Let’s begin with a contentious debate in social protection: do cash transfers increase fertility? A systematic review of 19 studies by Kneale et al examines the question among adolescent girls (see table 1 on descriptive statistics). Their findings are articulated around three mechanisms: in terms of contraceptive use, the study found evidence “tentatively suggestive” of a positive impact of cash transfers, although results were ultimately inconclusive; the evidence is stronger in reducing the odds of experiencing an early pregnancy; and transfers were not effective in reducing the odds of early childbearing.
Survey data is key, but are we harnessing the full potential of social protection administrative data? The question, posed by a review by Barca et al, is a compelling one. Specifically, the paper offers a crisp discussion of the pros of admin data (e.g., being less expensive, less “intrusive”, tracking people over time, etc.) and its cons (e.g., only available for participants, data quality risks, institutional fragmentation) – see summary table on p.7. The paper nicely sets out examples of how such data is used for program improvements and redesign, like in the case of Türkiye’s (which incorporated a Data Warehouse and Business Intelligence system to its integrated social assistance information system, which was used for the earthquake response in Feb 2023, p.11) as well as other 7 country cases (p.14). Helpful is also the discussion on the benchmarking adequacy (table 5, p.16-17), while lots of other juicy examples are present throughout the report – e.g., Costa Rica used administrative data to monitor time taken for approval of referrals by service providers (p.20), or the Philippines’ tracking of payments led to expanding the network of cash-out points available to beneficiaries (p.21). Yet constraints on undertaking cost-efficiency analysis are somewhat confirmed (p.23).
Let’s go around the globe, starting from East Asia: what examples are there of near-universal social protection coverage? Not many… so it was fascinating to learn about the evolution and current system of the Cook Islands. The analysis, and summary, by Gorman et al shows that the country has tax-financed schemes covering about 91% of citizens at a cost of 4.3% of GDP (if you think that’s high, Kiribati’s allocates 4.9%, p.8). Interestingly, it has a mosaic of coexisting age-based, i.e., child benefits and old age pensions – the former scaled-up (69% of the population), the latter unwound over time (figure 3, p.6) – and means-tested programs topping up those schemes for those most in need (i.e., via infirm benefits, destitute allowances, and a power subsidy). Figure 20, p.27 says it all… and the real value of transfers adjusted for inflation has gone up significantly (see figure 13, p.17; figure 15, p.21).
Moving westwards in the region, something very cool was piloted on a small scale in Karnataka, India: ex-workfare illiterate recipients were paid to solve educational micro-tasks on smartphones – sort of pay-for-learning instead of NREGA public works. An experiment by Berg et al showed it rose the number of characters recognized from local script by 65% (and was preferred over manual works by most participants).
MENA! The iconic Iran UBI of 2010-11 received plenty of attention, but what direction did cash transfers take in the country between 2010 and 2021? Knippenberg et al show that the share of cash transfers in the income of the bottom quintile has halved, from 32% to 16% (figure 14, p.21); but transfers remain near-universal (about 80% coverage), albeit eroded by inflation, and with other temporary injections rising steeply since late 2019 (figure B4, p.22).
Two bonuses on the region: Loewe and Zintl identify a range of multipliers stemming from a donor-funded public works program in Jordan, including among non-participating households in host communities. And Krafft and Hannafi explain factors behind the decline of social insurance in Egypt (i.e., with calls for “less expensive and more flexible contributions, better benefits, higher quality of administration, and shifting to a progressive system”, but also “the system could also be revised to be funded by consumption taxes (non-contributory) instead of the current contributory system”).
In Europe, an interesting paper by Bernhofer et al compares the conditionality of key social protection programs in Spain (table 1, p.11) and France (table 2, p.28). The paper also offers a vast array of considerations around labor incentives and take-up of benefits, e.g., it argues that key reasons for low take up of guaranteed minimum income benefits in Spain (in some cases up to 70%, figure 13, p.21) are its low adequacy and unawareness.
