Social Safety Net (Under Covid 19)

Bangladesh University of Professionals

Final Report
On
Course name: Business Economics
Course Code: BUS-8403
Topic-Social Safety Net (Under Covid 19)

Submitted To

Professor Mohammad Amzad Hossain

Faculty of Business
Bangladesh University of Professionals

Submitted By

Nurul Islam
Id-19022021
Intake- 22
Section-A

Date of Submission- October-31, 2020

 Letter of Transmittal

October 31, 2020

Professor Mohammad Amzad Hossain
Faculty of Business
Bangladesh University of Professionals.

Subject: Solicitation for Acceptance of the Term Paper.

Dear Sir,

I would like to thank you for allow me to work on such sensible topic for my Term paper and I am
very much privileged to submit the report on “Social Safety Net (Under Covid 19)". I have
completed this report as part of my course material. However working on this report has given me
wide range of experience. With your appropriate supervision and guidelines I was tried my level
best to build this report in an informative manner. Apart from the academic knowledge, preparation
of this report has given me the opportunity to accustom myself to gather real knowledge. In
addition I have tried to gather as much relevant information as possible.

I will be obliged if you have gone through this report at least once and consider my faults so that
I can improve. I would be glad to clarify any discrepancy that may arise or any clarification that
you may require regarding my report.

Sincerely,

Nurul Islam
Id-19022021
Intake- 22
Section-A
 Abstract

Social Safety Nets (SSNs) and the wider topic of Social Protection have assumed a centrality
within the development literature in recent years. Publicly-sponsored protection of the poor
and vulnerable has emerged from the shadows to become a mainstream concern for
policymakers. The contribution of SSNs is now viewed not merely in terms of their impact on
challenged families, but their systemic benefits - in enabling higher levels of employment and
entrepreneurship, sustaining household consumption and human capital, securing pro-poor
growth and promoting social inclusion and national cohesion. A body of experience, ranging
across continents, has now been established to inform the building of functional social
protection systems. Yet in spite of this new consensus much controversy remains. A crucial
first step in the development of a well-fitted national approach is the balancing of experience
elsewhere with the national context. The ambit of SSNs in Bangladesh is often wide and
fragmented. These typically include welfare payments, work guarantee schemes and
conditional cash transfers; and comprise both on and off-budget allocations and a plethora of
programs supported by donors. Gaining an understanding of the nature of provision and its
functionality is another important first step in crafting a pro-development social protection
system. This research provides information about different social safety net programs in
government level. An attempt has been made to explore the effectiveness and the existing
problems of current social safety net programs. The study also discusses the status and
accessibility of beneficiaries in selected areas as well as advantages, limitations and prospects
for social security in the context of this country. Besides, it also assesses the opinions of non-
beneficiaries who know more or less about the programs. Finally the paper suggests that there
is a need to establish workable and sustainable effects among recipients. It also recommends
that systematic efforts should be made urgently for the proper organization and management
of safety net programs.
 Table of Contents
Serial No. Topic Page #
01 Introduction 01-02
02 Overview of the Social Safety Net 02-03
03 Social Safety Net Program in Bangladesh 03-08
04 Impact of Social Safety Net during Covid-19 08-11
05 Impact assessment of SSNPs on poverty of Bangladesh (Critical 12-13
Evaluation)
06 Conclusion and policy suggestions 14-15
07 Reference 16
 Social Safety Net (Under Covid 19) Page |1

1. Introduction
Safety net programs in Bangladesh have been contributing to the reduction of poverty and
vulnerability by addressing a range of population groups through different forms of assistance.
These include the provision of income security for the elderly, widows and persons-with
disabilities, generating temporary employment for working age men and women, and supporting
the healthy development of young mothers and children.

The COVID-19 crisis has hit low-income families especially hard. As unemployment rates have
spiked overall, they have risen even higher for those with lower levels of education. Other aspects
of the crisis disproportionately impact low-income families as well; for example low-income
families are more likely to be headed by a single mother, and a higher share of women have lost
jobs than during prior recessions. Closures of schools and child-care centers have meant that large
numbers of low-income children have lost access to free- or reduced-price meals. Food prices have
increased sharply leading to a reduction in the purchasing power of families’ limited income. Two
pieces of legislation, the Families First Coronavirus Act and the Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and
Economic Security (CARES) Act, include important provisions to respond to these historic job
losses. Despite the burgeoning focus on social safety nets on the part of both government and non-
government actors, independent and comprehensive assessments on results have been relatively
limited. Most of these focus mainly on process issues i.e. coverage, benefit package, targeting and
beneficiary profiles, rather than on outcomes. Such a situation is not limited to Bangladesh. With
this knowledge gap on outcomes in mind, a key objective of the Study has been a comprehensive
field assessment of ten major social safety net programmes in operation covering both GOB-
financed and donor-financed programmes.
Social safety net is a measure taken by the government in order to prevent the vulnerable section
of its population to fall beyond a certain level of poverty. Social safety net programs (SSNPs) are
designed with the aim to provide support for the vulnerable section of the society. With a vision
to prevent transmission of poverty from generation to generation, the safety net programs opt for
a more efficient society in terms of the choices made by individuals. The Social safety nets play
both a redistributive and a productive role supporting moral philosophy as well as managing risks.
These two are the major pillars that justify the existence of safety net programs. It should be
mentioned at the outset that the safety net programs create a path towards poverty reduction in the
long run. They do not reduce poverty directly, rather, these programs tend to reduce transitional
poverty through ensuring proper nutritional intake, education, health care etc.

