Home / FT View/ Human rights and social welfare

Human rights and social welfare


Comments / {{hitsCtrl.values.hits}} Views / Thursday, 13 September 2018 00:00


United Nations Independent Expert on Foreign Debt and Human Rights Juan Pablo Bohoslavsky, wrapping up a visit to Sri Lanka this week, called for the Government and other organisations funding development to assess the human rights impact of their protects. Essentially, his call was for data-centric policymaking to become the Government standard. 

As a country which struggles to find adequate resources, it is doubly important that they are used to benefit as many people as possible. By international standards, social assistance is less generous in Sri Lanka than in many other comparable countries. The World Bank, in a 2016 benchmarking exercise examining the generosity and targeting of social assistance programs across 40 lower-middle-income countries, found that the contribution to the lowest of Sri Lanka’s poor, or those who live on about Rs. 120 a day, is merely 6.6%, significantly below Pakistan, the Philippines and even Bolivia.

Not only are Sri Lanka’s social assistance programs small, but the budget devoted to social transfers has also fallen in recent years. Spending on social transfers, with the exception of fertiliser subsidies, has declined in real terms. For example, the fall in the real value of Samurdhi transfers slowed poverty reduction by 9.6% between 2002 and 2012/13. Because of the decline in spending, by 2012/13, six key programs, including hand-outs for the disabled and elderly, combined amounted to only over 3% of total household consumption for the bottom consumption quintile. So, Samurdhi has had a minor and decreasing impact on poverty reduction. Samurdhi transfers are too small to make a large impact on poor households’ budgets as they contributed only 1.7% to household consumption of the poorest 20% of the population in 2012/13, according to the World Bank study. In other words, subtracting the Samurdhi benefit from household consumption would increase the national poverty rate by 2.1% points in 2002. But in 2012/13, the comparable figure had declined to merely 0.6% points.

The poverty reduction impacts of other social assistance programs are even smaller. These programs include the school food program, fertiliser subsidies, the Thriposha program, disability and relief, elderly payment, scholarship, health and medical aids, food and accommodation, and disaster relief assistance. Combined, their impact on poverty is almost negligible at 0.5% points.

The report goes on to say that among Sri Lanka’s social transfer programs, Samurdhi and the school lunch program are better targeted than fertiliser subsidies. Samurdhi and school lunch programs transfer roughly 55% of benefits to the bottom 40%. The fertiliser subsidy is the least well-targeted transfer, with only 45% of the benefit being devoted to the bottom 40%.

Samurdhi’s targeting performance has slightly worsened in recent years. In 2002, 42% of all transfers reached the bottom quintile and 70% reached the bottom 40%. But by 2012-13, this had fallen to 39% and 65%, respectively. Reforming the social assistance programs, including the Samurdhi, to reduce leakage and improve coverage of the disadvantaged can make it more helpful for the poor. 

Sri Lanka’s social welfare programs are also fragmented with coordination spread over about 11 departments and ministries, making their administration and evaluation almost impossible. 

Given this data, a massive change has to happen with both the public and the Government. For starters, the Government must invest in more studies to gather data and understand dynamics before crafting policies rather than rolling out hand-outs to broker more votes. The public must also understand the difference between quality and quantity so that their representatives use public revenue to formulate and implement poverty alleviation methods that actually work or it will continue to be precious public money spent inefficiently.


Share This Article


DISCLAIMER:

1. All comments will be moderated by the Daily FT Web Editor.

2. Comments that are abusive, obscene, incendiary, defamatory or irrelevant will not be published.

3. We may remove hyperlinks within comments.

4. Kindly use a genuine email ID and provide your name.

5. Spamming the comments section under different user names may result in being blacklisted.

COMMENTS

Today's Columnists

Courting democracy; Housing disaster?

Thursday, 15 November 2018

A small step was taken by a sovereign court the day before yesterday. It was a giant leap for the supremacy of the Constitution over all three arms of government in a recently benighted Sri Lanka. As well as being the tangible proof of intra-governme


Sri Lanka’s Judiciary in its finest hour

Thursday, 15 November 2018

“We must never forget that the only real source of power we as judges can tap is the respect of the people” –Justice Thurgood Marshall


When scholars turn slayers of reason

Thursday, 15 November 2018

“… I think, that the intellectual is an individual endowed with a faculty of representing, embodying, articulating a message, a view, an attitude, philosophy or opinion to, as well as for, a public. And this role has an edge to it, and cannot be


A stable democracy is a prerequisite for the wellbeing of Sri Lankans

Thursday, 15 November 2018

In Sri Lanka, despite the complexity of overlapping policies, the slow pace in implementing economic policies has been of central concern in the past few years. The current political state in Sri Lanka poses a series of e


Columnists More