1、A DA P T I V E S O C I A L P R OT E CT I O N I N S O U T H E R N A F R I CAPublic Disclosure AuthorizedPublic Disclosure AuthorizedPublic Disclosure AuthorizedPublic Disclosure AuthorizedA DA P T I V E S O C I A L P R OT E CT I O N I N S O U T H E R N A F R I CA 2022 International Bank for Reconstru

2、ction and Development/The World Bank 1818 H Street NW Washington,DC 20433 Telephone:202-473-1000 Internet:www.worldbank.org This work is a product of the staff of The World Bank with external contributions.The findings,inter-pretations,and conclusions expressed in this work do not necessarily reflec

3、t the views of The World Bank,its Board of Executive Directors,or the governments they represent.The World Bank does not guarantee the accuracy,completeness,or currency of the data included in this work and does not assume responsibility for any errors,omissions,or discrepancies in the infor-mation,

4、or liability with respect to the use of or failure to use the information,methods,processes,or conclusions set forth.The boundaries,colors,denominations,and other information shown on any map in this work do not imply any judgment on the part of The World Bank concerning the legal status of any terr

5、itory or the endorsement or acceptance of such boundaries.Nothing herein shall constitute or be construed or considered to be a limitation upon or waiver of the privileges and immunities of The World Bank,all of which are specifically reserved.Rights and Permissions The material in this work is subj

6、ect to copyright.Because The World Bank encourages dissemination of its knowledge,this work may be reproduced,in whole or in part,for noncommercial purposes as long as full attribution to this work is given.Any queries on rights and licenses,including subsidiary rights,should be addressed to World B

7、ank Publications,The World Bank Group,1818 H Street NW,Washington,DC 20433,USA;fax:202-522-2625;e-mail:pubrightsworldbank.org.Cover image:Munimara/Shutterstock.iiiC O N T E N TSAC KN OW L E D G M E N TS V I IAB B R EVIATI O N S I X1.I N T R O D U CT I O N 1BAC KG R O U N D AN D RATI O NAL E 1M E TH

8、O D O LO GY AN D ANALYTI CAL F RAM E WO R K 4S U B R EG I O NAL OVE RVI E W 92.B OTSWANA 29OVE RVI EW O F R I S K AN D H O U S E H O L D V U L N E RAB I L I TY 2 9AS S E S S M E NT O F ADAPTIVE S O C IAL P R OT E CT I O N 3 2P R I O R ITY I N TE RVE NTI O N S FO R B OTSWANA 513.E SWAT I N I 55OVE RV

9、I EW O F R I S K AN D H O U S E H O L D V U L N E RAB I L I TY 55AS S E S S M E NT O F ADAPTIVE S O C IAL P R OT E CT I O N 57P R I O R ITY I N TE RVE NTI O N S FO R E SWAT I N I 744.L E S OT H O 79OVE RVI EW O F R I S K AN D H O U S E H O L D V U L N E RAB I L I TY 79AS S E S S M E NT O F ADAPTIVE

10、S O C IAL P R OT E CT I O N 8 2P R I O R ITY I N TE RVE NTI O N S FO R L E S OTH O 1 07ivADAPT I V E S O C IAL P R OT E CT I O N I N S O UT H E R N AF R I CA5.S O UT H AF R I CA 111OVE RVI E W O F R I S K AN D H O U S E H O L D V U L N E RAB I L I TY 111AS S E S S M E NT O F ADAPT I V E S O C IAL P

11、R OT E CT I O N 114P R I O R ITY I N TE RVE NTI O N S FO R S O UT H AF R I CA 1 39AP P E N D I X 143G LOS SARY 149R E F E R E N C E S 153B OX E S1.1 L E S OTH OS S O C IAL R EG I ST RY AN D S H O C K R E S P O N S E 203.1 TH E NATI O NAL S O C IAL AS S I STAN C E P O L I CY 593.2 OVC CAS H T RAN S F

12、 E R P I LOT (201 61 8)653.3 FO O D R E S P O N S E P L AN FO R C OV I D-1 9 663.4 AC C E S S TO F I NAN C IAL S E RVI C E S AN D NAT I O NAL I D CAR D S I N E SWAT I N I 673.5 ACTI O N S P R O P OS E D TO I M P R OV E E SWAT I N I S I N FO R MAT I O N SYST E M S 704.1 I N TEG RATE D P O L I CY F RA

13、M E WO R K FO R AL I G N I N G T H E G OV E R N M E N T O F L E S OTH OS C O O R D I NAT I O N ST R U CTU R E S 854.2 AC C E S S TO F I NAN C IAL S E RVI C E S AN D NAT I O NAL I D CAR D S I S ST I L L L I M ITE D AN D I N E Q U I I N L E S OT H O 934.3 L E S OTH OS D I SAST E R R I S K F I NAN C I

14、N G I N STR U M E N TS 1054.4 C O N TI N G E N CY P LAN N I N G FO R C G P S CAL E-U PS I N R E S P O N S E TO D R O U G H TS 1065.1 S O UTH AF R I CAS S O C IAL P R OT ECT I O N R E S P O N S E TO C OVI D-1 9 1265.2 M I C R O I N S U RAN C E AS A S H O C K-R E S P O N S I V E S O C IAL P R OT E CTI

15、 O N O PT I O N 12 8F I G U R E S1.1 C O U NTR I E S AN D T E R R I TO R I E S U S I N G S O C IAL P R OT E CT I O N M EAS U R E S I N R E S P O N S E TO C OV I D-19 41.2 TH E FO U R B U I L D I N G B LO C KS FO R ADAPT I V E S O C IAL P R OT E CT I O N 51.3 D EVE LO P M E N T TRAJ E CTO RY O F S O

16、C IAL P R OT E CT I O N I N FO R MAT I O N SYSTE M S 182.1 B OTSWANAS C U R R E N T D I SAST E R R I S K MANAG E M E N T O R GAN I Z AT I O NAL F RAM EWO R K 362.2 TOTAL AN D P O O R P O P U L AT I O N S C OV E R E D BY B OTSWANA S O C IAL AS S I STAN C E P R O G RAM S,201 5/1 6 (%)412.3 S O C IAL A

17、S S I STAN C E P R O G RAM E X P E N D I TU R E S AS P E R C E N TAG E O F B OTSWANAS TOTAL B U D G E T 49vC O N T E N TS3.1 P OVE RTY H EAD C O U N T RATI OS I N SAC U C O U N T R I E S 553.2 D I SAST E R R I S K P R O F I L E O F E SWAT I N I 573.3 S O C IAL P R OTECTI O N C OVE RAG E I N SAC U C

18、O U N T R I E S:D I R E CT AN D I N D I R ECT B E N E F I C IAR I E S 643.4 SAC U S O C IAL AS S I STAN C E S P E N D I N G AS A P E R C E N TAG E O F G D P 733.5 D I STR I B UTI O N O F S O C IAL AS S I STAN C E S P E N D I N G I N E SWAT I N I 734.1 P OVE RTY H EAD C O U N T RATI OS I N SAC U C O

19、U N T R I E S 794.2 P OVE RTY I N M I D D L E-I N C O M E C O U N T R I E S 804.3 R U RAL AN D U R BAN W E L FAR E D I ST R I B UT I O N AN D P OV E RTY BY D I STR I CT 804.4 P O PU LATI O N AF F E CTE D BY C L I MAT I C S H O C KS I N L E S OT H O,1 96 8 2020 814.5 FO O D I N S E C U R ITY I N L E

20、S OTH O,2014 20 814.6 S O C IAL P R OTECTI O N C OVE RAG E I N SAC U C O U N T R I E S:D I R E CT AN D I N D I R ECT B E N E F I C IAR I E S 914.7 C O R R E LATI O N B E TW E E N C G P C OV E RAG E AN D FO O D D E F I C I TS I N L E S OTH O,BY D I STR I CT 914.8 B E N E F IT AD E Q UACY O F AL L S O

21、 C IAL AS S I STAN C E P R O G RAM S I N SAC U C O U NTR I E S 924.9 S O C IAL AS S I STAN C E S P E N D I N G AS A P E R C E N TAG E O F G D P FO R SAC U AN D OTH E R C O U N TR I E S 1 035.1 S O UTH AF R I CA:F I NAN C IAL C OST O F D I SAST E R S,1 96 8 201 9 1 1 25.2 S O UTH AF R I CAS S O C IAL

22、 P R OTECT I O N SYST E M 1 1 95.3 D I STR I B UTI O N O F S O C IAL P R OTE CT I O N G RAN TS BY W EALT H Q U I N T I L E I N S O UT H AF R I CA,2014/15 1 2 2MAPS2.1 B OTSWANA 315.1 HAZ AR D L EVE LS FO R VAR I O U S TYP E S O F F LO O D I N G I N S O UT H AF R I CA,2021 1 1 35.2 S O UTH AF R I CA

23、STAN DAR D P R E C I P I TAT I O N I N D E X,201 6 1 1 35.3 DAYS W H E N F I R E DAN G E R I S “VE RY L I KE LY”I N S O UT H AF R I CA 1 14TAB L E S1.1 S C O R ECAR D FO R TH E FO U R B U I L D I N G B LO C KS AC R O S S C O U N T R I E S 1 01.2 S C O R ECAR D FO R I N STITUTI O NAL AR RAN G E M E N

24、 TS AN D PART N E R S H I PS AC R OS S C O U N TR I E S 1 11.3 S C O R ECAR D FO R P R O G RAM S AN D D E L I V E RY SYST E M S AC R O S S C O U NTR I E S 1 51.4 S C O R ECAR D FO R DATA AN D I N FO R MAT I O N SYST E M S AC R O S S C O U NTR I E S 1 71.5 UTI L ITY O F AN D TRAD E-O F FS B E T W E E

25、 N B E N E F I C IARY AN D S O C IAL R EG I ST R I E S FO R S H O C K R E S P O N S E 1 9viADAPT I V E S O C IAL P R OT E CT I O N I N S O UT H E R N AF R I CA1.6 S C O R E CAR D FO R F I NAN C E AC R O S S C O U N T R I E S 242.1 I N C I D E N C E AN D I M PACT O F D I SAST E R EVE N TS I N B OTSWA

26、NA,1965 2018 302.2 S C O R E CAR D FO R I N ST ITUT I O NAL AR RAN G E M E N TS AN D PART N E R S H I PS I N B OTSWANA 332.3 S C O R E CAR D FO R P R O G RAM S AN D D E L I VE RY SYST E M S I N B OTSWANA 382.4 S O C IAL AS S I STAN C E P R O G RAM S I N B OTSWANA 402.5 S C O R E CAR D FO R DATA AN D

27、 I N FO R MAT I O N SYST E M S I N B OTSWANA 462.6 S C O R E CAR D FO R F I NAN C E I N B OTSWANA 492.7 S U M MARY O F AL L R E C O M M E N DAT I O N S BY B U I L D I N G B LO C K FO R B OTSWANA 533.1 I N C I D E N C E AN D I M PACT O F D I SAST E R EVE N TS I N E SWAT I N I,1 981 2019 563.2 S C O R