Updates from Africa? Leight et al take us to Ethiopia, where various combinations of a “graduation” program was evaluated: after 3 years, a package of cash transfers ($374, or provided as poultry for an equivalent value), savings and trainings “… did not lead to an exit from poverty” nor generated improvements in food security. Yet, the increase in some livestock income and better access to credit point to a potential future pathway. (In case you are wondering, it made no difference if the capital injection was made in cash or livestock).
More on food security: Levine and Wiggins explore the big question of how can development partners support food security in protracted crises. Their policy brief contains no shortage of thought-provoking points: among these, “… hunger is almost always intimately connected to poverty. But when international aid actors are so tempted to believe that deep, structural crises can be prevented through short term instruments such as anticipatory humanitarian projects, it is clear that this has been ignored” (p.5); and “… until actors from different disciplines speak a common language, share common goals and sit round the same table, we can expect to see the same repeated cycles of crisis, grand plans to reduce food insecurity, followed by another crisis, another plan, and so on” (ibid).
That’s not all for protracted crises: how can refugee-led organizations be improved? Sturridge et al lay out 5 main barriers, including their chronic underfunding (in 2022 they received just $26.4 million, or 10 times less than flows to local NGOs); most funds (83%) pass through at least one intermediary; they are a heterogeneous constellation of actors; funding is driven by private donors; and tracking is inadequate. Bonus: while not strictly related to social protection, two new climate reports are definitely consistent in results, namely The State of Climate Action 2023 (which finds that progress toward 1.5°C-aligned targets is limited) and the Climate Action Monitor 2023 (showing national climate actions adopted by OECD countries increased by only 1% in 2022).
… well, there is some positive news on crises: never were cash transfers (and vouchers) used as much in humanitarian assistance, i.e., they now account for 20.6% of total aid ($47 billion), or $10 billion ($7.9 billion of which constituted transfers net of admin costs). That’s only one of the findings of CALP’s new State of the World’s Cash 2023 Report, which blends administrative and qualitative data. On the latter, 58% of survey respondents agree that since 2019 national organizations have increasingly been taking on leadership roles in delivering humanitarian assistance. In practice, however, localization remains extremely limited (e.g., USAID’s direct funding for local organizations fell from 2% in 2020 to 1% in 2022). Chapter 6 is particularly relevant here, including for linkages with social protection: main barriers for such connection? Lack of coordination between actors is followed by limited technical capacity among staff to engage with each other (which works both ways for humanitarian and social protection practitioners). See also the report’s overview, webinar, and PPT.
BTW, on localization… Holm-Nielsen et al argue that it provides Kenyan “smaller organizations an opportunity to get involved without expensive structures”; Cheung contends that locally led action isn’t easy but it’s worth it; and Lintelo and Liptrot have an intriguing piece examining donor approaches to displacement in urban Lebanon and Jordan (where refugees “end up living side-by-side with the local poor in densely populated urban neighborhoods”). Oh… Kelly’s November edition of the humanitarian evidence and discourse summary is out, inclusive of 44 linked resources.
Three resources on social protection and children: Siren examines data from 16 countries and found that expansions of cash transfers during recent decades was associated with reductions in absolute, but not relative, child poverty. A report by Clarke and Thévenon investigate childhood socio-economic disadvantage in Austria. And if seeking data on children’s outcomes and policy… look no further than the Child Atlas data portal (check out also a blog on the tool by Fiala).
Finally, tune in for three upcoming events: on Nov 28, ILO and ODI discuss recent work on social protection and migrant workers in the Gulf countries (h/t Luca Pellerano); on the same time, ECA host a webinar on the future of social protection in Africa; and on Nov 30 involves a report launch on “national capacities to respond to crises and humanitarian actors in Somalia”.
Before you go… yours truly presents six reflections on the post-Covid state of social protection, hope you enjoy the reading!