Your SlideShare is downloading. ×
ANIS2013_Asia Seen through Technology Lens_Carla Lacerda
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in...5

Thanks for flagging this SlideShare!

Oops! An error has occurred.


Introducing the official SlideShare app

Stunning, full-screen experience for iPhone and Android

Text the download link to your phone

Standard text messaging rates apply

ANIS2013_Asia Seen through Technology Lens_Carla Lacerda


Published on

Published in: Business

  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Total Views
On Slideshare
From Embeds
Number of Embeds
Embeds 0
No embeds

Report content
Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

No notes for slide


  • 1. Cash Transfer Programming: Asia's Shared Concern 4th Asia NGO Innovation Summit 10 October 2013
  • 2. Basic Definitions: 4W’s of CTPs WHAT? A tool for meeting programme objectives • 2 of 3 main modalities for delivering assistance Who? Anyone (Un, GVT, NGO, CBOs) responding to emergencies WHERE? CTPs can be used in emergency responses: • Used when market/ needs analyses show that cash-based approaches would be appropriate to meet needs → Won’t always be appropriate... (but neither will other modalities, preconditions are important) WHY? Humanitarian and Pragmatic reasons  To meet basic needs  To protect, establish or re-establish livelihoods  On their own, or in combination        Dignity, choice and flexibility Power transfer Link response to recovery Cost efficiency Multiplier effects Support to local trade Fewer costs for recipients
  • 3. trends to date, Where we Are now? • • • • Before 2005. Cash-based responses not a key feature of humanitarian programming, policy and debate. 2005-08. Research and debate on appropriateness of CTP increases substantially; ‘Case’ for CTP made via evaluations and guidelines. 2009–12. Agencies and donors improve ability to provide and support CTP. 2013 – onwards...? Spending on CTPs increased from US$46 mil in 2008 to US$117 mill in 2012, peaking with US$262 mil in 2010 (due to Haiti, Pakistan res) (Global Humanitarian Assistance Report 2013). Estimates: •Global figures – €215 mill, 14 mil beneficiaries, 411 projects •Asia figures – €83mill, 5 mil beneficiaries, 126 projects. (€ 14 mill 2010-13) •WFP alone (planned) Asia figures 2012-16 – US$155 mill, 4 mil beneficiaries Between 2007 and 2010, DG ECHO saw increase of 20% of number projects from NGOs including CTP component. ECHO removed the €100,000 ceiling. Routine consideration/use of CTP in emergencies remains far from norm (or at comparable scale to service provision/ in-kind distributions, e.g. CTP represents only 1-2% of overall global humanitarian assistance.
  • 4. Who is CaLP ? • Partnership between Oxfam GB, the British Red Cross, Save the Children, the Norwegian Refugee Council and Action Against Hunger / ACF International. • 5 steering committee organisations came together to support capacity building, research and information-sharing on cash transfer programming as an effective tool to help deliver aid in times of crisis.
  • 5. Rationale for CaLP There is a growing recognition in the humanitarian sector that in an emergency, cash transfers and vouchers can be appropriate and effective tools to support populations affected by disasters in a way that maintains dignity and choice for beneficiaries while stimulating local economies and markets. CaLP’s objective is that “CTP is routinely considered as an appropriate emergency response option and, where implemented, is done so, in a high quality and timely manner and, when relevant, at scale”
  • 6. Growing Awareness, increasing Evidence, Ongoing Learning
  • 7. CaLP’s activities Capacity building In partnership with + Community of practice Research Advocacy, info sharing, coordination
  • 8. Where we work Norwegian Refugee Council Oxfam GB British Red Cross Save the Children Action Against Hunger Dakar: West Africa Bangkok:Asia Nairobi: East Africa Regional Focal Point (RFP) Steering Committee member
