PUBLICATIONS
Search by theme or free text for publications by STAAR and SPACE
Portfolio
Location
Theme
This document was developed to summarise existing literature (most prominently ILO 2021; UNDP 2021) for decision-makers and situate that literature against opportunities, challenges and lessons learned during COVID-19 on including informal workers within social protection systems. It thus draws heavily on existing work.
Digital information systems serving the social protection sector, and especially social assistance, are increasingly prominent and will continue to be, especially in the COVID-19 context. “Why? Because the ability of a country to care for its people and respond to their lifecycle needs depends on its ability to identify those who are in need, enroll them, provide tailored benefits and services, and follow up to cater to evolving circumstances”. Governments also need to be able to monitor programme implementation and impact, feeding into longer-term decisions on design and resource allocation. “All of these actions require accessible, dynamic and real-time data and information exchange if the goal of universal coverage is to be achieved” (Chirchir and Barca, 2019). The coverage (% of the population included in the information system), relevance (amount/type of data they store), and accessibility (e.g. level of interoperability/data sharing across the government data ecosystem) of these administrative data systems has also been increasing in many countries – posing important opportunities and challenges to policy-makers. The question is how to develop these systems in a way that is inclusive and right-based, leveraging technology “to ensure a higher standard of living for the vulnerable and disadvantaged” (Alston, 2019) rather than becoming a further barrier to inclusion. To illustrate the point this paper specifically focuses on gender and disability inclusion, while acknowledging similar considerations apply to all other forms of (intersectional) exclusion.
Inclusive care and support systems are crucial for developing human capabilities, promoting equal socio-economic participation, and ensuring functional societies. They facilitate women’s labor force participation, create decent jobs in paid care sectors, and enhance children’s capabilities, autonomy, and socio-economic participation for persons with disabilities and older persons. However, few countries have invested adequately in these systems, leaving families, particularly women and girls, as primary caregivers, which limits their education and economic opportunities. To address this, FCDO, UNICEF, and STAAR collaborated in 2023, hosting a global workshop to explore challenges and strategies for inclusive care systems. The workshop aimed to develop systems that are disability-inclusive, gender-responsive, contextually relevant, and fiscally sustainable. This report is a synthesis of the workshop’s key reflections.
The Informal Workers and Social Protection background note outlines the options for providing social protection to informal workers, with a particular focus on the implications for COVID-19 response and urban settings. In order to do so, it provides information on the impacts of COVID-19 on earnings and wellbeing among informal economy workers, considering the opportunities the crisis presents for reform to more efficiently link informal workers with social protection systems. Given the extent to which COVID-19 has affected urban livelihoods, this analysis focuses primarily on challenges faced by urban informal workers. Of course, much of it also applies to informal workers in rural areas, particularly those who are not involved in agriculture (e.g. household enterprises).
Climate change will profoundly shape and change the challenges and needs that current social protection policies, programmes and systems are attempting to address. There are many potential roles for social protection to play as part of the policy response to the impacts of climate change. These include addressing the growing poverty that climate change will engender; supporting resilience and adaptation at household and community levels; and contributing to addressing environmental degradation and climate change mitigation more broadly. The implications for the existing provision and approaches of social protection cannot be underestimated. For example, some of the potential adjustments to social protection programming could include the following: expanding coverage substantially; adjusting the type of programming to accommodate mass covariate events and non-traditional population groups (such as the working age poor and internal and transboundary migrant populations); altering the duration of provision to accommodate both chronic poverty and shock-related demand spikes; and expanding the spatial distribution of provision to new geographical areas, including vulnerable urban populations and areas affected by industrial restructuring under the green transition. The objectives of this note are to provide guidance to practitioners working on social protection, and specifically to: Highlight the relevance of climate change to social protection and explain why it is important to consider climate change as part of social protection policy, programming and systems. Present ideas for integrating climate change considerations into social protection policy and programming. Point to relevant resources on climate change and social protection.
COVID-19 has exacerbated existing inequalities for women and girls and persons with disabilities. During the pandemic, women have been more likely than men to drop out of the labour force, have shouldered an unequal burden of unpaid care work, and are facing increased threats from gender-based violence (GBV) linked to lockdowns and financial stress (UNFPA 2020; Peterman and O’Donnell, 2020, UN Women, 2020). The pandemic has also increased the risk of poverty amongst people with disabilities (Banks et al., 2021). This paper provides a snapshot of how SP responses to the COVID-19 crisis have integrated gender equality and social inclusion into programme design and implementation.