28、 E CAR D FO R I N ST ITUT I O NAL AR RAN G E M E N TS AN D PART N E R S H I PS I N E SWAT I N I 583.3 S C O R E CAR D FO R P R O G RAM S AN D D E L I VE RY SYST E M S I N E SWAT I N I 623.4 MAI N S O C IAL AS S I STAN C E P R O G RAM S I N E SWAT I N I 633.5 S C O R E CAR D FO R DATA AN D I N FO R M

29、AT I O N SYST E M S I N E SWAT I N I 693.6 S C O R E CAR D FO R F I NAN C E I N E SWAT I N I 723.7 S U M MARY O F AL L R E C O M M E N DAT I O N S BY B U I L D I N G B LO C K FO R E SWAT I N I 764.1 S C O R E CAR D FO R I N ST ITUT I O NAL AR RAN G E M E N TS AN D PART N E R S H I PS I N L E S OTH O

30、 824.2 S C O R E CAR D FO R P R O G RAM S AN D D E L I VE RY SYST E M S I N L E S OT H O 894.3 MAI N S O C IAL AS S I STAN C E P R O G RAM S I N L E S OT H O 904.4 S C O R E CAR D FO R DATA AN D I N FO R MAT I O N SYST E M S I N L E S OT H O 984.5 UTI L ITY O F N I S SA DATA FO R I N FO R M I N G S

31、H O C K R E S P O N S E S 1014.6 S C O R E CAR D FO R F I NAN C E I N L E S OT H O 1034.7 S U M MARY O F AL L R E C O M M E N DAT I O N S BY B U I L D I N G B LO C K FO R L E S OTH O 1095.1 I N C I D E N C E AN D I M PACT O F D I SAST E R EVE N TS I N S O UT H AF R I CA,1952 2019 1125.2 S C O R E CA

32、R D FO R I N ST ITUT I O NAL AR RAN G E M E N TS AN D PART N E R S H I PS I N S O UTH AF R I CA 1155.3 S C O R E CAR D FO R P R O G RAM S AN D D E L I VE RY SYST E M S I N S O UT H AF R I CA 1205.4 S O C IAL AS S I STAN C E G RAN TS AN D P R O G RAM S I N S O UT H AF R I CA 12 15.5 S C O R E CAR D F

33、O R DATA AN D I N FO R MAT I O N SYST E M S I N S O UTH AF R I CA 12 95.6 EAR LY WAR N I N G SYST E M S I N P L AC E FO R M O ST F R E Q U E N T S H O C KS I N S O UTH AF R I CA 1 325.7 S C O R E CAR D FO R F I NAN C E I N S O UT H AF R I CA 1 345.8 S U M MARY O F AL L R E C O M M E N DAT I O N S BY

34、 B U I L D I N G B LO C K FO R S O UTH AF R I CA 141viiThis report was prepared by a team that was led by Thomas Bowen(Social Protection Specialist)and included coauthors Rodolfo Beazley(Consultant)and Catherine Fitzgibbon(Con-sultant).The reports extended team also included the social protection ta

35、sk team leads for its assessment countries:Vic-toria Monchuk(Senior Economist),Melis Guven(Senior Social Protection Economist),Emma Monsalve(Social Protection Spe-cialist),and Indira Bongisa Lekezwa(Social Protection Specialist).Barry Maher(Senior Financial Sector Specialist)provided over-sight and

36、quality control for the sections on risk finance.The report and its methodology have bene-fited greatly from several related reports and initiatives that define and measure adaptive social protection.First,the report applies the definitions and framework developed by Bowen et al.(2020).More recently

37、,several studies have applied the framework outlined by Bowen et al.to the analysis of country systems,preparedness measures,and the required investments for adaptive social protection,on which this report builds.The report also features the traffic light assess-ment approach developed by Beazley an

38、d Williams in“Adaptive Social Protection in AC KN OW L E D G M E N TSthe Caribbean:Building Human Capital for Resilience”(Beazley and Williams 2021).In addition,this report was developed in tandem with the World Bank report Stress Testing Social Protection(2021g),benefit-ing substantively from a mut

39、ual exchange on assessment approaches during the drafting process.Of note,the framework developed in Stress Testing Social Protection has since been finalized and will now be the World Banks standardized ASP country assess-ment tool.Each country assessment of adaptive social protection in this repor

40、t also draws signifi-cantly upon recently finalized assessments of social assistance in the four countries covered.These include“Botswana Social Protection Programs and Systems Review”(World Bank 2022a);“Social Assistance Pro-grams and Household Welfare in Eswatini”(Raju and Younger 2021);“Lesotho:S

41、ocial Protection Programs and System Review”(World Bank 2021b);and“South Africa:Social Assistance Programs and Systems Review”(World Bank 2021f).Finally,the sections on financing adaptive social protection drew upon analysis recently undertaken in each country by the World Bank Groups Finance,Compet

42、itiveness&viiiADAPT I V E S O C IAL P R OT E CT I O N I N S O UT H E R N AF R I CAInnovation Global Practice and presented in“Eswatini:Disaster Risk Finance Diagnostic,”“Lesotho:Disaster Risk Financing Diagnos-tic,”and“South Africa:Disaster Risk Finance Diagnostic”(World Bank 2022b,2019b,and 2021e).

43、Overall guidance and quality control for this report were provided by Marie Franoise Marie-Nelly(Country Director),Asmeen Khan(Operations Manager),and Paolo Belli(Prac-tice Manager),while comments received during the peer review process from Evie Calcutt(Financial Sector Specialist),Sarah Coll-Black

44、(Senior Economist),and Asha Wil-liams(Senior Social Protection Specialist)helped to sharpen the report and highlighted important additional information and per-spectives that enriched it.Lastly,the authors would like to sin-cerely thank Lisa Ferraro Parmelee for her thorough,patient,and precise edit

45、orial assis-tance throughout the production process,as well as Nita Congress,who provided graphic design support and publication quality con-trol to finalize the publication.ixASP adaptive social protection ATM automated teller machineCGP Child Grants ProgramDMA Disaster Management AgencyDMC disaste

46、r management committeeDPMO Deputy Prime Ministers Office DRM disaster risk management E lilangeni(Eswatini currency)ECHO Directorate-General for European Civil Protection and Humanitarian Aid Operations GDP gross domestic product HEA Household Economy Approach ID identity cardIPC Integrated Food Sec

47、urity Phase ClassificationLVAC Lesotho Vulnerability Assessment CommitteeM maloti(Lesotho currency)MIS management information system MLGRD Ministry of Local Government and Rural Development MOSD Ministry of Social Development NCDM National Committee on Disaster Management NDMA National Disaster Mana

48、gement Agency NDMO National Disaster Management Office NDP national development plan AB B R EV IAT I O N SNGO nongovernmental organizationNISSA National Information System for Social AssistanceNISPIS National Integrated Social Protection Information System NSAP National Social Assistance PolicyNSPF

49、National Social Protection Framework NSPS National Social Protection StrategyOVC orphans and vulnerable children P pula(Botswana currency)PMT proxy means testPPP purchasing power parity R rand(South African currency)SADC Southern Africa Development Community SACU South African Customs UnionSASSA Sou

50、th Africa Social Security AgencySOBERS Social Benefits Registration SystemSOCPEN Social Security Pension System SRD Social Relief of DistressSSR single social registry TERS Temporary Employer-Employee Relief SchemeUN United NationsUNICEF United Nations Childrens Fund VAA vulnerability assessment and

51、 analysisWFP World Food ProgrammeAll dollar amounts are U.S.dollars unless otherwise indicated.11BAC KG R O U N D AN D RAT I O NAL EThe countries of the Southern Africa Customs Union(SACU)Botswana,Eswatini,Leso-tho,Namibia,and South Africaare exposed to climatic shocks,especially drought,that pose a

52、 continual threat to lives and livelihoods across the subregion.The El Nio event of 2015/16 resulted in the worst drought there in 35 years(World Bank 2022c),which was followed in 2019 by another particu-larly severe droughtjust prior to the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic.In Lesotho,the government d

53、eclared a national disaster,as a fourth of the countrys population faced severe food insecurity.Namibia meanwhile suffered its worst drought in 90 years,caus-ing a third of the population to go hungry,with a state of emergency declared for the second time in three years.In Botswana,the rains that ye

54、ar were described as the spars-est the country had seen in three decades(IFRC 2021).In line with global trends,data indicate interannual weather variability in the SACU countries has been increasing,and the droughts have been more intense and wider spread(see,for example,Ala-hacoon et al.2022;Fauche

55、reau et al.2003).This trend toward more frequent and more severe climatic shocks will worsen under the influence of climate change and the increas-ingly erratic weather patterns it is likely to bring.Climatic shocks such as these tend to affect the poorest most,exacerbating inequalities and increasi

56、ng poverty.While international poverty rates remain low in the SACU rela-tive to other Sub-Saharan African countries,1 inequality is notably high and persistent.Based on the Gini coefficients of con-sumption(or income),Botswana,Eswatini,Namibia,and South Africa are among the top 15 of the 164 countr

57、ies in the World Banks global poverty database.Despite recent improvements,Lesotho also ranks among the top 20 percent of the worlds most eco-nomically unequal countries(World Bank 2022c).At the same time,estimates sug-gest the consumption losses experienced by households from a climate shock can be

58、 substantial among the SACU countrieson average,the affected population suffers losses in per capita consumption of 11.7 per-cent from a drought and 13.2 percent from a flood(World Bank 2021d).In line with global findings,evidence also indicates that the 1 Poverty rates are measured according to the

59、 global poverty line of$1.90 per day in 2011 pur-chasing power parity(PPP)U.S.dollars.I N T R O D U CT I O N2ADAPT I V E S O C IAL P R OT E CT I O N I N S O UT H E R N AF R I CAimpacts from climatic shocks are distributed unequally in the SACU countries,with poorer households tending to be more expo

60、sed and vulnerable(World Bank 2021d).With limited assets to draw upon after a shock,poorer households often resort to negative coping mechanisms,including cutting consumption,selling productive assets,availing them-selves of high-interest loans,and removing children from school(del Ninno,Coll-Black,

61、and Fallavier 2016;Hallegatte et al.2016;Hill,Skoufias,and Maher 2019).While these are short-term mitigation strategies driven by necessity,the loss of productivity and divestment in human capital they produce can result in slower recovery and long-term harm.The pandemic has compounded these existin

62、g vulnerabilities.The World Bank Macro Poverty Outlook recently projected increased poverty rates in each of the SACU countries.Globally,the COVID-19 pandemic is estimated to have pushed an additional 97 million people into poverty in 2020(World Bank 2021h).The latest estimates for 2021 suggest this

63、 substantial increase had begun to decline slowly(from 732 million in 2020 to 711 million in 2021),but has remained far above pre-pandemic poverty reduction esti-mates(631 million).The rising trend has held true as well across the SACU subregion.Inclusive of mitigation measures,in Leso-tho the$1.90