In other words, the safety net programs are methods through which poverty is expected to fall
through investment in human capital. With about 40 per cent of its population living below the
poverty line and an increasing number of populations being added below the lower poverty line,
safety net programs in Bangladesh are more than a necessary element in fighting poverty. The
government has been following a combination of direct and indirect safety net programs for
poverty eradication addressing both human and income poverty. However, despite having a large
 Social Safety Net (Under Covid 19) Page |2

number of programs under the safety net, the rate of poverty reduction has not been decreasing
yet.

2. Overview of the Social Safety Net

The importance of a more systematic and comprehensive framework for safety net programming
is increasingly being stressed across the policy universe. Historically, public safety net efforts in
Bangladesh have clustered around the twin themes of food rations and post-disaster relief. The
third cluster has been informal safety nets at family and community levels to address issues of
demographic and social shocks. There has also been pension scheme for state employees. Over
time, however, safety nets have transcended these historical moorings and have graduated to a
mainstream social and developmental concern. Three factors have driven this process of change:
i) a political process whereby the welfare responsibilities of the state have come into sharper focus;
ii) a social process of erosion of informal safety nets due to the decay of the extended family
system; and iii) a developmental realization that safety nets are crucial to a sustainable anti-poverty
strategy. Consequent to these factors, Bangladesh has witnessed a proliferation of safety net
programmes over time. The bulk of the safety net programmes are implemented through
government channels. However, non-government channels play an important supportive role
particularly in those programmes focused on sustainable graduation. 97 percent of annual
allocations are spent through 30 major programmes. However, not all of those programmes listed
in government budget documents can strictly be categorized as safety nets as many of these are
more in the nature of sectoral development programmes. The inventory clearly establishes that
safety nets are a major policy focus. Questions, however, abound. Are all critical risks and
vulnerabilities being addressed? Are there significant gaps and duplication? Is programme
proliferation merely spreading tokenism? Are sustainable results being promoted? Do safety nets
in poverty-dominated countries like Bangladesh need to embrace goals of promotion alongside the
goals of protection?

The growth of safety net programmes in Bangladesh has seen a number of innovations over the
years. Some innovations were a response to major crisis events while others were incremental
unfolding of a policy agenda. Not all policy initiatives, however, have been assessed as innovations
since many were mere programme proliferation driven by narrow bureaucratic or political
interests. The innovations timeline described above underscore certain features of the development
of the social protection agenda. Firstly, there has been a significant demand-driven element in the
growth of the social protection agenda, both as response to crisis events such as the famine of
1974, the floods of 1987-88, the flood of 1998, and as responses to new democratic aspirations in
the wake of the return of electoral democracy in the 1990s. Examples of the latter were the focus
on girl education in the early 1990s and on allowance programmes for marginalized groups such
as the elderly and vulnerable women in the later 1990s. Secondly, Bangladesh appears to have
pursued a pragmatic path of incremental programme experimentation rather than a legalistic path
 Social Safety Net (Under Covid 19) Page |3

of abstract rights in developing its social protection agenda. The original food security-focused
VGD programme and the public works RMP programme have inspired many follow-on
programmes such as IGVGD, FSVGD, TUP, REOPA, RERMP that have incrementally embraced
more complex goals of graduation in their design and reach. But as the government denotes itself,
social safety nets programs (SSNP) are generally devoted to the hardcore poor, the programs listed
as safety nets are sometimes subject to further scrutiny as some of them are generally poverty
reduction oriented and covers both hardcore poor and general poor, even sometimes simply growth
oriented. For example, donor assisted “Agriculture research fund” or “Training fund for RMG
workers” might be subject to debate whether they are targeted towards the hardcore poor or not.
The government, however, provides a different explanation of 3 social protection in Bangladesh
Economic Review with wider scopes for safety nets as it states “Social Safety Nets (SSN) are
based on the government's policy to (a) reduce income uncertainty and variability; (b) maintain a
minimum standard of living; and (c) redistribute income from the rich to the poor”. Yet, there is a
common understanding in the study of safety nets, particularly for a low-income country like
Bangladesh, that the social security programs should emphasize the “very poor”, rather “poor” in
general. As Smith and Subbarao (2003) identifies, the problem in very low-income countries is
often not so much deciding what is desirable in terms of safety nets, but rather determining what
is feasible. Three factors that generally constrain the feasibility of safety net programs are (i) the
availability of information for identifying potential recipients, (ii) administrative capacity to
deliver the services, and (iii) fiscal affordability of the programmes needed. Unfortunately for
Bangladesh, all three are obligatory.

