PUBLICATIONS

Search by theme or free text for publications by STAAR and SPACE

Portfolio

Location

Theme

STAAR Evidence Digest (Issue 10)

STAAR Evidence Digest (Issue 11)

STAAR Evidence Digest (Issue 12)

STAAR Evidence Digest (Issue 13)

STAAR Evidence Digest (Issue 14)

STAAR Evidence Digest (Issue 15)

STAAR Evidence Digest (Issue 16)

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. Any feedback on the content, format, etc is welcome. Email us at STAAR@STAARfacility.org. This month’s digest highlights emerging information on themes relevant to: Social protection, climate and resilience Linking social protection and humanitarian assistance Working with local actors Gender equality and social inclusion

STAAR Evidence Digest (Issue 17)

STAAR Evidence Digest (Issue 18)

STAAR Evidence Digest (Issue 19)

STAAR Evidence Digest (Issue 2)

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 with themes that 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.

STAAR Evidence Digest (Issue 20)

STAAR Evidence Digest (Issue 21)

STAAR Evidence Digest (Issue 22)

STAAR Evidence Digest (Issue 23)

STAAR Evidence Digest (Issue 24)

STAAR Evidence Digest (Issue 24), curated by the STAAR Technical Senior Leadership Team.

STAAR Evidence Digest (Issue 25)

STAAR Evidence Digest (Issue 25), curated by the STAAR Technical Senior Leadership Team.

STAAR Evidence Digest (Issue 26)

STAAR Evidence Digest (Issue 26), curated by the STAAR Technical Senior Leadership Team.

STAAR Evidence Digest (Issue 3)

STAAR Evidence Digest (Issue 4)

STAAR Evidence Digest (Issue 5)

Share STAAR Evidence Digest (Issue 5) 2023 Publisher: Social Protection Technical Assistance, Advice, and Resources Facility, STAAR Language: English STAAR Evidence Digest (Issue 5) The STAAR Digest is a collection of articles that our Technical Leadership Team finds interesting related to both social protection in crises and genderresponsive 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. Any feedback on the content, format, etc is welcome. Email us at STAAR@STAARfacility.org.

STAAR Evidence Digest (Issue 6)

STAAR Evidence Digest (Issue 7)

STAAR Evidence Digest (Issue 8)

STAAR Evidence Digest (Issue 9)

Synthesising lessons and promising practices for country-level coordination in delivery of joined-up humanitarian cash and social protection

Increasing humanitarian needs coupled with social protection systems’ growing capability to respond to shocks means that coordination between humanitarian cash and social protection actors is vital. As of 2025, the world faces significant challenges with 712 million people living in extreme poverty and 733 million facing hunger. 52.4% of people globally are covered by at least one cash social protection benefit, leaving 3.8 billion unprotected, many of whom reside in fragile and conflict-affected states (FCAS). The protracted crises the world is facing today are compounded by limited resources for humanitarian appeals, with coverage standing at just 37.3% as of October 2024, further reinforcing the case for more effective coordination. Global evidence demonstrates that social protection can be effectively leveraged to respond to shocks and support household resilience. When implemented through adequate, predictable responses, social protection can reduce negative coping mechanisms, thereby reducing the cost of humanitarian interventions and preventing income and asset loss by households. It can also help rebuild asset stocks, reduce debt burdens, and improve nutrition, investment, and productivity, as well as generate economy- wide multipliers. While there may still be a need for complementary emergency responses, the benefits of effective social protection are clear.

The case for including persons with disabilities in social protection in Pacific Island Countries

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.

The Potential Role of Economic Inclusion Programmes to Respond to Those Affected by COVID-19

COVID-19 is accentuating the risks facing an increasing number of poor and vulnerable individuals and households in a myriad of ways. As the effects of the crisis evolve, many actors are considering whether and how to complement social assistance measures with additional inputs, components and linkages – including economic inclusion approaches – to help mitigate the impacts of the pandemic and move towards early economic recovery. This paper therefore explores the opportunities and challenges of economic inclusion approaches alongside social assistance responses in the COVID-19 context. It shows how evidence can inform the design of measures to help people recover from the impacts of the pandemic over the medium- and longer-term through the lens of government-led economic inclusion programmes which leverage national social protection systems.

The realities of climate finance for social protection

This report outlines the status of international public climate finance going to social protection, focusing on three categories of climate finance providers, bilateral, multilateral development banks, and the climate funds. It proposes options for more efficient and targeted use of climate finance for social protection. The report reviewed existing literature that looks at climate finance and social protection and assessed the climate finance strategies and portfolios of the major international public climate finance providers.

