Pandemic, lockdown and the stalled urbanization of welfare regimes in Southern Africa

IF 1.5 Q2 POLITICAL SCIENCE
L. Gronbach, J. Seekings
{"title":"Pandemic, lockdown and the stalled urbanization of welfare regimes in Southern Africa","authors":"L. Gronbach, J. Seekings","doi":"10.1177/14680181211013725","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"While Covid-19 caused few fatalities across most of Africa – with the notable exception of South Africa – the indirect economic effects were substantial, especially in urban areas. International organizations encouraged governments to expand their provision, especially for the urban poor. South Africa extended temporarily its already considerable system of social protection and introduced new implementation systems. Elsewhere, governments that had hitherto appeared ambivalent about social protection resisted major reforms, even on a temporary basis. In Zambia, the government committed considerable resources to small farmers but ignored almost entirely cash transfers to the poor. Botswana provided food parcels but did not expand its social grant programmes. The shock of Covid-19 in Southern Africa did not prove to be a ‘critical juncture’: Powerful pro-reform coalitions did not form to shift governments onto new policy paths. National governments were generally reluctant either to introduce programmes that were targeted on the urban poor specifically or to allow countrywide emergency programmes to become permanent. The crisis thus did not lead to any clear ‘urbanisation’ of welfare regimes in the region, despite the disproportionate effect of the crisis on the urban poor.","PeriodicalId":46041,"journal":{"name":"Global Social Policy","volume":"21 1","pages":"448 - 467"},"PeriodicalIF":1.5000,"publicationDate":"2021-05-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1177/14680181211013725","citationCount":"4","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Global Social Policy","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/14680181211013725","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"POLITICAL SCIENCE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 4

Abstract

While Covid-19 caused few fatalities across most of Africa – with the notable exception of South Africa – the indirect economic effects were substantial, especially in urban areas. International organizations encouraged governments to expand their provision, especially for the urban poor. South Africa extended temporarily its already considerable system of social protection and introduced new implementation systems. Elsewhere, governments that had hitherto appeared ambivalent about social protection resisted major reforms, even on a temporary basis. In Zambia, the government committed considerable resources to small farmers but ignored almost entirely cash transfers to the poor. Botswana provided food parcels but did not expand its social grant programmes. The shock of Covid-19 in Southern Africa did not prove to be a ‘critical juncture’: Powerful pro-reform coalitions did not form to shift governments onto new policy paths. National governments were generally reluctant either to introduce programmes that were targeted on the urban poor specifically or to allow countrywide emergency programmes to become permanent. The crisis thus did not lead to any clear ‘urbanisation’ of welfare regimes in the region, despite the disproportionate effect of the crisis on the urban poor.
大流行、封锁和南部非洲福利制度的城市化停滞
虽然Covid-19在非洲大部分地区造成的死亡人数很少(南非除外),但间接经济影响巨大,尤其是在城市地区。国际组织鼓励各国政府扩大援助,特别是为城市贫民提供援助。南非暂时延长了其已经相当可观的社会保护制度,并采用了新的执行制度。在其他地方,迄今为止对社会保障表现出矛盾态度的政府抵制重大改革,即使是暂时的改革。在赞比亚,政府承诺向小农提供大量资源,但几乎完全忽视向穷人提供现金援助。博茨瓦纳提供了食品包,但没有扩大其社会赠款方案。2019冠状病毒病对南部非洲的冲击并没有被证明是一个“关键时刻”:没有形成强大的支持改革的联盟,使政府转向新的政策道路。各国政府一般不愿推行专门针对城市贫民的方案,也不愿让全国性的紧急方案成为永久性方案。因此,危机并没有导致该地区福利制度的任何明显的“城市化”,尽管危机对城市穷人产生了不成比例的影响。
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
Global Social Policy
Global Social Policy POLITICAL SCIENCE-
CiteScore
3.20
自引率
6.70%
发文量
41
期刊介绍: Global Social Policy is a fully peer-reviewed journal that advances the understanding of the impact of globalisation processes upon social policy and social development on the one hand, and the impact of social policy upon globalisation processes on the other hand. The journal analyses the contributions of a range of national and international actors, both governmental and non-governmental, to global social policy and social development discourse and practice. Global Social Policy publishes scholarly policy-oriented articles and reports that focus on aspects of social policy and social and human development as broadly defined in the context of globalisation be it in contemporary or historical contexts.
×
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:481959085
Book学术官方微信