3. Social Safety Net Program in Bangladesh

The major social safety net programmes (SSNPs) in Bangladesh can be divided under four broad
categories: (i) employment generation programmes; (ii) programmes to cope with natural disasters
and other shocks; (iii) incentives provided to parents for their children’s education; and (iv)
incentives provided to families to improve their health status. The SSNPs can also be grouped into
two types depending on whether these involve cash transfers or food transfers. The review
indicates that SSNPs in Bangladesh have led to increased school enrolment and attendance
especially among girls in secondary schools and closing the gender gap; additional employment
generation; provision of food during crisis; building infrastructure; and increased access to and
utilization of maternal health care services. Such programmes deserve high priority to ensure the
rights and entitlements of the disadvantaged groups, including the urban poor and the poor living
in rural areas. The policy implications of the lessons learned indicate the need to sustain high-level
political commitment, strengthen programme management, better targeting of beneficiaries,
minimize leakages, improve financial management and payment systems, and strengthen
monitoring and supervision.
 Social Safety Net (Under Covid 19) Page |4

1. Current Programmes/Strategies

The present government has placed elimination of poverty and inequity at the forefront of its
development strategy. The aim is to bring down the poverty rate from 40 per cent in 2005 to 15
per cent by 2021. Investment in infrastructure, creation of employment opportunities during slack
seasons, and increased coverage of social safety net programmes will lead to improvement in
poverty situation; and priority will be given to activities targeting the extreme poor, women in
poverty, landless poor and other disadvantaged groups. A strong and expanded social safety net is
the main emphasis of the present government’s vision to protect the poor from all types of social,
economic and natural shocks (Gob 2009b). In the FY2010-11 budget, the government allocated
14.8 per cent of the total budget (compared to 15.2 per cent in the previous budget) and 2.5 per
cent of the total GDP (compared to 2.25 per cent in the previous budget) for social security and
social empowerment (Gob 2010, 2009c). The social safety net measures are broadly divided into
four types: (i) provision of special allowances for the various underprivileged sections of the
population, so that the poor and disadvantaged people can tackle the poverty effectively; (ii)
employment generation through micro-credit and different fund management programmes; (iii)
food security based activities to better manage the consequences of natural disasters; and (iv)
provision of education, health and training to make the new generation more capable and self-
reliant. A global report shows that an increasing number of countries implement safety net
programs and they contribute to reducing the poverty gap and improving the welfare of the poorest.
The following program briefs provide detailed information on each of these safety net programs,
present outcomes and achievements, and discuss opportunities to strengthen, as well as the Bank’s
support. They include:

1.1Unconditional Cash Transfers

 Old Age Allowance: Bangladesh has seen declines in fertility and mortality following vast
improvements in human development. This also means that the country has a growing
elderly population which is expected to grow further. This program targets the poor and
vulnerable elderly (62 years and older for women; 65 years and older for men) and pays
BDT 500 ($6) per month to over 4 million beneficiaries across the country.
 Allowances for the Widow, Destitute and Deserted Women: Women’s empowerment in
Bangladesh has shown steady progress over the years, but the poor and marginalized
continue to face poverty amidst many social restrictions. Since the 1970s, the government
has been implementing important social safety nets focused on vulnerable women. This
program pays BDT 500 ($6) per month to over 1.4 million beneficiaries across the country.
 Allowances for the Financially Insolvent Disabled: Persons-with-disabilities constitute
about 7 percent of the population in Bangladesh. Despite various initiatives from public
and private entities as well as NGO sectors, coverage of support has been limited. The
program started in 2006 with 100,000 beneficiaries and has now expanded to 1 million
beneficiaries who receive a monthly BDT 700 ($8.5) allowance.
 Social Safety Net (Under Covid 19) Page |5

1.2Public Works

 Employment Generation Program for the Poorest: The food, fuel, and financial crisis of
2007-08 revealed the vulnerability of the poor to shocks. Since 2010 the World Bank has
committed $767 million to Bangladesh to strengthen this program. The program currently
supports over 0.9 million beneficiaries with a daily wage BDT 200 ($2.5).
 Food for Work/Work for Money and Test Relief: This safety net program is a combination
of helping to build and repair rural infrastructure, while generating employment and
reducing the risk of disaster and climate change caused from food insecurity. Target
beneficiaries used to be paid with food until recently, but cash wages have been gradually
introduced for better efficiency.

1.3Humanitarian Relief

 Vulnerable Group Feeding: In the wake of the famine in 1974, the Government of
Bangladesh, in partnership with the World Food Program (WFP), launched the vulnerable
group feeding program. The program provided a monthly transfer of 31.25 kg of wheat per
household per month for a period of two consecutive years. To date, it continues to be a
humanitarian program that provides food transfers to the poor during disasters and major
religious festivals.

1.4Conditional Cash Transfers

 Towards a Child Benefit Scheme: Investments in development of children are vital for the
future productivity of individuals and for the country’s economic prosperity. The period
from conception to the first 1,000 days and to school ages provides a very important
window of opportunities for human development. The World Bank supports the
 Income Support Program for the Poorest (Jawtno) for early childhood support focusing on
health and nutrition. Each enrolled beneficiary receives a ‘Jawtno cash card’ which is
biometrically-enabled to serve as her beneficiary ID as well as her instrument for cash
withdrawal.

2. Review of Past/Ongoing Programmes

The successive governments attached high priority to SSNPs to deal with risks, poverty and
vulnerability faced by a sizeable proportion of the population. SSNPs have been an important
component of the government’s anti-poverty strategy, and the government has emphasized social
protection as a pillar of the PRSP. The first phase of the PRSP, phased out in 2007, or “Unlocking
the Potential” and the extended PRSP FY2009-11, or “Steps towards Change” gave considerable
importance on the role of SSNPS in poverty reduction (Gob 2005, 2009b). SSNPs are, however,
 Social Safety Net (Under Covid 19) Page |6

predominantly rural-based, although the country is getting rapidly urbanized with increasing
proportion of the poor living in informal settlements. The major past/ongoing SSNPs can be
divided under four broad categories: (i) employment generation programmes, (ii) programmes to
cope with natural disasters and other shocks, (iii) incentives provided to parents for their children’s
education, and (iv) incentives provided to the families to improve their health Khuda: Social Safety
Net Programmes in Bangladesh 93 status.

