How can people’s lives and livelihoods be protected during and after conflict? This paper examines a range of strategies and both state and non-state roles in social protection. In insecure environments, support to non-formal mechanisms provided by civil society may be most effective, as despite their limited capacity they have greater access than formal providers. Broad-based welfare provision in post-conflict environments might avoid the social and political tensions that targeted assistance could create. It is important to be aware of the range of risks against which people require protection. Social protection in situations of conflict and transition relates both to the threat of violence and coercion, and to the consequences of these, including acute impoverishment and social exclusion.
The need for social protection may be particularly acute in the aftermath of hostilities; conflict creates new forms of poverty and social exclusion, particularly among refugees, IDPs and demobilised troops. Loss or alteration of status affects people’s social security, and displaced people, for example, may suffer loss of entitlement through contested property rights and lost identity cards.
In conflict situations and in their aftermath, government services are often absent, and a heavy burden is placed on non-formal service provision by civil society actors – and on international humanitarian mechanisms. Communities also provide support for the most vulnerable.
- Targeted assistance may focus on the social protection needs of particular groups, notably widows, orphans, and people disabled by war or landmines. Targeting arouses resentment among those who are excluded, however, which may create political risks, particularly in post-conflict environments.
- The social protection agenda in conflict or transitional situations may include the restoration of access to basic commodities and services for whole communities, not just for particularly vulnerable households.
- In the aftermath of armed conflict, both the needs for social protection and the scope for providing it may be determined by the nature and duration of the conflict, its effects on people and structures, and the level of insecurity.
- Transition from ‘substitutory’ relief to sustainable service provision is difficult to achieve because of the need to build the capacity of public service providers while continuing to provide essential services.
International agencies must pursue strategies that facilitate transitions in realistic time frames, and should work flexibly to accommodate fluctuating conditions.
- Measures such as vocational training and demobilisation allowances are likely to be essential to successful reintegration of demobilised troops and displaced people, but recovery efforts must include the whole community.
- A focus on social policy in post-conflict states helps to maintain political stability and re-forge the social contract. Investment in social policy may also be important in promoting growth.
- In post-conflict states undergoing political and economic transformation, measures to support job creation should be prioritised. Naqvi, O’Keefe and Bodewig (n.d.) argue for the reform of labour policy and legislation to allow maximum flexibility within the formal labour market while complying with core labour standards, recognising the significance of the informal economy in such contexts. Coordination of donor policy and programming is essential to achieve these ends. So too are pubic awareness campaigns, informing people of their entitlements, managing expectations, and dispelling myths of favouritism.
