Harnessing employment-based social assistance programmes to scale up nature-based climate action

Abstract

As the severity of the triple challenges of global inequality, climate change and biodiversity loss becomes clearer, governments and international development institutions must find effective policy instruments to respond. We examine the potential of social assistance policies in this context. Social assistance refers to transfers to poor, vulnerable and marginalized groups to reduce their vulnerability and livelihood risks, and to enhance their rights and status. Substantial public funds support social assistance programmes globally. Collectively, lower- and middle-income countries spend approximately 1.5% of their GDP on social assistance annually. We focus on the potential of paid employment schemes to promote effective ecosystem stewardship. Available evidence suggests such programmes can offer multiple benefits in terms of improvements in local ecosystems and natural capital, carbon sequestration and local biodiversity conservation. We review evidence from three key case studies: in India (the Mahatma Gandhi National Rural Employment Guarantee Scheme), Ethiopia (the Productive Safety Nets Programme) and Mexico (the Temporary Employment Programme). We conclude that, to realize the potential of employment-based social assistance for ecosystem benefits it will be necessary to address two challenges: first, the weak design and maintenance of local public works outputs in many schemes, and second, the concern that social protection schemes may become less effective if they are overburdened with additional objectives. Overcoming these challenges requires an evolution of institutional systems for delivering social assistance to enable a more effective combination of social and environmental objectives. This article is part of the theme issue ‘Climate change and ecosystems: threats, opportunities and solutions’.

Ensuring a Post-COVID Economic Agenda Tackles Global Biodiversity Loss

“…Just as the Works Progress Administration and Civilian Conservation Corps were used in the US during the Great Depression, jobs in ecological restoration and green infrastructure could be a source of both employment and ecological benefits. 40 Given current demands for increased racial justice, and the disproportionate impact of COVID-19 on communities of color in the US in particular, such employment programs can be targeted to these harder-hit areas, such as in urban ecosystem restoration and green infrastructure. 41 A recent survey of economists found that stimulus measures focused on green sectors (both biodiversity and climate) were rated among the most positive potential measures, delivering both short-and long-term economic and societal benefits, while airline bailouts were rated as the worst stimulus option.…”

Climate change and ecosystems: threats, opportunities and solutions

“…The final two papers in this themed issue [24,25] address the challenge of scalability and societal transformation: how can changes in ecosystem management and restoration be implemented at sufficient scale to achieve meaningful climate change mitigation and adaptation, while also protecting biodiversity? Norton et al [24] explore the potential of scaling up NbS through public social assistance schemes for employment, whereby payment is given to poor or vulnerable groups in return for employment in public works. With reference to well-established large-scale public works programmes in India, Ethiopia and Mexico, they discuss the potential of incorporating labour-intensive NbS, such as reforestation, into these schemes.…”

“…There may be innovative opportunities for scaling, e.g. working with existing rural social protection programmes [24], or local fisheries management programmes, and many examples of good practice are emerging [5].…”

Ocean resource use: building the coastal blue economy

“…Large investments are needed to diversify economies, supporting communities to transition into alternative livelihoods and providing them with tools and incentives to shift to sustainable practices. Response pathways could include financial schemes such as a universal basic income (Coote and Percy 2020 ) or conditional or unconditional cash transfers (Haushofer and Shapiro 2013 ) similar to those often applied in disaster relief programs (Régnier et al 2008 ; Gyawali et al 2019 ; Norton et al 2020 ). Collaboration between countries and within international institutions is essential to ensure that all states have the financial capacity to support such schemes or the tools to build this capacity in a reasonable time frame.…”