Transfer Values: How Much Is Enough? Balancing social protection and humanitarian considerations

This Operational Guidance paper follows on from two blogs published by SPACE on the subject of transfer values across the social protection and humanitarian nexus (here and here). This note dives even deeper into the topic, highlighting some key elements that could be considered when setting transfer values for emergency response, while navigating the complexity of differing ‘pressures’ across sectors.

Ukraine: A social protection country profile for the Ukraine crisis response

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: The Ukrainian social protection system has undergone years of reform. Issues and weaknesses remain, such as low coverage, inclusion, gender responsiveness, low adequacy of benefit, issues with adequacy of local budgeting. It has however proved to historically be responsive to shocks, establishing specific programs for people affected by the 2014 invasion (IDP program) and COVID. The government immediately legislated and scaled up social assistance to persons affected by the conflict making their response the largest and swiftest.

Understanding the Economic Impacts of COVID-19 in Low- and Middle-Income Countries: Who, Where, How, and When?

Social protection is recognised as an essential mechanism to reach those who are in urgent need because of the COVID-19 crisis, and efforts are under way to scale up systems, so they can be ‘shock responsive’. What is needed next, however, is a much more disaggregated view, based on an understanding of who will be affected, how, and when so as to better understand the ‘what’ of the social protection response. While ultimately country-level assessments will be most useful for specific policy recommendations, this note sets out a framework for some of the key considerations.

Useful COVID-19 and Social Protection Materials

This is a living document tracking relevant COVID-19 and Social Protection Materials. Citation: Barca, V. (2021) ‘Useful COVID-19 and Social Protection Materials’, Social Protection Approaches to COVID-19 Expert Advice Service (SPACE), DAI Global UK Ltd, United Kingdom

Using Social Protection to respond to COVID-19 and other shocks in Somalia

This case study on Somalia forms part of a series of papers produced by SPACE which document and analyse the social protection responses to COVID-19 in several countries, including Fiji, Ghana, Indonesia, Nigeria and the Occupied Palestinian Territories. This case study differs from the other case studies in that it seeks to take a broader lens, as follows. It recognises that Somalia has been affected by multiple crises in recent years, and that COVID-19 is just one more layer of crisis that has compounded the current ‘triple crisis’ of floods, a locust invasion of historical proportions, and ongoing conflict in some areas. There was a limited social protection response to the pandemic itself, and the main scale-up of social protection over the last two years was to cover the additional needs caused by floods and the locust infestation: arguably of greater importance, especially in rural areas. The paper therefore includes information on how the flagship and pilot shock responsive social protection programmes have responded to both the locust crisis and the COVID-19 crisis.

Using social protection to respond to the COVID-19 pandemic in Ghana

This paper is a rapid review of how social protection was used in response to the COVID-19 pandemic in Ghana. It was carried out over two weeks in the second half of May 2021. It draws on largely publicly available documents, media releases and interviews, but was not able to draw on internal programme information, for instance from administrative or monitoring systems.

Using social protection to respond to the COVID-19 pandemic in Indonesia

This case study synthesizes the social protection response to the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic in Indonesia in 2020. It is part of six country case studies developed as part of the Social Protection Approaches to COVID-19 Expert Advice Helpline’s (SPACE) learning and documentation approach. By capturing country-level social protection responses to COVID-19, the case studies aim to inform the global audiences as to what has happened, what has worked well and less well and why. The case studies primarily draw upon a review of existing research; government regulations, decrees and policies; news media; and online media such as blogs and webinars. This desk-based review is supplemented by select key informant interviews (KIIs). The case study is structured as follows: This introductory section presents an overview of the country, the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic, and the national social protection system. It is followed by Section 2, which presents the social protection responses to COVID-19 in terms of the design, financing and delivery systems. Finally, Section 3 concludes with a light-touch assessment of the response and its long-term implications for the national social protection system.

Using social protection to respond to the COVID-19 pandemic in Nigeria

This case study documents experiences from the government of Nigeria and partners’ social protection and humanitarian responses to COVID-19. It aims to contribute knowledge and learning to inform both the direction of social protection in Nigeria, as well as global debates on shock responsive social protection (SRSP) and linking humanitarian action and social protection (HA-SP). The paper draws from a range of data sources including: Existing published and grey literature on social protection policy and programming in Nigeria – including social protection sector reviews, studies on SRSP and linking HA-SP in Nigeria, and grey documentation on the government’s planned social protection response. Experiences of the lead author, through SPACE, providing a range of technical assistance to social protection and humanitarian actors in Nigeria during 2020-21, and associated outputs. Primary data collection from a range of key informants in the country. FCDO Nigeria, the Government of Nigeria’s National Social Safety Net Coordinating Office (NASSCO) and members of the Development Partners Group on Social Protection in Nigeria also provided valuable comments and feedback on early drafts.

