Last month, the National Planning Department (NPD) of Sri Lanka and the Ministry of Finance, Planning and Economic Development held a dialogue with state institutions, development partners, civil society and think tanks to discuss international best practices on topics related to the National Social Protection Strategy.
The strategy currently being formulated by the NPD is based on the National Social Protection Policy that was introduced last year by the Government.
The full-day dialogue included presentations and reflections on topics such as social protection and climate, digital transformation and social protection, care and support systems, economic inclusion and access to jobs, and financing social protection.
Key takeaways
* There is a need to mainstream the idea of social protection as something that every citizen is entitled to, not just those who need economic protection in times of hardship. It was encouraging to hear officials from the NPD as well as the Treasury speak of social protection not only as safety nets, but as ladders of opportunity for everyone.
A lifecycle approach that acknowledges the diverse shocks that may fall upon individuals at different points in their lifecycle, serving as a reminder that all citizens of the country can and do benefit from social protection systems.
While this shift in thinking from economic protection towards more transformative approaches is encouraging, unless mainstreamed in policy documents as well as in the thinking and working culture of state institutions implementing these programs, social protection will continue to be understood as a handout in the narrowly defined contexts of poverty and crisis. It is also an opportunity to move towards universal social protection systems away from targeted schemes and thinking that imagine poverty and vulnerability look a certain way and design programs accordingly.
* A strong social protection strategy cannot be in the hands of one state department alone and the dialogue was a good starting point for discussions across sectors (from Department of Census and Statistics to Family Health Bureau to Disaster Management). Multi-sectoral and interdisciplinary input into conceptualisation, implementation, monitoring and evaluation will be key to have a dynamic strategy that meets the diverse support being made available for citizens. If institutions continue to work in silos (including in data gathering and sharing for example), responses to crises as well as designing and implementing broader protection programs – such as anticipatory assistance programs, will be fragmented, which is what we see in Sri Lanka at present.
Digitisation
* Transparency is key. There was a lot of discussion around digitisation initiatives planned and ongoing, creating dynamic integrated social registries, centralised data platforms. While creating systems that are meant to be efficient and cost effective, we must not forget that all these systems contain information about people. That consent is obtained correctly, that people know how their data is going to be stored and used were discussed by officials involved in the various processes.
However, one missing element in these discussions was about how these processes must go beyond consent, data security and storage but also how they will be used. For example, while there was discussion about how this data could be used to effectively target groups of people to select as beneficiaries (thereby not letting selections get “politicised”), there was no discussion about disclosure of selection criteria.
How do people know which criteria is used to select people? Scoring, cut off points, thresholds are all the information that should also be disclosed. Criteria used for selection (including national programs such as Aswesuma), should be reviewed periodically with input given by recipients, ground level officials such as Grama Niladharis, Divisional Secretariats and not treated as if such discussions are only for international specialists and consultants.
* Social protection should be oriented towards the future. Climate change will drastically change the nature, intensity and frequency of shocks and risks, and while there is an emphasis on disaster-related risks, there is also a need to think of hidden climate impacts such as heat stress, and how social protection systems can be used to increase resilience to these risks.
The dialogue also highlighted the need for Long Term Care systems in the context of Sri Lanka’s aging population and the increasing number of people living beyond 80 years. Case studies about Long Term Care from Japan and Thailand also highlighted the need for thoughtful policy design that leverages existing resources and structures of governance. Social protection strategy could also benefit from a holistic consideration of unpaid care work as it relates to children and persons with disabilities.
Complex challenges
Community consultation for sectoral strategies. Case studies from different countries highlighted the complex challenges related to widening social protection coverage, particularly for the informal sector that is slipping through the cracks. Government officials recognised the importance of a sectoral approach to engaging with the informal sector which is highly heterogenous in terms of shocks and capacities.
There is a need for real and meaningful consultation with diverse communities and stakeholders in different sectors to tailor social protection strategies rather than simply assuming that formalisation will solve all problems.
The willingness to champion holistic approaches to social protection systems which enable citizens to live with dignity and purpose is promising. Moreover, the diverse and dynamic range of case studies and examples drawn from around the world offered inspiration to draw on for local strategies. What is needed now is a renewed commitment to Sri Lanka’s unique context to ensure that our strategy works for our people.
(Iromi Perera is the Director of Colombo Urban Lab at the Centre for a Smart Future. Meghal Perera is a Research Associate at Colombo Urban Lab.)