This note was developed to support those working on designing and delivering social protection activities, specifically to: Highlight the key issues relating to gender equality and social inclusion and why it’s important for social protection policy, programming and systems. Present best practices and ideas for integrating gender equality and social inclusion into social protection. Identify the ways in which technical assistance can ensure a gender and inclusion lens. Point to further relevant resources on gender equality, social inclusion and social protection.
This brief provides recommendations for data collection in country-level, household surveys to improve sex-disaggregated data collection and accessibility to reduce gender data gaps on social protection. We provide recommendations on how to adapt existing data collection tools and processes focusing on household surveys. This brief is accompanied by a longer paper “Mapping gender and social protection data” which summarises findings from a rapid mapping exercise aimed at understanding current efforts of global development agencies in collecting and analysing sex disaggregated data in social protection systems and identifying priority gaps.
This Brief presents a guiding framework with key questions and key issues to consider when monitoring Shock-responsive social protection (SRSP) to understand how the intervention contributes to broader crisis response. It’s a guiding framework that includes the key domains of coverage and effectiveness, adequacy, timeliness, predictability, cost efficiency, equity and inclusion, accountability and sustainability. The key principles underpinning the monitoring framework include: approaching monitoring is not just a data collection and reporting exercise, but rather a process of regular or ongoing analysis; disaggregating data by sex, age and disability at a minimum, and asking gender and inclusion-specific questions; coordinating across sectors, and drawing on other sources of data is essential, including from other humanitarian and development actors responding to the crisis.
movement within and outside of the country, the Government of Ukraine and refugee host countries have very often been the first to respond. Countries welcoming refugees have State social protection systems that are mature and operational, as well as in some cases having available legal provisions. In parallel, humanitarian actors have responded through cash transfers, alongside other forms of assistance, to help address immediate population needs by providing opportunities for linkages between the governments and the international community’s response. This briefing paper, developed by the Social Protection Technical Assistance, Advice and Resources (STAAR) facility in response to a request by the Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office (FCDO), outlines key considerations and options for strengthening linkages between the humanitarian response to date and social protection systems, both with the aim of improving the response and supporting these systems to respond to shocks in future.
This note provides a background briefing and five key questions for humanitarian programme staff to consider when making decisions regarding the use of their Information Systems in COVID-19 responses, and beyond. It focuses in particular on contexts of transition from humanitarian to longer-term, state-led social protection systems. It has been written to accompany and complement a forthcoming SPACE piece focused exclusively on social protection information systems. These issues, and contexts, are complex and raise challenging questions, some of which are beyond the scope of this document – including the challenge of reforming technology and data use by stakeholders outside the influence of aid actors. These challenges remain an ongoing discussion amongst practitioners and other stakeholders.
This study comes at a time of profound change in the global aid architecture. Funding constraints, shifting geopolitical dynamics, and increasing demands for localisation and efficiency are reshaping how international cooperation is pursued. Simultaneously, as highlighted in the OECD’s report, States of Fragility 2025, fragility is not only deepening but becoming more complex – driven by overlapping political, climate, economic and displacement-related shocks.
This case study examines the challenges and strategies for maintaining and adapting social assistance in Armenia during and after conflict, focusing on the government-led response to the displacement of ethnic Armenians from Nagorno-Karabakh in 2021–2022 and 2023. Drawing on key informant interviews, a desk review and monitoring data, it explores efforts to sustain social protection, including emergency cash assistance and the transition of refugees into Armenia’s national social assistance system. The study highlights challenges, adaptive responses and lessons learned in delivering assistance in an upper-middle-income country with strong but evolving social protection systems.
This case study examines Ethiopia’s experience in delivering social assistance during internal conflicts from 2021 to 2024. It focuses on the challenges to maintaining the Productive Safety Net Programme (PSNP), adaptive responses, and lessons learned in maintaining social assistance in conflict-affected regions, particularly Tigray, Amhara and Afar. Using key informant interviews, desk reviews and monitoring data, the study highlights how Ethiopia’s social protection infrastructure was impacted by conflict and the measures taken to sustain services.