2.1 Employment Generation Programmes

Given pervasive poverty, malnutrition and underemployment in Bangladesh, it is quite logical that
the public development strategy includes programmes to generate employment, especially among
the poor. Toward this end, the government has undertaken a number of programmes. The
discussion here will deal with: (i) the Food-for-Work (FFW) Programme, (ii) the Rural
Development (RD) Programme, and (iii) the 100-day Employment Generation Programme (EGP).
In 1975, the government launched the FFW Programme to respond to the crisis resulting from the
famine by providing relief to the poor facing severe food insecurity, using food donated by other
countries. Subsequently, the focus has been shifted from relief to development. The major
objectives are to: (i) improve agricultural sector performance through the construction and
maintenance of infrastructure for production and marketing; (ii) reduce physical damage and loss
of human lives due to natural disasters through appropriate protective measures; and (iii) generate
productive employment for the rural poor during lean seasons.3 The FFW projects, administered
by the World Food Programme (WFP) and CARE, are implemented by several ministries,
government departments and NGOs. The allocation of resources to the FFW programme ranged
from 4 per cent to 5 per cent of the total national development expenditure during the 1970s. It
increased sharply to 11 per cent in 1988/89 in response to the major floods in 1988, and then
declined to 6 per cent in 1989-91, the normal production years (Hossain and Akash 1993).

2.2 Programmes to Cope with Natural Disasters and other Shocks

The Vulnerable Group Development (VGD) programme is a national targeted food aid programme
aimed at improving the lives of the poorest and most disadvantaged women in rural Bangladesh.
It started in 1975 as a relief programme, and subsequently evolved into a programme which
provides training and saving opportunities with the intent of creating a lasting impact on the lives
of its beneficiaries. The beneficiaries are poor women, selected directly by the programme
administrators. Each beneficiary is on the programme for 1.5 years, and receives 30 kg. of wheat
or a combination of wheat and rice every month. In addition, the beneficiaries receive some
training and cash savings, deposited in a bank, which they can access at the end of the programme.
The Ministry of Women and Children Affairs was assigned the responsibility of central planning,
distribution of resources, preparing the necessary paperwork for allocation of the VGD cards and
the food distribution. At the upazilla level, the Upazilla Nirbahi Officer implemented the
programme, while the Upazilla Project Implementation Officer was assigned the executive
 Social Safety Net (Under Covid 19) Page |7

responsibility, who works in close collaboration with the Upazilla Women’s Affairs Officer in the
136 upazillas where there is a Women’s Affairs Directorate. Too many actors, however, can cause
confusion, and thereby affect programme implementation. The number of cards allocated to each
of the 461 upazillas was determined by the WFP, according to the food security and vulnerability
map prepared in collaboration with the Planning Commission. In the process of selection,
preference was given to poor women who are household heads and women who are
widowed/divorced/separated/deserted or who have a disabled husband. Vulnerability of women is
determined based on the following criteria: (i) landlessness or owning less than half an acre of
land, (ii) women’s/family’s monthly income of less than Taka 300, (iii) lack of productive assets,
and (iv) women who were daily or casual laborers. Preference is given to women who are
physically fit, have the capability to improve their socioeconomic condition and are interested to
work in groups.

2.3 Incentives for Children’s Education

Several factors (economic, social and cultural) constrain schooling opportunities for girls,
especially at the secondary level. The major constraint, however, relates to the private costs of
secondary schooling. Hence, it is necessary to target girls rather than simply providing their
families with more income. To raise enrolment at the primary level, the government undertook a
number of projects: the Food-for-Education Programme (FEP), the Primary Education Stipend
programme (PESP), the School Feeding Programme (SEP), and the Reaching Out-of-School
Children Project (ROSC). These projects resulted in increased net enrolment at the primary level.
Enrolment was greater for girls than boys; and children from the poorer households benefited more
from such programmes (Ahmed 2006). Another programme, undertaken by the government and
the WFP in July 2002 known as the School Feeding Programme (SFP), targeted schools in
chronically food insecure rural areas and urban slums in Dhaka city (Rogers, Coates and Osei
2004) The SFP distributed fortified biscuits (a protein/caloric supplement) to elementary school
children in the targeted schools six days a week during the school year to improve their nutritional
and health status. The programme goals were to increase school enrolment and attendance, reduce
school repetition and drop-out rates, and improve attention and learning capacity by reducing
short-term hunger and improving nutritional status.

2.4 Incentives for Improved Health Status

The government is committed to achieving the MDG goal of reducing maternal mortality to 143
by 2015. Accordingly, the government undertook a number of measures, including the provision
of the Maternal Health Voucher Scheme (MHVS). The evidence thus far suggests that
improvement in maternal health care services through supply-side financing has not reached its
desired results largely because of very limited access to such services by the poor and vulnerable
women. The government, therefore, decided to address this issue through demand-side financing,
known as the MHVS, which provides subsidies (in the form of limited purchasing power) to the
 Social Safety Net (Under Covid 19) Page |8

target group to enable them to buy specific services. The overall goal of the MHVS is to reduce
maternal mortality rate and neonatal mortality rate by increasing: (i) awareness and demand for
maternal health services among poor pregnant women, and (ii) institutional delivery. The MHVS
was initially introduced in 21 upazillas in 21 districts, and subsequently extended to 33 upazillas
(Directorate General of Health Services, undated).The funding for the programme was provided
by the government and development partners (DFID, World Bank, UNFPA and WHO).

