View previous stories
	Precarious Lives: Work, food and care after the global food crisis by Oxfam, Institute for Development Studies   Sep. 2016   When food prices spiked in 2008, the international price of basic food items peaked at unprecedented levels, bringing a wave of food riots in low-income countries.   Subsequent price volatility had huge impacts on millions of people who struggled to feed their families nutritiously.   Life in a Time of Food Price Volatility was a real-time investigation by IDS and Oxfam of the experiences of people on low and uncertain incomes as they made dramatic adjustments to their place in the global economy in the wake of the food and financial crises that began in 2007.   This is the final report from four years of research in 10 countries, from yearly visits to 23 urban and rural communities and analysis of national and international food data. It finds that as people worked harder and longer and migrated to find work, more turned to convenience fast food, particularly unhealthy processed items – a more ‘Westernized’ diet.   People in all communities had concerns about food safety and quality. Many called for regulation to protect children from the marketing strategies that encourage poor eating habits from the earliest years.   The impact was particularly great for women, who are working harder – especially in informal employment – while maintaining the household and caring for children. Their time and energy are being squeezed as never before.   http://policy-practice.oxfam.org/resources/precarious-lives-work-food-and-care-after-the-global-food-crisis-620020/ Visit the related web page
	Cash transfers key to tackling poverty and hunger in Africa by UNICEF Office of Research – Innocenti   Social cash transfers are enabling some of Africa’s poorest families to substantially increase food consumption and increase school enrollment, new evidence from UNICEF Innocenti and its partners shows.   In a new book, From Evidence to Action: The Story of Cash Transfers and Impact Evaluations in Sub-Saharan Africa - launched in Johannesburg on November 15 – UNICEF, FAO, and other partners showcase the impacts cash transfer programmes have had in eight Sub-Saharan countries (Ethiopia, Ghana, Kenya, Lesotho, Malawi, South Africa, Zambia, and Zimbabwe).   “Cash transfers are enabling the poorest families to substantially increase food consumption and improve overall food security,” said Leila Gharagozloo-Pakkala, Regional Director for UNICEF in Eastern and Southern Africa.   “While cash alone is not enough to solve all problems, it is increasingly helping families avoid negative coping strategies, such as taking children out of school, or selling off assets.”   At the “Critical Thinking Forum,” organized by South Africa’s Mail & Guardian newspaper to launch the book, government and UN representatives discussed what’s working and what challenges remain with national social protection programmes across the region.   Evidence shows how there is an increase in secondary school enrollment as a result of cash transfers which allow families to purchase school uniforms and other supplies. Evidence shows that cash transfers did not result in increased expenditure on alcohol and tobacco – a commonly held concern.   In Zambia, evidence showed an increase of farmland and expenditure on hired labour by 36 per cent. A significant portion of the evidence presented in the book is based on research conducted in the field by UNICEF Innocenti.   The new evidence finds that government-run cash transfer programmes are expanding across the continent, with national social protection strategies often including a cash component.   While cash transfers in Africa tend to be provided unconditionally (direct and predictable transfers without strings attached), many countries do include programme messaging to encourage school enrolment and periodic health and nutrition checks for children.   For several years, there have been concerns that beneficiaries would waste money as a result of the cash transfers, however UNICEF and FAO gathered evidence across a ten year period through the Transfer Project, which clearly indicates that the majority of recipients are utilising cash transfers to better the living standards of their families, especially children.   Gathered evidence has also fostered strong collaboration among policymakers, development partners and researchers and led to improved social cash transfer policies and practices in Africa.   The Transfer Project is a multi-country research initiative to provide rigorous evidence on the impact of large-scale national cash transfer programs in sub-Saharan Africa. The project provides technical assistance in the design, implementation and analysis of Government programs in Ethiopia, Ghana, Kenya, Lesotho, Malawi, South Africa, Tanzania, Zambia and Zimbabwe.   