Social Protection Against Climate Change

Recent years have seen a growing recognition of the need for social protection systems that are climate sensitive, resilient, eco-intelligent and adaptive. Such systems combine measures to respond to environmental disasters with preparedness for extreme climate events while minimizing the long-term impacts on the most vulnerable groups (Ulrichs et al., 2019). 

The impact of climate change will be especially acute in developing countries, exacerbating existing problems with food security, water scarcity and disease prevalence (Bharadwaj et al., 2021). Nevertheless, some developing countries are offering practical experience and encouraging lessons to the rest of the world, including Egypt, about the role social protection systems can play in mitigating the knock-on effect of climate change (Vaziralli, 2021). 

Climate change: Repercussions for the poor

Climate change is closely tied to global patterns of inequality between and within states. EM-DAT, the international disasters database, shows that low-income countries sustained economic losses of 0.61% of GDP due to natural disasters between 2000 and 2019, which is three-fold the rate in high-income countries (United Nations Office for Disaster Risk Reduction & Centre for Research on the Epidemiology of Disasters, 2020). 

At the same time, the most vulnerable and poorest people, who have contributed the least to the climate crisis, bear a disproportionate brunt of its impact due to their inability to respond and adapt to the economic harms of climate change (World Bank, 2020). In the case of shocks, families not covered by social protection systems often resort to counterproductive coping strategies, such as selling their productive assets (land and livestock) or taking their children out of school, sending them further into the spiral of debt and poverty and fostering intergenerational poverty (Bharadwaj et al., 2021). As a result of climate change, another 100 million people around the world will likely fall into absolute poverty by 2030 (World Bank, 2016). 

Why should social protection systems address the adverse impact of climate change?

Shock-responsive social protection programs are important because they can rapidly respond to systemic shocks by, for example, allowing beneficiaries immediate access to cash transfers or food assistance in emergency situations. This makes citizens better able to absorb the short-term adverse repercussions of environmental shocks (Aleksandrova et al., 2019). For example, cash transfers to families affected by the drought in Zambia in 2015 reduced the likelihood of lowered food consumption by 14% and increased the likelihood of spending savings by 6% (Lawlor et al., 2015). In Ethiopia, families who received cash transfers through the Productive Safety Net Program in the wake of the 2008 had a 30% higher caloric intake than non-beneficiary families (Kuriakose et al., 2012). The Chars Livelihood Program in Bangladesh protected 95% of beneficiaries from the loss of their assets after the floods of 2012 (Vaziralli, 2021). 

Social protection as indemnification against the adverse impacts of climate change mitigation

Several states around the world have adopted climate change mitigation measures to reduce greenhouse gases, but such measures can entail short- to medium-term economic losses and harm for the most vulnerable groups (Györi et al., 2021). The experiences of countries as diverse as Armenia, Ukraine, and Ghana show that social safety nets can aid in the implementation of energy subsidy reform by protecting the poor against increases in energy prices (Bodewig & Hallegatte, 2021). In the Philippines, the total lifting of energy subsidies between 1996 and 2001 was offset by a combination of regular cash transfers to low-income families, exemptions from electricity fees for the elderly and a one-time cash transfer to vulnerable electricity consumers, along with the adoption of a program to support bicycle riders (Nordic Council of Ministers, 2016).

How can social protection systems support eco-friendly behavior?

Innovative social protection programs can encourage individuals to adopt eco-friendly behaviors. For example, environmental cash transfers (ECTs) or payments for environmental services (PES) encourage individuals to maintain natural resources like forests, agricultural land and water resources and use them more sustainably. Programs may offer cash transfers to farmers or landowners who agree to certain land- or water-management practices or measures to preserve biodiversity, such as reforestation, forest and tree preservation, or the use of certain agricultural technologies. Research indicates that the Familias en Acción program in Colombia and the Keluarga Harapan program in Indonesia helped to reduce deforestation by 25–30% in participating towns, while Brazil’s Bolsa Verde program reduced deforestation by 44–53% (Györi et al., 2021). 

Climate change and social protection in Egypt

Egypt will be severely affected by climate change. According to the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, the Egyptian Delta is one of three global “hotspots” for climate change (United Nations Development Program [UNDP], 2018b). In the near future, climate change may take Egypt to the brink of absolute water scarcity, defined as 500 m3 water per capita annually (Sakr, 2020). 

Some estimates find that 23–49% of coastal Delta governorates will be vulnerable to flooding, while a one-meter increase in sea level puts 12% of the country’s agricultural land at risk due to soil salinization (UNDP, 2018a). With reduced rainfall and successive waves of drought, agricultural productivity is likely to decline by 47% by 2060. A 1.26-meter rise in sea level will cost $5 billion annually by 2100, leading to a 6% decline in GDP (UNDP, 2018a). 

In order to adapt to climate change, the Egyptian government has begun limiting the consumption of environmentally polluting energy by reforming the energy subsidy system. Efforts to end energy subsidies coupled with agricultural and water efficiency initiatives could reduce carbon emissions in Egypt by 13% (International Labour Organization, 2016). 

But research into energy subsidy reform in Egypt in 2014 found that these reforms had a direct adverse impact on the welfare of Egyptian families due to higher energy prices and an indirect impact due to the increases in the price of other goods and services reliant on energy inputs, such as transport and commerce. The reforms led to a modest decrease in families’ actual consumption and a slight increase in poverty in the short term (Breisinger et al., 2019). 

