Natural disasters in contemporary society have evolved from occasional and exceptional events
into a significant, increasingly frequent collective social risk. This deeply affects the stability
of the social security system and the realisation of the constitutional right to social security.
This master’s thesis systematically examines how the Slovenian social security system
responds to the consequences of natural disasters. It also asks whether the system is sufficiently
adapted to their collective, sudden, and catastrophic nature.
This thesis employs a theoretical analysis of the fundamental principles of social security:
solidarity, equivalence, and personal responsibility. It also considers the positive obligations of
the social state, as outlined in Articles 2 and 50 of the Constitution of the Republic of Slovenia.
Based on specific examples of recent natural disasters and emergencies, such as the ice storm
that struck Slovenia in 2014, the fire in the Karst region in 2022, the catastrophic floods of
August 2023, and the COVID-19 epidemic, this study demonstrates that the existing social
security system leans too heavily toward a reactive and compensatory approach, rather than a
preventive one, which could prevent or significantly reduce the occurrence of social risks,
rather than merely mitigating their consequences. Despite extensive normative activity and
numerous interventions adopted after individual disasters, the system lacks a systematic,
permanent, and prevention-oriented framework. Such a framework would address long-term
socio-economic consequences, including loss of income, new risks of disability, increased
living costs, long-term care needs, and social exclusion of vulnerable population groups.
The research establishes that natural disasters constitute a new, autonomous social risk that
cannot be fully reduced to mere secondary consequences of classical individual social risks
(such as illness, unemployment, or disability). It is a complex collective risk whose
characteristics require a fundamental adaptation of the entire social security system. In this
context, the thesis particularly highlights the need for a new balance among the three
fundamental principles of social security and for strengthening the system's preventive and
resilient components, moving beyond the current predominantly reactive approach.
The thesis concludes that in emergency situations, the social state must fulfil its positive
obligations in a more comprehensive and proactive manner. This does not mean merely
adopting short-term, one-off interventions that address the immediate situation, but above all,
establishing permanent, adaptable, and inclusive mechanisms of social protection. Only in this
way can the right to social security retain its full constitutional significance even in times of
increasingly frequent and intense natural disasters, which, due to climate change, are becoming
part of the new normal of life risks in the 21st century.
|
