Pakistan Policy Note—Consolidating Social Protection 79578 Pakistan Policy Note 11 Iftikhar Malik and Lucian Pop 1 Consolidating Social Protection J une 2 0 1 3 Pakistan has taken steps to deliver social protection Nutrition Survey shows food insecurity to be a services, including unanimously passing the Benazir daily reality for millions: nearly 30 percent of Income Support Programme Act in 2010, and setting households experience food insecurity with up systems for targeted cash transfers to the poor. Such either moderate or severe hunger (Aga Khan measures are critical in a country with endemic pov- University, Pakistan Medical Research Council, erty, significant food insecurity, low education, and and Ministry of Health 2011). Moreover, any poor health outcomes. But more efforts are needed, income shock further increases their poverty, including bringing the federal and provincial govern- undermining their human development.1 Most ments together as partners in social protection service have no savings or back-up resources to stop delivery, especially in the new decentralized context them falling into destitution. since the 18th Amendment to the constitution was approved in 2010. A national social protection frame- To address these challenges, the government has work is to be established, and its overarching objective changed the profile of social protection markedly should be a technically sound and financially viable in the past five years. In June 2007, the Plan- system that provides appropriate, adequate, and pre- ning Commission launched a National Social dictable benefits to the target population. To meet this Protection Strategy (NSPS), approved by the objective, policy makers can ensure that the framework Federal Cabinet (Government of Pakistan is coherent between federal and provincial authorities, 2007). The strategy reviewed social protection harmonize systems for design and delivery of social initiatives, concluding that Pakistan’s safety THE WORLD BANK GROUP SOUTH ASIA REGION protection within that framework, ensure financing net developed largely as a series of ad hoc for social protection based on affordability and effi- responses to problems thrown up by particular ciency principles, and enable effective post­ disaster circumstances, and thus it contains duplicat- early recovery cash transfers as part of the future disas- ing and overlapping programs (Government of ter-response action plan. Pakistan 2007). The NSPS identified gaps and shortcomings and set out a more comprehen- Poverty in Pakistan is endemic, alongside signifi- sive approach to social protection for the coun- cant food insecurity, low education, and poor health try, with particular focus on safety nets. In outcomes. The economy has struggled in recent 2008, with the immediate objective to cushion years during the global economic downturn, the adverse impact of the food, fuel, and finan- with difficulties exacerbated by internal secu- cial crises on the poor, the federal govern- rity problems and natural disasters. Steep price ment launched the Benazir Income Support inflation for basic commodities has sharply Programme (BISP), a national cash transfer lifted the cost of living. The poor suffer most program, by committing PRs  34 billion. The from these shocks, and many of the poorest program was supported by legal, institutional, cannot meet their immediate needs for food, and administrative reforms to respond to the basic education, or health. The 2011 National challenges identified by the NSPS. Pakistan Policy Note—Consolidating Social Protection This paradigm shift resulted in a large increase in BISP undertook a national household cen- pro-poor social protection spending. From 2006/07 sus to establish an objectively verifiable wel- to 2011/12, pro-poor social protection expendi- fare ranking of households to target its safety ture (excluding universal subsidies)2 rose almost nets and other pro-poor interventions. This fivefold from 0.16  percent of GDP to 0.79  per- independently administered census, using a cent, approaching the Poverty Reduction Strat- poverty scorecard3 and supported by various egy Paper II target of 0.9 percent (Government control and accountability processes, covered of Pakistan 2009). This increase included heavy more than 27 million households and created 2 spending on social assistance cash transfers a socioeconomic national poverty registry. The targeted to the poorest and disaster relief. In program is better targeted than other social 2011/12, BISP expenditures represented 0.25 per- assistance programs in Pakistan, such as par- cent of GDP, while expenditures for disaster relief liamentarian selection at the start of the BISP, were 0.40 percent of GDP. It represents strong evi- Bait-ul-Mal, and Zakat (Figure 1). dence of