Still today, non-contributory social protection is often seen merely as a safety net for the very poor and vulnerable – a pure expenditure for the government and its funding partners. However, it has been suggested that, when properly designed and implemented social protection interventions can also constitute strategic investment in pro-poor growth. Therefore, this research aims to demonstrate the potential impact of social protection on inclusive growth.
The main question posed is, to what extent and under what conditions non-contributory social protection constitutes strategic investments into pro-poor growth. Specifically, it will focus on three main pathways between social protection and pro-poor growth – human capital development, household productive capacities and local economy outcomes. Hence, the research will generate novel insights into the relationship between social protection and inclusive growth and the economic case for investments into non-contributory social protection in Uganda. These insights will be vital for ongoing academic and policy debates.
The research is funded by the Research Programme on Inclusive Development and Social Protection of the Netherlands Organisation for Scientific Research (NWO). It is a collaborative effort between the Maastricht Graduate School of Governance at the University of Maastricht and the United Nations University-MERIT, the Global Development Institute at the University of Manchester, the School of Social Science at the University of Makerere and the Expanding Social Protection Programme of the Ugandan Ministry of Gender, Labour and Social Development.
PROJECT
In recent years, many low and middle income countries have initiated social protection programs in order to reduce poverty, vulnerability and inequality. Many evaluation and impact assessments have been conducted that provide evidence on the positive short-term impacts of social protection interventions on the lives of recipients. As such non-contributory social protection interventions, such as Social Cash Transfers, have often been seen as safety net for the poor and vulnerable which is considered as a pure expense of the government and its funding partners.
While there is yet limited empirical evidence, scholars and policymakers have however made ‘the economic case for investments in non-contributory social protection’. Specifically, it has been suggested that in the long run non-contributory social protection contributes to inclusive growth indirectly and through various proximate, intermediate and ultimate pathways.
Research aim and focus:
This research seeks to contribute to the evidence base on the potential impacts of non-contributory social protection to pro-poor growth. Hence, it asks as to what extent and under what conditions non-contributory social protection constitutes strategic investments into pro-poor growth. In particular, it will look at three main pathways between social protection and inclusive growth, namely human capital development, household productive capacities and local economy outcomes.
Using Uganda as a country case study, the research will focus on the Senior Citizen Grant (SCG) under the Social Assistance Grants for Empowerment (SAGE) – a social cash transfer providing cash to old people – as well as three alternative social protection programmes in Uganda.
The research will have four main components:
1. Cost-effectiveness of the SAGE intervention – What are the benefits and costs of the Senior Citizen Grant?
This theme will analyse the returns on investments of the Senior Citizen Grant. As such, it will analyse the benefits of the intervention on a national level and contrast them with its projected costs. In terms of benefits, it will consider both the direct benefits in the short run in terms of consumption as well as the indirect benefits in the mid- and long run in terms of investments in education and health. The approach taken will also go beyond the mainstream cost-benefit analysis and also measure the costs and benefits in terms of its economic welfare by employing social weights.
2. Comparison to alternative social protection interventions – Would alternative social protection interventions be more cost-effective?
This theme will investigate the cost-effectiveness of investing in Senior Citizen Grant in comparison to alternative social protection intervention in Uganda. As with the first research theme, the analysis will focus on both the direct and indirect benefits of social protection interventions as well as employ social weights in order to take social preferences into account.
3. Local economy outcomes of the SAGE intervention: To what extent and under what conditions does the Senior Citizen Grant produce local economy effects?
This theme will explore the link between the Senior Citizen Grant and micro-level growth. In particular, it will focus on the conditions and circumstances involved in which the intervention enhances household productive capacities and generates economic multiplier effects at community level. By looking at communities with different infrastructure endowments, the analysis will also gain insights into the differences of the use of the Senior Citizen Grant between communities with different sets of available facilities and services and between households with different opportunities to have access to them.
4. Economic and social mobility outcomes of the SAGE intervention – Does the Senior Citizen Grant foster the economic and social mobility of the poor?
This theme will focus on the effects of the Senior Citizen Grant on economic and social mobility. Specifically, the analysis will consider income growth at the micro-level and subsequent changes in the probability that a poor child becomes a non-poor adult of being poor in the future.
Methods and data sources:
The research will use both quantitative and qualitative research methods. The quantitative analysis will rely on secondary data sources and will largely build on the Uganda National Panel Survey (UNPS) household data set, which consists of four nationally representative survey waves between 2005 and 2011 and cover approximately 2,200 households per wave.
