Viet Nam Human Rights
Social Protection at a Crossroad—and Poverty On the Rise
How can we ensure a resilient and inclusive recovery from COVID-19? How can we hold on to the target of eradicating poverty and hunger by 2030, with the pandemic still ongoing?
I recently had the opportunity to participate as a lead discussant at the UN DESA expert group meeting with many distinguished speakers sharing their insights on achieving the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) in 2030 despite the COVID-19 pandemic.
One of sessions discussed future pathways for social protection. Discussants evaluated a set of policies that are gaining significant interest as a tool for recovery but also in building more resilient, adaptive, and inclusive social protection systems going forward.
The COVID-19 pandemic has led to an increased number of social protection measures to help people cope with economic challenges. A total of 4,648 policy measures that addressed the economic and health challenges of the pandemic were identified worldwide.
Most of them fall into the field of social assistance (for example cash or in-kind transfers), with 955 policies receiving fiscal support from a government (UNESCWA, 2021).
However, many of these programmes are temporary, and it is not yet evident whether they will remain an integral part of social protection in the long run.
Many of the challenges that have gained greater visibility during the pandemic have existed long before the pandemic started. As evidenced by the Sustainable Development Goals, the international community and policy makers were still in the pursuit of ending poverty and hunger, and establishing good health and well-being.
Yet as many as 115 million people might be pushed into extreme poverty by the end of 2021 — a major setback in the progress already made. Hence, challenges that continued to exist before can worsen if they remain unaddressed.
Social protection can constitute a tool to address multiple challenges, including poverty, food insecurity or inequalities.
A major concern or point of debate is fiscal space or fiscal prioritization. In other words, to what extent can countries afford and sustain social protection programmes.
This is an ongoing debate, with parties providing various funding solutions, but the most sustainable is often considered to be that of domestic revenues. An initiative in 2015 showed that countries do not need to invest an unreasonable amount in order to implement Social Protection Floors – a framework that captures basic provisions in the area of income and health. In 103 countries, the required resources would amount to less than 5 percent of GDP.
There are then only 12 countries which would require international assistance to implement Social Protection Floors as required resources exceed 10 percent of GDP.
Already in 2012 – the same year that ILO proposed the Social Protection Floor (Recommendation 202), two UN experts proposed a Global Fund for Social Protection (GFSP) for Least Developed Countries (LDCs) to ensure financial feasibility and enable countries to put ambitious social protection schemes into place.
In light of COVID-19, there is a growing momentum to revisit this proposal (for example, see here and here).
Another important aspect that was discussed during the expert forum is the availability of data. Data enables evidence-based policy making or to assess the design and feasibility of social policies.
Regarding fiscal capacity, the Government Revenue Dataset (with a newly released version in August 2021) can provide a valuable source on domestic revenues. It covers tax and revenue collection in 196 countries since the 1980s and can provide some insights into how previous crises may have affected fiscal space.
Band-aids or pathways to sustainable development?
Overall, the GFSP and current discussions provide examples of opportunities to propel social protection forward in order to address poverty and inequality.
Ongoing debates, political will, fiscal space, and prioritization will show whether we are on a pathway towards more adaptive, inclusive, and sustained social protection systems, or whether the current expansion of programmes remain short-lived initiatives.
As we move forward, research can support this process by providing timely insights and advice on the effectiveness of current programmes in addressing persistent challenges, e.g., poverty, hunger, and inequality.
At UNU-WIDER, the GRD project, as part of the Domestic Revenue Mobilization programme, is working on different aspects of revenue collection, which can support developing countries to make social protection a lasting solution towards sustainable development.
It is also important to gain a better understanding of the current political climate to see whether public support is aligned with a global mission of building back better, within which social protection can play a crucial role.
*The UN University- World Institute for Development Economics Research (UNU-WIDER) provides economic analysis and policy advice with the aim of promoting sustainable and equitable development for all. The institute began operations over 30 years ago in Helsinki, Finland, as the first research centre of the United Nations University.