government intention to mitigate risks of shocks to the poorest and support pro-poor The national cash transfer program under the BISP social protection to reduce income inequality. compares well with international best practice for design and administration of social assistance cash trans- The country’s safety net has been modernized. The fer programs. Alongside more transparent and national cash transfer program under the BISP efficient targeting, there were process improve- now serves as the country’s main safety net mech- ments including a computerized management anism to provide minimum income support to information and grievance redress system, an female representatives of extremely poor fami- online complaints system, and other third-party lies (Box 1). The program aimed to contribute mechanisms for spot checks, performance audits to the redistributive goals of the federal govern- and a multiyear impact evaluation. New technol- ment. It recognized that regular and predictable ogy is used for payments to reduce the potential cash assistance for the poorest households would for fraud and corruption. Moreover, the BISP provide a reliable source of supplementary Act 2010 embraced a number of good principles income, and it aimed to build the foundation of governance and accountability in delivering for moving from the essential basic safety net to social protection. For instance, the members of coherent social protection services that can help the board are appointed from the government them to graduate out of poverty. The program and nongovernmental organizations with equal contributed significantly to the country’s safety representation (Government of Pakistan 2010a). net modernization by introducing an objective targeting method and improving the administra- Coverage of the poor has increased. The families tion and governance of cash transfer programs. eligible for the safety net cash transfers under the BISP make up the poorest 21 percent of the BISP beneficiaries are selected through an objective country’s population. They receive a monthly targeting mechanism. From 2009 to 2012, the cash transfer of PRs 1,000 (around $10), which Box Impact of paying cash to women 1 Giving cash to women directly increases their bargaining power within the family, and when women have greater power to make decisions, the household increases its investment in human development. Studies endorse this gender-differentiated impact in Pakistan. Data from the Pakistan Social and Living Standards Measurement survey show that when Pakistani women have more decision-making power, households spend significantly more on things that women value, including nutrition and child education (particularly for girls), and that women make greater use of reproductive health ser- vices. In addition, when a woman acquires a Computerized National Identity Card, she gets other rights of a citizen (voting, the option to open a bank account, and the like). From 2009 to 2012, more than 15 million female citizens obtained a computerized identity card, largely due to collaboration with the Benazir Income Support Programme. Source: World Bank 2011a,b; National Database and Registration Authority. Distribution of benefits (targeting accuracy) by quintile of household consumption Figure per adult equivalent 1 Benazir Income Support Programme Bait-ul-Maal FSP Zakat 50 40 30 Percent 20 3 10 0 Poorest Second Middle Fourth Richest quintile quintile quintile quintile quintile Note: Quintiles are defined by household consumption per adult equivalent. Source: World Bank 2013; Benazir Income Support Programme statistics represent simulations of the poverty scorecard using the Pakistan Social and Living Standards Measurement Survey 2007/08. Bait-ul-Maal and Zakat statistics are from World Bank (2007). Figure Anticipated and current beneficiaries of monthly cash assistance, March 2013 2 Families identi ed as eligible Families currently receiving bene t 3 2 Millions 1 0 Azad Jammu Balochistan Federally Gilgit– Khyber Punjab Sindh and Kashmir Administered Baltistan Pakhtunkhwa Tribal Areas Source: BISP 2012b. is paid quarterly. The benefit amount was set in that the cash is spent on basic and pressing needs 2008 to provide income support for basic needs (World Bank 2010b). A recent study showed that (that is, consumption smoothing). This small 78 percent of the beneficiaries used their cash benefit does not discourage family members for food, while the next most common expendi- from working. By the end of 2012, as the pro- ture was on health (15 percent; ICF GHK 2012). gram rolled out across all provinces and regions, 4.3 million women of the poorest families were The government recently introduced measures on pro- receiving such cash transfers. As eligible women moting better health and education