Document Library

Gender and Risk in the Design of Social Protection Interventions

Author: K Ezemenari and N Chaudhury
Date: 2002
Size: 52 pages (200 KB)

Access full text: available online

Summary

What are the gender dimensions of risk and its effects on individuals, households and vulnerable groups? How can gender considerations be incorporated in the design of social protection programmes? This paper from the World Bank documents the gender disaggregated impact of shocks, based on available empirical evidence, and reviews the gender issues specific to safety nets, pensions and unemployment programmes. It concludes that undue focus on the household or family when designing social protection programmes compromises their efficiency, equity and effectiveness.

Social protection programmes alleviate poverty by providing assistance to individuals, households and communities to better manage risk, and support to the extremely poor. There is also an efficiency role for social protection programmes, through their potential to reduce inequities that lead to the prolonged asset depletion that compromises long-term economic growth.

The process of economic development and crisis leads to demographic, social and economic changes with gender dimensions and an impact on the changing structure of the family (these changes vary by country and by region). However, the designs of many programmes are still based on an implicit assumption of a family structure made up of one wage earner with dependents, and transfers which are pooled for the benefit of the family.

Undue focus on the household or family (without attention to intra-household dynamics and inequities, and the processes that generate these) compromises the efficiency, equity and effectiveness of social protection programmes.

• Current evidence suggests that shocks can lead to differences in outcomes by gender and that social protection programmes are not gender neutral.
• Household-level assets are the most important factor mitigating adverse shocks. The evidence shows that differences in gender outcomes are largest for the poorest households.
• Men and women may be exposed to different risks or may experience varying degrees of vulnerability. These differences in vulnerability are strongly influenced by differences in asset ownership.
• Gender roles and social norms determine whose labour is used as a buffer against shocks.

It is important to incorporate gender into the design and implementation of social protection programmes.

• Indicators should aim to estimate the gender-differentiated welfare outcomes associated with the shock.
• There is also a need to move beyond the household to re-examine the model of the family used to design these programmes.
• If programmes are not properly designed, they could lead to exacerbation of existing inequities or create new ones.
• In non-targeted social protection programmes, the gender of the transfer recipient matters for household expenditure and welfare.
• While it is important to pay particular attention to gender roles and social norms, overwhelming evidence suggests that transfers that ultimately aim to enhance child welfare should be deliberately made to women.
• The dual roles of women have strong implications for differential labour incentive effects between males and females and social protection programme design.

Access full text: available online

Source: Ezemenari, K., Chaudhury, N. and Owens, J., 2002, ‘Gender and Risk in the Design of Social Protection Interventions’, Social Protection Discussion Paper Series 0231, World Bank, Washington