of need. In these cases, tied benefits are an element of MIP but should not be confused with the basic MIP benefit, itself. This point is especially relevant for calculating MIP recipient rates among the population. Since the receipt of the two benefit types partly overlaps, the recipient data cannot be added up.