for the poorest. obtain Computerized National Identity Cards Many children of the poorest families do not (CNICs) and register for payments, the number attend primary school (Figure  3). The BISP of eligible beneficiaries is expected to rise to recently launched Waseela-e-Taleem to pro- more than 7 million families (the most poor and vide supplementary monthly cash payments of vulnerable in the ­ country—Figure 2). Detailed PRs 200 a month per child, over and above the evidence of the overall impact of cash transfers PRs  1,000 received by BISP beneficiary fami- will be available later in 2013 through the impact lies, but only if the primary school–age child evaluation, although initial assessments suggest enrolls and attends school (an example of a Pakistan Policy Note—Consolidating Social Protection Gender-disaggregated percentage of children (ages 5–12) not attending school Figure (poorest 21 percent of population) 3 Girls Boys 100 75 Percent 50 4 25 0 Punjab Sindh Balochistan Khyber Gilgit– Azad Jammu Federally Islamabad Pakhtunkhwa Baltistan and Kashmir Administered Capital Tribal Areas Territory Source: BISP 2012a. coresponsibility cash transfer).4 This will help poor and vulnerable in provinces with very dif- in further supporting household welfare and in ferent capacities and financial resources. Provin- addressing the intergenerational cycle of pov- cial buy-in to a dynamic and diversified social erty. Waseela-e-Taleem is being piloted in five protection system is essential. Provinces need to districts in collaboration with the provincial edu- prioritize and invest in the various social protec- cation authorities who will ensure the availability tion interventions (social insurance, active labor of schools and monitor student attendance. The market programs, social welfare services) if they federal government has publicly committed to are to achieve the desired sector outcomes. scale up this program to reach 3  million chil- dren by 2015/16. At the same time, the BISP is Fragmentation and inconsistent administration trialing a health insurance initiative, Waseela-e- practices across social protection programs Sehat, in Faisalabad District and plans to expand it by adjusting the design and implementation Social protection programs are still fragmented and arrangements after evaluation of the trial. uncoordinated. Since 2008, the federal govern- ment has taken some good steps to meet its Policy Challenges constitutional responsibility to help the poorest with a redistribution mechanism. But there is Social protection system after currently no coherent social protection system, the 18th Amendment just numerous disparate and uncoordinated programs operated by different ministries and The roles and responsibilities of the federal and pro- departments at the federal and provincial lev- vincial governments in social protection need to be els (Kardar 2013). Programs set up to address clarified, reflecting the institutional and fiscal land- specific problems remain ad hoc, reactive, iso- scape after the 18th Amendment.5 The federal and lated, and fragmented. Such programs include provincial authorities share no understanding the initiatives of Pakistan Bait-ul-Maal; Zakat; of their joint roles in policy, design, implemen- labor welfare programs; Rozgar initiatives in tation, and financing of social protection. Steps Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, Sindh, and Punjab; in this direction are especially important as school stipends in some provinces as part of social protection is not explicitly addressed in education reform programs; stipends for skills the constitution. In particular, strategic federal development programs; and special purpose responsibilities and functions need clarification, technical and vocational training centers.6 as does how they would be integrated with the There is a need to avoid program overlap and provincial programs to achieve equity for the promote synergies between interventions. Administration practices across social assistance pro- on electricity, petroleum products, fertilizers grams are inconsistent. But many such programs (agricultural input), wheat (agricultural out- suffer from lack of objective and transpar- put), and utility stores (especially for ghee and ent beneficiary targeting and have unreliable edible oil; Government of Pakistan 2011c,d). and irregular systems for delivering benefits (Kardar 2013). Weak administration wastes Although inclusion of spending on universal sub- resources and generates a poor profile among sidies in the Poverty Reduction Strategy Paper may the public, which has little appreciation of the suggest that they are “pro-poor,� in practice the poor- benefits of social protection. est benefit the least from them. The main benefi- 5 ciaries of electricity