4. Impact of Social Safety Net during Covid-19

The poor and other vulnerable groups are suffering the most negative consequences from the
COVID-19 pandemic. In response, many governments are rapidly expanding social protection
programs. Dan Gilligan describes why safety nets are essential tools in this global emergency, and
provides specific recommendations on how these programs can be adapted and implemented to
increase their immediate effectiveness—and provide a bridge to faster recovery of households,
communities, and national economies.—John McDermott, series co-editor and Director, CGIAR
Research Program on Agriculture for Nutrition and Health (A4NH). The twin health and economic
shocks of the COVID-19 pandemic are staggering in their breadth and scale. While the disease
arrived later and has spread more slowly in many low- and middle-income countries, COVID-19
is threatening the lives and long-term livelihoods of millions of poor people, and could push an
additional 140 million into extreme poverty.

We know from past crises that while an economic shock’s impacts may vary across the income
distribution, the poor face a multitude of vulnerabilities to the pandemic’s effects. In many places,
the poor are more likely to have underlying or untreated health conditions (such as hypertension,
diabetes, vitamin D deficiency) which raises the risk of serious illness if they are exposed. Poor
households are also more likely to cope with income loss by selling productive assets or
undertaking work that is either inherently riskier (e.g., construction or sex work) or increases their
risk of coronavirus exposure. Their children may also be less likely to return to schools upon
reopening, permanently reducing their earning potential. These factors leave the poor even more
vulnerable to additional impending shocks, like desert locusts in the horn of Africa or cyclones in
South Asia. Targeted social safety nets for the poor are central to the effort to stifle these negative
impacts and protect the substantial gains made globally in the fight against poverty, food
insecurity, and malnutrition in this century. Why social safety are nets important to the pandemic
response, what challenges do they face, and what lessons can we glean from past research into
social protection programs to craft effective responses over the long term?

Social safety nets have played a major role in the response to the COVID-19 pandemic in the last
three months. According to an effort by Ugo Gentilini of the World Bank to track social protection
responses during the crisis, 190 countries have implemented, adapted or planned over 900 social
protection measures during the crisis, often in the form of cash transfers. This response has
included an expansion in the number of social protection beneficiaries by roughly 15% in South
 Social Safety Net (Under Covid 19) Page |9

Asia and East Asia and the Pacific, but by only 2% in the Africa region. Several countries have
offered a temporary sharp increase in the benefit amount for current beneficiaries.

Why social safety nets during a health crisis?

Three factors explain why social safety nets have been central to the COVID-19 response.

First, two decades of extensive, rigorous research on social protection programs has documented
their effectiveness at protecting food security, assets and human capital, including in a crisis.
Safety nets can also improve health, including for newborns, and through improved nutrition when
combined with complementary nutrition programs, a high policy priority during the pandemic.

Second, large scale transfers help to replace lost income for credit-constrained poor households
and counter the economic drag of the pandemic by providing a fiscal stimulus that, under certain
conditions, may generate positive multiplier effects during the recovery. A temporary increase in
cash transfers during the pandemic can also make moral and political sense, protecting those most
in need and building trust in government.

Third, the infrastructure of a social safety net was already in place, to varying degrees, in most
countries. Over the last two decades, social protection, and particularly social assistance, has
grown in popularity as a leading response to poverty. Many poor countries developed targeted in-
kind and cash transfer programs, expanding their roles and improving their efficiency. Many safety
net programs are designed to be “shock responsive”: During a 2011 drought, Ethiopia increased
benefits for 85% of the 7.6 million beneficiaries in the Productive Safety Net Program (PSNP) and
provided temporary benefits to an additional 3.1 million people. As the COVID-19 pandemic hit
earlier this year, many countries had the payment mechanisms, poverty registries, and local
selection committees in place to quickly expand benefits and renew program targeting.

Challenges ahead

For countries that have had initial successes using social safety nets to respond to the pandemic,
significant challenges remain. For most, the fiscal cost is the greatest of these; continuing transfers
beyond a few months will be difficult. Yet the pandemic and its economic consequences may drag
on, or return later this year after a failed reopening. Social distancing measures pose obstacles to
targeting new beneficiaries, as this typically involves in-person interviews or local committees
meeting to screen applicants. Delivering cash or in-kind transfers can also increase the risk of
coronavirus transmission, and most programs still deliver benefits in ways requiring person-to-
person contact.

How should social safety nets be designed for the pandemic?