This case study examines the challenges of sustaining social protection in Niger and Burkina Faso amid conflict and political instability in the Sahel region. Using key informant interviews, a desk review and monitoring data, it explores barriers to sustaining assistance and highlights actions taken under the Sahel Adaptive Social Protection Programme (SASPP) in both countries, adaptations on the Niger Adaptive Safety Net Project (ASP2) and the national social transfer programme in Burkina Faso and adaptations on the UN Joint Programme on Social Protection in Niger. The study documents lessons learned to inform future efforts in building systems and delivering effective social protection in fragile and conflict affected settings.
This case study examines the challenges and strategies for building strengthening social assistance in Somalia, one of the world’s most fragile states. Drawing on key informant interviews and a desk review, it explores the experiences of the Federal Government of Somalia (FGS), donors, UN agencies and INGOs in delivering social transfers and building foundational systems in a context of insecurity, weak capacity and limited fiscal space. The study focuses on the Baxnaano programme, the SAGAL programme and the Child Sensitive Social Protection Programme (CSSP), highlighting operational and political challenges, adaptive approaches and lessons learned in conflict-affected and state-building contexts.
This case study examines the challenges of maintaining social protection systems in Sudan during its ongoing conflict, focusing on the Sudan Family Support Programme (SFSP), the Sudan Emergency Safety Nets Project (SESNP) and UNICEF’s Mother and Child Cash Transfer Plus programme (MCCT+). Using key informant interviews, a desk review and monitoring data, it highlights the operational and political obstacles faced. It examines adaptive responses and lessons learned about sustaining social assistance in conflict settings.
Over the past decade, fragility and conflict have become central policy concerns for international development and humanitarian actors. There are more violent conflicts ongoing than at any time in the past 30 years, and the world is facing the largest forced displacement crisis ever recorded. Fragile and conflict-affected states could host up to 60% of people living in extreme poverty by 2030, despite accounting for only 10% of the world’s population. In 2023, 46% of these countries were in conflict. Meanwhile, conflicts are emerging elsewhere in countries that are not typically considered fragile or politically unstable. Conflict threatens to derail development gains in affected countries and create spillovers in the global economy. A 2023 report has highlighted the extent to which conflict is driving the unprecedented scale of forced displacement. Conflicts are also becoming increasingly protracted in nature, and many countries affected by conflict tend to be characterised by multiple other shocks and stresses that overlap and reinforce each other. To contribute to filling this gap in guidance and knowledge for donors, practitioners and governments, the FCDO Social Protection Team and Humanitarian Department, together with the WFP and UNICEF, commissioned an assignment through FCDO’s Social Protection Technical Assistance, Advice and Resources (STAAR) Facility. This aims to research and document experiences to date of maintaining or strengthening social protection in conflict settings and provide forward-looking analysis to guide future efforts in this space. This country case study presents learning from Yemen, focusing on the ongoing protracted conflict from 2015 to the present. It documents challenges and solutions for adapting and maintaining and further strengthening social assistance systems to ensure continuity of social protection support in some form to people in need.
This study addresses gaps in evidence on the potential to integrate disaster risk finance (DRF) and social protection systems. The research includes three case studies – Jamaica, Malawi and Mozambique. Despite growing interest and a compelling logic for linking social protection and DRF these links exist primarily at the theoretical level and have few real-life examples. While the selected case study countries have experience with disaster risk financing and shock responsive social protection, only Malawi has attempted to use DRF to fund shock response delivered through the social protection system. Therefore, the case studies focus primarily on the theoretical potential of DRF to fund shock responsive social protection (SRSP). The study puts forward six lessons from the three country case studies and 12 recommendations for donors interested in supporting this agenda.
This report summarises findings from a rapid mapping exercise aimed at understanding current efforts of global development agencies in collecting and analysing sex disaggregated data in social protection systems and identifying priority gaps. Sustainable poverty reduction can only be achieved by acknowledging gender inequities and specific vulnerabilities faced by women and girls in social protection programming. While social protection alone cannot eliminate gender inequality, there is a growing recognition that gender-responsive social protection can address gender-specific drivers of women’s and girls’ vulnerability to poverty and related risks.