subsidies, which constitute Financing social protection about 80 percent of total subsidies in Pakistan, are in the richest quintile of the population, The government still devotes much social protec- while the poorest quintile benefits from only tion spending on universal subsidies, which are about 10 percent of the subsidy (Figure 5). regressive and thus inefficient as a social protection mechanism. In recent years, the federal govern- Weak institutional capacity for early ment has tried to offset inflation with untar- recovery disaster response geted (universal) subsidies. Since 2006/07, untargeted subsidies have recorded inordinate Institutional capacity is insufficient for effective social increases relative to trend gains in health, edu- protection response to disasters. Pakistan is prone to cation, and social protection programs other disasters, such as earthquakes, floods, and con- than subsidies (Figure 4). In the severely con- flict-related violence. Despite recent good experi- strained fiscal environment, the “unproductive ence in providing social protection through cash expenses� on such subsidies represent a direct transfers to those hit by disasters, institutional cost to the country’s human development and a capacity needs to be built to provide timely early major constraint to poverty reduction (Govern- recovery support in future disasters (Box 2). ment of Pakistan 2011c). In 2011/12, more than 70 percent of what are defined as social protec- After the response to the 2010 floods, the federal govern- tion outlays were untargeted subsidies, and just ment prepared a National Future Disaster Response 0.79 percent of GDP went to social assistance Action Plan (FDRAP) in consultation with provincial programs targeted to the poor.7 Untargeted authorities to outline how cash transfers could be best subsidies were equivalent to almost 3 percent operationalized in case of future disasters (Govern- of GDP, despite the government’s stated policy ment of Pakistan 2011b). The plan consolidates to move from “hefty subsidies� such as those international best practice and Pakistan’s own Figure Human development and subsidies, 2006/07–2011/12 4 Health Education Social assistance and social security Untargeted subsidies 600 400 PRs million 200 0 2006/07 2007/08 2008/09 2009/10 2010/11 2011/12 Source: Government of Pakistan various years; authors’ calculations. Pakistan Policy Note—Consolidating Social Protection Figure Proportion of benefits received for electricity subsidy, March 2008 and March 2011 5 2008 2011 40 30 Percent 20 6 10 0 Poorest Second Middle Fourth Richest quintile quintile quintile quintile quintile Source: Trimble, Yoshida, and Saqib 2011. Box Citizens’ Damage Compensation Programme 2 The government’s flood-response program after the devastating 2010 floods provided immediate cash assistance of PRs 20,000 to around 1.7 million families with further support of PRs 40,000 to more than 1.2 million households for early recovery. The cash transfers were designed to expand choice and empower citizens to prioritize their own needs for relief and recovery. With the federal and provincial governments, multidonor support provided the requisite funds for the second phase (PRs 40,000 per affected household) through improved targeting, third-party verification of targeting, beneficiary communication, and enhanced griev- ance redress. The program primarily targeted heads of households, with additional targeting of female- and disabled-headed families.1 An initial assessment showed that the largest uses of the cash transfers were food, repair of housing, medicines, and debt repay- ment. An independent impact assessment is under way and will report with more evidence later in 2013. 1. In the recovery phase, enhanced targeting resulted in around 18 percent of beneficiaries being female, a significant increase compared with the 8 percent female beneficiaries of the emergency phase. Source: Government of Pakistan 2010b, 2011a. experience, and has been approved by the gov- protection interventions to distinguish the dif- ernment. Adequate capacity is lacking, however, ferent types of interventions, objectives, and and the FDRAP notes that the key to implement- target groups. It would need to the approval ing effective cash transfers for early recovery is of the competent authorities (the Council of to ensure adequate capacities at all levels, from Common Interest or the Executive Commit- the federal government down to the districts. tee of the National Economic Council) when Although endorsed and published, the FDRAP finalized. The Planning Commission can map has not yet been operationalized; in particular, federal, provincial, and regional interventions the institutional capacity building is still pending. to aid discussions on the