Programs are nationally owned and implemented by Government, and there is focus on dissemination of results to national stakeholders, as well as regional workshops to allow for cross-country learning and capacity building.   The project aims to generate evidence from largely unconditional transfers across both social protection and productive domains. Key partners include UNICEF Country Offices, the regional office of East and Southern Africa, national implementing agencies, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Save the Children UK, and the Food and Agricultural Organization of the United Nations.   Why Assist People Living in Poverty? The ethics of poverty reduction   This paper provides an examination of the relevance of ethics to poverty reduction. It argues that linking the shared values that define the social arrangements and institutions, which we refer to as ‘ethical perspectives’, to the emerging welfare institutions addressing poverty in developing countries provides a window into these processes of justification at a more fundamental level.   By ethics of poverty the authors refer to the most basic arguments and processes used to justify how and why we assist people living in poverty. Given the extent to which poverty reflects injustice, they argue it is appropriate to consider poverty in the context of ethics. Drawing on the recent expansion of social assistance in Brazil, South Africa and Ghana, the paper shows that ethical perspectives are relevant to our understanding of the evolution of anti-poverty policy>   * Access the 25 page paper via external link: http://bit.ly/2hCT5da   Cash transfers reduce poverty and have widespread impacts, by Amber Peterman   The rise of ‘cash without strings’ and ‘basic income’ in the development policy and aid discourse has blossomed, and for good reason. The arguments for just giving cash to poor households to use as they best see fit are numerous: cash transfers reduce poverty and have widespread impacts—often larger than traditional forms of assistance—program operational costs are low and, importantly, cash provides recipients more dignity and autonomy over spending.   Cash transfers have also recently been highlighted as a most promising response in humanitarian crises.. Are unconditional cash transfers just a new development fad? No. In fact, unconditional grants have been around for decades. Take Africa as an example: The government of South Africa has been operating the Child Support Grant for nearly two decades (since 1998), reaching just over 11 million beneficiaries. Ethiopia’s Productive Safety Net Project (PSNP) started in 2005, and last year PSNP transferred cash to approximately 5.16 million beneficiaries. The Tanzanian Productive Social Safety Net, started in 2010 is expanding to approximately 900,000 beneficiaries this year.   How do we know that these large, bureaucratic and corruption-prone government programs actually work? Well, some would argue that we have more evidence from Government programming in Africa, than in any other region in the world. For example, since 2008, a consortium of organizations under the umbrella of the Transfer Project, have conducted or have ongoing rigorous evaluations of 12 government cash transfer programs in nine countries in sub-Saharan Africa. Researchers use the gold standard of evaluation designs, randomized controlled trials (RCTs) or quasi-experimental methods paired with qualitative research to show how benefits accrue to poor households.   There is now cross cutting evidence that these programs have widespread impacts on protection outcomes—including poverty and food security, health and education, the safe transition to adulthood of youth—as well as on productive domains, including labor force participation, agriculture and productive assets, and local economy multipliers.   Take Zambia’s Child Grant Programme (CGP) as an example: Originally implemented in three rural districts, starting in 2010 the program transferred an equivalent of USD $12 each month to women in households with a child under the age of five. Recently published research shows that after two years, beneficiaries had higher consumption levels, food security, cash savings and productive activity, including crop production, livestock ownership and entrepreneurship of women. Results demonstrate that households did not waste transfers or become lazy, they utilized them to improve the situation of their household. Of course, cash alone is not a silver bullet—there are many dimensions of development that cash transfers cannot address—such as improving health clinics, schools or roads.   * FAO: From Evidence to Action: The story of cash transfers and impact evaluation in sub-Saharan Africa (400 pages): http://bit.ly/2eFQe46   * The Office of Research – Innocenti is UNICEF’s dedicated research centre undertaking research on emerging and current priorities to shape policy and practice for children, access the link below to visit the social protection Transfer research homepage. Visit the related web page
	View more stories