Popular Posts
-
Religion is a part of the spiritual life in society, this phenomenon of the superstructure has been strongly changed with economic - social... -
Vietnam has just done well for the second cycle of Universal Periodical Review (UPR) in Geneva, Switzerland. So, what’s the UPR? an... -
Thai people in Shutdown Bangkok protests Not until this crisis, we have realized the ne... -
Representatives from foreign countries congratulate Viet Nam on its election to the Human Rights Council for the first time on November ... -
A street flowers vendor in Hanoi Another new spring has come to Vietnam, bring... -
If nothing changes, there will be a preferential credit program with hundreds of thousands billion of capital for agriculture and r... -
Recently, several anti-governmental individuals have established series of illegal groups and organizations in the name of civil soci... -
Radio Free Asia (RFA) is a private, nonprofit international broadcasting agency of the United States government that broadcasts and...
All comments [ 20 ]
Although economic activity slowed somewhat in subsequent years, it remained relatively robust, especially when compared with the other emerging markets that were buffeted by the Asian financial crisis.
The ongoing COVID-19 Pandemic is not a great equalizer – the poor and vulnerable are far worse hit.
Economic inclusion programmes typically target the poorest people and seek to address the many barriers to escaping poverty by providing multiple, complementary interventions.
with the number of poor living in extreme poverty on the rise for the first time in a decade due to COVID-19, and the increasing focus on re-engaging people in the economy post-pandemic, the time may be ripe for a big push on taking more of these programmes to scale.
An increasing number of countries are facing growing levels of acute food insecurity, reversing years of development gains. Even before COVID-19 reduced incomes and disrupted supply chains, chronic and acute hunger were on the rise due to various factors including conflict, socio-economic conditions, natural hazards, climate change and pests.
COVID-19 impacts have led to severe and widespread increases in global food insecurity, affecting vulnerable households in almost every country, with impacts expected to continue through 2021, into 2022, and possibly beyond
Surging prices reflect strong demand, along with weather uncertainties, macroeconomic conditions, and COVID-19-related supply disruptions, even though the global production outlook for major grains remains good.
The primary risks to food security are at the country level: Higher retail prices, combined with reduced incomes, mean more and more households are having to cut down on the quantity and quality of their food consumption.
Numerous countries are experiencing high food price inflation at the retail level, reflecting lingering supply disruptions due to COVID-19 social distancing measures, currency devaluations, and other factors.
Rising food prices have a greater impact on people in low- and middle-income countries since they spend a larger share of their income on food than people in high-income countries.
COVID-19 is estimated to have dramatically increased the number of people facing acute food insecurity in 2020-2021.
Hunger was trending upward even before the COVID-19 pandemic, which exacerbated existing effects from extreme climate events, conflict, and other shocks to economic opportunities.
We’re committed to helping countries prevent the next zoonotic disease from turning into a pandemic and be better prepared when risks materialize.
Under the first COVID-19 package of World Bank Group financing, countries can invest in longer-term prevention, such as strengthened veterinary services, disease surveillance and food safety.
The coronavirus pandemic has sparked not only a health crisis but also an economic crisis, which together pose a serious threat to food security, particularly in poorer countries.
COVID-19 is spreading through the developing world. Many low- and middle-income countries are now reporting growing numbers of cases and imposing rigorous lockdown regulations in response, which impact all aspects of the economy.
Governments will have to develop policies to respond to these varied impacts to avoid supply chain disruptions, higher food prices, and severe economic fallout for millions of employees.
To contain the spread of COVID-19, health ministries and the World Health Organization (WHO) are advising everyone to keep up to date on latest developments, wash hands frequently, stay at home, and practice physical distancing when outside the home.
as COVID-19 cases are increasing fast, there is great concern about the disease’s potential spread and impact.
A global health crisis could thus cause a major food crisis — unless steps are taken to provide unprecedented economic emergency relief.
Your comments