framework. Such a framework would help reduce fragmentation Policy Recommendations and program overlap. The following outline format could be considered, drawn from inter- Establish a national social protection framework national practices (Table 1). that harmonizes federal and provincial policies and programs and clarifies the roles and responsibilities Consultations among federal and provincial authori- of federal and provincial governments ties are necessary to establish a national social pro- tection framework owned by all concerned. These Establishing a national social protection framework, would help clarify institutional roles, possible agreed on between federal and provincial authorities, sharing of financing responsibilities, and a is essential for an effective and efficient social protec- complementary program of interventions tion system. The framework would classify social between federal and provincial governments. Table Outline format for a national social protection framework 1 Intervention type Description Examples from Pakistana Social assistance (addressing Social safety net: Cash or in-kind transfers Benazir Income Support Programme, Pakistan poverty or vulnerability) Unconditional cash transfers: Usually target the poor Bait-ul-Maal, Zakat, Food Support Program Coresponsibility cash transfers: Promote human Waseela-e-Taleem, Punjab Secondary School Stipend development. Payments depend on recipients fulfilling Program, Zakat educational vouchers certain conditions, such as children attending school, mothers and children receiving primary health care services. Not necessarily poverty targeted Social care services: Bait-ul-Maal, “Sweet Homes,� many of the Social Welfare Department programs 7 Target particular groups such as disabled people and orphans. Usually poverty targeted Disaster relief: Cash or in-kind transfers Citizens’ Damage Compensation Program, cash Target those affected by disaster transfers for internally displaced persons Subsidies: Reduce costs of basic goods or services. Untargeted subsidies on petroleum products, fertilizers, Most efficient when targeted, usually the poorest wheat, utility stores, and bread 20–40 percent Social security Such contributory social insurance programs mitigate risk Waseela-e-Sehat, Punjab pension fund, Khyber from old age, unemployment, and work injuries. Examples Pakhtunkhwa pension fund, pensions for federal and are old-age pensions and health insurance provincial government employees Employment promotion and labor Support access to productive work such as skills training Waseela-e-Rozgar, Waseela-e-Haq, labor welfare market programsb and apprenticeships. May have a specific target group, programs like youth. Not necessarily poverty targeted a. Not an exhaustive list. b. More details of labor market interventions, including promoting access to the labor market through skills training, apprenticeships, minimum labor standards, and decent work, are covered in a separate policy paper. Source: Authors’ compilation. Under the framework, the provincial and national safety net could be a fixed percent of regional governments may consider establish- GDP, and the provincial governments could ing their own social protection authorities, to top up the contribution. Flexibility in select- liaise with a federal social protection authority. ing the program mix will enable provincial There are good international examples of how governments to adopt the programs best suited different levels of government can work effec- to their realities. Cofinancing will allow both tively in a coordinated manner under a coher- levels of government to receive public acknowl- ent social protection framework (Box 3). edgment for their efforts and will establish shared program ownership. To encourage a dynamic, diversified, sustainable, and equitable social protection system, the prag- Encourage wider use of the matic way forward would be to establish cofinancing national poverty registry arrangements through federal–provincial dialogue with a partnership approach. For example, the The national poverty registry could be used more often federal government’s contribution to the basic for targeting pro-poor social protection and disaster Box Decentralized operations in Brazil 3 Brazil’s Bolsa Familia Program is a health and education coresponsibility cash transfer program. It is the largest program of its type in a developing country, implemented in a decentralized manner. The Bolsa Familia Program covers more than 11.2 million house- holds, with 94 percent of the transfers reaching the two poorest quintiles. The program is managed at the federal level by the Ministry of Social Development and implemented by a number of different agencies at all levels of government. The 5,564 constitutionally independent