To offset this, the government increased food subsidies and initiated two cash transfer programs — Takaful and Karama — to protect poor and vulnerable groups. It also expanded the coverage of the two programs from 1% of the population to 12% in 2020 (Ministry of Planning and Economic Development, 2021).

Toward adaptive social protection in Egypt

While social programs in Egypt are vitally important, there is an urgent need to expand coverage and increase the value of cash subsidies, while also considering including the middle class in social security networks and working to address the adverse impacts of climate change on the poor. One promising way to boost Egyptian society’s resilience is through adaptive social protection, which takes into account the short- and long-term shocks associated with climate change and combines social protection interventions with disaster risk management and measures to adapt to climate change (Davies et al., 2008). Implementing an adaptive social protection in Egypt requires several steps, among them: 

• Incorporate climate considerations in social protection frameworks and national development strategies; complement social programs with a set of adaptive tools in sectors like agriculture, infrastructure, transport, energy, national disaster risk management and early warning systems; develop voluntary resettlement systems for communities affected by disasters; and devise initiatives for human resource development.
• Adopt a set of innovative social protection tools that can provide sustainable sources of income to vulnerable groups while also protecting the environment. Relevant examples include eco-friendly public works programs in Malawi, active labor market policies in the Philippines, sustainable living programs in Mongolia, and India’s weather-based crop insurance scheme. 
• Develop existing social protection schemes by expanding coverage and increasing the benefits they offer. Experience shows that countries with social protection systems in place prior to climate shocks are better able to immediately and effectively respond when disasters strike. 
• Improve the flexibility of social protection programs to enable the rapid expansion of coverage during times of crisis. A study from east Africa found that the cost of drought for households increases from zero to USD50 if social assistance is delayed four months after the harvest season and up to USD1,300 if it is delayed by six months or more (Bodewig & Hallegatte, 2021). 
• Improve targeting mechanisms by identifying groups, sectors and geographic areas likely to be more adversely affected by environmental disasters and green policies in Egypt. Early warning systems could be relied on to identify possible beneficiaries of social programs. 
• Involve and consult society: social protection programs play a decisive role in building a broad social consensus around the importance of taking measures to mitigate the impact of climate change and transition to more sustainable green policies. This requires involving representatives from the private sector, civil society institutions and local communities in the discussion of proposed government policies. 

References

• Aleksandrova, M., Balasubramanian, P., Bauer, S., Beck, T., Brandi, C., & Burchi, F. (2019). Social protection as a tool to address slow onset climate events: Emerging issues for research and policy (Discussion Paper No.16/2019). German Development Institute.

• Bharadwaj, R., Chakravarti, D., Karthikeyan, N., & Kaur, D. (2021). Comparative analysis of the efficiency of different social protection delivery mechanisms in the context of climate resilience. International Institute for Environment and Development.

• Bodewig, C., & Hallegatte, S. (2021). Building back better after COVID-19: How social protection can help countries prepare for the impacts of climate change. World Bank.

• Breisinger, C., Mukashovb, A., Raoufa, M., & Wiebelt, M. (2019). Energy subsidy reform for growth and equity in Egypt: The approach matters. Energy Policy, 129, 661–671.

• Davies, M., Leavy, J., Mitchell, T., & Tanner, T. (2008). Social protection and climate change adaptation (Briefing note). Institute of Development Studies.

• Györi, M., Diekmann, K., & Kühne, E. (2021). The importance of social protection for climate change mitigation in LMICs: Success stories and opportunities for the future. Deutsche Gesellschaft für Internationale Zusammenarbeit and the German Federal Ministry for Economic Cooperation and Development.

• International Labour Organization. (2016). Social protection and climate change: Egypt: How has the removal of fuel subsidies in Egypt affected its people and the climate?

• Kuriakose, A. T., Heltberg, R., Wiseman, W., Costella, C., Cipryk, R., & Cornelius, S. (2012). Climate responsive social protection (Discussion Paper No. 1210). World Bank.

• Lawlor, K., Handa, S., & Seidenfeld, D. (2015). Cash transfers and climate-resilient Development: Evidence from Zambia’s child grant programme (Innocenti Working Paper No.2015-03). UNICEF Office of Research.

• Ministry of Planning and Economic Development. (2021). Egypt's 2021 voluntary national review.

• Nordic Council of Ministers. (2016). Learning from leaders: Nordic and international best practice with fossil fuel subsidy reform. 

• Sakr, D. (2020). Climate change and lessons learned from COVID-19. Alternative Policy Solutions.

• Ulrichs, M., Slater, R., & Costella, C. (2019). Building resilience to climate risks through social protection: From individualised models to systemic transformation. Overseas Development Institute.

• United Nations Development Programme. (2018a). Climate change adaptation in the Arab states: Best practices and lessons learned.

• United Nations Development Programme. (2018b). National adaptation plans in focus: Lessons from Egypt. 

• United Nations Office for Disaster Risk Reduction, & Centre for Research on the Epidemiology of Disasters. (2020). Human costs of disasters: An overview of the last 20 years, 2000–2019.

• Vaziralli, S. (2021). Building climate-responsive social protection. International Growth Centre.

• World Bank. (2016). Closing the gap: Building resilience to natural disasters and man-made shocks through social safety nets. 

• World Bank. (2020). Social dimensions of climate change.