Evidence from past research on the design, implementation, and effectiveness of social assistance
programs during an economic crisis provides guidance on handing some of these challenges:
 S o c i a l S a f e t y N e t ( U n d e r C o v i d 1 9 ) P a g e | 10

1. When safety net programs are disrupted, maintain transfers by adopting alternative
delivery methods. At the start of the pandemic, many school feeding programs ceased
operating as countries closed schools. These are one of the most popular forms of social
assistance, reaching more than 270 million children in 89 countries in one World Bank
estimate. In India, many school systems replaced on-site meals with rations delivered to
homes or available for pick-up at schools. As they reopen, schools should consider
maintaining take-home rations initially, to reduce the risk of coronavirus transmission
when students eat together; in Uganda, fortified take-home rations were as effective as
equivalent on-site school meals for improving school participation and attainment, and for
reducing anemia prevalence of adolescent girls.
2. Eliminate conditions on assistance temporarily. Reassess their importance and
effectiveness during the recovery. Cash transfers are often conditioned on child school
participation or adult work requirements. These should be suspended during the pandemic.
Unconditional cash transfers can also improve school attendance. In Ethiopia, PSNP work
requirements were temporarily suspended for beneficiaries because it was no longer
possible to bring work teams together safely. Payments to public works beneficiaries
continued, and were even accelerated in case it became impossible to make payments for
some time. When work can resume, programs should identify work activities that bolster
the COVID-19 response, such as building or renovating health clinics or supplying hand-
washing stations.
3. Strengthen and expand targeting. Safety nets often exclude a high proportion of the
poorest households and fail to reach the most vulnerable groups. They should expand
coverage in poor areas and make efforts to target migrants, orphans, and the urban
unemployed, who face substantial livelihood risks and have limited social support. Social
assistance programs should also be used as platforms to identify the newly poor. For
example, community health systems and local government can be used to target new
beneficiaries. In areas that are particularly hard-hit with a collapse in employment,
programs should consider providing universal transfers temporarily.
4. The form of assistance matters, but distributing it quickly is the priority. Food,
vouchers, or cash assistance can all increase household consumption and improve calorie
intakes, though vouchers may perform better than food transfers or cash at improving
measures of dietary diversity and thus quality. However, setting up a voucher system
involves coordination with food retailers and thus may be challenging to establish during
the pandemic. Cash transfers have many of the advantages of voucher programs—they
work well where people have access to markets and as long as prices do not escalate—and
they are usually cheaper to deliver. Still, all of these transfer modalities can be beneficial,
so following a “no regrets policy” is best: Prioritize speed in scaling up transfers with
whatever method works the fastest.
 S o c i a l S a f e t y N e t ( U n d e r C o v i d 1 9 ) P a g e | 11

5. Respond to the crisis with the future in mind. Many acknowledge the need to “build
back better” following the pandemic to improve safety net systems. Here are some
priorities:

 Strengthen mental health services for beneficiaries. Anxiety and depression

increase with poverty and, in women, are associated with worse development
outcomes for their children. The pandemic is an opportunity to bring mental health
out of the shadows. Programs should build a cadre of community health workers to
provide mental health services and screening.
 Design new programs or features to be gender-sensitive. Most social assistance
programs are not designed with the specific needs of women beneficiaries in mind,
a wasted opportunity that can widen gender inequality. As my colleagues Melissa
Hidrobo, Neha Kumar, Tia Palermo, Amber Peterman, and Shalini Roy emphasize,
social protection programs designed to be gender-sensitive during the pandemic
have the potential to protect women’s livelihoods and assets, reduce unequal
burdens of care, improve women’s empowerment, and reduce intimate partner
violence.
 Strengthen nutrition-sensitive social assistance. An ever-growing body of evidence
shows that critical investments in health and nutrition for the poor can be better
achieved by combining cash transfers with information campaigns and access to
services. These investments in child human capital will have large economic returns
as these individuals enter the labor market and begin their own families.
 Invest more in mobile payments. Contactless mobile payments have a clear
advantage during the pandemic. Though the poor continue to have lower access to
mobile phones, it is important to provide transfers through mobile phones when
possible—or better yet, to steeply subsidize mobile phone ownership for the poor.
Many will benefit from the new access to social networks and information. Even
where literacy is low, household heads often have a family member who can
support the phone use.

6. Strengthen fiscal support for the social assistance response. The global slowdown in
economic activity and lockdowns have ravaged economies of low- and middle-income
countries at a time when many face a debt crisis. With public health costs growing
enormously, governments will need aid to finance a robust social safety net response.

As they try to contain the pandemic, countries must also confront a rise in extreme poverty and the
suffering that goes along with it. But they have many tools to combat this problem. Extensive
research on social assistance programs provides a firm foundation for approaches to strengthen
safety net designs and adapt responses to fit changing circumstances. These actions can improve
social safety nets and help to counter some of the worst effects of the COVID-19 pandemic.
 S o c i a l S a f e t y N e t ( U n d e r C o v i d 1 9 ) P a g e | 12

5. Impact assessment of SSNPs on poverty of Bangladesh (Critical Evaluation)

Social safety net is especially designed and implemented for the poor and the vulnerable groups
of the society. However, the implication of these programmes on poverty is often remained
untouched. In recent times a number of countries and international agencies-initiated researches to
find out how safety net programmes can effectively work for poor. However, in Bangladesh such
initiatives are somewhat limited. One of the major constraints is placed from the inadequacy of
necessary information and data. At national level a survey regarding social safety net has yet to be
commenced. Household Income and Expenditure Survey (HIES) is specially designed to analyze
the living standard related statistics at household level. The survey also covers information on
social safety net partially, considering the programmes that directly transfer money (or kind) to a
household and considered as a source of income. As a result, the resource transferring programmes
and other subsidy supports are not included in the survey. At present microcredit and other resource
transfer programmes are important parts of the social safety net structure in Bangladesh.
Nonetheless the data provided by HIES can be useful to understand direct effect of social safety
net on poverty reduction. Since benefits from SSNPs are accounted as a part of income of the
household, using the conventional measures of poverty based on household consumption such as
Cost of basic Needs (CBN) and Daily Calorie Intake (DCI) cannot be compared as a reflection of
SSNPs. For this purpose, this study proposes a threshold of income poverty based on the
consumption poverty line used in HIES, 5 2005 and adjusted for income. The exercise then aims
to find how the recipient households find their positions along income poverty threshold in absence
of safety net.

