Successfully reported this slideshow.
We use your LinkedIn profile and activity data to personalize ads and to show you more relevant ads. You can change your ad preferences anytime.
Social Protection –
A main Pillar in Drought
Resilience?
Martina Ulrichs
Overview
 Drought, Social Protection and Resilience
 Findings from BRACED research programme
on social protection and re...
Drought in East Africa
• 2015-2017 consecutive years of
drought has led to food and
water shortage
•10.7 million people in...
Social Protection
• SP aims to reduce vulnerability to risks through
cash- or in-kind support
• Different SP programmes ha...
BRACED Resilience
framework
Absorptive capacity
 Anticipatory capacity
 Adaptive capacity
(Bahadur et al. 2015)
Turkana...
Absorptive capacity
Credit: Bioversity International / E.Hermanowicz
Regular income transfers allow people to
absorb shock...
Anticipatory capacity
HSNP beneficiary, Turkana
Credit: Martina Ulrichs
SP can increase anticipatory capacity at two
level...
Adaptive capacity
WFP Public Works Programme in Lesotho
Credit: Martina Ulrichs
SP’s contribution to adaptive capacity les...
Three reflections
1. What is SP’s main contribution to resilience?
Auxiliary outcomes
Environmental outcomes
Intrinsic outcomes
Household/in...
2. Isomorphic mimicry – is it form or function that matters for
resilience?
In SP you observe two things:
•Programmes that...
3. Premature load bearing and institutional capacity
‘Asking
too much
of too
little too
soon too
often’
Credit: Rachel Sla...
Conclusions
 Social protection’s key contribution to resilience is to reduce
negative impact of shocks – this needs to be...
Thank you
Contact:
Martina.Ulrichs@gmail.com
This research formed part the Building
Resilience and Adaptation to Climate
E...
You’ve finished this document.
Download and read it offline.
Upcoming SlideShare
What to Upload to SlideShare
Next

of

Social Protection – A main Pillar in Drought Resilience?  Experiences from sub-Saharan Africa Slide 1

YouTube videos are no longer supported on SlideShare

View original on YouTube

Social Protection – A main Pillar in Drought Resilience?  Experiences from sub-Saharan Africa Slide 3 Social Protection – A main Pillar in Drought Resilience?  Experiences from sub-Saharan Africa Slide 4 Social Protection – A main Pillar in Drought Resilience?  Experiences from sub-Saharan Africa Slide 5 Social Protection – A main Pillar in Drought Resilience?  Experiences from sub-Saharan Africa Slide 6 Social Protection – A main Pillar in Drought Resilience?  Experiences from sub-Saharan Africa Slide 7 Social Protection – A main Pillar in Drought Resilience?  Experiences from sub-Saharan Africa Slide 8 Social Protection – A main Pillar in Drought Resilience?  Experiences from sub-Saharan Africa Slide 9 Social Protection – A main Pillar in Drought Resilience?  Experiences from sub-Saharan Africa Slide 10 Social Protection – A main Pillar in Drought Resilience?  Experiences from sub-Saharan Africa Slide 11 Social Protection – A main Pillar in Drought Resilience?  Experiences from sub-Saharan Africa Slide 12 Social Protection – A main Pillar in Drought Resilience?  Experiences from sub-Saharan Africa Slide 13 Social Protection – A main Pillar in Drought Resilience?  Experiences from sub-Saharan Africa Slide 14 Social Protection – A main Pillar in Drought Resilience?  Experiences from sub-Saharan Africa Slide 15
Upcoming SlideShare
What to Upload to SlideShare
Next
Download to read offline and view in fullscreen.