64、poverty rate was expected to have increased from 27.7 percent in 2019 to 30.3 percent in 2021.In Botswana,based on the upper-middle-income country poverty line($5.50),the poverty rate was projected to reach 57.6 percent in 2020(roughly 1.5 million people)a record for the country.In South Africa,arou

65、nd 2 million people may have fallen into poverty in 2021,bringing the$5.50 poverty rate there to 59 percent(World Bank 2021h).Food insecuritywhich is chronic in the subregion and both a root cause of vulnera-bility to drought and an outcome of italso increased as a result of impacts from the pan-dem

66、ic.In January 2020,before the onset of COVID-19,the World Food Programme(WFP)estimated that as many as 45 million people were food insecure across the SACU coun-tries due to ongoing drought conditions,with Eswatini,Lesotho,and Namibia found to have been the hardest hit(WFP 2020c).With the additional

67、 effects of the pandemic,food insecurity is expected to deteriorate even further.For example,a March 2020 rapid assessment by the Lesotho Vulner-ability Assessment Committee found that more than 90 percent of rural households in Lesotho had depleted their food stocks as a result of drought and were

68、depending largely on food purchased at the onset of the pandemic.Indeed,around 26 percent of the countrys population(374,000 people)faced high food insecurity from July to Septem-ber 2020,and around 40 percent(582,000 people)were projected to be in crisis(IPC Phase 3)between October 2020 and March 2

69、021,with pockets of highly vulnerable pop-ulations in emergency(IPC Phase 4;WFP 2020b).2 Similarly,in Eswatini,37 percent of the rural population(around 335,420 people)were expected to experience acute food insecurity between October 2020 and March 2021,with 280,201 classified as in crisis and 55,21

70、9 as in emergency(WFP 2020a).Social safety net programs can help poor and vulnerable households manage the risks 2 The Integrated Food Security Phase Classifi-cation(IPC)is a multipartner initiative using internationally recognized scientific standards to classify countries food security across five

71、 phases:1:food security,2:stressed,3:crisis,4:emergency,and 5:catastrophe.31:I N T R O D U CT I O Nthey face from shocks,helping to mitigate the impacts on poverty and food insecurity,but their effectiveness can be constrained in several ways.Impact evaluations of safety net programs in six African

72、countries have described“unambiguous”increases in the food security of beneficiary households(Asfaw and Davis 2018).In Ethiopia,the Pro-ductive Safety Net Program reduced the initial impact of a drought on beneficiaries by 57percent,eliminating the adverse effects on food security within two years(K

73、nippen-berg and Hoddinott 2017).Furthermore,a recent study found that,while household food insecurity in Ethiopia increased by 11.7 percentage points following the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic,participation in the Productive Safety Net Program reduced the likelihood of becoming food insecure to on

74、ly 2.4 percent(Abay et al.2020).Evi-dence has repeatedly shown that social assistance can also help reduce the need to resort to negative coping strategies that trig-ger longer-term detrimental effects(Barca etal.2015;Dammert etal.2018;Hill,Skou-fias,and Maher 2019).As has been vividly highlighted i

75、n many countries since the start of the pandemic,however,sizable gaps in social protection coverage often exist,which,when combined with rigid delivery systems and limited information systems,prevent social protection programs from reaching nonbeneficiaries with assistance after a shock hits.Several

76、 governments in Sub-Saharan Africa,especially those of countries that are highly exposed to climatic shocks,are increas-ingly undertaking ex ante investments to overcome these constraints.In Kenya,for example,the Hunger Safety Net Program,which operates in drought-prone dis-tricts,was developed with

77、 the capability to expand its caseload rapidly after a drought by up to an additional 302,000 pre-targeted households,backed by an e-payment system,early warning information,and risk financing.In Mauritania,as part of the Sahel Adaptive Social Protection Program,a cash transfer program called Tekavo

78、ul is comple-mented by a dedicated emergency response program,Elmouna,that provides the flex-ibility to reach beyond the core safety net caseload.Elmouna was developed in part-nership with humanitarian actors and is informed by the subregional food insecurity assessment system,assessment system,the

79、Cadre Harmonize.In Senegal,in addition to enabling it to respond to lean season fluc-tuations,ex ante investments have prepared the social protection system to respond to flooding in Dakar.The response has been made possible through contingency plan-ning and standard operating procedures,as well as

80、preprepared household damage assessments linked to the social registry.Fundamental gaps in social protection cov-erage and rigidity in delivery systems in SACU countries constrain the ability to pro-vide social protection to persons affected by shocks.Despite progress in the devel-opment of social p

81、rotection systems in southern Africa in recent years,many are still underdeveloped,with only limited forms of social protection offered,inadequate coverage of the poor,low benefit amounts,and some examples of manual adminis-trative mechanisms.Moreover,as noted in a recent World Bank report on inequa

82、lity among SACU countries,social protection programs as currently designed cover only a small fraction of climate-vulnerable house-holds in the subregion(World Bank 2022c).Relatedly,the WFP has emphasized that the effect of recurrent droughts in the subregion highlights the need for more adaptive so

83、cial protection(ASP)and anticipatory actions to ensure adequate coverage of vulnera-ble and potentially vulnerable households 4ADAPT I V E S O C IAL P R OT E CT I O N I N S O UT H E R N AF R I CAF I G U R E 1.1 Countries and territories using social protection measures in response to COVID-194584106

84、95200247528038709371,0241,0551,1791,4143,33320 Mar202027 Mar20203 Apr,202010 Apr202017 Apr202024 Apr20201 May20208 May202015 May202022 May202012 Jun202010 Jul202018 Sep202011 Dec202014 May20200250Number of countries/territories 4001006001,1001,6

85、002,1002,6003,1003,600Number of measures222Source:Gentilini et al.2021.(WFP 2019).Social protection systems gen-erally have not,however,been designed or prepared to respond to climatic shocks in most of the SACU countries,despite the frequency and predictability of their occur-rence and peoples vuln

86、erability to them.The mobilization of social protection in response to COVID-19 and the challenges that have emerged to that mobilization have strengthened the case for investments in preparedness ahead of future shocks.Glob-ally,between March 20,2020,and May14,2021,a total of 3,333 social protectio

87、n mea-sures were planned or implemented in 222 countries or territories(figure 1.1),of which 1,841 were social assistance programs.Among these,734 cash-based programs were planned or implemented in 186 coun-tries(Gentilini et al.2021).In line with this global social protection response,each of the c

88、ountries in southern Africa mobilized social protection responses to COVID-19 in one form or another,in an attempt to ame-liorate the impact of the crisis on poverty and food insecurity.The response in South Africa was notably large,with initial evi-dence finding that social assistance grants were e

89、ffective in substantially increas-ing the incomes of the poor and that the grants themselves were pro-poor(Khler and Bhorat 2020),indicating a significant mitigation of the impact of the crisis on pov-erty.These COVID-19 responses and the challenges encountered in their mobiliza-tion provide an entr

90、y point for examining the social protection systems more closely and considering the ways in which they may be better prepared to respond to future crises through ASP.M E T H O D O LO GY AN D ANALYT I CAL F RAM E WO R KAdaptive social protection refers to an agenda for preparing social protection sy

91、s-tems to improve their response to shocks and to build the resilience of poor and vulner-able households.The World Bank defines ASP in the following way:“Adaptive social protection helps to build the resilience of poor and vulnerable households by invest-ing in their capacity to prepare for,cope 51

92、:I N T R O D U CT I O NF I G U R E 1.2 The four building blocks for adaptive social protectionData and informationFinanceProgramsInstitutional arrangements and partnershipsSource:Bowen et al.2020.with,and adapt to shocks,protecting their wellbeing and ensuring that they do not fall into poverty or b

93、ecome trapped in pov-erty as a result of the impacts”(Bowen et al.2020).While the prescription for the devel-opment of ASP is highly context specific,depending on the risk profile of the country and its social protection system,prepared-ness investments tend to be concentrated in four key areas,repr

94、esented here as build-ing blocks(figure 1.2).These four areas are institutional arrangements and partnerships,programs and their delivery systems,data and information systems,and finance.This report takes stock of ASP in four of the five SACU countriesBotswana,Eswatini,Lesotho,and South Africaand pr

95、ovides tar-geted recommendations for each countrys development.3 A“traffic light”scorecard is used to summarize the status of each ASP building block for each of the four countries.Some of the dimensions assessed relate to what can be considered foundational social protection systems and,occasionall

96、y,foun-dational disaster risk management(DRM)systems.These dimensions represent the foundations that underpin the general capacity of a country to respond to shocks with social protection,but which the country is not necessarily investing in or conceiv-ing of for that specific purpose.Examples might

97、 include a social registry or electronic cash transfer payment system,which can identify beneficiaries and deliver benefits to them in normal times as well as in response to shocks,or a national early warning system for the dissemination of risk information and the mobilization of governmentwide sho

98、ck responses.Such foundational inputs 3 Namibia was outside the scope of this report due to budget limitations,but assessment can easily be extended there in the future for a com-plete understanding of the SACU subregion.and measures represent the context within which ASP could be developed and impl

99、e-mented and offer insights into the extent to which this context constrains or enables this development.Additionally,the assessment reviews specific adaptive dimensions and preparedness measures.These are more specific inputsgoing beyond“business as usual”investments in social protection(or DRM)tha

100、t are essential for explicitly preparing social protection to respond to shocks.While the full suite of social protection instru-ments includes social assistance,social insurance,and labor market programsall of which can help households manage climate risk to varying extentsthis assessment concentra

101、tes on social assistance programs.This focus reflects the prominent role played by social assistance programs(such as cash 6ADAPT I V E S O C IAL P R OT E CT I O N I N S O UT H E R N AF R I CAand in-kind transfers and public works pro-grams)in response to both the COVID-19 pandemic and a growing num

102、ber of cli-mate shocks within southern Africa,as well as more widely.It also reflects the compar-ative advantage of these programs in terms of their ability to reach the poorest and most vulnerable in times of crisis by virtue of their objectives and eligibility criteria.Finally,this narrowing of sc

103、ope allows this report to build upon social assistance assessments recently completed by the World Bank in each of the four countries,expanding their findings specifically with regard to the shock responsiveness of those same social assis-tance programs.The specific foundational and adaptive measure

104、s to be assessed within each build-ing block for each of the four case study countries are discussed briefly below.Fur-thermore,the appendix outlines the detailed scoring criteria for each,according to“nascent,”“emerging,”and“established”cat-egorizations.It must be emphasized that this is a qualitat

105、ive assessment designed to bring structure to the analysis,and the ratings assigned throughout should be regarded as indicative and instructive but not definitive.B U I L D I N G B LO C K 1:I N ST I T U T I O N A L A R RA N G E M E N TS A N D PA RT N E R S H I P SThe dimensions assessed under instit

106、u-tional arrangements and partnerships reflect the fact that ASP is an inherently multisec-toral undertaking.Coordination is required across a broad range of actors that are engaged in building the resilience of vulner-able households and the myriad actors that are mobilized after shocks hit.To be e

