Vulnerability and social protection in Malawi

Vulnerability appears to be rising for many Malawians, whose exposure to livelihood shocks is increasing while their ability to cope is decreasing. The first part of this report draws on recently published studies and analysis of the 2004/05 Integrated Household Survey dataset to explore the nature of vulnerability in Malawi. Most livelihoods in Malawi depend on agriculture, but agricultural vulnerability is extremely high due to erratic rainfall, inequality in landholdings, constrained access to inputs, limited diversification and weak markets. Noneconomic factors that compound economic risks include demographic and health risks, gendered vulnerabilities, social change and governance failures. Economic vulnerability, defined as the risk of future monetary poverty, is high because of the heavy concentration of Malawians clustered close to the poverty line, and because of the frequency and severity of covariant shocks such as droughts, floods and food price fluctuations, as well as idiosyncratic shocks such as accidents, illness and death of family members. The economic, demographic and social impacts of HIV/AIDS are especially devastating. Monetary and subjective indicators of vulnerability are related to demographic characteristics (female- and older-headed households, orphans), lack of assets, geographic location (with a north-south gradient of rising vulnerability) and multiple shocks. Policy priorities derived from this analysis include: stabilise food prices, enhance access to agricultural inputs, and identify labour-saving technologies for labour-constrained households. More generally, social protection and livelihood promotion measures, together with an enabling environment, are central to addressing vulnerability in Malawi. The second part of this report reviews a range of ongoing and discontinued social protection mechanisms in Malawi. Free inputs distribution (‘Starter Packs’) followed the abolition of fertiliser subsidies in the 1990s, and had positive impacts on food production and prices. Public works programmes (food-, cash- or inputs-for-work), social funds (the Malawi Social Action Fund) and food transfers (food aid, school feeding) also have long histories in Malawi, but have demonstrated limited impacts. Finally, unconditional cash transfers are increasingly popular, which this review endorses with the qualification that ongoing pilot projects need to be institutionalised within a comprehensive, government owned, national social protection strategy. Keywords: Malawi, poverty, social protection, vulnerability

Richer but Resented: What do Cash Transfers do to Social Relations?

Cash transfers are an increasingly important component of social protection systems in most countries. Usually, cash transfers are evaluated against their effects on poverty or human capital, with their impact on social relations within and between households relegated to discrete comments on ‘stigma’, ‘resentment’ and sharing, including reduction of remittances and other support. Using evidence from Oxford Policy Management's evaluations of cash transfer programmes in Malawi and Zimbabwe, we suggest reconceptualising cash transfers as ongoing processes of intervention in a complex system of social relations. Cash transfer interventions operate through and affect this system at each stage: awareness?raising, targeting, payment, case management and monitoring and evaluation. We conclude that the impact of cash transfers on social relations is large and often negative. We argue that this is intrinsically important for wellbeing, but can also have negative consequences for material aspects of wellbeing, such as livelihoods

New Technologies in Cash Transfer Programming and Humanitarian Assistance

This study was commissioned by the Cash Learning Partnership (CaLP) to review the current use of new technology in humanitarian cash and voucher programming and the broader implications for humanitarian practice. The research was undertaken to explore (i) preconditions for the use of technological mechanisms identified; (ii) user-friendliness of the technology for the recipient and for the agency; (iii) issues concerning accountability; and (iv) potential for wider impacts.The research discusses in detail three types of technology currently being used in aid programming: electronic payment systems, the use of mobile phones for text and voice communication, and digital data gathering tools. For each, the study outlines current use, examines benefits experienced and issues faced by the recipient and the agency and highlights key lessons learned. The study also looks briefly at new emerging uses of technology in aid programming including recipient management and crisis mapping. The report then looks at the potential benefits and risks of using new technologies in the cross-cutting areas of cost-effectiveness and accountability