This profile was developed with the available information between 26/04/2022 and 13/06/2022, as a supplement to the overarching briefing paper Humanitarian Assistance and Social Protection Linkages: Strengthening shock-responsiveness of social protection systems in the Ukraine crisis. Some key messages are: Moldova is the least resourced country to incorporate a very large caseload of new intrants into its social protection system. Modernization of the State and reform of social protection has been on the agenda for many years, but a fragmented governance has not led to the progress of other neighbouring country. Moldova has therefore requested for support to address the crisis. Initial conversations about longer term strengthening of the social protection system are encouraging but they will need to be deepened to locate support within the wider reform needs, to analyse transferability in architecture and scope of the response, to assess other risks associated to running a refug
This note describes the main strategies used by, and available to, countries to deliver cash support in response to the COVID-19 pandemic. The objective of the note is to inform both ongoing responses to COVID-19 and medium to long term investments in delivery mechanisms that could be used to respond to future crises. In detail, it builds on existing literature (see Box 1 for full references) to provide governments and development partners with concise information on the main payment options available, outlining strengths and weaknesses of each, as well as pre-requisites and key actions required for their inclusive implementation. It is important to highlight that this note focuses on: the provision of cash support to new beneficiaries, not existing ones. Reaching new caseloads is more challenging than supporting existing beneficiaries since it requires creating new payment mechanisms or adapting/leveraging existing ones. monetary or semi-monetary transfers (vouchers), not in-kind; Government to Person (G2P) transfers and Humanitarian cash delivery (noting considerations will differ slightly across the two); social assistance transfers primarily, not social insurance.
The importance of strong coordination between actors preparing, designing and implementing shock responses is well accepted. This has been highlighted specifically concerning shock responsive social protection (SRSP) as well as linking humanitarian action and social protection (HA-SP). However, despite unanimous professed acceptance of the principle of coordination, practical experiences of linking shock responses with social protection systems have shown that this can be challenging to put into practice. The COVID-19 pandemic presents an opportunity for change – the global crisis having galvanised interest in and experimentation with shock responsive social protection (SRSP) and linking humanitarian action and social protection (HA-SP). This paper presents a synthesis of global learning from efforts to coordinate shock responses linked with social protection during the COVID-19 pandemic as well as in response to other shocks, to inform dialogue and future action.
The purpose of this paper is to offer a detailed assessment of the two primary needs-tested Ukrainian government social assistance programmes: the Housing and Utilities Subsidy (HUS) programme and the Guaranteed Minimum Income (GMI) programme. This paper is part of a series, which includes: Assessing the Current Level of Alignment Between Humanitarian and Social Protection Programmes in Ukraine in November 2022 Overview of the Ukraine Government’s IDP Social Assistance Support Programmes Overview of the Unified Information System of the Social Sphere (UISSS) and the eDopomoga System
The purpose of this paper is to offer an overview of the Internally Displaced Persons (IDP) Social Assistance programmes currently undertaken by the Government of Ukraine, with a focus on the potential for linkages with humanitarian cash. This paper is part of a series, which includes: Assessing the Current Level of Alignment Between Humanitarian and Social Protection Programmes in Ukraine in November 2022, Overview of the Ukraine Government’s Housing and Utilities Subsidy Programme and the Guaranteed Minimum Income Programme, Overview of the Unified Information System of the Social Sphere (UISSS) and the eDopomoga System
The purpose of this paper is to help humanitarian and development actors engage with Ukraine’s social protection systems and initiatives. It does so by providing an overview of the Unified Information System of the Social Sphere (UISSS) and the connected eDopomoga platform, exploring how humanitarian actors have linked and/or aligned humanitarian multipurpose cash (MPC) assistance transfers with the programme, and identifying potential areas in which humanitarian/development actors can strengthen the system in the future. This paper is part of a series, which includes: Assessing the Current Level of Alignment Between Humanitarian and Social Protection Programmes in Ukraine in November 2022, Overview of the Ukraine Government’s Housing and Utilities Subsidy Programme and the Guaranteed Minimum Income Programme, Overview of the Ukrainian Government’s IDP Social Assistance Support Programmes
