GSDRC

Governance, social development, conflict and humanitarian knowledge services

  • Research
    • Governance
      • Democracy & elections
      • Public sector management
      • Security & justice
      • Service delivery
      • State-society relations
      • Supporting economic development
    • Social Development
      • Gender
      • Inequalities & exclusion
      • Poverty & wellbeing
      • Social protection
    • Conflict
      • Conflict analysis
      • Conflict prevention
      • Conflict response
      • Conflict sensitivity
      • Impacts of conflict
      • Peacebuilding
    • Humanitarian Issues
      • Humanitarian financing
      • Humanitarian response
      • Recovery & reconstruction
      • Refugees/IDPs
      • Risk & resilience
    • Development Pressures
      • Climate change
      • Food security
      • Fragility
      • Migration & diaspora
      • Population growth
      • Urbanisation
    • Approaches
      • Complexity & systems thinking
      • Institutions & social norms
      • Theories of change
      • Results-based approaches
      • Rights-based approaches
      • Thinking & working politically
    • Aid Instruments
      • Budget support & SWAps
      • Capacity building
      • Civil society partnerships
      • Multilateral aid
      • Private sector partnerships
      • Technical assistance
    • Monitoring and evaluation
      • Indicators
      • Learning
      • M&E approaches
  • Services
    • Research Helpdesk
    • Professional development
  • News & commentary
  • Publication types
    • Helpdesk reports
    • Topic guides
    • Conflict analyses
    • Literature reviews
    • Professional development packs
    • Working Papers
    • Webinars
    • Covid-19 evidence summaries
  • About us
    • Staff profiles
    • International partnerships
    • Privacy policy
    • Terms and conditions
    • Contact Us
Home»GSDRC Publications»Post-graduation from social protection

Post-graduation from social protection

Helpdesk Report
  • Evie Browne
November 2013

Question

What are the longer-term assessments of social protection graduation programmes telling us about the sustainability of these programmes? Is there evidence of good practice from states offering support to people who have 'graduated'? How can we design social protection programmes so they can most effectively help people become more productive, including by transitioning from informal to formal sector employment?

Summary

This paper reviews the results of social protection graduation programmes. It highlights whether people who leave the programmes are lifted sustainably out of poverty, and what changes they experience in their lives and livelihoods. The first part of the report reviews general lessons about how graduation happens and whether there are any impacts on employment, and the second part of the paper reports the results from longer-term or followup evaluations of graduation programmes.

Key findings from the literature are:

    • Cash or asset transfers alone are not enough. The most successful programmes are complemented with skills training and social support.
    • Nearly all literature notes the existence of structural barriers against graduating out of poverty. Social protection cannot address market failures, environmental shocks, and infrastructure. The state has a role to play in creating an enabling environment.
    • Graduating beneficiaries from one programme into another appears to be a successful approach.
    • Successful graduation may depend on the personal skills and pre-existing assets of the beneficiaries. Experience and understanding in the chosen livelihood strategy is important.
    • Social networks, peer support and confidence have played a strong role in successful graduation. One-to-one mentoring from programme staff has also been helpful.
    • Evidence is mixed on long term effects. Some programmes have had positive long-term impacts, while others have found effects diminishing over time.
    • Education CCTs in general seem not to have had positive effects on employment in the long run. Beneficiaries successfully complete more years of schooling, but this does not translate into better economic opportunities. There is a gap which some suggest the state should fill.
    • Results from Brazil’s Bolsa Família show that the programme does not create dependency and it does not jeopardise entry into the labour market. However, Ethiopia’s PSNP does appear to have some dependency issues.

 

file type icon See Full Report [PDF]

Enquirer:

  • Australian Government

Related Content

Affirmative action around the world Insights from a new dataset (update)
Working Papers
2023
Pathways to Increase Rural Women’s Agency Within Social Protection Programmes
Helpdesk Report
2023
Donor Support for the Human Rights of LGBT+
Helpdesk Report
2021
Interventions to Address Discrimination against LGBTQi Persons
Helpdesk Report
2021

University of Birmingham

Connect with us: Bluesky Linkedin X.com

Outputs supported by DFID are © DFID Crown Copyright 2025; outputs supported by the Australian Government are © Australian Government 2025; and outputs supported by the European Commission are © European Union 2025

We use cookies to remember settings and choices, and to count visitor numbers and usage trends. These cookies do not identify you personally. By using this site you indicate agreement with the use of cookies. For details, click "read more" and see "use of cookies".