social protection in myanmar: the context, relevance … · example, with the use of social cash...

I. The context in Myanmar

The period of dynamic transformation ahead of Myanmar will bring new opportunities as well as

challenges, including the risk of a widened gap between those who can benefit from these

opportunities and those who fall behind. With well-designed, broad-based social policies, the

country can use its resources to alleviate current widespread poverty and social and economic

vulnerabilities.

While investing in expanded coverage of health and education services is crucial, it is not always

sufficient to ensure that people can access these services. For example, a poor family that lost its

main source of income may feel forced to withdraw their children from school and send them to

work. Programmes such as social cash transfers and public employment programmes can help

such families to boost their income security and continue sending their children to school. Social

protection can thus be seen as an important social policy instrument to reduce poverty, social

and economic vulnerabilities and deprivations that can otherwise have lasting adverse impacts.

Through meaningful continued investments in social protection, alongside health and education,

the new government can ensure that opportunities accorded by the current transformation benefit

all, and, especially, that the poorest and most vulnerable are protected from existing and new

risks.

This note provides a brief introduction to social protection in Myanmar, in particular the 2014

National Social Protection Strategic Plan (NSPSP). Also drawing upon relevant experiences, it

articulates possibilities for strengthening the social protection system in Myanmar in a practical

and feasible manner. As the contours of an evolved social contract between the government and

its citizens are being set in Myanmar’s historic transition, the increased emphasis on achieving

equity and social justice accords an important role for social protection as a priority policy

instrument.

II. Social protection is an integral component of social policy

Myanmar has defined social protection as “policies, legal instruments and programmes for

individuals and households that prevent and alleviate economic and social vulnerabilities, promote

access to essential services and infrastructure and economic opportunity, and facilitate the ability

to better manage and cope with shocks that arise from humanitarian emergencies and/or sudden

loss of income.”2

SOCIAL PROTECTION IN MYANMAR: THE CONTEXT, RELEVANCE & KEY ISSUES

A policy brief prepared by the Social Protection sub-sector Working Group 1

(May 2016)

1 This preparation of this brief was led by the Ministry of Social Welfare, Relief and Resettlement (MSWRR), Chair of the SocialProtection sub-SWG, and UNICEF, DP co-chair. It benefited from valuable feedback from a number of sub-SWG members, andespecially from a smaller technical team (ILO, WFP, Help Age International and Save the Children) that provided detailed comments.2 The government of Myanmar’s 2014 National Social Protection Strategic Plan

SOCIAL PROTECTION IN MYANMAR: THE CONTEXT, RELEVANCE & KEY ISSUES 1

Social protection is therefore a social policy, like healthcare or education, and therefore an

investment in a country’s human capital and economic development. Its complementarity to

other social policies lies in its ability to reduce household-level social and economic barriers (e.g.

income poverty and social vulnerabilities) to accessing services and engaging in productive

activities. At the same time, by promoting a demand for social services, social protection also

stimulates their provision.

The concept of social protection includes:3

- Social security and social insurance, which is usually contributory and accessible to

people with formal employment (tenured jobs).4 These groups are covered by Myanmar’s

2012 Social Security Law. The NSPSP recognises its link to the Social Security Law and its

importance.

- Non-contributory social protection programmes that are designed to reduce poverty

and vulnerabilities through tools such as social (cash or kind) transfers and human resource

intensive services (case management). These programmes mostly address the needs of

those who do not have the ability to contribute, which includes informal sector workers,

as well as children, the elderly and persons with disabilities. The NSPSP focuses on non-

contributory schemes.

This brief focuses on non-contributory social protection as a necessary component of social

protection as it is recognised as the most important type of intervention to support the poorest

and most vulnerable groups, especially in a context (like Myanmar’s) of widespread poverty and

deprivation, and where a large part of the population works in the informal sector.5

Global and regional experiences, including from contexts similar to Myanmar, have increasingly

shown that it is important to think of social protection as a whole system. The concept of integrated

social protection systems is based on the ability of social protection to build linkages with other

services. This entails creating a network of interventions across social sectors that can address

multiple vulnerabilities in an effective and coordinated manner. By maximising linkages between

social sectors, such systems also maximize equity, efficiency and the impact of interventions. For

example, a key role is that of social work case managers, who are trained to assess the

vulnerabilities of individual cases (e.g. children and households) and address them directly or

refer the people to appropriate services (e.g. NGO programmes, village and township programmes,

and health, education, justice and police services).