This profile was developed with the available information between 26/04/2022 and 13/06/2022, as a supplement to the overarching briefing paper Humanitarian Assistance and Social Protection Linkages: Strengthening shock-responsiveness of social protection systems in the Ukraine crisis. Some key messages: Poland operates a social assistance program with a strong inclination towards family transfers and less so on guaranteed minimum income schemes, whilst making over thirty different schemes available nationally and locally. In response to the influx of refugees, the government makes the Big Four family package (Family 500+, Dobry Start, Family Care Capital, and the Nursery Benefit) available to all individuals enrolled. It is unclear how systematic the allocation of all other social assistance transfers of the national social protection system has been, partly due to uneven understanding of entitlements at the municipal level. The value of the family packages is not intended to meet the minimum income threshold and this gap is partly covered through the support provided by aid agencies for most vulnerable families. Aid agencies reported providing targeted assistance both using “severity of need” and vulnerability criteria, although not necessarily with an explicit objective to complement government support. Families will need to rely on a wider package of services provided by the third sector, which is robust in Poland, and by municipal centres for social work. These local social assistance institutions face many structural issues, and, overall, the system is not fit-for-purpose to address chronic or acute poverty or a sudden surge of beneficiaries. The government will be stretched to respond to the increased needs. Although the Polish system has demonstrated a great political willingness and capacity to adapt to the refugee “shock”, there will be many medium-term challenges. As refugees settle in, localised cash and non-cash social assistance services will need to be effectively planned, sourced and delivered to refugees. This needs to be addressed through high-level political dialogue on refugee policy and strategy whilst providing surge support on the ground.
The purpose of this brief is to help social protection actors think through potential options/strategies to strengthen the preparedness of social protection systems to respond to future shocks. The responses to COVID-19 have highlighted the stark limitations of many social protection systems, particularly with regard to the three core tenets of universal social protection: ‘coverage’, ‘adequacy’, and ‘comprehensiveness’, as well as the fourth dimension of ‘timeliness’. For example, expanding coverage to those in need has been both complex and slow in many countries (partly due to low coverage before the crisis and weak administrative systems), while the adequacy of benefits has often been limited due to trade-offs against coverage and a lack of sufficient (and swift) funding.
This guidance note describes key considerations for integrating local actors. It applies to social protection programming that is delivered either (1) centrally by country governments or (2) via UN/INGOs. The guidance is also applicable to humanitarian cash transfers that are delivered as part of longer -term efforts to build SP systems. While funding that is transferred directly to governments is considered towards localisation commitments, it is nonetheless essential that a strong social contract exists between government and civil society. This includes communities and individuals understanding their rights and having access to services. Moreover, any programming needs to reach the most vulnerable and hardest to reach populations, and there should be accountability and transparency between government and other local actors. In the case of UN/INGO delivered programming, it is critical to shift more funding directly to local actors – government, local and national NGOs, as well as private sector – as well as build government systems to be able to lead on programming
This guidance note describes key considerations for integrating local actors into the COVID-19 social protection and/or humanitarian cash response. Local actors are defined as national and sub-national entities and can include civil society organisations (CSOs), government, private sector actors, and communities themselves. They can take a variety of forms, including local NGOs, local government, women’s networks and groups, youth/elderly/people with disabilities organizations, indigenous groups, faith-based organisations and networks, trade unions, informal worker organisations (see also SPACE Informal Workers and Social Protection), etc.
It is important to consider interventions that go beyond transferring cash or vouchers and to consider a range of complementary interventions that can be implemented alongside cash transfers. This not only provides the opportunity to maximise the benefits of the cash itself but enables a more comprehensive approach to address the multiple risks and vulnerabilities which individuals and households face, by supporting access to relevant interventions, both in the short-term immediate response to COVID-19 and for longer-term sustainable and equitable recovery. The aim of this document is to provide an overview of the options for linking cash transfers to complementary services in the context of COVID-19, drawing out lessons learned from existing evidence and knowledge of good practices to highlight how cash plus can be effectively designed and implemented in crisis response.
Implementing partners under the Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office’s (FCDO) Food Security Safety Net (FSSN) programme in Yemen are using cash combined with a range of interventions – including livelihoods support, development of Village Saving and Loan Associations (VSLAs), and subgrants for local projects – designed to promote transition to social protection and longer-term resilience. National and international partners have long standing experience of delivering Self Help Group (SHG) and VSLA interventions, but to date there has been little analysis of effectiveness or sharing of experience and best practice. FCDO commissioned this review to gain insights on effectiveness of SHG/VSLA interventions and make recommendations for scaling up the use of SHGs, VSLAs and other communitybased structures in Yemen. The study findings are based on a high level desk review as well as extensive consultation with implementing partners, local actors and research practitioners working on related studies.