municipalities play various roles in executing the program, including cofinancing, registering potential beneficiaries, monitoring education and health conditions, and prioritizing program benefi- ciaries for other complementary services. In a highly fiscally decentralized state structure, a performance based management mechanism has been developed under the program to incentivize better quality program execution at the municipal level. Source: Lindert and others 2007. Pakistan Policy Note—Consolidating Social Protection response, as well as programs in health, education, A coherent national CNIC-based management infor- and other social sectors. The government needs mation system is one tool to improve coordination to encourage the use of the national registry and governance of programs, including monitoring, as the unified database for pro-poor programs tracking, and impact assessment. The national pov- and to ensure that household poverty data erty registry is linked to the National Database are freely available to provincial government and Registration Authority’s (NADRA) CNIC departments and others. The Planning Com- database and provides a good mechanism for mission could facilitate the dialogue between monitoring beneficiaries to ensure essential 8 federal and provincial authorities on identify- synergies and avoid duplication among various ing the most appropriate institution to be the programs. The Planning Commission and pro- permanent custodian of the registry. The insti- vincial planning and development departments tution should be granted a mandate to manage should encourage all agencies to link social development data. It should have the capacity protection benefits to the beneficiary’s CNIC, to ensure the integrity of the database and to and together they should maintain a national update it as necessary. And it should be tasked beneficiary database of social protection inter- to help others use the database. To strengthen ventions. The programs, with support from the analytical underpinning of the registry and NADRA, could use smart identity cards and a recertification of existing beneficiaries, the digital or e-platform to deliver social protec- government needs to encourage the Federal tion services or payments. The system, linked Bureau of Statistics to include a social protec- to the CNIC poverty registry, could swiftly iden- tion module in the Pakistan Social and Living tify eligible beneficiaries and on biometric veri- Standards Measurement (PSLM) survey.8 fication could activate the service or payment.9 Potentially, any ministry or department, federal Strengthen administration and monitoring or provincial, could use the cards or platform of social protection programs for targeting and delivering their services (with control and accountability mechanisms). Minimum standards need to be set for all social protection programs at the federal, provincial, and Phase out universal subsidies to sustain regional levels. Consensus needs to be built financing of pro-poor social protection with provincial governments on program governance and on performance standards Continuing to finance social protection programs for all aspects of social protection based on is critical for sustaining the reform momentum and good experience in Pakistan and elsewhere. achieving the desired outcomes. Figure 6 attempts Outcomes would encompass protocols for tar- to estimate the expenditure required to meet geting, data management, beneficiary com- even the minimum commitments of the munication, grievance redress, and the like, planned poverty-targeted cash transfers under using the experience of the national safety net the BISP. (It presents estimates only and aims program. to give an idea of rough scale; it is based on the planned BISP rollout strategy, with esti- All social protection programs should be monitored mates of administrative costs.) In addition regularly and evaluated. Within a shared national to the costs implied by the full roll-out of the social protection framework, programs can be national safety net, the government needs to evaluated individually or as coordinated opera- consider maintaining the purchasing power of tions for their impact on poverty, human devel- benefits, which was seriously eroded by infla- opment, economic growth, and public welfare. tion over the last four years. Moreover, other Federal and provincial governments should programs would also need financing, requir- disseminate evaluation findings to improve ing federal and provincial governments to practice and inform policy, allowing programs commit fiscal resources to achieve the social from one part of the country to be properly protection objectives. Such a budgetary effort understood, results shared, and scaled up by will be unsustainable if fiscal room is not