This guide provides an inventory of existing toolkits on incorporating CCA and DDR into development projects and programmes, but notes a lack of focus on designing social protection programmes. To address this gap, the guide outlines the process required to incorporate climate change adaptation and/or disaster risk reduction into social protection programmes. It provides case studies of integration, highlights barriers to integration (institutional, legislative, technical and political) and suggests ways of addressing them. Social protection policymakers could broaden vulnerability assessment, taking into account projected future as well as current vulnerability.
Linking social protection, climate change adaptation and DRR is essential to reduce vulnerability to both current and future risks. A growing number of organisations are committing to integration and the promotion of adaptive social protection, although in practice most case study examples involve two out of the three concepts. Barriers to integration relate to:
- Institutional issues: Social protection, climate change adaptation and disaster risk are often addressed by different ministries. Such barriers can be addressed by producing and communicating evidence of how climate change and disasters can undermine social protection programmes.
- Insufficient policies/legislation: The extent to which policies and legislation exist within the three spheres varies, and the different policies and legislation are not necessarily complementary or streamlined. Such barriers can be addressed by advocacy using empirical results, and by national climate change policies and strategies, which are supporting the integration of climate change and disaster risk into sectoral policies.
- Technical issues: Lack of technical knowledge relating to the three concepts, particularly to climate change projections (which are based on complex models with an array of limitations, and run under various scenarios of future socioeconomic development). Such barriers can be addressed by identifying relevant partners in other government departments, NGOs and/or academia who can contribute perspectives from other domains. NGOs are often innovative in piloting new approaches to vulnerability reduction in small-scale projects, the results of which can, in turn, inform broader programmes.
- Long-term political commitment: Typical government timeframes for decision-making are relatively short – often coinciding with election cycles. Such barriers can be addressed by awareness-raising and advocacy.
Providing a ‘recipe’ for an adaptive social protection programme is difficult: the individual and vulnerability context – both current and projected – need to be taken into account. Social protection policymakers could broaden vulnerability assessment, taking into account projected future as well as current vulnerability. For example, climate change may cause a shift in who remains vulnerable, and to what kinds of exposures and shocks. Social protection planning needs to consider future shocks and stresses and their effects on livelihoods. Altering the fundamental policy goals and objectives of social protection will affect management arrangements and aspects of programme design.
Climate change adaptation and disaster risk reduction policymakers could expand their perspective of risk-sharing so as to consider social protection as a mechanism through which to reduce risk. Current vulnerability reduction can build adaptive capacity for coping with future risks, thereby reducing negative coping strategies.
