SOCIAL PROTECTION IN SOUTH CENTRAL SOMALIA. The findings of a feasibility study October 2013 January 2014

Transcription

1 SOCIAL PROTECTION IN SOUTH CENTRAL SOMALIA The findings of a feasibility study October 2013 January 2014

2 Introduction Assess whether aspects of a formal social protection system might provide a better way to assist households Focus on South/Central Regions of Somalia Starting point for discussions on the way forward towards social protection Recommendations on how current programming could be improved to assist in the transition to longer-term programming

3 Methodology Literature review Global social protection literature Social protection in Africa and fragile states Learning from experiences in Somalia Interviews with key informants (Government, UN, NGO, donors, external experts) FGD with community members and local leaders Areas: Gedo, Lower Juba, Hiran, Mudug, Mogadishu, Lower Shabelle, Bay

4 Number of interviews and focus groups Community Groups and Representa2ves Government of Somalia NGO / UN Agencies Donors / external experts Total

5 Key areas of enquiry Understanding of social protection Understand the ways that people in need seek and receive assistance Identification of projects currently in place that have relevance to social protection outcomes Understand the views of stakeholders on the need for longer term engagement with the community Understand the feasibility of starting longer term programming in different locations Understand what type of activities would be most appropriate?

6 Why social protection? Famine in 2010/11 despite humanitarian community working for 20+ years Lessons are still being learned about the timeliness and modality of response to the 2011 famine Research is still being conducted as to the exact causes of the famine. Some humanitarian agencies are starting to re-think their strategies in Somalia. Increasing interest in exploring approaches that result in resilience - households being better prepared for shocks

7 What is social protection? The set of public actions that help households address risk, and moderate their vulnerability to hazards and shocks: Transfer of assets to vulnerable groups and/or Through policies and mechanisms that promote social equity and social inclusion and prevent discrimination.

8 How does social protection differ from humanitarian programming? Social protection should operate within government policy Even if external partners are involved in elements of its delivery and funding Transfers made through the social protection programmes should be long term and predictable. Long-term nature, selection and targeting of beneficiaries should be transparent and easily understood.

9 Social protection encompasses initiatives, both formal and informal, that provide: social assistance to extremely poor individuals and households; social services to groups who need special care or would otherwise be denied access to basic services; social insurance to protect people against the risks and consequences associated with the loss of employment and livelihood shocks; and social equity to protect people against social risks such as discrimination or abuse. Devereux and Sabates-Wheeler (2004)

10 How to intervene? Social assistance - when resources are transferred to vulnerable individuals or households with no other means of adequate support. These groups might include single parents, the homeless, or the physically or mentally challenged. Social insurance - mitigates risks associated with unemployment, ill health, disability, work-related injury and old age, such as health insurance or unemployment insurance.

11 Labour market interventions - policies and programmes designed to promote employment, the efficient operation of labour markets and the protection of workers. Policies (and their enforcement) to ensure social equity

12 Areas of social protection intervention Protective - recovery from shocks (social assistance) Preventative - mitigating risks in order to avoid shocks (social insurance) Promotive - promoting opportunities (labour interventions) Transformative - focusing on underlying structural inequalities which give rise to vulnerability (social equity) Devereux and Sabates-Wheeler (2004)

13 Who are the beneficiaries? Universal E.g. All people over 60 years of age E.g. All households with children <5 years Targeted Based on net income (and assets) E.g. households earning less than X

14 Who funds social protection? Ideally, state actors (government) Usually from taxation revenue Importance of government involvement is well recognized (for sustainability, trust building ) International donors such as World Bank, other donors, NGOs, UN, community E.g. Ethiopia World Bank still funds a % of the PSNP E.g. Kenya DFID funds a % of HSNP Both programmes had early involvement with government and a clear transition plan for government take over

15 Minimum Social Protection Floor International Labour Organization (ILO) - 5% and 12% of gross domestic product (GDP) annually. Access to essential health care, including maternity care; Basic income security (social assistance) for: Children, providing access to nutrition, education, care and any other necessary goods and services; Persons in active age who are unable to earn sufficient income, in particular in cases of sickness, unemployment, maternity and disability; Older persons.

16 What if the government cannot fully fund social protection? Make efforts to increase funding from government sources This is most important in fragile states where people tend to have limited access to external assistance, but face greater issues External funding of predictable social protection measures is likely to ultimately be a more cost effective way to support households. Evidence suggests that it should reduce the need for emergency, ad hoc, additional support.

17 Social protection in developing countries Social protection programmes in developing countries have emerged as a major contributor to social development and equity. Programmes in South America most widely described, evaluated and discussed in the literature. Growing number of examples from Africa.