3 For a more detailed overview of the types of social protection cash transfers, see Annex 3.4 Social insurance schemes can also play an important role in dealing with life cycle contingencies, what is particularly relevant in acontext of high vulnerable employment.5 Social protection can be conditional or unconditional. A conditional cash transfer means that beneficiaries receive cash on thecondition they fulfil a specific requirement. Examples from different programmes are: attending health check-ups, sending children toschool, or performing a public work. While conditional cash transfers are used with the intention to stimulate positive behaviour, theycan limit families’ choices, can impose too difficult requirements, and be costly and difficult to monitor.

2 SOCIAL PROTECTION IN MYANMAR: THE CONTEXT, RELEVANCE & KEY ISSUES

As Myanmar is developing its own social protection system, the effort is reinforced by its culture

of sharing and giving and the rich social assets this tradition has generated. This lays a strong

foundation to develop an institutionalised – and integrated - government-led system to achieve

equitable outcomes for all across the country.

III. Social protection is a feasible and affordable investment with high returns

Social protection is a human right6 and it is also an investment in people and a nation’s future.

This has been increasingly understood by policymakers across the globe. Over the past decade,

many low- and middle-income countries with varied administrative capacities have implemented

broad-based social protection in a phased and progressive manner. Virtually all of the ASEAN

countries are engaged in strengthening social protection systems and their ability to prevent and

respond to poverty and adversity, including emergencies. Even low-income countries in Sub-

Saharan Africa have or are developing a social protection policy and some form of government

social transfer.7 Figure 1 shows investments in social protection, alongside other social sectors,

made by governments in ASEAN countries. While current government expenditure on social

protection in Myanmar is relatively low, Box 1 shows examples of realistic sources of income that

could be tapped, which reiterates how this is a feasible investment.

There is also a growing body of evidence to confirm the feasibility and returns of investing in

adequate social protection – and also highlight the cost of not doing so. For example, a study

conducted in Cambodia demonstrated how investingin a comprehensive set of social cash transfers

was estimated to generate a return of up to 12-15 percent in terms of increased household

consumption.8 Similarly, for children especially, the adverse consequences of not investing during

the crucial period of their development can be difficult and costly to make up for later in life. For

example, with the use of social cash transfers, Zambia reduced the prevalence of stunting by 9

percent, Mexico by 10 percent, and Bangladesh by over 7 percent. Just to provide some perspective,

lost national productivity due to stunting can reach 2 to 3 percent of their potential GDP each

year.9 When deciding how much to invest in social protection, non-monetary and non-quantifiable

costs and benefits – such as strengthening social cohesion and trust in the government –also

need to be considered.

6 The right to social security is articulated in Article 22 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, in Article 9 of the InternationalCovenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (ICESCR) (Myanmar signed in 2015), and in Article 26 of the UN Convention on theRights of the Child (Myanmar acceded in 1991).7African Union Commission and UNICEF 2014.8 Maastricht University and UNICEF 2012Estimation of Rates of Return of Social Protection Instruments in Cambodia: A case for non-contributory social transfers.9 The World Bank 2015 (http://www.worldbank.org/en/topic/nutrition/overview#1)


Figure 1: Education, health, social protection and defence budgets in ASEAN countries (2012-15)

as % GDP (Source: Data from World Development Index 2015 and the ILO’s State of Social

Protection in ASEAN 2015)

Box 1: Financing social protection in Myanmar

Significant improvements in tax administration and strong economic growth mean that the

time is opportune to use the increased flow of resources (incremental financing) to finance

key flagship programs. To illustrate, in Myanmar from 2013/14 – 2015/16:

• Total revenues (from all sources) jumped by nearly 30 percent, meaning that total

revenues increased by nearly 4 billion USD. This increase could finance all eight NSPSP

flagship programmes for two years.

