Social Protection in Bangladesh: Past Experience and the Way Forward

1. Social Protection in Bangladesh: Past Experience and the Way Forward Akhter Ahmed International Food Policy Research Institute Social Protection Policies and Safety Nets in South Asia UNESCO-ICSSR Research Meeting 18-19 March 2010

2. Social protection in Bangladesh • Bangladesh possesses a wealth institutional diversity and a wide range of experiences in providing assistance to the poor through social safety net programs • Comprehensive portfolio of social protection or safety nets—28 programs • Expenditures on safety nets increased from 4.4% of public expenditure in early 2000s to 12.6% of 2009/10 budget • Yet, safety net coverage represents only a fraction of the extreme poor • Safety nets (risk coping) rather than protection (risk reduction) orientated programs and policies

3. Policy and program reforms • Successive governments have shown remarkable willingness to evaluate program effectiveness, confront shortcomings, and cancel or modify programs as a result. • Substantive changes in admin structure and implementation mechanisms: • Transformed most relief programs to development programs • Converted ration food price subsidies to targeted food distribution • Engaged NGOs in the implementation of various safety net programs

4. IFPRI Evaluations of SP Programs in Bangladesh: Key Findings Page 4

5. Cash, Food & Food+Cash Transfers in Bangladesh Page 5

6. Annual full costs of programs(Value of full transfer entitlements + delivery costs) Page 6

7. Annual full costs per beneficiary(Value of full transfer entitlements + delivery costs) Page 7

8. Comparing food and cash transfers to address social protection debates • Poorest households prefer food, relatively well off cash • Size of transfer and type of food ration important to improve food security • Transfer + microcredit access sustained impact • Onerous work requirement improves targeting but limits impact

9. Form of food transfer affects intrahousehold food distribution

10. Transfers for Providing Education incentives Page 10

11. Education incentive programs works! Net primary education enrollment rates increased FFE = Food for Education Program PES = Primary Education Stipend Program SFP = School Feeding Program ROSC = Reaching Out-of-School Children Project - Ananda schools Page 11

12. In FFE, enrollment increase was greater for girls than for boys % Changein enrollmentfrom before (1992) to during (1994) FFE Page 12

13. Short-term hunger alleviation in the classroom improves children’s learning • Bangladesh’s school feeding program (SFP) provides a mid-morning snack of high-nutrient biscuits to children in school • Participation in the SFP increased achievement test scores by 15.7% • Participating students did especially well in mathematics Other findings: • SFP raises enrollment by 14.2% and reduces dropout by 7.5% • SFP improves nutritional status (BMI) of school children • Calories from SF biscuits are almost entirely (97%) additional to the child’s normal diet. The child’s family does not give him or her less food at home for eating SF biscuits at school. Page 13

14. Girls’ secondary school stipend programs over-achieved gender equity in schooling • These programs started in 1993 in rural areas. From 1992 (before program) to 2002, girls’ enrollment overtook that of boys at both primary and secondary levels of education. • However, the difference is larger at the secondary level, which indicates that the girls’ secondary education stipend programs over-achieved the gender equity. Page 14

15. Impact of asset transfers: The Targeted Ultra Poor Program (TUP) program of BRAC Page 15

16. Program participation resulted in an increase in rented/leased-in Land

17. Ownership of cows increased dramatically

18. Participation induced saving behavior

19. Sustained impact on food energy consumption

20. Way Forward Page 20

21. Addressing new challenges • Social protection will become even more important in Bangladesh as the country faces economic downturn, food price fluctuations, climate change, and other developments that increase the vulnerability of the poor. • For example, the global economic downturn is leading to expulsion of migrant workers from the Middle East and Malaysia is leading to reduced income, and difficulties in seeking unemployment for returnees. • Bangladesh is the only country in South Asia that has introduced a massive safety net intervention in response to the 2008 food crisis—the 100-Day Employment Generation Program with nationwide coverage.

22. Role of SP during crisis • Real need for increasing attention and investment in social protection: • Protective approaches (short-term mitigation) • Preventative approaches (long-term prevention) • Scale up effective programs • Focus on: CCT, pension schemes, employment, microfinance • Continue to invest in human capital creation Page 22

23. What research questions need to be answered? • What SP modalities work best? Where, for whom and why? • Conditional vs unconditional transfers • Food vs alternative modalities • Behavioral factors/responses • How can social protection promote longer term livelihood development? • Risk management • Assets

24. What research questions need to be answered? • How can social protection reach vulnerable and underserved populations? • Indigenous groups • Adolescent girls • Extremely poor • Children 0-2 • Pregnant/lactating women

25. Key issues in program choice • Levels of specific human capital disadvantage • Desired outcomes, where, for whom? • Reasons for these deficiencies • Administrative capacities • Capacity of supply side to deliver with quality • Capacity to monitor compliance • Costs and resources available over time • Political support Page 25