The Philippines is one among the most vulnerable countries in the world when it comes to disasters and climate change. The impact of these disasters is compounded by socio-governance risks such as armed conflict, corruption, red tape, and political patronage. Truly, the millions of people living in poverty and the near-poor are always at the brink of survival when another disaster strikes.
The government’s social protection (SP) programs are supposed to cushion the impact of different risks and hazards on the poor. In the Philippines, the Social Protection Operational Framework defines SP as policies and programs that seek to reduce poverty and vulnerability to risks and enhance the social status and rights of the marginalized. Some examples of social protection programs are the Sustainable Livelihood Program, Universal Health Care, emergency relief during disasters, the Social Amelioration Program in response to the pandemic, and other sector-specific programs for women, senior citizens, indigenous peoples, persons with disabilities, and the like.
In recent years, humanitarian actors and policy-makers have tweaked SP to make it more responsive to shocks and vulnerabilities. Shock-responsive social protection refers to social protection programs adapted and integrated with disaster risk management systems to help cope with localized stresses and large-scale shocks. The goal of SRSP is to make SP responses effectively mobilized and rapidly expanded in the event of a shock or disaster. This means that even before the landfall of a typhoon, we should have anticipated, prepared, and provided SP programs so that the long-term detrimental effects can be avoided.
We have been used to doing disaster response after it strikes and after the damage has been done. Of course, providing disaster relief and the basic needs of those affected are important, but SRSP is about preparing, minimizing, and mitigating the risk so that vulnerable populations can build their absorptive capacities in anticipation of any natural or man-made disaster. For example, in Salcedo, Eastern Samar, the local government unit (LGU) partnered with organizations to be able to provide cash assistance to at-risk families three days before typhoon landfall. They were able to do this through an innovation based on smart data early warning system combined with digital financial services technology so that targeted households can immediately access aid.
SRSP minimizes unnecessary damage to lives and livelihoods and greatly reduces the cost of responding to disasters. One significant finding is that early response protects human capital and saves us money. Various studies show clear economic gains from early response, as it is far more cost effective than late emergency response. For example, every invested dollar in early response and social transfers is equal to up to $3.30 in humanitarian response. A 2016 economic analysis estimated that the annual savings that would accrue to the Philippines as a result of introducing instruments that support SRSP would be $6.6 billion.
Recognizing how SRSP can make disaster programs more responsive and effective, national government agencies are jumping in to support it. Last July, DSWD signed a cooperation agreement with the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations to establish an adaptive and shock-responsive social protection system in the Philippines. They also launched the National ASRSP Roadmap that is approved by the National Disaster Risk Reduction and Management Council. At the local level, SRSP activities are being implemented by the Moving Urban Poor Communities Towards Resilience Project (MOVEUP 4). Part of MOVE UP activities are influencing and capacitating LGUs to review and enhance their SP programs by making them shock-responsive. Small-scale SRSP projects will be piloted in cities in Mindanao that respond to different shocks such as typhoons, flooding, and the Covid-19 pandemic. What we learn from this small-scale SRSP pilot activities will be used to advocate for replication and modelling for other LGUs.
We have seen how natural and man-made disasters destroyed communities and impacted our economy. Also, this pandemic wiped out decades of investment in human development where the poor and vulnerable are the most exposed and often have the least means to cope. SP has a key role to play in ensuring the resilience of our people and our communities to both rapid and slow onset climate hazards and disasters.
We should build concerted efforts to strengthen the responsiveness of our social protection programs with attention to the most vulnerable so that we can protect our investments and hard work in reducing poverty. SRSP and investing in resilience are the ways to go so that the hard-fought gains secured through inclusive and sustainable development will be ensured.
Mr. Roger Cabiles teaches economics at the Ateneo de Manila University. He is Head of Project and Consortium Manager of MOVEUP 4, a consortium project funded by the European Union and implemented by Action Against Hunger, PLAN International, CARE Philippines, and ACCORD Incorporated.