• Taxes(from production/consumption; income/property; customs; and natural resource)

surged by 115 percent, increasing by nearly 3.6 billion USD (from 2.6 USD to 5.9 billion

USD) – enough to finance social pensions for all elderly (65+) for three years. Just 7.5

percent of this increase could finance universal social cash transfers to pregnant women

and their children aged 0-2 for a whole year.

• Revenues from natural resources/national properties increased exponentially, and only

25 percent of the increase in tax revenues from natural resources – i.e. 850 million

USD–would be needed to finance universal social cash transfers to mothers and children

0-2 for over three years.

• GDP growth: Revenues as a fraction of the GDP average around 24 percent. If this ratio

were to remain stable, or increase, the country could expect an additional 2.4 billion

USD to flow each year from GDP growth alone. Just 10 percent of this increased flow of

revenues could finance universal social cash transfers to mothers and children 0-2 for a

year.


IV. Myanmar can use social protection to support its development objectives

There is an international consensus on the importance of social protection. In the 2013 ASEAN

Declaration on Strengthening Social Protection, member countries committed to providing social

protection to everyone, especially those most vulnerable, as an entitlement and a human right.

Extended social protection coverage is one of the explicit targets10 under the new Sustainable

Development Goals (SDGs),which more than 150 countries, including Myanmar, have adopted.

• Foreign aid (excluding grants) jumped by more than 270 percent as international

development partners resumed relations with Myanmar. Just 10 percent of this increase

could finance the set-up of integrated service delivery centres in all 330 townships and

the deployment of 6,000 social workers within a year.

Source: Calculations based on Union Budget Laws 2013/14 – 2015/16.

Box 2: Social protection to cushion the impact of financial shocks

In Southeast Asia, social protection largely emerged as a response to the Asian Financial

Crisis in the 1990s. The crisis revealed the inadequacy of existing social security schemes.

These were generally limited to the formal (mostly public) sector, and did not cover those

most vulnerable: children and families whose livelihoods depended on the informal sector.

Despite the existence of an informal support network – with strong cultures of charity and

giving, and significant private remittances —, the crisis reversed poverty reduction and

human development gains across the region. To prepare for future shocks, Southeast Asian

governments began to put in place robust social protection systems.

This has paid rich dividends. In Indonesia, it allowed continued poverty reduction despite

the 2008 global financial crisis.11 Elsewhere, in South Africa it was estimated that social

transfers reduced the poverty gap by 47 percent and that during the 2009 financial crisis,

the percentage increase in poverty would have doubled without the protection afforded by

the Child Support Grant.12

In Myanmar, especially as the country becomes increasingly connected to the regional and global

economy —which compounds existing vulnerabilities —, social protection can support the following

aspirations:

1. Reduce poverty and vulnerability, and support overall growth. Poverty and vulnerability

is widespread in Myanmar: An estimated 25-38 percent13 of the people in Myanmar live under the

poverty line. A further 40 percent live just above that threshold and are effectively one shock

away — job loss, illness or a disaster — from falling into poverty. Adding to this is the high share

10 Target 1.3 – Implement nationally appropriate social protection systems and measures for all, including floors, and by 2030achieve substantial coverage of the poor and the vulnerable11Suryahadi et al. 2014 Expanding Social Security in Indonesia, UNRISD Working Paper.12African Union Commission and UNICEF13 IHLCA 2009 estimates poverty at 25 percent, and the World Bank revised this estimate to 38 percent.


of the informal sector in the total labour force, approximately 70 percent.14 Because of this

poverty and vulnerability profile, Myanmar has opted for broad-based coverage to reach those

particularly vulnerable due to their age and the variety of social barriers they face.One analysis

showed that significant poverty reduction can be achieved through the universal implementation

of key flagship programmes of the NSPSP that are focused on the most vulnerable groups:

pregnant women and children aged 0-2, children aged 3-15, and people aged 65 and above15

(Figure 2). Implemented systematically, social cash transfers also help prevent the transmission

of poverty from one generation to the next.

Figure 2: Investing in a set of universal social cash transfers to vulnerable groups in Myanmar

can lift 5.4 million people out of poverty.