107、ffec-tive,ASP requires the adoption of policies,backed by constitutional and legal instru-ments,that acknowledge the role of social protection in responding to shocks.These policies,structures,and mechanisms can create an environment that enables the nec-essary leadership and coordination among soci

108、al protection programs,the DRM sector,the actors operationalizing climate change adaptation initiatives,and humanitarian actors.The following are the foundational and adaptive indicators assessed under Build-ing Block 1,with examples of the questions associated with them.F O U N DAT I O NAL AS S E S

109、 S M E N T I N D I CATO R S Social protection policy and legislative frameworks.Do these exist?Are they relevant and up to date?Social protection institutional capacity and coordination.What is the adminis-trative(human,physical,and financial)capacity of social protection institutions at different l

110、evels?What is the extent of their ability and influence to coordinate action with others?DRM policy and legislative frameworks.Do these exist?Are they relevant and up to date?DRM institutional capacity and coordina-tion.What is the administrative(human,physical,and financial)capacity of DRM institut

111、ions at different levels?What is the extent of their ability and influence to coordinate action with others?ADAPT I V E AS S E S S M E N T I N D I CATO R S Clear mandate for ASP.To what extent is the use of social protection in response 71:I N T R O D U CT I O Nto/in advance of shocks explicitly sup

112、-ported by national social protection,DRM,and climate change adaptation policies and strategies?Multisectoral coordination for shock response.To what extent are DRM,social protection,or other coordination mechanisms in place to support effec-tive vertical and horizontal coordination of ASP actions?4

113、 Partnerships with nongovernmental actors.What mechanisms and agree-ments are in place for coordination with humanitarian actors,development part-ners,and civil society?What have recent partnership experiences been like?B U I L D I N G B LO C K 2:P R O G RA M D E S I G N A N D D E L I V E RY Dimensi

114、ons assessed under Building Block 2 represent the fundamental aspects of the design and delivery of existing social protec-tion programs and the extent to which they have successfully responded to shocks in the past.Programs may have responded to previous shocks through vertical expansion(increased

115、benefit amounts)and/or horizon-tal expansion(increased coverage).Often countries have learned by doing,and these experiences have resulted in adjustments to social protection program design and sys-tems and/or new programs to fill gaps in coverage and enable additional beneficia-ries to be reached i

116、n times of crisis.Over the longer term,social protection programs can also build the resilience of beneficiaries to 4 Vertical coordination refers to coordination among actors operating at the national level and actors at the subnational level.Horizontal coordination is that among the different acto

117、rs operating at the national level.shocks,meaning they may require less sup-port after a shock hits.To do so,appropriate types of assistance need to reach those identified as being the most vulnerable to shocks in a timely and predictable manner.The following are the foundational and adap-tive indic

118、ators under Building Block 2.F O U N DAT I O NAL AS S E S S M E N T I N D I CATO R S Coverage of main programs.What shares of the population generally and of the poor specifically are already covered by social protection programs?Benefit adequacy.Do core and reg-ular transfers address households con

119、sumption needs,thereby building their resilience to shocks?Eligibility criteria and targeting.Are there clear eligibility criteria and processes for selecting and registering beneficiaries?Financial inclusion and national ID.What is the coverage of these key enablers for registration,payment deliver

120、y,and other processes,and how sophisticated are they?Social protection payment modalities.How effective are modalities to deliver cash(or other)transfers to beneficiaries?Delivery processes and systems.What guidance,protocols,manuals,and so on,exist to administer and operate the social protection sy

121、stem?ADAPT I V E AS S E S S M E N T I N D I CATO R S Experience of vertical expansion(increased benefits).Have any social protection programs previously provided additional temporary support during or after shocks to existing beneficiaries?8ADAPT I V E S O C IAL P R OT E CT I O N I N S O UT H E R N

122、AF R I CAHow effectively was this done,including in terms of timeliness and adequacy of the response?Experience of horizontal expansion(increased coverage).Have any social protection programs previously provided additional temporary support during or after shocks to additional beneficiaries?How effe

123、ctively was this done,including in terms of timeliness and adequacy of the response?Protocols and contingency plans.Do any protocols or plans exist setting out when and how social protection programs should respond to shocks?B U I L D I N G B LO C K 3:DATA A N D I N F O R M AT I O N SYST E M S The s

124、trengthening of data and information systems is central to the ASP agenda,with an improved understanding of risk and house-hold vulnerability central to preparing and mobilizing effective responses.Dimensions assessed under Building Block 3 fall into two broad categories.The first concerns the quali

125、ty of management information system(MIS)data held on existing social protection,as well as potential ASP,clients.Although interest in social registries has been grow-ing,few countries in Africa have developed mature systems,and levels of digitization vary widely.The second key area concerns the qual

126、ity of data and information on house-hold vulnerability and resilience to shocks.As systems for monitoring and tracking haz-ards exist in all the countries examined,the dimensions scored address the extent to which they inform ASP design,response,and financing.The following are the foundational and

127、adap-tive indicators under Building Block 3.F O U N DAT I O NAL AS S E S S M E N T I N D I CATO R S Beneficiary registries.What registries or databases exist for current social protec-tion programs?Are they paper based or digital?Are digital registries integrated/interoperable across social protecti

128、on programs?How valid,accurate,relevant(for ASP),and current are the data in the registries?Social registries.Are social protec-tion databases integrated into social registries that include details on wider populations or those receiving other gov-ernment services?Data and information on disaster ri

129、sk and household vulnerability.What early warning and disaster monitoring sys-tems exist?How well are the data they gather analyzed and used to forecast or mitigate shocks?What data exist on household-level poverty,vulnerability,and exposure to shocks?How valid and current are the data?ADAPT I V E A

130、S S E S S M E N T I N D I CATO R S Use of preexisting data to inform shocks.How have early warning data and his-torical weather information been used to inform ASP or other preparedness measures and shock responses?Have social protection databases been used to inform ASP?Post-shock household needs a

131、ssess-ments.What is the capacity to undertake postdisaster needs assessments?Are roles and responsibilities clear?Are there clear guidelines and protocols for assessing needs that can be quickly translated or linked to ASP responses?91:I N T R O D U CT I O N Data-sharing protocols with internal/exte

132、rnal partners.Are systems and pro-tocols in place to share data across departments to facilitate response?Are there processes to share data inter-nally and externally with other service providers?B U I L D I N G B LO C K 4:F I N A N C E For ASP programs to respond to shocks in a timely manner,risk f

133、inancing strategies will need to be developed that can be uti-lized to mobilize resources rapidly through safety net programs when needed.Build-ing on international experience,optimal risk financing strategies consist of multi-ple financial instruments established before a shock occurs(ex ante)and c

134、ombined in a risk layering approach.In the event of a shock,the appropriate financial instrument is drawn on to finance an ASP response,depending on the severity(and cost)of the shock.More generally,ASP will benefit from increased budgetary allocations that sup-port the extension of social protectio

135、n to poor households and sustain investment in their resilience,along with investments in long-term system strengthening.The following are the foundational and adap-tive indicators under Building Block 4.F O U N DAT I O NAL AS S E S S M E N T I N D I CATO R Government spending on social protec-tion.

136、What percentage of gross domestic product(GDP)is allocated to social pro-tection spending?Is the percentage increasing or decreasing?What share of these resources goes toward programs that target the poorest?How does this share compare with those in neighboring countries or at a similar stage of dev

137、el-opment?What portion of the resources are for core social protection benefi-ciaries,and what portion are for ASP beneficiaries?ADAPT I V E AS S E S S M E N T I N D I CATO R S Disaster risk financing policy.Do any laws or policies exist on disaster risk financing that set out how the government wil

138、l pro-actively manage the financing of disaster response?Quantification of post-shock ASP costs.Has the government undertaken any modeling or calculation of the economic and fiscal impacts of shocks and disas-ters?Did any such work consider the long-term/average costs of financing any ASP response?F

139、inancing instruments for ASP.Does the government have ex ante financ-ing instruments in place for disaster response,such as emergency funds,contingency budgets/loans,or risk transfer instruments?Do these financing instruments have clear conditions or trig-gers under which they can be utilized?Have t

140、hey been or can they be used for ASP response?Is the ability to use them explicitly mandated or codified?S U B R E G I O NAL OV E RV I E WThe chapters that comprise the bulk of this report present the individual country assessmentsincluding findings and and recommendationsfor Botswana,Eswatini,Lesot

141、ho,and South Africa.The remainder of this introductory chapter summarizes these findings and reflects on recommendations 10ADAPT I V E S O C IAL P R OT E CT I O N I N S O UT H E R N AF R I CATAB L E 1.1 Scorecard for the four building blocks across countriesBuilding blockBotswanaEswatiniLesothoSouth

142、 AfricaInstitutional arrangements and partnershipsProgram design and deliveryData and information systemsFinanceNote:=nascent;=emerging;=established.Mixed colors imply the rating is between two stages of development.that are pertinent at a subregional level.This includes findings and recommendations

143、 that emerged for more than one of the countries and are relevant elsewhere.Some of these common,country-specific recommenda-tions could be applied subregionallywhich might be especially beneficial to small coun-tries like Eswatini and Lesotho,for which there would be large economies of scale in doi

144、ng so.While the findings and recommen-dations are broadly grouped around each of the four ASP building blocks,many issues are relevant to more than one.Overall,the findings from the assessment suggest ASP is at a formative stage of devel-opment in southern Africa.Table 1.1 presents a high-level over

145、view of the traffic light scores across the four countries for each building block,the vast majority of which fall between nascent and emerging stages of development.This overview clearly indi-cates that,despite the considerable climatic risk to which southern Africa is exposed,the subregion is not

146、well prepared to mobi-lize postdisaster support to households in a timely and effective manner.Many of the building blocks that are scored as emerg-ing exhibit strong foundations within either the social protection system(in terms,for example,of social protection policy frame-works,program coverage,

147、and adequacy of benefits)or the DRM sector(in terms of early warning systems and DRM legislation).With a few notable exceptions,adaptive indicators pertaining to additional specific investments required for ASPclear insti-tutional mandates for social protection in disaster response,program contingen

148、cy plans,pre-positioned risk financing linked to social protectiontend to be at a nascent stage of development.The score for each building block is,however,only a rough sum-mation of its constituent indicators.A closer examination of the indicators offers deeper insights into specific findings,along

149、 with recommendations for their strengthening.B U I L D I N G B LO C K 1:I N ST I T U T I O N A L A R RA N G E M E N TS A N D PA RT N E R S H I P S The assessment of institutional arrange-ments and partnerships for ASP in the subregion placed them,for the most part,at an emerging stage of developmen

150、t.As pre-sented in table 1.2,this building block is rated as emerging in Botswana,Lesotho,and South Africa;development is largely driven in Lesotho and South Africa by the presence of relatively strong foundational social protection and DRM policies and leg-islation,and in Botswana by relatively str

151、ong coordination for shock response.Eswatini has made less progress in the development of this building block,with foundational and 111:I N T R O D U CT I O Nadaptive indicators all assessed as being between the nascent and emerging stages of development.KEY F I N D I N G 1The role of social protect

