Bangladesh is committed to reducing poverty, and the large budget allocation to social safety nets is evidence of this commitment. Despite this expenditure, a large proportion of the poorest continue to struggle without access to safety net support. This summer, Manusher Jonno Foundation (MJF) conducted a study on accountability and transparency of government social protection programs.
The goal of this study was to get feedback from the poor on the reach, effectiveness, and impact of the government’s schemes, and use the evidence to influence good governance in this sector. I shall highlight and comment on some of the findings.
Not enough resources in the pool
Government safety net programs cover an average of 2,500 households annually per union. Almost double this amount falls outside the net, though they are eligible. According to both the formal elected leaders and informal opinion leaders, about 35% of the village population is extremely poor while only 16% is covered by safety nets.
Health care is not affordable
The study explored various allowances, and across the board it found beneficiaries are spending most of their allowance on health care. Those receiving old age allowance are spending 70% of their stipend on treatment (and the rest on essential expenses). Those receiving widow allowance are spending 61% on treatment. Health shocks are the biggest cause of extreme poverty. This needs to be addressed through a stronger health care system rather than social protection.
Able-bodied poorest need skills not nets
In the Employment Generation Program for the Poorest (EGPP), only 1% of the allowance was spent on health care and the rest on supporting family livelihoods. This demonstrates that able-bodied poor are less in need of health care and more easily lifted out of extreme poverty and plugged into the mainstream economy, with the support of skills training and jobs. Programs targeting these people should work with the formal private sector and suitable training providers.
Lack of grievance mechanism for exclusion
Of those eligible for old age allowance, but not receiving or enlisted, 69% applied but were not selected. Only 13% of these people placed a verbal complaint against their non-selection.
Non-recipient waiting lists are supposed to be available at Union Parishad offices but the study suggests none was available for inspection. There is no priority list indicating who is the most needy among those waiting.Master roll copies of beneficiaries are maintained in paper form, making it clumsy, static, and disorganised.
Bias in selection -- exclusion errors
Selection for safety net support is “competitive.” In the case of old age allowance, widow allowance, and disability allowance, on average, 5% of beneficiaries claim to have bribed ward members and social service officers for enlistment. This is not the case for primary education stipend or secondary school stipend, where no one claimed to pay a bribe for enlistment, and on average, most beneficiaries received resolution for problems by reporting their situation to their teachers.
Fortunately, inclusion errors appear to be reasonably low as the study suggests that 90% of the selected candidates are indeed poor and dependent on the safety nets for food and health care.
Lack of single registry of the poorest
According to service providers (UP chairmen, upazila, and district social welfare officer, UNO) interviewed for the study, the main obstacles to enlistment of beneficiaries were shortage of funds and political interference. They also expressed that selection errors occur due to lack of ground-level socio-economic data at the UP office. One way to address this is to create a single extreme poverty digital registry.
Unclear targeting criteria
The study suggests that it would be better to have a few essential targeting criteria that are common to all social safety net programs rather than the mixed set that exists now. A comprehensive and dynamic socio-economic database of extremely poor households would be useful for reducing targeting errors as well as for framing a long-term development strategy.
No impact measures
There is an absence of effective monitoring and evaluation of safety net programs, and no formal mechanism for reviewing performance on an individual or national level. Digital tools to measure and monitor impact, to identify the best performers, to replicate successes, and remove programs that do little good are necessary steps that need to be taken.
Other challenges identified in the study include the lack of formal mechanisms for sharing information among implementing ministries and agencies. Some safety net programs seek to address life-cycle risks but there are significant gaps.
For example, no programs address the under-nutrition of toddlers. No programs address the specific needs of adolescent girls. Not enough is done to strategically address urban poverty.
The study suggests that better use of the significant government expenditure on social protection could yield greater results. Better-sustained results require systemic change, including more focused strategic leadership, fewer larger programs which are better targeted to the poor and more focused on helping them graduate out of extreme poverty, larger average transfers, greater coordination across ministries, and transparency in decision-making.
Fortunately, the government has formulated a new social security strategy and plan. This will create a stronger digital platform to track social protection expenditure and enhance evidence-based decision-making to ensure better targeting and support for the poorest.