Beyond reducing vulnerability at the level of individuals or households, as social cash transfers

enable people to buy more goods and use more services, they also generate income for local

economies. Evaluations in a number of countries (Kenya, Lesotho, Ghana, Malawi, Zambia,

Zimbabwe and Ethiopia) show that social cash transfers generated 2.5-times their value in income

for local economies.16 In South Africa, social cash transfers allowed lower income groups to

spend more, resulting in a shift in the patterns of national spending from imported to local

goods, boosting overall economic growth.17

2. Invest in human capitalfor Myanmar’s development. Social protection facilitates and

expands on human capital gains, including in health and education. This is particularly important

for children’s long-term development. A social cash transfer (unconditional and universal)

13 IHLCA 2009 estimates poverty at 25 percent, and the World Bank revised this estimate to 38 percent.14 The World Bank 2014 Myanmar: Ending poverty and boosting shared prosperity15UNICEF 2015 Social Protection in Myanmar: The impact of innovative policies on poverty16 FAO and UNICEF 2014 The Economic Impacts of Cash Transfer Programmes in Sub-Saharan Africa17 OECD 2009 Promoting pro-poor growth: Social protection


18 FAO and UNICEF 2014, Surender et al. 2010 Social Assistance and Dependency in South Africa: An analysis of attitudes to paidwork and social grants, DFID 2011 Cash Transfers: Evidence paper, African Union Commission and UNICEF 2014 Children and SocialProtection Systems: Building the African agenda19 IPC-UNDP 2012 Do Cash Transfers Change Household Consumption Preferences: Evidence from an unconditional cash transfer inKenya20The Cash Learning Partnership 2015 Voices and Views of Beneficiaries on Unconditional Cash Transfers

implemented by Save the Children in Myanmar has improved health and nutrition practices among

pregnant women and their children, resulting in reduced stunting. As the scheme was accompanied

by activities to increase awareness of good health and nutrition practices, mothers used the

additional money to buy nutritious food and to pay for transport to health clinics. Save the

Children is expanding the maternal and child cash transfer scheme to the Delta/Dry Zone and is

conducting preliminary discussions with government counterparts about potential engagement.

These findings are in line with evidence from other countries and challenge misconceptions that

social cash transfers encourage anti-social behaviour (such as alcoholism or gambling) or create

a culture of dependency. Evaluations from other countries found instead that well-designed

unconditional social cash transfers uniformly increased investments in productive activities and

financial and human capital.18 For example, an evaluation of Kenya’s unconditional cash transfer

to orphans and vulnerable children showed that recipient households changed their spending

behaviour and spent more on health and significantly less on alcohol and tobacco compared to

households that did not receive the transfer.19 Importantly, beneficiaries — as shown in a study

in the Philippines, Nepal and the Democratic Republic of the Congo — value the choice and

flexibility, and the sense of dignity, of unconditional cash transfers.20

Figure 3: Unconditional social cash transfers and investments in productive activities and human

capital.


21 OECD 2009 Promoting Pro-Poor Growth: Social Protection.22 UNICEF 2014 Linking Social Protection with Disaster Risk and Climate Change Adaptation in East Asia and the Pacific; ODI 2015Doing Cash Differently: How cash transfers can transform humanitarian aid; ODI 2013;Social Protection and Resilient Food Systems:The role of cash transfers; ODI 2008 Cash Transfers for Disaster Risk Reduction in Niger: A feasibility study

Schoolfeeding is an example of social transfers which are in kind. The objective is to promote

school attendance by offering free meals to children. The meals can provide extra energy and

nutrients that children need. The World Food Programme (WFP) has been running school feeding

programmes in various locations around Myanmar that have the lowest school attendance rates

and food security indicators. A mid-term review of the programme highlighted that school feeding

helped increase enrolment and children’s participation, and it improved their learning. Teachers

reported that students were able to concentrate, especially after the lunch break. Building on the

lessons learnt from the WFP programme, the government is in the process of developing a

national schoolfeeding scheme in 2016.

To achieve a program’s objectives of reducing poverty and promoting human development, it is

vital to ensure sound program design. In particular, a robust monitoring and evaluation (M&E)

mechanismis important to monitor progress and measure impact. Such evidence also allows

policymakers to better understand the use of social cash transfers. In Myanmar, the requirement

to set up complex M&E needs to be balanced with the available human and financial resources.