152、ion in respond-ing to shocks in the case study countries is typically not clearly mandated in either social protection or DRM policy or leg-islative frameworks,leading to limited coordination and little to no investment in preparedness measures within the social protection sectors.Even when a clear

153、mandate exists in social protection and DRM frameworksas in the case of Lesothoit has not translated into ade-quate investments in preparedness.The status of foundational social protec-tion and DRM policies and legislation varies across countries.Where policies do exist,they are often outdated and m

154、ake limited or no mention of the role of social protection in disaster response.This is the case in Botswana,where social protection is not explicitly mentioned in the constitution or any legislation,nor is there any specific law or legislation relating to DRM.While a rel-atively recent National Soc

155、ial Protection Framework(GOB 2018a)sets out clear pri-orities for the social protection sector as a whole,it omits any explicit reference to the use of social protection in shock response.By contrast,South Africa enshrines both social protection and DRM provisions in its consti-tution and wider legi

156、slative frameworks.It recently amended its Social Assistance Act to establish a mandate for one of its grant programs,the Social Relief of Distress grant,to respond to disasters.In Eswatini and Lesotho,foundational pol-icies have been developed more recently,with substantial support from partners.In

157、 Lesotho,the National Social Protection Strategy 2014/152018/19(GOL 2014)emphasizes the role of social protection TAB L E 1.2 Scorecard for institutional arrangements and partnerships across countriesIndicatorBotswanaEswatiniLesothoSouth AfricaComposite country ratingFoundational indicatorsSocial pr

158、otection policy and legislative frameworksDisaster risk management policies and legislative frameworksSocial protection institutional capacity and coordinationDisaster risk management institutional capacity and coordinationAdaptive indicatorsClear mandate for social protection responseMultisectoral

159、coordination for social protection responsesPartnerships with nongovernmental actorsNote:=nascent;=emerging;=established;=not available.Mixed colors imply the rating is between two stages of development.12ADAPT I V E S O C IAL P R OT E CT I O N I N S O UT H E R N AF R I CAin shock response and resil

160、ience building;ongoing revisions for 202125 are expected to articulate these roles further.In 2020,a comprehensive set of legislative frame-works and policies for DRM was developed,with explicit provisions for the development of ASP.Eswatini has shown less progress in this regard,although the recent

161、 launch of the National Social Assistance Policy is promising for the whole social protection sectorand for ASP,too.The Lesotho experience also highlights that legislative frameworks and policies need to specify roles and responsibilities regarding social protection and be backed with suffi-cient in

162、vestment to enable actors to fulfill their mandates.Social protection is still not fully embedded in Lesothos DRM plans and strategies,lacking specificity in terms of concrete roles and responsibilities over the DRM cycle.Translating the policies and com-mitments articulated in these documents into

163、investments in preparedness and effec-tive shock responses has been challenging.The occasional promotion and facilitation of such policies by partners has resulted in documents that,while comprehensive and in line with global evidence,are not entirely effective because the underlying institu-tional

164、bottlenecks and constraintssuch as limited administrative capacity,scarce resources,and political economy issuesare not resolved.The gaps in policy and the largely absent mandate for social protection contribute to weak coordination mechanisms among the relevant agencies in most of the countries.Soc

165、ial protection departments often have very little interaction with those responsi-ble for DRM and humanitarian response.Although DRM agencies may lead on disas-ter responses that include both national and nonstate actors,these efforts are typically managed by separate disaster response systems with

166、weak to nonexistent links to government social protection programs and delivery systems.The South Africa Social Security Agency(SASSA),for example,has no formal engagement with the National Disaster Management Centre or local equiv-alents in disaster response.For its part,the National Disaster Manag

167、ement Centre has developed significant guidance on under-taking postdisaster assessments,including mapping human impact,but the response focuses mainly on immediate in-kind assis-tance(such as food parcels or temporary shelter)provided by local disaster man-agement committee actors and does not incl

168、ude any SASSA-led cash transfer grants.In short,no coordination or linkage with SASSA is apparent relative to the postdisas-ter assessment process or committees.In Eswatini and Lesotho,cross-sectoral coordination is also weak,mostly as a result of constraints on the capacity of the disaster manageme

169、nt authorities that limit their ability to fulfill their coordination mandates.In Leso-tho,capacity constraints on the National Disaster Management Agency include not only inadequate resourcing but also limited authority and autonomy to lead the sector and the constituent ministries,depart-ments,and

170、 agencies involved over the DRM cycle.In such a context,legislative frame-works that promote ASP become ineffective.Indeed,in both countries,these coordination issues have led to the development of par-allel coordination structures between social protection and DRM actors,which creates inefficiencie

171、s and further deepens the coor-dination problems.Botswana provides a good example within the subregion of effective cross-sectoral coordination around ASP,especially at the local level.In Botswana,most social 131:I N T R O D U CT I O Nprotection programs are administered by the Ministry of Local Gov

172、ernment and Rural Development,whose representatives also serve as key members of national and dis-trict disaster management committees.Indeed,at the village level,ministry social workers who manage social protection pro-grams are the first responders to disasters,often leading postdisaster damage an

173、d needs assessments.KEY F I N D I N G 2Humanitarian and development partners continue to play an important role in fill-ing government technical and financial capacity gaps related to ASP in Eswatini and Lesotho.Partnerships with nongovernmental actors have been and will continue to be critical enab

174、lers for the further development of ASP in Eswatini and Lesotho.In both countries,partners also play key roles in implementa-tion of annual vulnerability assessments as well as by conducting postdisaster needs assessments.Partners have been instru-mental in promoting policy dialogue on ASP(mainly in

175、 Lesotho)and in the devel-opment of policies and operational capacity(in both countries,though more success-fully in Lesotho).In Lesotho,the United Nations Childrens Fund(UNICEF),the WFP,and donors are working to strengthen the governments social registry,the National Information System for Social A

176、ssistance;as well as build the capacity of the National Disaster Management Agency to coordinate and respond to annual vulnerability analysis and needs assessments.While this relation-ship is born of necessity,it can result in a free-rider problem where governments have limited incentive to invest i

177、n the national insti-tutions and coordination systems required to develop their own national capacity to mobilize social protection responses.Con-sequently,the onus is on external agencies to work with government to plan clear exit strategies that systematically hand over and build the capacity of s

178、ocial protection and DRM agencies.International humanitarian actors do not play any significant role in shock response in South Africa,where responsibility for social protection and DRM has been internalized by the national government.Botswana also does not currently depend on humanitar-ian partners

179、 to respond to shocks,although the country was a recipient of humanitar-ian assistance(primarily through the WFP)until the mid-1990s.In 1994,the govern-ment established the national Pula Fund to support the development of a national social assistance system.The fund set up a range of social protecti

180、on programs,out-lined in the Botswana case study,among them several food assistance programs pre-viously delivered by the WFP,including in response to shocks.In the many years since,these programs have served as the basis for government-led shock-responsive social protection in Botswana.Hence,relian

181、ce on nongovernmental partners in Botswana has been low,although national civil society organizations and nongovernmental orga-nizations do work in partnership with the government in the delivery of postdisaster assistance.Development assistance from partners could be catalytic in helping finance cr

182、ucial investments highlighted in the case study,including early warning systems and the implementation of a social registry(dis-cussed further below).14ADAPT I V E S O C IAL P R OT E CT I O N I N S O UT H E R N AF R I CAS U B R E G I O N A L R E C O M M E N DAT I O N S O N I N ST I T U T I O N A L A

183、 R RA N G E M E N TS A N D PA RT N E R S H I P S 1.Establish policy environments that encourage the develop-ment of ASP,providing a clear mandate for social protection in shock response and specific roles and responsibilities for implementing agencies.2.In most contexts,significantly increase resour

184、ce allocations to enable DRM agencies to fulfill their coordination man-dates,including as those mandates relate to the coordination of social protection in response to shocks.Social protection departments should be integrated fully into DRM coordination mechanisms at all levelsnational,regional,and

185、 local.3.Ensure the support provided in Eswatini and Lesotho by non-governmental partners is part of a strategic vision that aims to strengthen government capacity to build household resilience and to respond to shocks with social protection over the longer term.Key nongovernmental partners should b

186、e engaged by the respective country governments in the development of shock-responsive social protection contingency plans(see Building Block 2)to enhance coordination across the govern-menthumanitarian divide when responses are initiated.programs and delivery systems.The assess-ment found,however,t

187、hat the significant social assistance response in South Africa to COVID-19 was the exception to the rule of very limited large-scale vertical or horizontal expansions in response to climatic shocks.KEY F I N D I N G 1Generally,the countries with broad social assistance coverage and stronger foundati

188、onal social protection delivery systems have been better able to mobi-lize responses to shocks,including to COVID-19.The countries assessed in this study that have mounted the more effective ASP responses to shocks are those whose delivery systems are more established and comprehensive.All the case

189、study countries have implemented vertical and/or horizontal expansions of their social protection programs,particu-larly in response to the COVID-19 crisis and recent droughts.Those that have mounted the most effective ASP responses tend to have more comprehensive and relatively well-established cor

190、e social protection sys-tems,with relatively high coverage.South Africa is a clear illustration;its social protec-tion system is one of the most comprehensive on the continent,with almost all foundational dimensions under Building Block 2 scoring as established in this assessment.In the face of the

191、pandemic,the government of South Africa immediately expanded payments to over 17 million social protection beneficia-ries,and a new COVID-19 Social Relief of Distress grant was established and opera-tional in just over one month.This new grant represented a horizontal expansion of cov-erage to worki

192、ng-age adults(aged 1859)affected by the pandemic.By November 2020,the government had registered and paid over 6 million people under the new B U I L D I N G B LO C K 2:P R O G R A M D E S I G N A N D D E L I V E RY The assessment of ASP programs and deliv-ery systems found them to be at an emerging

193、stage of development in the subregion.As shown in table 1.3,Botswana,Eswatini,and Lesotho are in transition from nascent to emerging with respect to this building block,with these ratings largely driven by limited investments in both adaptive and founda-tional social protection indicators(although B

194、otswana stands out as established for several foundational indicatorsfor exam-ple,in the coverage of its social assistance programs).South Africa is classified as between emerging and established,sup-ported by strong foundations in terms of its 151:I N T R O D U CT I O NTAB L E 1.3 Scorecard for pro

195、grams and delivery systems across countriesIndicatorBotswanaEswatiniLesothoSouth AfricaComposite country ratingFoundational indicatorsBenefit adequacyEligibility criteria and targetingCoverage of the main social assistance programFinancial inclusion and national IDSocial protection payment systemsSo

196、cial protection delivery systemsAdaptive indicatorsExperience of vertical expansionExperience of horizontal expansionProtocols and contingency plans Note:=nascent;=emerging;=established.Mixed colors imply the rating is between two stages of development.grantan achievement reflecting SASSAs strong in

