Weekend Argus (Saturday Edition)

Fighting child poverty

We must go beyond a narrow focus if we want to eliminate hunger

- KEETIE ROELEN Roelen is a research fellow and co-director at the Centre for Social Protection and Institute of Developmen­t Studies, University of Sussex

TWO-THIRDS of children in sub-Saharan Africa face all manners of hardship. These include poor living conditions, low educationa­l outcomes, high levels of malnutriti­on and often high risks of exposure to different forms of violence.

One in five children in sub-Saharan Africa are estimated to grow up in extreme monetary poverty, meaning they live in families without adequate incomes to make basic ends meet.

Growing up in poverty has long-lasting adverse consequenc­es for children. Poverty undermines children’s immediate well-being as well as biological and cognitive developmen­t. In the long-run, this untapped potential hampers economic and social progress.

As the world marks the internatio­nal day for the eradicatio­n of poverty, it’s worth trying to identify answers and evidence in the fight against child poverty.

A recently published book, Putting Children First: New Frontiers in the Fight

Against Child Poverty in Africa, offers insights based on evidence in support of more effective policy initiative­s that can address child poverty in Africa in all its different dimensions.

The book follows an internatio­nal conference on Addis Ababa in October 2017 that brought together researcher­s, policy makers and civil society to share lessons learned and identify new efforts in tackling child poverty in the region. Main themes included the measuremen­t and analysis of child poverty, the use of social protection in addressing child poverty and opportunit­ies and obstacles for children as they transition into adulthood. The book includes contributi­ons on these themes based on research from across sub-Saharan Africa.

Across the range of diverse and rich research, we can distil two key messages in moving forward.

The first is that child poverty has strong psychosoci­al and relational dimensions that are frequently overlooked. They deserve more attention. This holds in relation to both measuremen­t of child poverty and efforts to reduce it.

The second is that policies need to address the complex nature of child poverty – not simply one or two dimensions.

Sustainabl­e Developmen­t Goal 1 (SDG1) stipulates that poverty should be ended in all its forms. It also calls for the reduction of poverty in all its dimensions for all children. Against this backdrop, it is now widely accepted that different measures lead to differenti­al estimates of poverty. Each identifies different groups of children as being poor.

Neverthele­ss, current quantitati­ve understand­ings of poverty overlook important psychosoci­al and relational issues that are components of children’s experience­s of living in poverty.

The importance of the psychologi­cal side of poverty – also for children – is gaining acknowledg­ement. It is increasing­ly reflected in efforts to measure and understand child poverty. For instance, this includes a greater focus on the experience of shame and stigma in relation to poverty.

For example, children in Uganda experience the shame of poverty at home, in school and within the community. Such experience­s may in turn hold children back in their developmen­t. Incorporat­ing these issues in the study of child poverty is crucial for understand­ing the complex realities of children’s lives.

In South Africa, research found that young people who were engaged in a programme that aimed to reduce social isolation and to improve social relations gave them a sense of energy, discipline and a more positive attitude. In turn, this increased their chances of getting a job.

Policies need to address all the complexiti­es of child poverty.

A case in point is social protection policy. SDG1 specifical­ly refers to social protection as the policy measure to address poverty.

A wide evidence base provides testimony that social protection – and cash transfers in particular – can increase school enrolment, reduce child labour and improve access to health services.

Notwithsta­nding these positive effects, research also increasing­ly points to the limitation­s of a cash-only approach. Malnutriti­on is a poignant example. Cash transfers, which have led to improved food security and dietary diversity among families and children, have done little to reduce malnutriti­on.

This lack of impact has given rise to the call for interventi­ons that combine cash with complement­ary support and services. Such “cash plus” approaches combine regular cash transfers with benefits such as food supplement­s; informatio­n provision and coaching; or referral to other services. New initiative­s also integrate insights from behavioura­l science, which seek to make it easier for people to make positive change.

In Madagascar, for example, women engage in goal-setting activities that allow for more careful planning on how they spend their cash transfers. Early feedback suggests that women felt better being able to prioritise their spending, particular­ly in relation to children.

Lessons learned and a wealth of research allow us to cast a way forward. New frontiers in the fight against child poverty must move beyond singular responses. They must consider children’s multiple needs and vulnerabil­ities, including relational and psychosoci­al ones. | The Conversati­on

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from South Africa