On the 15^th of May 2008, the Regional Hunger and Vulnerability Programme, together with the launch of its series of short films profiling social transfer programmes across southern Africa, hosted an expert panel discussion on Food price inflation: the role of social protection in combating food insecurity.

Panellists included Professor Coleen Vogel (University of the Witwatersrand), Dr Sheshi Kaniki (Economic Policy Research Institute), John Rook (Regional Hunger and Vulnerability Programme), and a representative of the Southern African Development Community.

After being welcomed by Brett Davidson, the MC for the event, the four distinguished panellists introduced their perspective and thoughts on the debate topic: Food price inflation: the role of social protection in combating food insecurity.

Professor Vogel explained that her interest and experience is in climate change and disaster risk reduction, but there are many overlaps in trying to explain the causes and consequences of chronic and transitory vulnerability as these situations are usually brought about by multiple stresses. She put forward the question of how to make people more resilient and robust in the face of variability, not just in the distant future, but now. There is a history of social transfers as interventions in response to past droughts, such as food transfers and starter packs but the key issue is finding which transfer is appropriate to the context. She cited the need to look for novel transfers and also raised questions around how business and the private sector could be incorporated in social transfers.

Dr Kaniki made three points concerning social protection in a time of high inflation. Firstly, he explained that a good social protection programme (i.e. one that is nationally-owned, funded from the state budget, and takes a long-term view) puts governments in a position where they can act decisively in times of crisis, highlighting how South Africa, for example, is able to increase the social grant so that it is linked to inflation. Secondly, he made the point that social protection fosters stability in turbulent times such as these: he cited how manifestations of insecurity, such as the food riots seen in various countries of the world, were in countries that do not have social protection systems, and the government responses were all very reactive (such as Egypt suspending rice exports and Sudan increasing subsidies). Dr Kaniki closed by pointing out that food is not the only commodity whose price rises under inflationary pressures, which raises questions about which type of social transfer is most suitable because it is not just a question of food security, but broader survival – and so cash makes sense as it allows those affected to make choices and deal with the increase in prices across the range of livelihood inputs.

Regional Hunger and Vulnerability Programme (RHVP) Programme manager, John Rook, brought the audience’s attention to a Wahenga Brief about what higher food prices will mean for poor consumers and small farmers in southern Africa (available online at www.wahenga.net/uploads/documents/briefs/Brief_15_higher_food_prices_s.pdf) and went on to extend some of the points raised therein. He cited the need to assess the causes of food price inflation: whilst there is much "finger pointing" towards the rapidly-growing economies of India and China, the bulk of grains are still consumed in the west, and whether or not high prices are a problem is dependent on the perspective – it could be an opportunity for some farmers. But as small scale farmers are typically the last to benefit from such opportunities, measures may be required, and the right kind of social protection can provide that stimulus. He also explained that there are good and bad instruments, but rather than going back to the situation where governments respond to high consumer prices by controlling producers and trade and ultimately reducing the incentives to producers, we should instead look to utilise resources more efficiently to avoid running the risk of ending up in a constant race to improve productivity and reaching a "limit to growth", as predicted by Meadows et al in the 1970s.

Following on the theme of the need for appropriate responses, Duncan Samikwa outlined SADC’s initiatives to address food insecurity in the region. Food security is a top agenda item within SADC and appears within the strategic and development policy plans. Hunger and vulnerability are not new in the region, with recent crises in 1999 and 2002-03. SADC has a programme of regional Vulnerability Assessment and Analysis (VAA) to promote policy formulation and planning, and this provides an input to governments on how to ensure instruments meet the needs of end users. Each country within SADC also has its own national Vulnerability Assessment Committee (VAC) comprising all relevant sectors (agriculture, health etc).

After the panellists' introductory discussions, questions were then taken from the floor. Responding to a question on how to build political will, Professor Vogel highlighted the importance of showing win-win scenarios (when development interventions actively reduce vulnerability to future shocks); Mr Samikwa emphasised the need to show the wider positive benefits of social protection (for example how household members other than the recipient of cash grants tend to benefit); and Dr Kaniki noted the need to build awareness amongst parliamentarians and the need for their electorate to hold them accountable. Social protection is very political, and decisions have to be taken at the highest level if it is to be effective.

Questions were also raised around affordability and cost implications of social protection: how social protection links to other projects to encourage long-term economic viability of households, and the costs and security of delivery. Mr Rook noted that cash is cheaper to deliver than food, due to being less bulky, but less secure. He also noted that affordability is not just about cost, but more about the difference between the cost and the benefits which accrue (the impact), citing empirical evidence of a multiplier effect noted in the Dowa Emergency Cash Transfer Scheme in Malawi that proves how cash stimulates a local economy far more than food aid. However, he did caution that not all social protection is good social protection and that cash transfers are not a panacea or an alternative to humanitarian responses where they are required, but rather, that social protection is a missing cog in the development wheel.

Other questions concerned the practicality of delivering cash and deciding who to target in the provision of social protection. One participant raised the question that systems don’t always exist to ensure the delivery of cash; Mr Rook said that this is an easy excuse rather than taking the challenge. He cited the examples of Lesotho and Swaziland, who both had crisis situations last year, and through having existing national social protection schemes, extensive retail networks and being linked to South Africa, would have been well placed to offer a cash transfer. The links between HIV and AIDS and social protection were also questioned; although there is a clear link, the danger is that linking social protection to HIV status acts to reinforce stigma, so it is better to target on other criteria that coincide. Also raised was the issue that nutrition studies have shown that cash doesn't necessarily lead to improved nutritional status, and thus how can we ensure that appropriate knowledge is also transferred?

In the concluding comments, Professor Vogel reinforced the need for integrating development interventions to bring about win-win scenarios. Mr Rook said that rather than being concerned with finding more evidence, the key is to highlight the popularity of interventions to politicians, citing that Lesotho's last election was won on the basis of promises about its Old Age Pension. Dr Kaniki reiterated that how social protection is defined is important: whether it is to prevent people from falling into poverty, or to transform lives and promote improvement from one situation to a better one (which is where skills development would come in) – there are no hard and fast answers to this and it remains something which needs to be debated to develop a broad social protection framework into which various interventions would have their place.