The qualitative analysis will rely on both, primary and secondary data. In terms of primary data collection, a set of in-depth focus group discussions and key informant interviews will be conducted.
Contribution:
The research will offer in-depth insights into the link between social protection and inclusive growth. Specifically, it will enhance our understanding on the pathways between social protection and human capital development, household productive capacities, and local economy outcomes. The research will also generate rigorous evidence on investment case for social protection to achieve inclusive growth as well as social preferences in investment decisions. These findings will be crucial for academic and policy-maker and contribute to better designs and implementation of social protection interventions.
TEAM
Coordinator &
senior researcherFranziska Gassmann
Maastricht Graduate School of Governance, Maastricht University and the United Nations University-MERIT, the NetherlandsAdvisor Armando Barrientos
Global Development Institute, University of Manchester, United KingdomAdvisor Pierre Mohnen
Maastricht Graduate School of Governance, Maastricht University and the United Nations University-MERIT, the NetherlandsSenior researcher Nyasha Tirivayi
Maastricht Graduate School of Governance, Maastricht University and the United Nations University-MERIT, the NetherlandsSenior researcher
& local coordinatorFirminus Mugumya
School of Social Sciences, Makerere University Kampala, UgandaSenior researcher Fred Matovu
School of Social Science, Makerere University, UgandaSenior researcher Jane Namuddu
Expanding Social Protection Programme, Ministry of Gender, Labour and social Development, UgandaStakeholder coordinator David Tumwesigye
Expanding Social Protection Programme, Ministry of Gender, Labour and Social Development, UgandaResearcher Stephan Dietrich
Maastricht Graduate School of Governance, Maastricht University and the United Nations University-MERIT, the NetherlandsResearcher Daniele Malerba
Global Development Institute, University of Manchester, United KingdomResearcher Maria Klara Kuss
Maastricht Graduate School of Governance, Maastricht University and the United Nations University-MERIT, the NetherlandsPARTNERS
Global Development Institute,
University of Manchester, United Kingdom
Website: http://www.bwpi.manchester.ac.uk/School of Social Sciences,
Makerere University, Uganda
Website: http://www.ss.mak.ac.ug/Expanding Social Protection Programme,
Ministry of Gender, Labour and Social Development, Uganda
Website: http://www.socialprotection.go.ug/OUTPUT
Blog post: 3 April 2018
Why contextualising the transmission channels from social pensions to economic growths matters
By Maria Klara Kuss, Edith Vos and Hannah GrijnsUNU Policy Brief, Number 2, 2018.
Rates of Return to Social Protection: Social Cash Transfers in Uganda.
By Stephan Dietrich and Franziska GassmannUNU Policy Brief, Number 1, 2018.
The Economic Impacts of Social Cash Transfers in Integrated and Remote Areas in Uganda.
By Maria Klara Kuss and Franziska GassmannUNU-MERIT Working paper #2018-006
The economic impacts of a social pension on recipient households with unequal access to markets in Uganda
By Maria Klara Kuss, Patrick Llewellin and Franziska GassmannUNU-MERIT Working paper #2018-004
The relevance of local structures for economic multiplier effects of social pensions in Uganda
By Maria Klara Kuss, Franziska Gassmann and Firminus MugumyaUNU-MERIT Working paper #2017-040
Rates of return to antipoverty transfers in Uganda
By Stephan Dietrich, Daniele Malerba, Armando Barrientos and Franziska GassmannUNU-MERIT Working paper #2017-029
Social protection investments, human capital, and income growth: Simulating the returns to social cash transfers in Uganda
By Stephan Dietrich, Daniele Malerba, Armando Barrientos, Franziska Gassmann, Pierre Mohnen, Nyasha Tirivayi, Susan Kavuma and Fred MatovuResearch Protocol submitted to the MildMay Uganda Reseach and Ethics Committee (MUREC)
Building an Economic Case for Investment in Social Protection in Uganda
September 2016UNU Policy Brief, Number 1, 2016.
Social Cash Transfers as Economic Investments: Contextualising the Transmission Channels between Uganda’s Senior Citizens Grant and Economic Growth.
By Maria Klara Kuss and Paddy LlewellinBLOG
Experiences from piloting qualitative research tools in Kyenjojo district in Uganda
By Maria Klara Kuss and Anthony Kadoma
8 September 2016