This report presents the major findings drawn from literature review, the fieldwork in three provinces (which conducted focus groups discussions (FGDs) and key informant interviews (KIIs)) and the roundtables held in three provinces and in Kathmandu. This report first discusses the situation of child marriage in Nepal, its drivers and policy and programmatic responses and then assesses the existing social protection schemes which contribute to the reduction of child marriage. Pathways to reduce child marriage, with some learnings from different global and regional social protection initiatives, are then discussed. The report then presents the theory of change for the roadmap for social protection to tackle child marriage, the results framework, operational plan, coordination and M&E mechanisms.
Child marriage, defined as a formal marriage or informal union before the age of 18, remains a prevalent issue in Zambia. Despite Zambia having legal frameworks such as the Marriage Act in place, traditional practices, poverty, and socio-cultural norms often still lead to early marriages, particularly in rural areas. The persistence of child marriage poses significant challenges to girls’ education, health, and economic empowerment, undermining national development efforts. The purpose of this study is to explore the ways in which social protection can contribute to reducing child marriage. Specifically, the study examines how social protection can combat child marriage and develops a cross-stakeholder road map for utilising social protection measures to help address the issue of child marriage in Zambia. The road map aims to provide a comprehensive strategy for integrating social protection into broader efforts to eradicate child marriage.
This profile was developed with the available information between 26/04/2022 and 13/06/2022, as a supplement to the overarching briefing paper Humanitarian Assistance and Social Protection Linkages: Strengthening shock-responsiveness of social protection systems in the Ukraine crisis. Key messages: Romania’s social protection system is weak and although it has expanded to respond to shocks, it does not provide sufficient safeguards for very vulnerable groups against poverty. This is true both in terms of financial transfers and social care. • The response to refugee influx has been organised through a package delivered by aid agencies on the one hand and support from government on the other through tweaks to the existing refugee social protection programme. The collaboration needs to scale up to identify more precisely the bottlenecks and opportunities for a response that further builds the ability of the government to deliver support through the State social protection system. The government may want services to Ukrainians to be on par with those provided to pre-war asylum seekers. Response actors will need to agree with the government on a package of services (cash and non-cash) and commit to their delivery over time and discuss what changes could put it place to this package. Through the possible reforms to the refugee package and ongoing work by UNICEF on the minimum package of services, it may be judicious to support a longer-term reform that can put the onus on adequacy, coverage, labour market policies and delivery at local level.
This profile was developed with the available information between 26/04/2022 and 13/06/2022, as a supplement to the overarching briefing paper Humanitarian Assistance and Social Protection Linkages: Strengthening shock-responsiveness of social protection systems in the Ukraine crisis. Key messages: Further analysis is required to make any solid suggestions on how the social protection system in the Slovak Republic can durably support the plight of Ukrainian refugees, a large proportion of whom chose the Slovak Republic because of kin residing there. However, based on the information available here, it would be advisable to revise, jointly with the government, the municipalities and the humanitarian community, the purpose and modalities for support of Ukrainian refugees within the provisions of the Social Assistance Act to clarify which benefits are needed and under what conditions. Support to municipalities to deliver on the ground is also needed. Entitlements need to be communicated to refugees and service providers. Mid-term needs need to be anticipated and addressed so that Ukrainians who choose to stay can quickly have access to employment and/or social assistance under the provisions of the Temporary Protection Directive.