Table shows that safety net definitely has a positive impact in bringing people out of the poverty
line. Under the circumstances the table suggests that in 2020 among the beneficiaries, safety net
programmes contributed to 0.15 per cent people transferring above the poverty line. In numbers
that is equivalent to 215 thousand people. However, the contribution has mainly made to the rural
population. This is quite obvious from the fact that 90 per cent of the total safety net programmes
is directed towards the rural area. Nonetheless such a small impact of SSNP on poverty can be
 S o c i a l S a f e t y N e t ( U n d e r C o v i d 1 9 ) P a g e | 13

explained from the fact that expenditure on safety net as share of total public expenditure is very
negligible and declining further (World Bank, 2006). As a result, overall share of social safety net
in household income is also insignificant. At division level SSNPs were most successful in Sylhet
to bring people over the poverty line followed by Chittagong and Khulna. The contribution of
VGD programme in the Sylhet division is clearly evident from the picture. Average amount
received per recipient from the VGD programme in Sylhet division stood Tk. 1686 in 2020.
Whereas Chittagong division is an 6 exception; it is covered with almost all programmes under
the consideration. Unfortunately, these two divisions are among the less poverty prone areas with
the country following after Dhaka. Considering that Dhaka has the highest share of people under
the poverty line even though poverty incidence is least in percentage term, it can be argued that
SSNPs in Bangladesh needs to be restructured in dealing spatial poverty. However, one may also
need to recognize that HIES survey is not adjusted to seasonal shock. Supporting poor during
seasonal and natural shock is a key guideline of social safety net. With a more dedicated survey
focusing the safety net issue could have outlined a closer understanding about the safety net’s
impact on poverty. Among the recipients only 71.51 per cent households can be considered poor
according the above-mentioned income threshold drawn for this study.
In a bid to enable the poor absorb the shock of COVID-19 impact, the budget for next fiscal (FY21)
proposed an allocation of Tk 955.74 billion for the social security sector, which is 16.83 per cent
of total proposed budget and 3.01 per cent of GDP. In the revised budget of the ongoing fiscal
(FY20), the allocation was Tk. 818.65 billion. “We are also implementing various programmes for
the welfare of marginalized communities besides helping the people with disabilities,” Finance
Minister AHM Mostafa Kamal said in his budget speech. As the government enforced general
holidays, lockdowns, closure of factories and businesses to prevent the spread of coronavirus
infections, income of the common people has reduced, which now threatens our achievements in
poverty alleviation and social security. In order to save the livelihoods of the poor from the impact
of coronavirus-led income shortfall, the government has taken an initiative to make direct cash
transfers to 5.0 million people in the current fiscal year to alleviate the sufferings of the poor.

In the next fiscal, the finance minister proposed to increase the coverage of social security
programmes in several areas. According to his proposal, poor senior citizens in 100 upazilas are
most prone to poverty due to the coronavirus outbreak and will be brought under the old age
allowance as per the existing policy. This will add 500,000 new beneficiaries, and an additional
Tk 3.0 billion will be provided to the programme. All widows and women deserted by their
husbands in 100 upazilas, poverty ridden due to coronavirus outbreak, will be brought under the
coverage of the existing allowance programme for women. This will add 350,000 new
beneficiaries, and an additional Tk 2.10 billion will be provided to the programme. The number of
beneficiaries of the allowance for insolvent persons with disabilities will be increased to 1.8
million following the latest disability identification survey. This will add 255,000 new
beneficiaries, and an additional allocation of Tk. 2.29 billion will be required for this purpose.
 S o c i a l S a f e t y N e t ( U n d e r C o v i d 1 9 ) P a g e | 14