Share

Social Protection – A main Pillar in Drought Resilience? Experiences from sub-Saharan Africa

Download to read offline

Joint GIZ-DIE event starting with a keynote by Martina Ulrichs.
Background:
In the past five decades, drought has become a major problem in Africa. It has caused depletion of assets, environmental degradation, impoverishment, unemployment and forced migrations, thus threatening to undermine the development gains made. Especially in the drylands drought represents one of the most important factors contributing to malnutrition and famine that affects the poorest and most vulnerable communities. Climate shocks force poor households to liquidate productive assets such as livestock or land in exchange for food, default on loans, withdraw children from school, and/or engage in exploitive environmental management practices to survive. Furthermore, the lingering risk of drought weakens the ex-post adaptation options as it prevents farmers from adopting profitable technologies and practices that are perceived as risky, hence creating a nexus that increases the cycle of vulnerability and depletes the capability to overcome hunger and poverty. This inability to accept and manage risk and accumulate and retain wealth locks vulnerable populations in poverty and food and nutrition insecurity.
During the last decade, social protection instruments have gained popularity among policy responses to drought. An increasing number of governments in Sub-Saharan Africa have integrated cash transfer and public works schemes into their strategies for food and nutrition security and disaster risk management. These programmes shall prevent disinvestment and depletion of assets and enhance post-drought recovery, adaptation and resilience of livelihoods for the poorest parts of the population in affected areas. Most prominent examples are Ethiopia with its Productive Safety Net Programme (PSNP), the largest safety net in Africa, outside South Africa, or the Kenya´s Hunger Safety Net Programme (HSNP). But can social protection programmes factually deliver the promises made?

Panellists:
Martina Ulrichs (Independent consultant)
Ralf Radermacher (GIZ)
Guush Berhane (IFPRI)
Bettina Tewinkel (KfW)

Moderators:
Markus Loewe (DIE)

The event is part of a series:

Research meets Development:
Drought resilience in Sub-Saharan Africa
Event series in the context of the “One World – No Hunger” (SEWOH) initiative of the
German Ministry for Economic Cooperation and Development (BMZ) in the summer term 2017

More on the series at: https://www.die-gdi.de/veranstaltungen/drought-resilience-in-sub-saharan-africa/

  • Be the first to like this

Social Protection – A main Pillar in Drought Resilience? Experiences from sub-Saharan Africa

  1. 1. Social Protection – A main Pillar in Drought Resilience? Martina Ulrichs
  2. 2. Overview  Drought, Social Protection and Resilience  Findings from BRACED research programme on social protection and resilience capacities  Three reflections moving forward
  3. 3. Drought in East Africa • 2015-2017 consecutive years of drought has led to food and water shortage •10.7 million people in Ethiopia, Kenya and Somalia in need of food assistance (ECHO 2017) • Increasing urgency to support vulnerable people in building resilience to drought . “Ukame” is drought in Swahili. Participatory risk ranking in Turkana. Credit: Martina Ulrichs
  4. 4. Social Protection • SP aims to reduce vulnerability to risks through cash- or in-kind support • Different SP programmes have different forms and functions: • Form: • Cash transfers • Public works • Function: • Prevent intergenerational transmission of poverty (CCT) • Provide protection in old age (pensions) • Increase food security (safety nets)
  5. 5. BRACED Resilience framework Absorptive capacity  Anticipatory capacity  Adaptive capacity (Bahadur et al. 2015) Turkana women Credit: Martina Ulrichs
  6. 6. Absorptive capacity Credit: Bioversity International / E.Hermanowicz Regular income transfers allow people to absorb shocks. Ethiopia PSNP: welfare of households receiving support drops less after drought and recovers faster  Uganda Pension: similar impact on capacity to absorb, despite different function
  7. 7. Anticipatory capacity HSNP beneficiary, Turkana Credit: Martina Ulrichs SP can increase anticipatory capacity at two levels: Household / individual  Savings, investing in assets Institutional  Putting in place systems to ‘scale-up’ support during an emergency
  8. 8. Adaptive capacity WFP Public Works Programme in Lesotho Credit: Martina Ulrichs SP’s contribution to adaptive capacity less clear - but important to build resilience.  Limited evidence of impact of assets on adaptive capacity  Complementary programmes needed Ethiopia: PSNP and HABP
  9. 9. Three reflections
  10. 10. 1. What is SP’s main contribution to resilience? Auxiliary outcomes Environmental outcomes Intrinsic outcomes Household/individual Auxiliary outcomes Institutional / systems Absorptive Increasing the environment’s capacity to absorb through public works e.g. soil and water conservation activities. Cash transfers allow people to meet basic consumption needs during times of shocks. Putting in place effective delivery mechanisms that can deliver assistance even during times of crisis. Anticipatory Increasing preparedness by supporting infrastructure to reduce disasters, e.g. building flood walls. Cash transfers provide people with the ability to save in anticipation of a shock. Putting in place delivery mechanisms, contingency plans to deliver emergency assistance through social protection. Adaptive (social protection +) Promoting adaptation through reforestation, conservation farming. Enabling households to improve their livelihoods through asset-building and income generation activities that are less vulnerable to climate risks. Providing linkages between social protection and other livelihoods programmes. Source: Ulrichs and Slater, 2016
  11. 11. 2. Isomorphic mimicry – is it form or function that matters for resilience? In SP you observe two things: •Programmes that look the same on paper, but perfom differently •Programmes that have different functions but similar forms (e.g. cash transfers)
  12. 12. 3. Premature load bearing and institutional capacity ‘Asking too much of too little too soon too often’ Credit: Rachel Slater  Expectation of social protection are high and don’t always match capacity to deliver.  Putting in place functioning programmes takes time, e.g. PSNP Ethiopia.
  13. 13. Conclusions  Social protection’s key contribution to resilience is to reduce negative impact of shocks – this needs to be strengthened.  Social protection can be a vehicle for effective humanitarian assistance in certain contexts – but a focus on ‘shock- response’ should not bring us back to short-term assistance.  Building resilience is complex and cannot be achieved by one programme alone – we need to understand the comparative advantage of different sectors in a wider resilience building agenda.
  14. 14. Thank you Contact: Martina.Ulrichs@gmail.com This research formed part the Building Resilience and Adaptation to Climate Extremes and Disasters (BRACED) programme. http://www.braced.org/