197、stitutional capacity;its highly digi-tized application,registration,and payment systems;and the wide national coverage of its programs,staff,and offices.KEY F I N D I N G 2 Despite their all being subject to regular climatic disasters,no case study coun-tries have developed any protocols or guidelin

198、es for using social protection programs to respond to shocks.This finding reflects a general lack of pre-paredness across the subregion,leading to largely ad hoc mobilizations of social protec-tion responses.As countries have expanded and developed their social protection sys-tems,few have considere

199、d the role of social protection in responding to shocks as part of the design or delivery of their programs.As highlighted in the case studies,most ASP interventions are designed and mobilized ex postthat is,when a disaster has already occurredresulting in an ad hoc approach that often translates in

200、to assistance being late and of limited adequacy in terms of who is reached and the amount of the assistance provided.Attempts to consider the overlap between the beneficiaries of existing social protection programs and those populations more regularly or severely affected by each countrys most freq

201、uent climatic shocks have also been limited.No countrys social protection program has guidelines or operating procedures for when and how to scale up even in response to rela-tively regular shocks.This deficiency reflects limited planning in the development of the social protection systems and their

202、 potential role in offering direct and speedy assistance in the wake of acute shocks and building resilience to shocks in the long terma defi-ciency that persists despite the very regular and increasingly frequent climatic hazards affecting all the countries.This situation 16ADAPT I V E S O C IAL P

203、R OT E CT I O N I N S O UT H E R N AF R I CAmay be changing,though,as a result of the COVID-19 crisis.This major covariate and unexpected shock has brought far more attention to the role of social protection as a response mechanism and has provided a significant stress test of existing systems and t

204、he extent to which they are prepared to scale up and meet widespread household needs.How much learning from this expe-rience is being documented and used to develop more standardized guidelines or pro-tocols for ASP responses remains unclear.KEY F I N D I N G 3The design of key elements of regular s

205、ocial protection programs(targeting,benefit timing,duration,and amount)could be improved to build household resilience to climate shocks.Given the chronic nature of climate shocks in southern Africa,the design of some ele-ments of core social protection programs could be improved to build household

206、resil-ience to shocks in the longer term.The assessment found no evidence in the four countries of relatively minor adjustments to targeting and benefit package design to account for climate risk in regular program-ming.Geographical targeting,for example,did not prioritize the subnational areas that

207、 are most exposed and vulnerable to cli-mate risk as a basis for providing long-term support through regular social protection programs.Similarly,the review did not find evidence that the amounts,timing,and dura-tion of benefit packages were being tailored to climate shocks and stresses such as the

208、lean season.Only limited evidence indicated that public works programs were identifying physical works that would more effectively reduce the impact of disastersfor instance,the clearing of drainage systems in urban areas and/or the creation of water catch-ments in rural areas.Lastly,no significant

209、experience was found of efforts to connect beneficiaries located in high-risk areas with complementary resilience-building or cli-mate change adaptation activities,such as livelihood grants and training for off-farm income-generating activities and/or the cre-ation of savings groups.S U B R E G I O

210、N A L R E C O M M E N DAT I O N S O N P R O G R A M D E S I G N A N D D E L I V E RY1.The most important step in developing each countrys capacity to respond to shocks is continued strengthening of the foundational elements of national social protection programs,including their coverage and their de

211、livery systems,which remain relatively nascent in Botswana,Lesotho,andespeciallyEswatini.South Africa provides a good exam-ple in the subregion of how strong social protection foundations result in a generally improved preparedness posture.2.Greater ex ante analysis of disaster risk should be applie

212、d in the design and delivery of regular,day-to-day social protection programs to ensure targeting is risk informed(prioritizing poor and vulnerable households in high-risk areas)and that benefit packages maximize resilience outcomesfor example,by timing delivery to coincide with the lean season and

213、offering complementary services to support more resilient livelihoods.3.The use of social protection in response to COVID-19 has provided an opportunity for systematic review of the potential of existing social protection programs to respond to the most frequent and regular shocks affecting each cou

214、ntry.Reviews of COVID-19 responseseach in and of itself a severe stress test of the capacity for social protection to respond to shocksshould inform the creation of contingency plans and protocols.These forward-looking plans and protocols should capture the lessons learned,informing the program desi

215、gn parame-ters and delivery processes needed for future responses.171:I N T R O D U CT I O NB U I L D I N G B LO C K 3:DATA A N D I N F O R M AT I O N SYST E M SThe assessment of social protection and DRM data and information systems placed most countries between the nascent and emerging categories.

216、As shown in table 1.4,South Africa has the most digitally advanced and comprehensive beneficiary registration systems.In Eswatini and Lesotho,many indi-vidual programs still lack digital beneficiary registries and MISs(an exception is Leso-thos Child Grants Program);beneficiary data are thus not wel

217、l integrated.That said,Lesotho stands out as the only country in the subregion with a social registry,although plans for developing social registries are under way in Botswana and South Africa.Lesothos registry covers virtually the entire population and has been used to inform recent responses to sh

218、ocks.In the collection and utilization of disaster risk or early warn-ing information to inform social protection responses,all the case study countries were assessed as nascent or emerging.Botswana had the most developed cross-sectoral systems for sharing and responding to disas-ter risk informatio

219、n.KEY F I N D I N G 1Varying degrees of digitization and lim-ited interoperability,integration,and coverage of social protection informa-tion systems constrain the ability of the case study countries to respond to shocks,with the notable exception of Lesotho.Most of the countries have social protect

220、ion information systems that can be classified as either nascent or emerging.(See the typol-ogy in figure 1.3.)Beneficiary registries enable the government to reach existing social protection beneficiaries quickly with additional cash transfers during an emer-gency.This process is hastened significa

221、ntly in countries where beneficiary registries are digitized.Countries do not register all ben-eficiaries digitally,however,and they use multiple MISs whose sophistication ranges from paper-based lists to national databases.Eswatinis main social assistance programs,TAB L E 1.4 Scorecard for data and

222、 information systems across countriesIndicatorBotswanaEswatiniLesothoSouth AfricaComposite country ratingFoundational indicatorsData and information on disaster risk and household vulnerability Beneficiary registrySocial registryAdaptive indicatorsUse of preexisting data for shock responsePost-shock

223、 household needs assessmentsData-sharing protocols with internal/external partners Note:=nascent;=emerging;=established.Mixed colors imply the rating is between two stages of development.18ADAPT I V E S O C IAL P R OT E CT I O N I N S O UT H E R N AF R I CAF I G U R E 1.3 Development trajectory of s

224、ocial protection information systemsSource:Based on World Bank 2020b.Note:The development of information systems is not as linear as the figure suggests.Countries can advance development on one spectrum yet demonstrate less maturity on another;they can also leapfrog to more integrated and interopera

225、ble systems.Having social registries in place is not a precondition for an“established”social protection information system.Countries may decide to strengthen other registries and their interoperability rather than develop a social registry.The best approach will depend on the context and policy pri

226、orities;since social registries,for example,are typically associated with poverty-targeted programs,countries with universal or categorical programs may prefer or need other types of registries.for example,lack digital beneficiary regis-tries with associated MISs.In Lesotho,the Child Grants Program

227、is the exception to the same trend,with all other social assistance programs in the country lacking digital bene-ficiary registries.South Africa has developed a comprehensive digitized beneficiary reg-istration and payment systemthe Social Security Pension System(SOCPEN)which is used to process appl

228、ications for all social protection grants and generate payments for approximately 17 million grants each month.The interoperability of social protection infor-mation systems within the subregion(their ability to exchange and make use of data)and their levels of integration(consolidation of processes

229、 like data collection and analy-sis across programs and institutions)are very limited.As a result,the ability to aggregate or cross-reference beneficiaries in different programs is also limited,which reduces their utility in informing shock responses,even for relatively straightforward vertical expa

230、nsions.South Africas SOCPEN is an exception,as its systems provide interoperability among 191:I N T R O D U CT I O Nseveral administrative databases.Integrated beneficiary registries like SOCPEN,which the other countries do not have in place,can be used to inform vertical expansions.Despite the meri

231、ts of such registries,they tend to include only beneficiaries(and some-times former beneficiaries and people on the waiting list),which limits the possibility of reaching nonbeneficiaries(for horizontal expansions)using existing data.Social registries can be a key source of information for rapid res

232、ponses to shocks,including horizontal expansions.When responding to a shock,policy makers face a trade-off between timeliness and accu-racy.Taking advantage of existing registry data(as opposed to collecting new data through postdisaster needs assessments,for instance)may be the fastest way to iden-

233、tify individuals,depending on the scale of the shock and the capacity to collect data ex post.Unlike beneficiary registries,social registries hold the valuable potential of enabling the government to expand assis-tance to households that are not already social protection beneficiaries(table 1.5).Rel

234、ying on social registry information has a core limitation,however,that can lead to missed or mistaken identifications:the data collected before the shock cannot capture the changes caused by the event.While social registries can play a key role in inform-ing timely shock responses,the feasibility of

235、 using such data given the potential for inac-curacy is very context-specific and depends on social registry coverage,the relevance of the data the registry contains,the accuracy of the data,their currency,and their accessi-bility(Barca and Beazley 2019).Of the four countries studied,only Lesotho ha

236、s a social registry in place,and although the countrys experience in using it to inform responses to recent shocks has been noteworthy,it has also presented challenges,as outlined in box 1.1.TAB L E 1.5 Utility of and trade-offs between beneficiary and social registries for shock responseResponse ty

237、peBeneficiary registrySocial registryVertical expansion(giving additional transfers to existing beneficiaries)Contains information on existing social protection beneficiaries used to inform vertical expan-sions during times of crisis Integrated beneficiary registries allow vertical expansions of var

238、i-ous programs Contains information on individuals who may or may not be ben-eficiaries of existing social protection programs While it can also be used to inform vertical expansions to existing beneficiaries,the social registry needs to retrieve infor-mation from beneficiary registries to match tho

239、se individuals to the beneficiaries in its databaseHorizontal expansion(increasing coverage to reach nonbenefi-ciaries affected by the shock)Cannot be used for horizontal expansions to new beneficiaries,since it only contains data on exist-ing social protection beneficiaries Suitable for informing h

240、orizontal expansions,as it contains information on the wider population(although the share of the population in a social registry can vary significantly)Since it is designed to inform the assessment of needs and conditions of households for entry into any number of social protection and related prog

241、rams,it contains socioeconomic data useful for prioritizing those who should receive support via horizontal expansions after a shock Does not,however,typically include operationally relevant data,such as bank account details,to facilitate post-shock transfers20ADAPT I V E S O C IAL P R OT E CT I O N

242、 I N S O UT H E R N AF R I CAB OX 1.1 Lesothos social registry and shock responseLesothos National Information System for Social Assis-tance(NISSA),unique among the countries studied,provides an essential foundation for shock response.NISSA is a social registry containing socioeconomic data for virt

243、ually all households in the country.These data have been gathered from surveys going as far back as 2009,with the latest survey rounds for rural areas conducted from late 2016 to mid-2019(GOL 2020d).The registry currently covers all 331,248 rural households in Lesotho.An additional 78,000 urban hous

