The limits to cash-plus provision in protracted crises

IF 1.4 3区 经济学 Q2 DEVELOPMENT STUDIES
Rachel Sabates-Wheeler, Jeremy Lind, Carolina Holland-Szyp
{"title":"The limits to cash-plus provision in protracted crises","authors":"Rachel Sabates-Wheeler,&nbsp;Jeremy Lind,&nbsp;Carolina Holland-Szyp","doi":"10.1111/dpr.70020","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div>\n \n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Motivation</h3>\n \n <p>Cash-plus programmes have succeeded in places where different provisions (e.g., health, education, nutrition) are able to complement each other while augmenting a regular cash transfer payment. The institutional capacity to deliver an integrated support package has marked the effective functioning of these programmes. However, in contexts of conflict and protracted crisis and the associated disruptions of infrastructure damage, insecurity, distrust, and violence, the necessary institutional scaffolding for a well-functioning cash-plus programme becomes unstable and may collapse altogether. Despite this, cash-plus programmes continue to be implemented in these contexts.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Purpose</h3>\n \n <p>We assess whether cash-plus programmes are designed and delivered to reduce vulnerability and promote livelihoods in protracted crises, and if their outcomes resonate with their objectives.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Approach and Methods</h3>\n \n <p>We develop a multidimensional indicator of protracted crisis, incorporating conflict, displacement, and climate change vulnerability, and map this against the strength of national social protection systems. We review 97 cash-plus programmes in 16 countries, examining design features, objectives, and outcomes.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Findings</h3>\n \n <p>The review exposes the weakness in relying on the usual small-lift aims of cash-plus interventions (such as the provision of seeds or poultry, or basic training in business) in contexts where household-level barriers to improving livelihoods are dwarfed by macro-level structural, political, and social ruptures. The evidence demonstrates that most cash-plus interventions are not designed or delivered in ways suitable for crises.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Policy Implications</h3>\n \n <p>Household-level objectives will be stymied by institutional and political disruptions; therefore, programmes must also seek to help reshape the context in which people live. During active conflict (as compared to intermittent violence), cash-plus may simply be impossible: it may be better to focus on providing for basic needs, such as through humanitarian aid.</p>\n </section>\n </div>","PeriodicalId":51478,"journal":{"name":"Development Policy Review","volume":"43 4","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.4000,"publicationDate":"2025-06-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/dpr.70020","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Development Policy Review","FirstCategoryId":"96","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/dpr.70020","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"经济学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"DEVELOPMENT STUDIES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Motivation

Cash-plus programmes have succeeded in places where different provisions (e.g., health, education, nutrition) are able to complement each other while augmenting a regular cash transfer payment. The institutional capacity to deliver an integrated support package has marked the effective functioning of these programmes. However, in contexts of conflict and protracted crisis and the associated disruptions of infrastructure damage, insecurity, distrust, and violence, the necessary institutional scaffolding for a well-functioning cash-plus programme becomes unstable and may collapse altogether. Despite this, cash-plus programmes continue to be implemented in these contexts.

Purpose

We assess whether cash-plus programmes are designed and delivered to reduce vulnerability and promote livelihoods in protracted crises, and if their outcomes resonate with their objectives.

Approach and Methods

We develop a multidimensional indicator of protracted crisis, incorporating conflict, displacement, and climate change vulnerability, and map this against the strength of national social protection systems. We review 97 cash-plus programmes in 16 countries, examining design features, objectives, and outcomes.

Findings

The review exposes the weakness in relying on the usual small-lift aims of cash-plus interventions (such as the provision of seeds or poultry, or basic training in business) in contexts where household-level barriers to improving livelihoods are dwarfed by macro-level structural, political, and social ruptures. The evidence demonstrates that most cash-plus interventions are not designed or delivered in ways suitable for crises.

Policy Implications

Household-level objectives will be stymied by institutional and political disruptions; therefore, programmes must also seek to help reshape the context in which people live. During active conflict (as compared to intermittent violence), cash-plus may simply be impossible: it may be better to focus on providing for basic needs, such as through humanitarian aid.

Abstract Image

在旷日持久的危机中对现金加拨备的限制
在一些地方,不同的服务(如保健、教育、营养)能够相互补充,同时增加定期现金转移支付,现金附加方案取得了成功。提供一揽子综合支助的机构能力标志着这些方案的有效运作。然而,在冲突和旷日持久的危机以及与之相关的基础设施破坏、不安全、不信任和暴力的背景下,一个运作良好的现金+方案所需的制度框架变得不稳定,甚至可能完全崩溃。尽管如此,在这些情况下继续执行加现金方案。目的我们评估现金+方案的设计和实施是否能够减少持续性危机中的脆弱性和促进生计,以及这些方案的结果是否符合其目标。方法和方法我们制定了一个包含冲突、流离失所和气候变化脆弱性的长期危机多维指标,并将其与国家社会保障体系的强度进行对比。我们审查了16个国家的97个现金+项目,检查了设计特点、目标和结果。在家庭层面改善生计的障碍与宏观层面的结构、政治和社会破裂相比显得微不足道的情况下,该综述暴露了依赖通常的现金+干预措施(如提供种子或家禽,或基本的商业培训)的小目标的弱点。有证据表明,大多数现金+干预措施的设计或实施方式都不适合危机。家庭层面的目标将受到体制和政治混乱的阻碍;因此,规划还必须设法帮助重塑人们的生活环境。在激烈冲突期间(与间歇性暴力相比),现金补贴可能根本不可能实现:最好是集中精力满足基本需求,例如通过人道主义援助。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Development Policy Review
Development Policy Review DEVELOPMENT STUDIES-
CiteScore
3.50
自引率
5.90%
发文量
87
期刊介绍: Development Policy Review is the refereed journal that makes the crucial links between research and policy in international development. Edited by staff of the Overseas Development Institute, the London-based think-tank on international development and humanitarian issues, it publishes single articles and theme issues on topics at the forefront of current development policy debate. Coverage includes the latest thinking and research on poverty-reduction strategies, inequality and social exclusion, property rights and sustainable livelihoods, globalisation in trade and finance, and the reform of global governance. Informed, rigorous, multi-disciplinary and up-to-the-minute, DPR is an indispensable tool for development researchers and practitioners alike.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信