This document presents a selection of high-level facts and figures about social protection, summarising current data and evidence in the field. Points have been selected with a view to currency and analytical rigour. It is intended that the facts and figures from this document be used to support officers in developing analysis and strengthening arguments relating to social protection. It is important to note that this “Killer Facts” document is intended as a living document and should be updated regularly with new facts and figures to ensure it remains current and relevant. As a collection of facts, however, this document should not be read as a comprehensive synthesis or ‘case’ for social protection in its own right. Conclusions presented here are those of the reports and papers cited within and should be subject to critical interpretation when used. [COVID-19]
Social protection can be a strategic tool for climate risk management and provides an important answer to the current calls for climate action and for increased resilience as we recover from COVID-19. The Paris Agreement demands rapid action to keep the average temperature from rising above 1.5 degrees, but also progress on adaptation and finance to increase resilience in the face of rising risks. However, because of the pandemic, we are now further behind on key poverty targets than just a year ago, so the window of opportunity to reduce poverty and the associated vulnerability to rising climate risks has narrowed. Social protection can be a critical policy instrument for addressing these concerns. This paper articulates the role of social protection in addressing major socioeconomic challenges arising from climate change, especially for low- and middle-income countries, and the need to strategically link social protection and national climate change responses.
Climate change, once perceived as a long-term environmental issue, is now an immediate threat to safety and prosperity, especially for the most vulnerable people that are hit hardest by increasing weather extremes. The impacts cannot be managed just by reducing greenhouse gas emissions or by small tweaks and adaptations to our investments. We also have to manage the reality of social and economic impacts – of climate change, but also of climate change mitigation measures – right now, especially given that these impacts often degrade future resilience, resulting in a downward spiral of climate impacts and rising vulnerability. The unprecedented increases in global poverty in 2020 as a result of COVID-19 exemplify the multidimensional impacts that a global and complex risk can create. Even before the pandemic, climate change threatened to push over 130 million more people into poverty in the next decade alone (Hallegatte, 2016). While we cannot perfectly predict risks, it is essential to have risk management systems in place to save livelihoods, property, and lives. The COVID-19 crisis has brought to the forefront the importance of protecting people in times of shocks through large, established risk management tools such as national social protection systems. Social protection is a key policy instrument to manage social risks, which are those arising from life cycle and income risks (old age, job loss, etc.). To respond to the socio-economic impacts of the COVID-19 crisis, over 200 countries and territories invested over $800 billion in more than 1,400 social protection measures in 2020 alone (Gentilini, 2021). Similarly, social protection can play a central role in managing climate risks by addressing chronic poverty, providing temporary support during periods of acute economic and livelihood disruption, and ultimately building resilience preparing people better for shocks.
The direct economic impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic and associated lockdowns are leading more people into poverty and hunger. Estimates to date on the impact of COVID-19 on poverty and food security are an important first step towards understanding the potential scale of need. However, they are mainly based on very high-level projections that apply uniform assumptions on impact, that simultaneously under-estimate the scale of needs and obscure who or where the needs are likely to be. At the same time, there have been some impressive efforts at compiling a detailed picture of social protection responses (Gentilini et al; IPC-IG), but the scattered and incomplete nature of the data makes it difficult to ascertain the extent to which coverage is expanding to meet the increase in needs. This exercise aims to provide a more comprehensive look at needs, coverage, and gaps for 10 fragile and conflict-affected countries. It does this by undertaking detailed micro-simulation for three ‘deep dive’ countries (Bangladesh, Ethiopia, and Zimbabwe) and a more ‘light touch’ approach in the others (Afghanistan, Burkina Faso, Chad, DRC, OPT, Syria, and Yemen).
Countries across the globe are using or adapting social protection systems and programmes, including labour market policies and social insurance schemes, as well as humanitarian cash assistance, to respond to the range of immediate and medium-term impacts of COVID-19. Getting assistance to those who need it quickly is helping to safeguard the well-being of individuals and families – enabling them to meet unexpected health care costs and adopt necessary protective behaviours; compensating for loss of income; and mitigating the impact of inflation, particularly increased food prices. Further reliance on social protection approaches is also anticipated in the future, as countries recover from the pandemic and prepare for future shocks.
Social Protection as a ‘Solar’ System 2023 Publisher: Social Protection Technical Assistance, Advice, and Resources Facility, STAAR Language: English Social Protection as a ‘Solar’ System Social Protection practitioners, decision-makers and researchers have long been using the term ‘system’ when referring to social protection. This paper frames Social Protection as a ‘Solar’ System to demonstrate the building blocks which collectively contribute to the System as a whole. These building blocks are built on three different ‘levels’: Policy, Programme and Implementation / delivery which this paper sets out in detail.