244、eholds(representing 36 percent)were enrolled by the end of 2020,with enrollment anticipated to reach 100 percent by the end of 2021.Currently,NISSA data are used to determine eligibility for the Child Grants Program and the Orphans and Vulnerable Children Bursary program.The Ministry of Social Devel

245、opment plans to utilize the registry for other social support pro-grams but has not yet done so.NISSA has played a central role in recent shock responses.It informed vertical and horizontal expan-sions of the Child Grants Program in response to recent droughts and the COVID-19 pandemic.Key actors ag

246、ree that NISSA should be the main source of household-level information for planning and execut-ing response actions.Despite the impressive achievement of developing a social registry that covers virtually all households,the system still faces several challenges and limitations.First,NISSA lacks a m

247、echanism for updating data fre-quently and at scale,which is a constraint not only for regular social protection programming but also for responding to shocks.The“census sweep”strat-egy for data collection(in which data are collected on every household in the country,as is done in the roll-out of a

248、national census survey)is expensive,and the ministry and key partners have indicated that a more cost-effective method should be developed.Serious challenges to the registrys sustainability are posed by limitations on capacity at the local level,the scale of the registry,and the amount of data that

249、needs to be collected.A further challenge lies in NISSAs very limited interop-erability and integration,which prevents its ASP potential from being fully exploited.In terms of interop-erability,NISSAs data exchanges are rare and mostly ad hoc,rather than on the basis of protocols and agreements.Rega

250、rding integration,the only process incorporated so far has been the targeting of the Child Grants Program and the Orphans and Vulnerable Chil-dren Bursary program.NISSA does not yet use the national ID as a unique identifier,which is an obstacle to further interoperability and integration.KEY F I N

251、D I N G 2The use of data on risk and vulnerabil-ity from disaster early warning systems to inform social protection responses is very limited.Despite the existence of ever-more sophis-ticated satellite-based tools to provide early warning data on climatic disasters,none of the case study countries h

252、as used such information to inform and trigger social pro-tection responses.The information base associated with disaster risk,vulnerability,and early warning is very mixed across the four countries:Botswana has the weakest early warn-ing system of the countries assessed,with limited agrometeorologi

253、cal mon-itoring systems and almost no recent disaster risk profiles for most of its 211:I N T R O D U CT I O Npopulation.Consequently,social pro-tection responses are triggered by post-shock assessments undertaken by national or local DRM committee teams in the field.Although these comprise robust m

254、ultisectoral assessments of household needs,they do not constitute early warning.Eswatinis and Lesothos early warning systems are based on annual assess-ments that combine agrometeorological data with baseline data on household vulnerability.These annual assessments produce estimates of food-insecur

255、e pop-ulations throughout the two countries,drawing on the WFPs vulnerability anal-ysis and mapping approach(WFP 2018).Although very useful and credible,these assessments are time-consuming and expensive to carry out and are still often conducted ex post(for example,after rains or harvests),providin

256、g only static annual assessment.Although con-ducted by the governments themselves,they are heavily supported(in terms of both resources and capacity)by exter-nal agencies,primarily the WFP.It is not clear this approach would be sustain-able if external support were withdrawn.Additionally,because the

257、se assessments always identify household needs based on conditions that have already materi-alized,they tend to be used to appeal for assistance rather than inform or trigger any predetermined ASP response.South Africa has several sophisticated government-led early warning systems and multiple organ

258、izations involved in forecasting and monitoring climatic events.These include the National Disaster Management Centre,the South African Weather Service,the South African National Space Agency,the Department of Environmental Affairs,and the Department of Health.Together they provide accurate climate

259、informa-tion,such as historical trend data and seasonal predictions,projections,and early warnings of extreme weather and other climate-related events to inform adaptation planning and disaster risk reduction.What is not being monitored,however,is the disaster risk and expo-sure levels of individual

260、 households,particularly poor ones.Fundamen-tally,while offering granular information on weather and disasters,these sys-tems reveal very little about the impact of monitored hydro-or agrometeoro-logical conditions on households.The indications they provide of these condi-tions need to be complement

261、ed with very different information to assess and quan-tify their effects at the household level.This is a common problem that reflects the incongruity between the availability of very advanced technology to monitor meteorological and agricultural indica-tors and the much greater difficulty of monito

262、ring household poverty and vul-nerability,which requires much more time and many more resources to collect appropriate data.KEY F I N D I N G 3Few countries have systematic protocols or guidance for conducting postdisaster household needs assessments,and the linkages between such assessments and soc

263、ial protection responses are weak.All countries undertake some form of post-disaster assessment of household needs following both fast-onset shocks like floods and slower-onset shocks like drought,but the linkages between the findings of these assessments and social protection are often weak.South A

264、frica has a network of disaster 22ADAPT I V E S O C IAL P R OT E CT I O N I N S O UT H E R N AF R I CAmanagement agencies responsible for post-disaster assessments,with a particular focus on floods,fires,and other short-onset shocks;protocols and guidelines do exist for these activities.Elsewhere in

265、 the subregion greater emphasis is placed on assessments in response to drought,which tend to follow harvests rather than disasters.Where these assessments happen annually,such as those conducted by the Lesotho Vulnerability Assessment Committee,they tend to follow standard approaches based on globa

266、l proto-cols used by agencies such as the WFP.In Eswatini,postdisaster assessments of food security(which are very similar to posthar-vest assessments)are led by the National Disaster Management Agency(NDMA)annually and carried out by nongovern-mental organizations and agencies based on selection cr

267、iteria and procedures jointly developed by the NDMA and a consortium of partners.In Botswana,similar assessments only take place in years of bad drought.In all cases,guidance linking the findings on the impact of the shock to any specific social protection responses is limited due to lack of financi

268、ng(see Building Block 4)and to weak connections among disaster management agencies,their assessments,and social pro-tection ministries.The mapping of human impact and response can thus be adhoc and focused mainly on the provision of imme-diate in-kind assistance(such as food or temporary shelter).Ev

269、en the provision of food assistance following assessment is not often viewed as social protection,though.This further reflects the lack of any sys-tematic consideration or inclusion of social protection agencies and programs as part of disaster response.There are no examples of the retention of hous

270、ehold needs assessments in central-ized databases to inform planning for future responses.In Eswatini,for instance,the information from the postdisaster needs assessments conducted by different actors is neither consolidated in any single data-base nor by the NDMA,so each partner relies exclusively

271、on the information it has collected.In the responses to COVID-19,the NDMA and some partners used the WFPs beneficiary information and transfer manage-ment platform(SCOPE)to register affected households.In sum,recognition of the role social protection information systems can play in generating benefi

272、ciary lists,identify-ing poor households,and understanding the demographics of a shock-affected popula-tion is limited.231:I N T R O D U CT I O NS U B R E G I O NAL R E C O M M E N DAT I O N S O N DATA AN D I N F O R MAT I O N SYST E M S1.Countries should continue to prioritize investments in the de

273、velopment of mature social protection information systems.Maturity can be achieved in different ways,with different types of registries and integration strate-gies based on country needs,and is a long-term endeavor.Having both widespread coverage of national IDs and digital registries in place is ke

274、y for interoperability and integration.The development of protocols and mecha-nisms for data sharing and data protection is also crucial,as are mechanisms to ensure data are up to date and reliable.In the development of social registries,each country should follow a tailor-made,context-specific path

275、-way.Although remarkable,Lesothos approach to developing a social registrythrough household-level census sweeps covering the whole countryis not the only way.Alternative or complementary pathways may entail developing on-demand mechanisms at the local level(for example,allowing those who are affecte

276、d or in need to enroll on an ongoing basis)and making use of other administrative registries containing information on nonben-eficiaries(further highlighting the importance of interoperability).2.Social registries should be risk informed.With regard to ASP,social registries are risk informed when th

277、ey col-lect household information useful for conducting risk and vulnerability analysis and informing shock responses and when they exchange data with DRM and humanitarian actors.When increasing the coverage of existing or planned social registries,the preregistration of households living in high-ri

278、sk areas should be prioritized as a means of enabling horizontal expansions in response to predictable climatic shocks.3.Countries should develop clear protocols and guidance for postdisaster assessments.Such guidelines should take into account how existing social protection programs,including their

279、 MISs,can serve as a basis for calcu-lating needs and delivering responses.Similarly,social protection registries should be expanded through the registration and enrollment of beneficiaries for emergency support in the wake of a shock.Consideration should be given to harmonizing data collection tool

280、s across departments to enhance interoperability and the develop-ment of social registries.4.A strong case can be made for a more systematic approach to early warning systems for ASP across the sub-region.Because of their geographical proximity to South Africa,small nations like Eswatini and Lesotho

281、 could benefit from South Africas comprehensive remotely sensed early warning information.Indeed,the homoge-neity of climatic shocks makes a subregional approach to developing early warning systems that inform ASP cost-effective.Subregional actors such as the Southern African Development Community(S

282、ADC)and the WFP should consider how to help countries across southern Africa develop standardized systems to track the disaster risk and vulnerability of their populations to make it easier to predict which populations need the most assis-tance in the face of different shocks.Cross-regional support

283、could also be helpful to governments in developing national indicators and thresholds for the most regular climatic shocks.These indicators and thresholds could be used to trigger standardized but country-specific social protection for predetermined households(see the above recommendation on social

284、registries)in response to the more recurrent and predictable climatic shocks.Similar support should be provided for the development of robust but simple methodologies to monitor the disaster risk of different populations across the subregion,the results of which could inform the provision of long-te

285、rm social protection measures that build the resilience and support the adaptation of those households.24ADAPT I V E S O C IAL P R OT E CT I O N I N S O UT H E R N AF R I CAB U I L D I N G B LO C K 4:F I N A N C EAll case study countries were assessed as nascent with regard to financing for ASP.Alth

286、ough all except Eswatini scored well in terms of national expenditures on core social protection,resources for financ-ing ASP were absent in almost all cases,as table 1.6 shows.While no country has developed disaster risk financing policies,the governments of Eswatini,Lesotho,and South Africa have c

287、ompleted disaster risk finance diagnostics and are in the process of developing such policies,with a focus on expanding the suite of risk financing instru-ments available to finance disaster response,including through ASP programs.Some such instrumentsfor example,the contingency reserve in South Afr

288、icaare in place to fund unexpected expenditures,including disas-ters;none,however,has the explicit purpose of financing an ASP response.KEY F I N D I N G 1 Governments are mostly maintaining and even expanding social protection budgets,but the effectiveness of social protection expenditure in reduci

289、ng poverty varies.Three of the case study countries allocate between 2.5 and 5.0 percent of their national budgets to social protection,which compares favorably against international standards.Eswatini is the exception,with its spend-ing the lowest of any country in the SACU subregion.The higher spe

290、nding levels show that,for the most part,political support for social protection programming is relatively strong.The role of social protection in build-ing the resilience of the poorest to shocks is less acknowledged,however,which may mean large amounts of social protection financing are directed t

