Short Abstract:

This study was conducted to assess the impact of the social safety net program (SSNP) on livelihood in a selected area of Bangladesh. The majority of the respondents belonged to the active age category. One-fifth of the respondents dropped out after primary school. The average family size was 5.9 members. The SSNP had a positive impact on livelihood in the research area.

Long Abstract:

The social safety net is made up of non-contributory aid meant to help vulnerable families and individuals who are facing destitution and poverty; on the other hand, a livelihood is made up of the skills, resources, and activities necessary to support oneself. The Government of Bangladesh (GoB) is putting in place a lot of social safety net programs (SSNPs) to combat chronic poverty and vulnerability. These initiatives take a wide approach to addressing poverty and vulnerability, utilizing employment, health, nutrition, education, and disaster response initiatives, among other means. When it comes to receiving safety net assistance, vulnerable populations, including the elderly, women, children, and people with disabilities, are given precedence. Programs provide benefits in the form of food, cash transfers, or both, and are managed by elected local governments and government agencies. Bangladesh's social safety net initiatives have had a big influence on households, especially when it comes to boosting their capacity and enhancing the welfare of the most vulnerable. This study was conducted to assess the socioeconomic characteristics, examine the impact of the social safety net program (SSNP) on livelihood, and determine the problems and constraints faced by the beneficiaries in the study area. Primary data were collected from Sadar Upazila in Gaibandha district, Bangladesh. The period of data collection was from August to November 2022. The Sustainable Livelihoods Framework was used to determine the impact of the SSNP on livelihood. The major findings show that the majority of the respondents (65%) belonged to the age category of 30 to 65 years. One-fifth of the respondents dropped out after primary school, and two-thirds were illiterate. There were roughly 53.33% of jobless individuals. The average family size in the examined area was 5.9 members, and the dependence ratio was 2.52. According to the allowance category, the participants received safety nets worth an average of Tk. 641.67 per month: Widow: 500 Tk; disabled: 850 Tk; old age: 500 Tk; stipend for primary education: 900 Tk; stipend for secondary education: 500 Tk. They spent the most on consumable and health-related items, averaging 310 taka. All five categories of assets—human, natural, social, physical, and financial—saw favorable changes following the implementation of social safety net programs in the research area. A significant portion of the respondents, 88.33%, thought that the SSNP's member selection process was unfair, and 86.67% pointed to the involvement of local leaders as another contributing reason. Furthermore, 46.67% and 33.33% of respondents said they were obliged to make an upfront payment yet did not receive their benefits on schedule. Officials at the district, upazila, and union levels are frequently involved in the beneficiary selection and distribution process. Naturally, there are differences among programs. Even in cases where the lower echelons of administration have a limited official role, depending on the ministry in question, their influence through informal networks can nevertheless be substantial. Particularly, union officials participate in the program beneficiary selection process and frequently have a great deal of discretion in what they choose. The distribution of aid is carried out by union representatives and other individuals. The system's administration and monitoring capabilities are inadequate, which frequently results in leaks and ineffective beneficiary targeting. It is recommended that the government form a comprehensive monitoring and assessment team and collaborate with nearby communities to enhance their involvement in the selection and distribution procedures.

Keywords: Bangladesh, Impact, Livelihood, Social safety net program