Joint GIZ-DIE event starting with a keynote by Martina Ulrichs. Background: In the past five decades, drought has become a major problem in Africa. It has caused depletion of assets, environmental degradation, impoverishment, unemployment and forced migrations, thus threatening to undermine the development gains made. Especially in the drylands drought represents one of the most important factors contributing to malnutrition and famine that affects the poorest and most vulnerable communities. Climate shocks force poor households to liquidate productive assets such as livestock or land in exchange for food, default on loans, withdraw children from school, and/or engage in exploitive environmental management practices to survive. Furthermore, the lingering risk of drought weakens the ex-post adaptation options as it prevents farmers from adopting profitable technologies and practices that are perceived as risky, hence creating a nexus that increases the cycle of vulnerability and depletes the capability to overcome hunger and poverty. This inability to accept and manage risk and accumulate and retain wealth locks vulnerable populations in poverty and food and nutrition insecurity. During the last decade, social protection instruments have gained popularity among policy responses to drought. An increasing number of governments in Sub-Saharan Africa have integrated cash transfer and public works schemes into their strategies for food and nutrition security and disaster risk management. These programmes shall prevent disinvestment and depletion of assets and enhance post-drought recovery, adaptation and resilience of livelihoods for the poorest parts of the population in affected areas. Most prominent examples are Ethiopia with its Productive Safety Net Programme (PSNP), the largest safety net in Africa, outside South Africa, or the Kenya´s Hunger Safety Net Programme (HSNP). But can social protection programmes factually deliver the promises made? Panellists: Martina Ulrichs (Independent consultant) Ralf Radermacher (GIZ) Guush Berhane (IFPRI) Bettina Tewinkel (KfW) Moderators: Markus Loewe (DIE) The event is part of a series: Research meets Development: Drought resilience in Sub-Saharan Africa Event series in the context of the “One World – No Hunger” (SEWOH) initiative of the German Ministry for Economic Cooperation and Development (BMZ) in the summer term 2017 More on the series at: https://www.die-gdi.de/veranstaltungen/drought-resilience-in-sub-saharan-africa/

Views

Total views

468

On Slideshare

0

From embeds

0

Number of embeds

168

Actions

Downloads

6

Shares

0

Comments

0

Likes

0

×