others where appropriate. created. Benazir Income Support Programme expenditure to date and future anticipated annual Figure expenditures, 2008/09–2015/16 6 Monthly cash transfer (to date) Monthly cash transfer (anticipated, increasing to cover 7 million children) Coresponsibility cash transfer (anticipated, increasing to cover 3 million children) 100 75 PRs billion 9 50 25 0 2008/09 2009/10 2010/11 2011/12 2012/13 2013/14 2014/15 2015/16 Source: BISP various years; authors’ calculations. Cutting untargeted subsidies would be one option to systems, identification of areas and definition arrange the necessary financing. By 2011/12, untar- of processes for investments from the fund, geted subsidies had risen to nearly PRs  600 and definition of arrangements for monitoring billion, far in excess of current expenditure and evaluating the results through the fund’s and predicted requirements of social protec- investments. tion (see Figure 5). Benefit incidence analysis of these untargeted subsidies could inform Improve postdisaster early policy makers about the impact on different recovery support mechanism income groups; consequent losses to the dif- ferent groups if subsidies were cut; and options The FDRAP needs to be operationalized so that vic- for redirecting expenditure to improve impact. tims of future disasters receive rapid and appropriate Similar analytical work has been carried out cash transfers to support their early recovery. This recently in Morocco and Tunisia as the first would require financial and human resources step to reducing untargeted subsidies. Subsidy from federal and provincial authorities. Prov- reform was undertaken to finance social pro- inces and regions should consider the FDRAP tection in Indonesia in 2005 (Box 4). when preparing their disaster response action plans. All the key players—Cabinet Division, The government could also consider establishing NADR A, National Disaster Management and operationalizing the Income Support Fund as Authority, provincial disaster management provided in the BISP Act 2010, to attract funds authorities, and district authorities—need to from local and international sources. This move maintain at least a skeleton capacity for postdi- would require rules and procedures to capital- saster early recovery support to affected fami- ize the fund, governance and accountability lies in line with FDRAP. Box Indonesia switches finance from fuel subsidies to social protection 4 In 2005, Indonesia removed a regressive universal fuel subsidy and, with the savings, financed new targeted social safety net programs. An unconditional cash transfer of $10 a month, much more than the increase in energy costs, reached more than 19 million house- holds. The cash transfer cost 0.8 percent of GDP versus the fuel subsidy’s cost of 3.5 percent. Before the transfers were made, each household was given a proxy means test. Recipients were issued with smart cards, and transfers delivered through the post office system. By covering the poorest 40 percent of the population, the program also helped gain acquiescence to the fuel price rise from the less poor. Source: Handayani and Buckley 2009; World Bank forthcoming. Pakistan Policy Note—Consolidating Social Protection Notes monitoring social protection program per- This note benefited greatly from the inputs formance regularly, including capturing provided by Alison Barrett, Uzma Basin, the contribution to the well-being of the Quanita Ali Khan, and Shirin Gul Sadozai. ­ poor. 1. The Pakistan Social and Living Stan- 9. The platform would support online pro- dards Measurement Survey 2008–10 panel cessing capability and real-time reconcili- revealed that around 25 percent of house- ation of transactions linking the central holds reported at least one idiosyncratic processing unit to all partner agencies shock over the previous two years. (franchises) and commercial banks. For 10 2. Based on the Poverty Reduction Strategy cash disbursements, the smart cards Paper classification of “Social Assistance would operate dial-up or GPRS-based POS and Social Security.� According to the Pov- machines and ATMs across the country. erty Reduction Strategy Paper, the following programs fall under the “pro-poor� social References protection spending: subsidies, social secu- Aga Khan University, Pakistan Medical Research rity and welfare, Benazir Income Support Council, and Ministry of Health. 2011. “Paki- Programme, Pakistan Bait–ul–Maal, Food stan National Nutrition Survey Report 2011.� Support Programme, natural calamities Government of Pakistan, Islamabad. and other disasters, and low-cost housing. BISP (Benazir Income Support Programme). 3. The poverty scorecard is a measure of 2012a. “Progress Report, December.� Islamabad. household assets and composition. The ———. 