Using social protection to respond to the COVID-19 pandemic in the Occupied Palestinian Territories

As part of the Social Protection Approaches to COVID-19 Expert Advice Helpline’s (SPACE) approach to learning and documentation, five in-depth country case studies1 will capture information on country-level social protection and humanitarian nexus responses to COVID-19. The case studies aim to capture what has happened, what has worked well and less well and why. This case study covers the Occupied Palestinian Territories (OPTs) and is based on a literature review and key informant interviews during March 20212 . The analysis also explores other triggers, including the date on which each country reported its first COVID-19 related death and the dates on which each country implemented restrictions on international travel, workplace opening, school opening, public transport functioning, public gathering, and internal movements. These triggers produced similar results to those selected for further analysis below.

Value for Money Analysis of Emergency Multi-Purpose Cash Assistance Delivery Models in Ukraine

The PeReHID Initiative (PI) has conducted a Value for Money (VFM) study to assess three humanitarian Multipurpose Cash Assistance (MPCA) delivery models in Ukraine: Rapid, Regular, and Expansion MPCA. The study aims to inform strategic decisions around transitioning emergency cash transfers into government-led social protection systems, focusing on efficiency, effectiveness, and equity. Using the FCDO’s VFM 4Es Framework (excluding Economy), the study draws on extensive document review, budget analysis, stakeholder interviews, and focus groups. Despite data and access constraints, it highlights key findings and trade-offs among the models: Efficiency: Expansion MPCA, leveraging government systems, shows the lowest cost-to-transfer ratio (0.19), outperforming Rapid and Regular models (0.27 combined). However, its efficiency depends heavily on existing infrastructure and may come with higher risks of inclusion and exclusion errors. Effectiveness: Rapid MPCA stands out for its speed, delivering assistance within days—critical in emergency contexts. Regular MPCA faces delays and challenges in coordination, while Expansion MPCA’s effectiveness hinges on government cooperation and design. Equity: According to key informants, Rapid MPCA proves most inclusive, reaching people in hard-to-access areas through face-to-face registration. Regular MPCA uses targeted scorecards but struggles with verification. Expansion MPCA risks exclusion due to outdated registries and limited social protection coverage. No single MPCA model excels across all criteria. A hybrid approach is recommended to balance cost-efficiency, speed, and equity. The study calls for clearer definitions of VFM, better data sharing, and continued collaboration to integrate humanitarian cash into broader social protection reforms.

Value for Money of Social Protection and Humanitarian Cash Transfers in the Context of COVID-19

Social protection and humanitarian cash responses to the COVID-19 pandemic have emerged globally within the last few months, with more responses to come as the early phases of lockdowns have in many places been replaced with the beginnings of L-shaped recessions and on-going extreme economic hardship for tens of millions globally. While the value for money (VfM) of social protection and cash transfers is already well established, and existing guidance already plentiful, the COVID-19 context raises some particular issues from a VfM perspective. This short note addresses these issues and is aimed at economists, social protection and humanitarian specialists within development partner organisations, as well as policy-makers in government – anyone tasked with designing social protection responses and assessing different options, whether in concept notes, business cases, or budget submissions.

What are future financing options for shock responsive social protection: A technical primer

This paper aims to advance these discussions in a number of ways. As ‘financing for SRSP’ is understood differently by different people, it starts by providing greater clarity on what this term constitutes, and its relation to disaster risk finance. It acknowledges the broad potential remit of financing for SRSP (including the financing of routine social protection, longer-term risk reduction, and resiliencebuilding efforts), and the need for a balance of investments to reduce and transfer risks – reducing the size of the risks to be transferred also reduces the cost of transferring the risk. However, the paper focuses on those aspects of financing linked to shock preparedness, response, and recovery.

What are future financing options for shock responsive social protection? (Summary Brief)

This paper, and the longer Technical Primer that accompanies it, are designed to inform discussions around financing shock-responsive social protection (SRSP). It starts by clarifying terms and providing a framing to guide approaches to SRSP financing. It then provides a high-level overview of current and potential sectoral financing sources for SRSP, as well as specific financing instruments, their applicability and limitations for SRSP, and how they can be better institutionalised. It ends with a series of reflections for a broad policy and programme audience. Along the way, the Technical Primer signposts the reader to useful resources through footnotes, a recommended reading list, bibliography, and a glossary.