This paper describes the current practice of providing social protection to refugees and migrants with regular immigration status in low and middle-income destination countries. While informal social protection provided by family or community members is important, especially in contexts of low state capacity, this paper’s focus is on formal providers of social protection, such as state institutions and development and humanitarian actors. Development and humanitarian actors often complement government-provided social protection with cash assistance or livelihood programmes targeted especially at refugees. While reference to some high-income countries will be made, the paper focuses on low- and middle-income countries.
This document provides information and guidance on social protection and older people, with a focus on pensions to cushion the economic impacts of COVID-19. It is intended as an advisory for people involved in planning and delivering social protection support for older people across a range of contexts. The document briefly describes the specific impact of COVID-19 on older people’s health and wellbeing, as well as the socio-economic impacts. It discusses the current responses which for the most part have not specifically targeted older people and makes the case for pensions as a proven mechanisms to provide immediate income support. The guidance goes onto describe why expanding pensions in response to COVID-19 is particularly important as many older people face difficulties accessing emergency cash transfers, offers a few simple tips to make emergency social protection response more accessible and inclusive for older people and concludes with a short discussion on the transition from emergency to protracted crisis requiring longer-term social protection solutions.
Social protection, crucial in times of stability, becomes even more vital in crisis – offering both immediate support and a foundation for resilience and recovery. BUT many people still believe that working with and through social protection systems is too expensive, too slow, and too rigid to be feasible when a crisis hits. Drawing on evidence from a range of crises across the world, STAAR and BASIC Research dispel these myths and other common misconceptions. Demonstrating that whether a crisis is caused by climate, pandemic or conflict responses can and should always consider Social Protection First.
This paper analyses the potential contribution of social protection in supporting poor and vulnerable populations over the medium term – defined loosely as the period from the present until end 2022. The decade prior to COVID-19 witnessed an increasing global focus on social protection, a phenomenon illustrated by the inclusion of social protection as part of the Sustainable Development Goals. Over the past six months, social protection has been at the forefront of responses to COVID-19, with many governments invoking social assistance and other measures as short-term buffers to the immediate impacts of the pandemic.
This paper has been developed specifically for organisations of persons with disabilities in Pacific Island Countries, to support their advocacy for the inclusion of persons with disabilities in social protection programmes. It responds to the increased focus on social protection in the region in response to the social and economic effects of COVID-19 and reflects the global conversation on disability and social protection.
Social protection systems prevent and protect people – especially women and girls – from poverty, vulnerability and social exclusion throughout the course of their lives. Access to social protection is a human right and a powerful tool to empower women and girls and promote gender equality. Strong social protection systems increase women’s income, assets and financial decision-making, support girls to stay in school, delay early marriage and pregnancy, and provide economic and social security in later years. A strong social protection system incorporates a range of contributory and non-contributory policies and programmes – including cash and in-kind transfers, skills training, maternity/paternity and sickness benefits, social care services and pensions.
As Ukraine navigates through the complexities of 2023, marked by unprecedented challenges and transformative opportunities, this report presents an essential updated analysis of the Unified Information System of the Social Sphere (UISSS). Building upon our comprehensive 2022 study we delve deeper into the dynamic shifts in Ukraine’s social protection systems, with a specific focus on the pivotal developments within the UISSS. This study, grounded in an exhaustive review of internal Ukrainian government documents and enriched by discussions with key personnel from the Ukrainian Ministry of Social Policy, is designed to capture the most current strategic advancements in the UISSS. Addressing a diverse audience comprising civil society, government policymakers, social protection experts, and international stakeholders, including the UN, donors, and the World Bank, our report offers a thorough assessment of the UISSS’s critical role in the modernisation of Ukraine’s social protection framework. Amidst transformative national reforms, understanding the evolving landscape of the UISSS becomes imperative. This report not only provides insights into the system’s impact on service delivery and operational efficiency but also supports decision-makers in strategic planning for social protection reform and digital progression.
The STAAR Digest is a collection of articles that our Technical Leadership Team finds interesting – related to both social protection in crises and gender-responsive social protection. We aim to publish the Digest each month. We have curated the content by themes which relate closely to our work on STAAR and the content is by no means exhaustive. We would be happy to receive suggestions for our next issue, as well as any feedback on the content, format, etc. Email us at: STAAR@STAARfacility.org.