Experiences of other countries have shown that programmes that rely on complex targeting and

conditionalities impose significant administrative costs and capacity requirements21. The role of

complementary interventions also needs to be given careful consideration. Adequate behavioural

change communication will help sensitize communities and households to a program’s objectives.

Social workers can offer support by referring potential beneficiaries as well as strengthen families’

ability to access services.

3. Strengthen families’ resilience, including against disasters. The role of social protection

goes beyond reducing poverty and vulnerabilities to promoting individuals and households’

resilience vis-à-vis their capacity to adapt to and manage risks – including those posed by economic

crises and disasters. As one of the most disaster prone countries in the Asia-Pacific region,

Myanmar will continue to be afflicted by natural hazards. Social protection will thus be a key

intervention that can also help strengthen resilience among the most vulnerable, as evidenced

by a growing body of experiences around the world.22 Without social protection, the poor and

socially marginalised are less able to cope and recover due to limited livelihoods options and

reliance on informal support networks (family and community) that become stretched in the

wake of disasters. In this context, social cash transfers can enable households to plan for

contingencies and respond to the aftermath of a disaster with minimised losses to households

and the wider community’s welfare.

Many governments in disaster-prone countries have used social cash transfers as a response to

support families’ recovery. For example, in response to the 2010 floods, the government of

Pakistan rolled out the Citizens’ Damage Compensation Programme, a cash transfer which initially

covered the immediate needs of flood-affected families and then expanded to support their


recovery. In other countries with existing programmes, immediately following a disaster, broad-

based social protection can be designed to be quickly scaled up to an emergency response for the

affected population. Recent examples include the management of national disasters in the

Philippines and Nepal by activating existing social protection structures to deliver additional

social cash transfers to enable affected households to meet their various relief and recovery

needs.

In addition, a public works programme can also help rebuild community assets and livelihoods

after a disaster strikes (e.g., rain water collection tanks, school latrines, dams, water sources and

irrigation/drainage canals). People should be able to sign up for such programmes and receive

food or cash, or both, in return. By creating or strengthening community assets, these programmes

can contribute to resilience in the long-term while generating seasonal employment.

Other (non-cash transfer based) elements of a social protection system also play an important

role in supporting resilience. This was demonstrated during the Myanmar flood response in 2015

when social work case managers, part of an integrated social protection system initiated in the

same year, played an important and timely role in reaching out to affected communities to assess

their needs, provide psycho-social support, and refer victims to appropriate services.

4. Strengthen social cohesion in times of peacebuilding and at the onset of rapid socio-

economic transition. As the peacebuilding process advances in Myanmar, a broad-based

government-led social protection system has great potential to strengthen the social contract

between citizens and the government. Introducing inclusive social protection becomes an

opportunity to extend the social contract and build trust towards the government among those

previously excluded. Other countries have implemented inclusive social protection programmes,

recognising that broad coverage garnered the political support of taxpayers. Examples include

Mongolia’s universal Child Money Scheme, the UK’s universal oldage pension, and Uganda’s

universal Senior Citizens’ Grant. A household survey conducted in Tanintharyi in 201523 found

there was a strong demand for social protection programmes to complement the delivery of

public services.

At the community-level, social cash transfers strengthen people’s ability to share their resources

with others and participate more often in communal activities, which ultimately strengthens

social cohesion. This is particularly meaningful for those who tend to be excluded from participation,

either because of their poverty and/or social vulnerabilities,e.g. persons with disabilities. Over

the next two years, HelpAge International will pilot a system for the identification of persons with

disabilities in six selected townships in the Mandalay and Magway Regions to facilitate their

access to social protection.

As Myanmar is expected to witness more rapid economic growth, social protection will help

equalise social and economic outcomes among the people. In many countries that transitioned

23Government of Myanmar and UNICEF (forthcoming) Local Social Plan in Tanintharyi Region


to middle-income status on the back of rapid but unequal growth, widened social and economic

disparities have hindered further economic growth and fractured social cohesion. Putting in place

an inclusive social protection system early on will go a long way in ensuring that the benefits

from Myanmar’s growth – which is accelerating and also creating new vulnerabilities – are shared

by all the people. This is why governments need to balance considerations of efficiency with

those of equity and social cohesion.