  • 9. “Social Innovation Meets Technology: Scale-up Impacts, Enrich People’s Lives” Q: How does technology contribute to scale up social innovation and solve complex social challenges? How does technology connect people and bring impact to people lives? A: Technology is a means to an end. During emergencies, technology has the power to connect people to communicate where they are, if they are well/ in danger and transmit messages as well as send cash and assistance. Q: What are the best social innovation practices and its replication and sustainment strategies to expand social innovation and technology in Asia? A: NGO/ UN and private sector relationships (e.g. WFP and Globe Telecom, Oxfam/ CaLP and Visa, Telecommunication Sans Frontiere, WFP and Mastercard, Telenor in Myanmar). Also multi-sectorial responses! Q: What are the key challenges and opportunities for technology in social innovation? How can we create environment that fosters technology in social innovation? What are the enabling factors and support requirements? A: Challenges are network coverage/ systems failure during emergencies. TSF provide solutions and support. Emergency preparedness, contingency plans and established positive relationships with governments, regional bodies (ASEAN, SAARC etc) and private sector are key.
  • 10. 2 0 0 9 Typhoon in the P h i l i p p i n e s UN Photo/Evan Schneider - 1 2 F l o o d s i n P a k i s t a n UN Photo/Logan Abassi
  • 11. CTP Activities in Asia Afghanistan – Agencies use of CTPs, insecure environments, concerns for next year Nepal – Long experience of CTPs increasingly using technology Bangladesh – Many agencies using CTPs namely BRAC and international UN/ NGOs, government also uses safety nets Pakistan – Several agencies (PEFSA) use CTPs, government developing BISP + other safety net, Zero Hunger India – Large cash-based government safety net programmes, agencies supporting on the technical side Sri Lanka – Agencies using cash and vouchers since the Asian Tsunami Myanmar – Increasingly using CTPs namely in Kachin (not in Rakhine yet) and some in the South for refugee returns, low but increasing infrastructure Philippines – Increasingly using CTPs since 2009, government developed 4P safety net Cambodia – Increasing CTP response since floods in 2012, government developing safety net with World Bank
  • 12. The Cash Atlas: Innovative CTPs South Asia: •Pakistan - UBL ‘Kash’ Cards WFP, OGB, GVT •Bangladesh - Mobile phones South East Asia: •Philippines – ACF and Citibank, OGB and Visa, WFP and Globe Telecom
  • 13. CaLP in Asia Other contexts (e.g. Bangladesh, Indonesia, Sri Lanka, Cambodia and learning from China and/ or India) Myanmar Afghanistan Pakistan Philippines CaLP in Asia – Regional Hub in Bangkok Regional themes research: •Links with government safety nets •Refugees protracted displacement •Emergency preparedness •Urban response •Innovations, technology and private sector Cash Working Groups •Regional (BKK: 3 so far since June) •Country (MYA, PHL started; AFG, PAK ongoing) Trainings •Ongoing CaLP Level 2: Bangkok and Yangon, •Government trainings:(NEP, PHL or MYA or PAK) Learning Events -Kuala Lumpur IFRC, Mercy Malaysia -Asia NGO Innovation Summit (ANIS) -Regional Humanitarian Partnership Funding - co-funding with NGOs, UN agencies
  • 14. Relevance of CTPs and New Technologies for Social Innovation? 1. ‘CTPs is Fit for Purpose’ - CTP is indirectly ‘raising the bar’ in humanitarian assistance ensuring needs are met in appropriate, effective, accountable ways. 2. ‘CTPs is Fit for the Region’ - CTP is cross-cutting and fit to issues of urban, emergency preparedness, safety nets, innovations/ technology. Domestic governments increasingly take a stronger role in response to crises, especially natural disasters, within their borders in this region. China and India were home to a reported 78% of all people affected by disasters between 2002-11 and received little international humanitarian assistance. CTP can enhance discussions w/ ASEAN, SAARC and SPC. 3. ‘CTPs is Fit for the Future’ – CTP promotes an increased discussion on coordination, engagement with governments, multi-sectoral approaches, accountability to beneficiaries, cost-effectiveness of humanitarian response and use of technology/ private sector/ innovative delivery mechanisms. The UN’s Transformative Agenda was designed to improve leadership, coordination and accountability. New technologies are being applied, not just talked about, in early warning, mapping and delivery.
  • 15. Relevance of CTPs and New Technologies for Social Innovation?
  • 16. Relevance of CTPs and New Technologies for Social Innovation? It’s a Crowded Plain-Field Out there (or In here??), GHA Report 2010