Does social protection reach those left behind: empirical evidence from Botswana using multidimensional poverty approaches
Khaufelo Raymond LekobaneGiel Tona Human and Social Development Unit,Botswana Institute for Development Policy Analysis (BIDPA),Gaborone,Botswanab Institute of Development Studies,University of Sussex,Brighton,UKDr Khaufelo Raymond Lekobane is a Research Fellow at the Botswana Institute for Development Policy Analysis (BIDPA) in the Human and Social Development Unit. He holds a PhD in Development Studies from the University of Sussex,Institute of Development Studies (IDS). Dr Lekobane is equipped with both quantitative and qualitative skills. His research interest include multidimensional poverty,child (multidimensional) poverty,welfare and inequality,food security,disability,and the role of public policy (social protection) on poverty eradication.Dr Giel Ton is a Research Fellow at the Institute of Development Studies (IDS) and Co-Director of the Centre for Development Impact. He promotes contribution analysis as an overarching approach to impact evaluation and learning development policy practice. His research is focused on interventions relating to institutional arrangements and collective action in agricultural value chains,such as contract farming,collective marketing,and certification. His research work is on cash transfers for social protection and wage improvement.
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/19439342.2024.2355635
2024-05-20
Journal of Development Effectiveness
Abstract:Social protection policies are important for advancing the United Nations 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development, especially the call to leave no one behind. We employ multidimensional poverty measures to identify those left behind. Using data from the 2015/16 Botswana Multi-Topic Household Survey, this study compares the targeting performance of selected social assistance programmes according to: (a) the specific programme eligibility criteria; (b) the monetary poverty measure; and (c) the multidimensional poverty index. The overall results reveal high inclusion and exclusion error rates among most programmes, indicating that they perform poorly in reaching their intended beneficiaries. The results also reveal high under-coverage rates irrespective of the poverty measure used. However, when the programmes are ranked according to leakage rates, the results differ across the two poverty measures. Relying on the monetary poverty measure alone may send inadequate information to policymakers tasked with reforming Botswana's national social protection policy.
development studies