2012年-世界发展银行全球_Mozambique_Social_Protection_Assessment_214页_4mb

Social Protection Assessment in Mozambique

Core Content

This document presents a comprehensive review of the social protection system in Mozambique, focusing on the effectiveness and coverage of social assistance programs and public expenditures. It outlines the key challenges and recommendations for strengthening the system to better support vulnerable populations and reduce poverty and food insecurity.

Main Purpose

The study aims to assist the Government of Mozambique in the implementation and consolidation of the National Basic Social Security Strategy (ENSSB) by analyzing:

• The adequacy of the social protection system in meeting the needs of vulnerable groups.
• The cost-effectiveness of existing programs.
• The responsiveness of the system to emerging vulnerabilities.
• Whether the range of existing programs is appropriate for the country's needs.

The analysis is organized around a life-cycle (or life-course) framework to better understand the risks and how they affect different groups across their life stages.

Key Findings

1. Economic and Social Context

• Mozambique's economy grew at an average of 7.5% annually from 1992 to 2009.
• Poverty rates fell from over 70% to around 60% between 1996 and 2003, but progress has slowed due to less inclusive growth.
• Over half of the population remains poor, and food constitutes more than two-thirds of the average consumption of poor households.
• Approximately 20% of the population is food-insecure, and 44% of children under 5 are chronically malnourished.
• Poor households are highly exposed to both seasonal (e.g., lean season) and non-seasonal (e.g., cyclones, floods) shocks.

2. Vulnerable Groups and Risks

• Poor families with children are not adequately supported.
• Youth lack targeted programs.
• Subsistence farmers and urban unemployed are not properly protected against recurrent shocks.
• Vulnerable groups include:
  • Children not in school.
  • Orphans and vulnerable children (OVC).
  • Elderly without pensions.
  • People with HIV/AIDS.
  • Individuals in the informal sector and subsistence farming.

3. Social Protection System Overview

• The system is still in development and faces significant gaps, fragmentation, and duplication.
• Most social protection spending is directed towards untargeted subsidies and pensions that benefit only a small group.
• The National Basic Social Security Strategy (ENSSB) was approved in 2010 and aims to extend coverage to the poor and vulnerable.

Program Coverage and Generosity

4. Program Coverage

• Basic Social Security accounts for 44% of total social protection spending.
• Compulsory Social Security accounts for 56% of spending (excluding subsidies).
• PSA (Food Subsidy Program) has low coverage and generosity, only covering 24% of the food needs of the poorest families.
• INSS (Social Security Institute) covers less than 5% of the labor force and 88% of elderly have no pension.
• PASD (Direct Social Support Program) and PSA have low targeting accuracy, with benefits often reaching better-off households instead of the neediest.

5. Program Gaps and Challenges

• There are significant gaps in support for:
  • Poor families with children.
  • Youth at risk.
  • Seasonal agricultural workers.
  • Urban unemployed.
• Fragmentation and duplication exist across programs, especially in the areas of:
  • Youth and training.
  • Pension systems (MOF and INSS).
  • Health and education.
• Lack of coordination between government institutions, NGOs, and other civil society organizations leads to inefficiencies and duplication of efforts.

6. Cost-Effectiveness and Administrative Costs

• Many programs have low cost-effectiveness due to poor targeting and high administrative costs.
• PSA, PGR, and PBST have high administrative costs relative to their impact.
• Administrative costs for INAS programs are around 20-30% of total program costs, which is relatively high compared to other countries.

Institutional and Coordination Issues

7. Institutional Weaknesses

• MMAS (Ministry of Women and Social Action) and INAS (National Institute of Social Action) require institutional strengthening to implement the ENSSB effectively.
• There is a lack of coordination between different sectors and between government and non-government actors.
• At the local level, the roles of various actors are often unclear, leading to inefficiencies in program delivery.

8. Monitoring and Evaluation

• Despite progress in developing M&E systems, there are still weaknesses due to the variety of methodologies and lack of standardization.
• Three distinct systems exist at the central level for monitoring:
  • The Economic and Social Plan (PES).
  • The National Action Plan for Absolute Poverty Reduction (PARPA).
  • Sector Strategic Plans.
• The balance do PES is the most entrenched system and serves as a major source of data for this study.

Recommendations

9. Key Recommendations

• Develop effective mechanisms to enhance the impact of social protection on poverty reduction.
• Rationalize public expenditures while addressing existing program gaps.
• Strengthen institutional arrangements and improve coordination between sectors and actors.
• Improve targeting and selection mechanisms to ensure benefits reach the most vulnerable.
• Enhance cost-effectiveness by reducing administrative costs and improving program design.
• Promote a culture of results-based management and invest in information systems and staff training.

Conclusion

Mozambique's social protection system is still in its early stages of development and requires substantial improvements to better serve the needs of vulnerable populations. The system is fragmented, inefficient, and under-targeted, with a significant portion of resources allocated to untargeted subsidies and pensions. A gradual and coordinated approach is recommended to implement the ENSSB and build a more effective and sustainable social protection system.

Key Information

• Currency Unit: Metical (MT)
• Exchange Rate (2010): 1 US$ = 33.2 MT
• Key Programs:
  • PSA (Food Subsidy Program)
  • PASD (Direct Social Support Program)
  • PBST (Social Benefit for Work Program)
  • PGR (Income Generation Program)
  • INSS (Social Security Institute)
• Key Institutions:
  • MMAS (Ministry of Women and Social Action)
  • INAS (National Institute of Social Action)
  • MOF (Ministry of Finance)
  • MISAU (Ministry of Health)
  • ME (Ministry of Education)

Summary of the Assessment

This assessment provides a critical foundation for improving Mozambique's social protection system and aligns with the broader goal of promoting poverty reduction and social inclusion in the region.