18 The two main social protection programmes in East Africa are: The Productive Safety Net Programme in Ethiopia The Hunger Safety Net Programme in Kenya

19 Social Safety Nets Non-contributory (free) transfer programmes Objective = Prevent the poorest members of society from falling below a certain poverty level. Transfers can include cash, food, non-food items, conditional cash transfers, price subsidies, public works or fee waivers. Safety net programmes are generally targeted at people with low income and have specific cut-offs.

20 Links with humanitarian programming Humanitarian needs still arise, therefore an understanding of both humanitarian and development principles are key. Must be space to still respond to humanitarian crisis But within a framework that encompasses movement towards longer-term outcomes. Both PSNP and HSNP have space for scale-up in the event of humanitarian crises, including a possible increase in beneficiary numbers, and/or an increase in transfer size.

21 Social protection in South Central Somalia

22 Vulnerability OECD principles for engagement in fragile states Take the context as the starting point. Main objective of social protection programming is to reduce the vulnerability of the poor à It is critical that stakeholders have a good understanding of the multi-dimensional nature of risk and vulnerability

23 Who is vulnerable? In Somalia, vulnerability is based on: Ethnicity and clan? Conflict and population movement Natural disasters Economic factors Other social factors Political factors

24 Informal social protection mechanisms Informal: Protective: Social assistance to help most vulnerable in society Remittance (US$1.2 2 billion per year) Range of other mechanisms (zakat, sadaqah, qaraan ) Preventative: Mechanisms to allow households to earn income and prevent further deterioration of economic status Promotive: No examples reported Transformative: No examples reported

25 Formal social protection mechanisms Humanitarian assistance Donors UN agencies NGOs Civil Society Government strategies and priorities Economic Recovery Plan ( ) Social protection is an objective Ministry of Human Development and Public Services Provision of basic services for all regions is a key pillar (minimum SPF) Requested technical support

26 Key informant perspectives

27 Opportunities Common direction among humanitarian community Emergence of new policies and strategies New FGS- Fed Gov Improving security Commitment to research and sharing Repatriation from Kenya Agencies moving to Mogadishu

28 Barriers Community doesn t yet trust FGS FGS policy enforcement and capacity Security Regional and livelihood differences Finance Capacity of stakeholders Operational issues: targeting, accountability Lack of basic services Operating environment Social issues

29 Is a formal social protection system feasible? No, BUT: There is need for something better than current humanitarian aid Population needs are high Longer term programmes needed Predictability A formal, comprehensive system is a goal at which to aim. What could be done now?

30 Predictable humanitarian programmes

31 Currently Humanitarian programming is neither predictable, nor timely Done little to increase household resilience Reliance on informal support from community People in need don t first seek help from humanitarian community Few agencies have relationships with government

32 Both agencies and donors need to have a longer-term vision of their work in Somalia. If the objective is to improve long term outcomes for people and to build household resilience à Recommended that agencies consider the path of social protection in order to enable households to have predictable assistance that helps them to plan their future and build resilience to future crises.

33 Possible first step to improve predictability à cash-based social safety net Provide regular assistance to most vulnerable households Dependent on donor funding Preparatory work needed by humanitarian community Opportunity to think through operational issues and learn lessons from previous projects Create a harmonized and coordinated approach

34 Preparatory steps Capacity building for stakeholders Improve relationships with government and local authorities Improve regional level analysis Harmonize approaches Improve key operational issues Improve relationships with communities Lobby donors for long-term funding

35 Next steps Ensure programmes are designed to support the objectives of the ERP. Involve FGS staff at all stages of the planning and delivery process, supporting their capacity to play this role where necessary. Ensure that FGS commits resources to any proposed social protection programme, even if it is just in terms of staff time. Invest in systems which provide more reliable seasonal and region specific information on the nature and extent of poverty, to allow better targeting and impact evaluation

36 Invest in the staffing and structures that support capacity of building of FGS staff. These will not necessarily be the same staff members that run cash or food delivery project as the required skill set will be quite different. Agree with government and other development actors on a definition of social protection for use in Somalia and from this move towards the development of a social protection strategy for the country. Commit to working in consortia (ideally including FGS), rather than individually

37 Support interventions that provide basic services such as health and education Consider united advocacy on key issues Identify potential programmes under all four social protection pillars

38 There is still much work to be done on building the technical capacity of stakeholders. Recommend that agencies take time to do some collective thinking, learning and capacity building, and gain a better understanding of the vulnerabilities that people in their operational areas face. Learning from the many cash programmes in Somalia, the cash and voucher response to the famine, the DFID Health Consortium in Somalia and the Social Safety Net programme in northern Somalia should all be considered in the programme design.

39 At this stage, South Central Somalia is not ready for a comprehensive, formal social protection system. However, establishing a social safety net and supporting provision of basic social services is a potential starting point. Due consideration to the wide range of social protection instruments is a starting point for understanding the relevance of social protection both for building resilience and for improving long term outcomes for beneficiaries.

40 THE END