Opm report Template version 5

Conclusions and recommendations

PASP is not yet a vehicle for an effective, climate-sensitive approach to social protection in Mozambique, or for the promotion of resilience linked to climate change on any significant scale. PASP is unlikely to have any significant effect on resilience, either in terms of direct participants or in terms of the communities that are provided with PASP assets. While PASP could have an impact on consumption smoothing and coping through the wages channel (despite the low level of the wages paid) it is unlikely that wages will increase adaptive capacities and, given the low quality of the assets produced, impact through this channel is also likely to be negligible. No impact is expected through skills, principally because the complementary services component of the programme has not yet been initiated.

Given PASP’s current design and operational constraints, therefore, its impact on resilience, climate change adaptation and DRM are likely to be very small. The programme would need to improve significantly before it could aim to achieve goals that not even better performing programmes in the region have yet managed to achieve. Also, if impact is only achieved through wages, as currently seems likely, it is necessary to question if a PWP is the right kind of programme at all. Either the programme will need to improve so that the other vectors achieve the effects desired, or a more cost-efficient intervention created – one with less costly (or no) conditionalities.

These findings and recommendations are consistent with the findings of simultaneous studies carried out for DFID London and IrishAid in Maputo into complementary aspects of social protection and climate responsive programming (Kardan et al, 2016 and Irish Aid and IIED, 2016).

Recommendations for DFID support

Any further significant DFID budget support to INAS for programming (either PWP or cash transfer-related) should be conditional on the key design and operational challenges identified in the assessment being resolved. If certain prerequisites are met, expansion of provision of the cash transfer and PASP wage under INAS programmes are both viable options for increasing basic resilience in the form of coping capacity, although neither are likely to promote adaptive capacity, due to the transfer level.

It is recommended that further DFID support to INAS be spread across three phases:

In the first phase, up to June 2016, DFID should feed into the INAS review process by highlighting donor concern regarding the current plans for expansion, and by introducing key research findings and ideas into the discourse.

In the second phase, DFID should finance an additional post/consultant exclusively focused on INAS support and donor coordination. At the same time, it should support the implementation of basic procedures in INAS (MIS, payments and grievance mechanisms, etc.) and it should lead research into key programme components (targeting outcomes, asset quality etc.). It should also develop an advocacy and engagement strategy with donors and INAS regarding programme design and discourse and programme rephasing.

In the third phase, and subject to satisfactory achievement of the second phase, DFID may choose to provide budget support to INAS in one of the following ways:

Support PASP on the basis of adequate systems being put in place, together with changes to PASP’s processes and design;

Support the Basic Social Subsidy Programme (PSSB) on the basis of adequate systems being put in place; or

Support both PASP and PSSB.

Alternatively, DFID may choose not to provide further support to INAS.


Table of contents

Poverty and shocks in Mozambique 6

The role of PASP in resilience, adaptation and disaster mitigation: Theory of change 7

Impact through wages 9

Impact through creation of assets 10

Impact through skills training 11

Other key design and implementation issues affecting impact 12

Key findings 13

Recommendations for DFID support 15

1Introduction 21

2Vulnerability context 23

Theories of change linking PWPs to resilience 25

2.1Wage 26

2.2Assets 30

2.3Skills and Work Experience 34

3PASP assessment 36

3.1Impact through wages 37

3.2Impact through assets 43

3.3Impact through skills 47

3.4Other key design and implementation issues 48

3.5Political space and willingness 55

3.6Summary of main findings 56

4Options for support 57

4.1Operational support 59

4.2Policy support 69

4.3Research 75

4.4Development partner coordination to support INAS and MGCAS 81

5Conclusions 84

5.1PASP and climate change resilience 85

5.2Options for DFID 86

5.3DFID institutional requirements 89

5.4Summary of recommendations to DFID 90

Annex A PASP in ENSSB II 96

Annex B Recommendations for Zero Phase of Engagement 98

Annex C Summary Findings of Irish Aid and IIED (2016) 104

List of tables and figures

List of abbreviations

CBT Community-Based Targeting

DFID Department for International Development

DRM Disaster Risk Mitigation

ENSSB National Strategy for Basic Social Security

GoM Government of Mozambique

IIED International Institute for Environment and Development

INAS National Institute for Social Action

INGC National Institute of Disaster Management

LAP Local Adaptation Plan

M&E Monitoring and Evaluation

MGCAS Ministry of Gender, Children and Social Welfare

MIS Management Information System

OPM Oxford Policy Management

PASD Direct Social Support Programme

PASP Productive Social Action Programme

PMT Proxy Means Test

PSNP Productive Safety Nets Programme

PSSB Basic Social Subsidy Programme

PWP Public Works Programmes

SDA Social Development Advisor

VUP Vision Umurenge Programme

WFP World Food Programme

WVI World Vision International