Cash assistance in humanitarian emergencies: An immediate intervention to meet basic needs with long-term potential
From Syria to the U.S., cash is distributed to populations grappling with humanitarian emergencies from armed conflict to the economic impacts of COVID-19, but how can we transition from an immediate intervention to one that promotes long term, sustainable recovery?
Co-authored with Elizabeth Tromans (Economic Recovery & Development), and Joanne Creighton (Violence Prevention & Response)
Time and time again, cash assistance has been shown to help people meet their basic needs in humanitarian emergencies around the world, including in response to some of the worst conflict-related atrocities in Raqqa Governorate, Syria where people have fled airstrikes, armed fighting, and ISIS occupation. Cash has also been given to citizens in towns and cities across the United States as the doors to non-essential businesses have shuttered in the wake of the COVID-19 pandemic, which has led to historic rises in unemployment levels and devastated livelihoods. We have also seen cash being used in places grappling with dual burdens of armed conflict and/or forced migration and COVID-19 including Colombia, Yemen, Jordan, and Afghanistan. In order to meet people’s needs, the International Rescue Committee (IRC) quickly adapted programs in these locations by adjusting cash distributions to ensure the safety of staff and recipients, moving as much of the cash program cycle to remote (i.e. phone surveys), and launching information campaigns about COVID-19 prevention, symptoms, and treatment.
Whether distributed by governments or non-governmental organizations, cash assistance programming is a critical vehicle to provide needed assistance for people around the world in times of emergency. For instance, the IRC’s most recent analyses from women in Raqqa Governorate, Syria, published this week in PLoS One, shows that before and after cash assistance, food insecurity decreased and women reported being able to better meet their basic needs. Syrian women described how they were able to pay rent, buy food, and purchase needed clothing and other items for their families, and later on, for themselves. During the third and final cash transfer, some women also described being able to save a portion of the funds for medical expenses or for seed funding for household productive assets, like a sewing machine, as illustrated in the graphic below.
Yet, data from this IRC study in Northeast Syria reveal that despite cash helping women meet these immediate basic needs, challenges about the impending future underscored feelings of worry and anxiety about how they would continue to meet their basic needs when the cash distribution ended. The data also shows that opportunities to improve their own livelihoods and economic well-being remained scarce in the aftermath of pervasive armed conflict, insecurity, and a breakdown of social safety nets. In fact, while there was no control group to provide causal inference, women’s depressive symptoms increased over time and their perception of serious needs and household stressors remained stagnant. Of course, there could be many different reasons for this finding such as changing relationship dynamics with surveyors, conflict over how to spend cash within the household, or a worsening of the overall volatile environment in which people were living in Raqqa Governorate. Even still, some women told IRC that receiving cash boosted their sense of self-esteem and increase in decision-making power within the home.
Despite the questions that remain, this new analyses shows us that while the short-term emergency cash assistance programming in Northeast Syria was widely accepted, appreciated, and helpful to meet these basic needs for women, it is simply not enough to meaningfully ensure a sustainable way to meet basic needs, support positive mental health and women’s safety, or build resilience against future economic shocks.
In order to better meet the needs of the populations grappling with conflict, natural disasters, or public health emergencies like the COVID-19 pandemic, governments, donors, and the humanitarian community need to maintain focus on both immediate needs AND invest in the long term recovery landscape through multi-year funding. This can be done through sustainable and equitable income generating activities, alongside other social protection approaches such as gender-based violence prevention and response services. We also need to test how we can bolster the potential positive impact of cash assistance through behavioral insights and recognize the importance of bridging holistic interventions that combine economic well-being, safety, and mental health to support populations grappling with emergencies now and in the future.