2012b. “Progress Report, June.� score is correlated directly using PSLM Islamabad. data on household consumption. The use ———. Various years. “Progress Reports.� of such scorecards is globally accepted best Islamabad. practice, known as a proxy means test. Government of Pakistan. 2007. “National Social 4. There will be no gender-based priority Protection Strategy.� Planning Commission, for inclusion of girls into the program. Islamabad. The requirement for families to enroll ———. 2009. “Pakistan: Poverty Reduc- the youngest three children is intended to tion Strategy Paper II.� Finance Division, ensure the inclusion of girls just like boys. Islamabad. 5. The 18th Amendment has induced struc- ———. 2010a. “Benazir Income Support Pro- tural changes that guide and redefine the gramme Act 2010.� Islamabad. architecture of governance in the country ———. 2010b. “Memorandum of Understand- through the devolution to the provinces ing on Cash Transfers.� Signed between Cab- of all shared and overlapping responsibili- inet Division and World Bank, Islamabad, ties, particularly those of economic and November 26, 2010. social services. See Kardar (2013) for more ———. 2011a. “Memorandum of Understand- detailed discussion of how this could relate ing by and among the Islamic Republic of to social protection. Pakistan and the International Development 6. For more detailed information, see Gov- Association and the United States of America ernment of Pakistan (2007), World Bank and Additional International Development (2013), Kardar (2013), and work being Partners for the Joint Support to the Second carried out by the Planning Commis- Phase of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan’s sion to map current social protection Citizen’s Damage Compensation Program as interventions. of 9 June 2011.� Islamabad. 7. This total includes disaster relief spending ———. 2011b. Action Plan for Early Recovery after the 2010 and 2011 floods (0.4 percent in Future Disasters (through Cash Trans- of GDP in 2011/12) and BISP spending fers). Cabinet Division. Islamabad. (0.25 percent of GDP). ———. 2011c. “FY2011/12 Mid-Year Progress 8. The inclusion of a social protection mod- Report.� PRSP Secretariat, Finance Division. ule in the PSLM survey is essential for Islamabad. ———. 2011d. “PRSP–II Period Progress Tariffs and Subsidies in Pakistan� Report Report FY 2008/09–FY 2010/11.� Ministry of 62971-PK. World Bank, Washington, DC. Finance, Islamabad. World Bank. 2007. “Social Protection in Paki- ———. Various years. “PRSP Progress Reports.� stan: Managing Household Risks and Vulner- Islamabad. ability.� Washington, DC. Handayani, Sri Wening, and Clifford Buckley, ———. 2010. “2009 BISP Beneficiary Survey eds. 2009. Social Assistance and Conditional Report.� Washington, DC. Cash Transfers: The Proceedings of the Regional ———. 2011a. “Women’s Decision Making and Workshop. Tunis: African Development Bank. Human Development in Pakistan—Applica- 11 ICF GHK. 2012. “Request for Expression of tions for BISP.� South Asia Human Devel- Interest: Financial Inclusion and Literacy opment, Pakistan Social Protection Policy Outcomes of Cash Transfers through the Notes. Washington, DC. Banking System in Pakistan: Survey and Ben- ———. 2011b. “Empowering Women through eficiary Assessment.� Final Report. London. BISP: The Effect of Women’s Decision Mak- Kardar, S. 2013. “Social Protection and Consti- ing Power on Reproductive Health Services tutional Reform in Pakistan: Implications of Uptake in Pakistan.� South Asia Human the 18th Amendment.� World Bank, Wash- Development, Pakistan Social Protection ington, DC. Policy Notes. Washington, DC. Lindert, Kathy, Anja Linder, Jason Hobbs, and ———. 2013. “Pakistan: Towards an Integrated Bénédicte de la Briere. 2007. “The Nuts National Safety Net System: Assisting Poor and Bolts of Brazil’s Bolsa Familia Program: and Vulnerable Households: An Analysis of Implementing Conditional Cash Transfers in Pakistan’s Main Cash Transfer Program.� a Decentralized Context.� Social Protection Report 66421-PK. Washington, DC. Discussion Paper 0759, World Bank, Wash- ———. Forthcoming. “Implementing Energy ington, DC. Subsidy Reforms: Evidence from Case Stud- Trimble, Chris, Nobuo Yoshida, and Moham- ies.� Washington, DC. mad Saqib. 2011. “Rethinking Electricity © 2013 The International Bank for Reconstruction and Development/THE WORLD BANK 1818 H Street NW Washington, DC 20433 USA All rights reserved This report was prepared by the staff of the South Asia Region. The findings, interpretations, and conclusions expressed herein are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of the World Bank’s Board of Executive Directors or the countries they represent. The report was designed, edited, and typeset by Communications Development Incorporated, Washington, DC.