V. Building on the existing foundation of Myanmar’s inclusive social protection

Myanmar has a defined vision articulated in the 2014 National Social Protection

Strategic Plan (NSPSP).The strategic plan was developed through an extensive consultative

process24 coordinated by the Department of Social Welfare and was launched in December 2014.

Rooted in Myanmar’s context, the NSPSP endorses the principles of universality (everyone is

entitled to social protection) and integrated approach (addressing multiple vulnerabilities in a

coordinated manner that maximises linkages with other services). Based on the country’s

vulnerability profile, the NSPSP outlines eight ‘flagship’ programmes and interventions for Myanmar

to address vulnerabilities along the life cycle (Annex 1).To ensure the implementation is technically

and financially feasible, these programmes are expected to be – and in some cases have already

been– progressively rolled out.

The Department of Social Welfare has strengthened its technical readiness to

coordinate social protection programmes.The Department of Social Welfare (DSW) has

rolled out a universal social pension on a limited scale to test operational procedures. Evaluations

have found that the social cash transfers were well received by beneficiaries and actively supported

by the Township General Administration Department. Findings also highlighted, among other

things, the need for greater efforts to ensure that all who are eligible are enrolled in the programme,

and the need to strengthen the DSW’s capacity and resources at the state/regional level.

Furthermore, following the 2015 floods the government call for cash transfers for relief and

recovery in the affected areas, the DSW, supported by development partners, developed a manual

to guide the implementation of social cash transfers by adapting international good practice to

Myanmar’s existing structures and capacities. This was accompanied by the costing of different

options for defining the scope of the social cash transfers.

A foundation of the integrated social protection system was put in place with the first

deployment of trained social work case managers across the country. In 2015, the

Department of Social Welfare deployed three social work case managers to each of their 27

offices at the state/regional and district levels. They had been trained in professional case

management, which means that they followed standard procedures whenever they addressed

the needs of a child or a family, or referred them to other services. Case managers demonstrated

the importance of their role in facilitating access to essential services for the most vulnerable

when they were sent to help flood-affected children and families.

24This also included a participatory Assessment Based National Dialogue facilitated by the ILO


VI. The next step to realizing Myanmar’s vision of National Social Protection: Feasible

opportunities for the first year of the new administration

Few programmes have been studied as extensively as non-contributory social protection. The

intersection of findings overwhelmingly suggests that even low- and middle-income countries

can reap significant social, economic and political benefits by instituting inclusive and universal

social protection systems. Given the increasing trends of tax revenues, increasing FDI and GDP

growth, it is not only well within reach, but also an imperative and an opportunity for Myanmar

to implement an affordable and efficient system. Only then will Myanmar realize its true potential.

Table 1 below outlines programmes that the Department of Social Welfare has identified as

possible priorities for progressive implementation in the first year of the new government’s

administration. They have been selected from among the eight flagship programmes of the

National Social Protection Strategy, which will be implemented in the future as the capacity of the

system develops.

Concerted support from both the government and development partners will be extremely

important as the system develops. While government funding from natural resources and taxation

is critical to ensuring long-term sustainability of the system, seed financing from post-flood and

other donor financing streams can be catalytic in helping the system grow, develop and learn. In

the short term some immediate steps that would be useful are:

1. Consult with the new government and define the scale-up priorities vis-à-vis the

implementation of the NSPSP;

2. Implement a phased rollout of the NSPSP according to clear and transparent prioritization,

available and expected fiscal resources, and administrative capacity;

3. Include the government’s social protection programmes in the national budget;

4. Design information systems, M&E systems and transparent governance rules;

5. Strengthen integrated delivery systems and deploy social work case managers in selected

areas; and

6. Articulate areas where interested development partners can provide support.


Table 1. Priority programmes from the National Social Protection Strategic Plan and the possibilities

for rollout/scale-up in the 2016-2017 and 2017-2018 fiscal years.


Annex

2.

Soci

al ca

sh t

ransf

ers

and b

roader

eco

nom

y


Annex

3.

Types

of

soci

al pro

tect

ion inst

rum

ents


social protection in myanmar: the context, relevance … · example, with the use of social cash...

Documents