6. Conclusion and policy suggestions

There is nothing like an ideal or universal safety net program design that can be guaranteed for
successful poverty reduction. While most countries use indirect transfers in the form of subsidies,
a large number of safety net programs are conducted through direct transfer programs. Among
these, the conditional cash transfer programs have been successful and replicated in a number of
countries while following the same route the unconditional cash transfer programs in some other
countries have also yielded positive results. On the contrary, despite having any particular highly
successful safety net program, Vietnam’s poverty reduction strategy through various policy
variables and more particularly through agricultural diversification has managed to set a
benchmark in this area. This actually points out the need for a coordinated policy framework for
poverty reduction along with effective implementation of the safety net programs. The first phase
of the PRSP (phased out in 2007) of Bangladesh gave significant importance on the role of safety
net in poverty reduction. In fact, safety nets have been treated as one of the four strategic blocks
in fighting poverty. The extended PRSP for FY2008 also similarly emphasizes on safety nets in
poverty reduction efforts. In view of the identified poverty and inequality impact of safety nets in
this study, an increased allocation is well justified since per capita benefit received by the poor is
still very small in assisting them to get out of poverty permanently. On the other hand, the coverage
is by far less than exhaustive. 7 A well-judged choice on modality is crucial for providing social
protection in a country like Bangladesh. With the absence of an optimum mix, the government
should opt for more to cash as the mode of transfer in view of the efficiency as well as the inbuilt
flexibility that cash contain for the poor in its utilization. However, in case of risk management,
distribution in kind would be the preferable choice since the nature of disasters in Bangladesh
causes starvation more than anything else and mere survival becomes the prime concern.
Regarding conditional Vs non conditional transfers, even though the performance of CCTs are
well depicted in other countries, resorting only to conditional transfers will be no option for
Bangladesh. While unconditional transfers will have to be there for the old and the disabled (the
vulnerable groups) and disaster victims, conditional transfers can prove to be a useful tool in
relating growth (through infrastructural and human resource development) and poverty reduction.
One important aspect of safety net programmes demanding improvement in Bangladesh is the
“regional disparity” issue. Uneven distribution of wealth and variation in poverty incidence
between regions has to be incorporated in targeting the poor. Employment creation in Monga areas
in a more permanent basis should be emphasized. At the same time, the growing urban poverty
needs to be taken into account and social protection for the urban poor needs to be improved. One
concern would be the food subsidy. In view of the steep rise in food price, the subsidy programme
should continue with due address to the growing number of lower-middle income group (who does
not really belong below the lower poverty line) resorting to subsidized distribution of food grain.
Financing post disaster security programmes among the victims is always a big issue for a
government of a third world country like Bangladesh, calling for donor assistance. However, for
other types of safety nets, financing should depend on domestic resources as much as possible
since donor contribution in safety nets tend to be discontinuous or not lasting for long, being
 S o c i a l S a f e t y N e t ( U n d e r C o v i d 1 9 ) P a g e | 15

replaced by other initiatives. This may result in loss of efficiency, a scarce resource for any
developing country, gained by the implementing authorities from the previous programme.
Moreover, often the donor driven programmes are not based upon requirement, rather on what is
available from them. Lack of coordination between the funding partners also hold the chance of
overlapping target groups, while some of the potential beneficiaries may remain outside the net.
Most important issue would be to manage leakages in transferring resource to the poor. Along with
administrative reforms, this will call for better targeting. Avoiding participation of non-poor in the
8 transfers require self-targeting mechanism along with community targeting to be in place as
much as possible. The local government bodies will need to be strengthened and work closely with
potential beneficiaries to further enhance the targeting efficiency. Altogether, a national policy on
Social Safety Net will have to be developed with particular focus on strategic options for
channeling aid to the safety nets and modality as well as targeting options. The national policy will
need to be characterized by its promotional role in public-private collaboration in providing social
security. At the same time it will facilitate a common aim and understanding between political
regimes to avoid change of nature and means of safety nets with a change of government.
Obviously, poverty reduction is not confined to, rather supplemented by, safety nets. However,
safety nets undoubtedly are vital options to fight damages from natural disasters and for preventing
transmission of poverty from generation to generation in the long run. While on one hand the safety
nets provide immediate relief during emergencies, by ensuring employment, education and
nutritional intake of the poor, these programs can often play leading role in addressing poverty and
inequality in the long run. Success of any such attempt will depend on how, where and for whom
the government decides to design the safety net programs. There are a lot of lessons to be learnt
from the various successful conditional and unconditional transfer programs taking place in South
America, Africa and India. Successful replication of such programs in the Bangladesh context may
help to identify safety net programs that can leave radical impact on poverty reduction in
Bangladesh.
 S o c i a l S a f e t y N e t ( U n d e r C o v i d 1 9 ) P a g e | 16

7. Reference:

1. The World Bank (2006). Social Safety Nets in Bangladesh: An Assessment. Bangladesh
Development Series – Paper No. 9, The World Bank.
2. Devereux S. (2002). Social Protection for the Poor: Lessons from Recent International
Experience. IDS Working Paper 142, Institute of Development Studies, England.
3. Government of Bangladesh (2007). Expenditure on Social Safety Nets. Budget documents
for FY2008, Bangladesh.
4. Government of Bangladesh (2005). Unlocking the Potentials: National Strategy for
Accelerated Poverty Reduction. General Economic Division, Government of Bangladesh.
5. Government of Bangladesh (2007). Unlocking the Potentials: National Strategy for
6. Accelerated Poverty Reduction (extended up to June 2008). General Economic Division,
Government of Bangladesh.
7. https://ideas.repec.org/a/ris/badest/0517.html
8. https://thefinancialexpress.com.bd/economy/emphasis-on-social-safety-net-to-minimise-
impact-of-covid-19-1591878141
9. https://www.ifpri.org/blog/social-safety-nets-are-crucial-covid-19-response-some-lessons-
boost-their-effectiveness
10. https://www.brookings.edu/blog/up-front/2020/06/23/the-social-safety-net-the-gaps-that-
covid-19-spotlights/
11. https://medium.com/@helencollins1996/extending-the-social-safety-net-social-responses-
to-covid-19-in-the-developing-world-7672275df8a6
12. https://www.worldbank.org/en/news/feature/2019/04/29/social-safety-nets-in-
bangladesh-help-reduce-poverty-and-improve-human-capital