Recovery, Renewal, Resilience

A current research project, by the Overseas Development Institute, is examining social protection (SP) measures employed during the pandemic in LMICs. The project is producing a series of working papers. One paper examines the inclusion of refugees in government-led SP and the “alignment and integration of cash assistance to refugees and government social protection”. The paper evaluates the effectiveness of social protection responses across four countries in terms of: “Timeliness; coverage adequacy; and level adequacy (value of benefit)”. It also offers the emerging lessons from the study and initial policy recommendations. Consider:

Lessons on the drivers of effective government social protection response

• The maturity of SP systems and pre-existing local and state capacities directly impacted how effectively SP programmes met the needs of refugees during COVID
• Targeting criteria that evaluates eligibility based on risk of vulnerability could be more effective, timely and suitable during a crisis rather than traditional criteria such as length of residency or status
• Benefit levels of government systems are unlikely to be sufficient for refugees’ needs, as these are typically higher than those of nationals and require very careful consideration. The main challenge identified when setting benefit levels which include refugees during the pandemic is that governments are “faced with two competing objectives: (1) preventing social tension and unfairness between population groups” (by varying benefit levels between refugees and nationals); and (2) “ensuring that everyone can meet their basic needs”

Policy recommendations for protecting refugees during a crisis

• Conduct a national socio-economic survey, to include data on refugees’ needs, to develop an overview of the needs of the population across the country. This can enable more effective social protection programme design that effectively meets the needs of everyone
• A review of registration processes can highlight barriers to access for refugees (e.g. in terms of the documents required to register for programmes). Where this is not possible, governments can “draw on international/national/local humanitarian actors’ databases of refugee populations” to swiftly target them with support during crisis
• Hosting governments could consider “integrating refugees into social insurance” (e.g. those with work permits) which may reduce political or public opposition as those receiving benefits will be contributing to national insurance
• Careful consideration of benefit levels and trade-offs between “politically greater acceptability but possibly lower effectiveness” in terms of meeting refugees needs is essential

Low- and middle-income countries (LMICs)

Existing resilience strategies should be amended in real-time to include long and short-term actions to combat the effects of COVID-19. This should include consideration of pre-existing vulnerabilities such as local socio-economic conditions, and environmental risk such as heatwaves and floods. Consider evaluating all indicators of all resilience programmes to weave COVID-19 impacts and indicators into sustainable resilience planning. This helps accommodate COVID-19 into existing long-term city plans, rather than trying to build resilience purely around COVID concerns

This lesson was contributed to by Chief Resilience Officers in the USA and Colombia, during project data collection.

In one city in Colombia, the local authorities decided on a campaign based on the idea of looking out for one another, and the slogan "Let's get our hands back into work, while looking out for each other". Involving local residents included:

• taking photographs of residents' hands working on relatable activities e.g. local bakers baking bread, or greengrocers laying out fruit and vegetables in the local store. The campaign also included photographs of residents' eyes
• preparing posters for city-wide use of the images and slogan

The campaign successfully involved people from the community literally looking out at, and for, one another, and improved engagement with the message.

This lesson was contributed by a Chief Resilience Officer in Colombia during project data collection.