291、o projects with limited impact in reducing poverty or vulnerability to shocks.Botswanas tertiary grants and sponsorships program,for instance,is the countrys most expensive social protection program,despite having a very low caseload(less than 29,000).The program is also not means tested,being avail

292、able to any youth achieving the requisite score in the second-ary school leaving exam.By not specifically targeting the poorest children,the program tends to benefit wealthier households.The reallocation of such budgets to provide more generous payments to the poorest and/or for complementary liveli

293、hood activ-ities(highlighted under Building Block 2)TAB L E 1.6 Scorecard for finance across countriesIndicatorBotswanaEswatiniLesothoSouth AfricaComposite country ratingFoundational indicatorsSocial protection spending Disaster risk financing policies and strategies Adaptive indicatorsQuantificatio

294、n of the expected costs for social protection responsesDisaster risk financing instruments linked to social protectionNote:=nascent;=emerging;=established.Mixed colors imply the rating is between two stages of development.251:I N T R O D U CT I O Nwould do more to build the resilience of poor househ

295、olds to climatic shocks.Ultimately,this should reduce the numbers of those requiring ASP in the event of shockspartic-ularly regular climatic shocksand,in turn,the implied cost of response.Robust impact monitoring of social protection programs is essential to track these implicit benefits.KEY F I N

296、D I N G 2While all countries lack disaster risk financing policies and ex ante financing instruments for ASP,they are working to strengthen their financial resilience to shocks.Governments in southern Africa are prior-itizing the strengthening of disaster risk financing,albeit from a low starting po

297、int.Having recognized their acute exposure to disaster shocks and the lack of ex ante financing instruments available to mobi-lize a response,Eswatini,Lesotho,and South Africa have now all completed disas-ter risk finance diagnostic studies,which include a range of recommendations to strengthen fina

298、ncial resilience to disasters in the subregion.Central among these are the development of national risk layering strate-gies to finance disaster responses,including through ASP programs.Although the eco-nomic and wider costs of disasters were modeled as part of these diagnostic reports,the analysis

299、was not at the sectoral level and thus did not quantify the cost of an ASP response.While no country has any disaster risk financing policies or strategies in place,the recently completed disaster risk financ-ing diagnostics will provide a useful basis for their development(World Bank 2019b).Some ex

300、 ante risk financing instruments are in place in the subregion,but they tend to be unreliable.These include the Disaster Risk Management Fund in Eswatini(not yet operational),the Contingency Fund in the Ministry of Finance of Lesotho,and the con-tingency reserve in South Africa.Although in theory th

301、e instruments should be available to finance disaster response,they are fre-quently used to support other emergencies and are depleted early in the budget cycle before shocks occur.This was the case in both Lesotho and South Africa for the 201619 droughts.The diagnostic studies showed the financ-ing

302、 of shock responses relies largely on ex post budget reallocations,adjustment budgets,ex post borrowing,and humanitar-ian aid.In Botswana,a United Nations Office for Disaster Risk Reduction review of DRM expenditure found that,in the five years leading up to 2019,the government made no allocations f

303、or disaster risk response,relief,or reconstruction and recovery(UNDRR 2020).In response to COVID-19,Eswatini,Lesotho,and South Africa drew upon the ex post borrowing facilities available from the International Monetary Funds Rapid Credit Facility and Rapid Financing Instru-ment.In 2020,South Africa

304、drew its full allocated amount of$4.3 billion from the Rapid Financing Instrument,which may have helped enable its generous and expansive social protection response to the pandemic.Eswatini gained access to$110 million through the Rapid Financing Instrument and Lesotho to$49.1 million through the Ra

305、pid Credit Facility and the Rapid Financing Instrument,both in July 2020(IMF 2020a,2020b,2020c).KEY F I N D I N G 3 The quantification of the costs and impacts of regular and frequent disas-ters is almost exclusively undertaken post shock.26ADAPT I V E S O C IAL P R OT E CT I O N I N S O UT H E R N

306、AF R I CAIn all the case study countries,social protec-tion response costs are quantified ex post,and no estimation is actively undertaken ex ante as a basis for securing financing in advance of a shock.Ex post assessment is led by the relevant disaster management agency in South Africa,and by multi

307、agency teams of government and nongovernmen-tal actors(such as the Lesotho Vulnerability Assessment Committee)elsewhere.Despite the chronic nature of most climate-related disasters in the subregion,few countries have methodologies in place to estimate their costs before they occur.In South Africa,ef

308、forts to estimate the costs of disaster have concentrated on damage to property and infrastructure.In the case of drought,the focus of financial assessments has been on commercial impacts to agricultural productionin,for instance,the wine indus-tryor on reductions in hydroelectric power supplies.The

309、 gaps in income and consump-tion of poor households that result from the most regular shocks are not analyzed.No examples were identified of ex ante aggregated analysis or modeling of the indi-vidual-or household-level impacts or costs of disasters to affected populations.Such exercises are importan

310、t preliminaries in the development of disaster risk financing strat-egies or actions to gain,for example,an understanding of the annual budget required for a drought contingency fund.Such anal-yses could also inform the nature of social protection responses that would most effec-tively build the dis

311、aster resilience of poor households.Modeling should include a range of the most likely disasters and consider how the costs associated with response and impact vary relative to the magnitude and frequency of each.271:I N T R O D U CT I O NS U B R E G I O N A L R E C O M M E N DAT I O N S O N F I N A

312、 N C E1.Social protection expenditures should be prioritized toward those programs that most effectively reduce poverty and,by extension,build resilience among the households that are likely among the most vulnerable to climatic shocks.Most countries have the scope to reorient spending away from reg

313、ressive social programs,such as tertiary bur-sary schemes,toward programs that prioritize poor households.2.Implement the recommendations of the disaster risk finance diagnostic studies carried out in Eswatini,Lesotho,and South Africa(World Bank 2019b,2021e,2022b).Build-ing on the momentum created b

314、y the completion of the diagnostics,the respective governments are well placed to move forward with the drafting of national disaster risk financing policies,the adoption of which is important to clarify their strategic objec-tives related to disaster response.Financing of ASP should have a central

315、role among these objectives.3.Expand the suite of ex ante risk financing instruments available for disaster response,including for ASP.The diagnostic studies in all three countries recommend doing so through a risk layering approach,with the inclusion of more robust contingency funds,contingent cred

316、it(for example,through the World Bank Development Policy Opera-tion with Catastrophe Deferred Drawdown),and sovereign risk insurance.Fiscal gap analyses conducted in the diagnostic studies that sought to quantify the cost savings if Eswatini,Lesotho,and South Africa expanded their risk financing ins

317、truments found that the governments in all three would save money on average if they implemented the modeled risk layering approach,with significantly higher savings($26 million in Eswatini,$33 million in Lesotho,and$500 million in South Africa)for extreme disas-ter events.4.In parallel to the above

318、,all the case study countries should examine the long-term costs of adapting social protection in response to disasters.This will require ex ante analysis and modeling of historical disaster data alongside data on the actual or esti-mated impact of disasters on household consumption.Such analyses wo

319、uld provide a data-driven understanding of the likely financial costs each country can expect in developing various approaches to and scales of ASP programming.Significant scope exists for such analyses to be undertaken at the subregional level,given the similarity in type and frequency of the clima

320、tic shocks experienced across the subregion and the often transboundary nature of their impacts.5.Alongside investments in linking disaster risk financing for shock response,there is significant,untapped potential for the case study countries to access climate finance in support of adaptation.As out

321、lined by Longhurst et al.(2021),climate finance could be channeled to invest in ASP delivery systems,while social protection programs could offer the southern African countries new ways to deliver support for household adapta-tion,mitigation,and risk management.292OV E RV I E W O F R I S K AN D H O

322、U S E H O L D V U L N E RAB I L I TYBotswana has long been considered a top performer on the African continent in terms of economic development.The country suc-cessfully maintained an average growth rate of over 5 percent from the time of its indepen-dence in 1966 until the 2009 global financial cri

323、sis,as its gross domestic product(GDP)per capita grew almost five times faster than the global average during the same period.This success was catalyzed by the discov-ery of the worlds largest diamond deposits,which have made Botswana a leading pro-ducer and exporter of the gems,accounting for over

324、80 percent of both overall exports and government revenues.High-end tour-ism has also grown in recent years,although agriculture has remained largely dominated by subsistence farming,with some commer-cial livestock production.Botswanas economic growth has stalled somewhat since the financial crisis,

325、as demand for diamonds fell and has remained depressed.The COVID-19 crisis has exac-erbated these trends,with the economy B OTSWANAA DA PT I V E S O C I A L P R OT E CT I O N AS S E S S M E N T CAS E ST U DYestimated to have contracted by 8.5 percent in 2020(World Bank 2021c).While the econ-omy was

326、expected to rebound to 8.5 percent in 2021,GDP was expected to remain below its 2019 level until 2022(World Bank 2021c).The government of Botswana has conse-quently been keenly aware of the need to diversify the economy to maintain growth and address its persistently high levels of unemployment and

327、inequality.Additionally,Botswanas emergent tourism industrywhich is based on the countrys wildlife and national parksis being affected by travel restrictions related to the pandemic;tour-ism is also threatened by climate change.The economic impact of COVID-19 is likely to be deep and long-lasting,an

328、d,in common with most shocks and disasters,it will dis-proportionately affect the poor.The World Bank estimates that poverty in Botswana under the upper-middle-income poverty line($5.50 per day)increased in 2020 by 3 per-centage points(World Bank 2021c).P OV E RT YDespite an impressive record of gro

329、wth,Botswana struggles with persistent pov-erty and inequality.In 2015/16,16.1 percent of the population(approximately 390,000 Botswana)were poor.This total masks 30ADAPT I V E S O C IAL P R OT E CT I O N I N S O UT H E R N AF R I CAsignificant geographical variations;while the poverty rate in citie

330、s and towns was 3.3 per-cent,in rural areas it was 26.8 percent(World Bank 2022a).Unemployment,dis-ability,and disease prevalence are all greater in rural areas.The overall unemployment rate in Botswana was around 23.2 percent before the pandemic,rising to 24.5 percent in 2020 as a result of it(Worl

331、d Bank 2021c).Unemployment is higher among youth and women,with 64.8 percent of the unem-ployed in 2020 under the age of 35.1Botswana experiences stubbornly high rates of malnutrition,despite its middle-income status.Overall,28 percent of children are stunted,rising to 32 percent in the rural northe

332、ast.Wasting rates are estimated at 7.2 percent,much higher than the average for poorer neighbors in the subregion,such as Eswatini and Lesotho.Although the World Bank estimates that inequality,as measured by the Gini index,fell from 60.5 percent to 53.3 percent between 2010 and 2015,2 it remains una

333、cceptably high.Improving income growth and economic opportunities for the rural population will be crucial in cre-ating a more equal society.1 Source:World Bank“Where We Work”Botswana web page.2 Source:World Bank“Where We Work”Botswana web page.S H O C KS A N D D I SAST E R SBotswana is exposed to numerous hazards,including droughts,floods,earthquakes,strong winds,land fires,and pest infes-tations