Pakistan

Cash for Work in Pakistan

This time-lapse Oxfam slideshow shows how one man uses the income he earns from doing cash for work.

CaLP Needs Assessment mission

As agencies have moved into the recovery process there has been a huge range of cash modalities and delivery mechanisms that have been used with varying degrees of success.  The CaLP engaged a consultant in order to determine what needs still exist in country with regards to cash coordination and facilitation.  Main findings were:

• The harmonization of the Cash-for-Work (CFW) rates at the start of the emergency, a process led by the cash technical working group, was an important input.
• Training and capacity building, especially in the provinces, had a strong impact with local partners who were able to implement programmes with more confidence.

However, there are still ongoing needs in the country, especially:

• Agencies are working in isolation and are lacking coordination.  This coordination should take the form of knowledge and resource sharing, holding capacity building events and conducting research on key issues (such as delivery mechanisms).
• National implementing partners need more support with trainings, guidelines and technical support.

Lessons Learned from the Pakistan Emergency Food Security Alliance

In response to the unprecedented scale of flooding that affected Pakistan in July 2010, six INGOs - Save the Children, Oxfam GB, IRC, CARE, ACTED and Action Against Hunger / ACF International - formed the Pakistan Emergency Food Security Alliance (PEFSA).

Working together in order to maximise effectiveness, all of these INGOs used cash-based responses in this large-scale emergency. PEFSA released a study documenting the challenges, successes and lessons learned from the response in four key areas: targeting, different cash modalities, the joint market assessment, and working in an alliance. The study also highlights key constraints to responding to emergencies at scale, including the cap on ECHO funding for unconditional cash grants.  Download the report.

Cash transfers have been used in Pakistan since 2005, notably in response to the 2005 earthquake and to support displaced people in 2009.

After rescue operations in response to the 2010 floods, the majority of the agencies started shifting to cash based interventions besides the traditional in-kind support in the early relief phase. Different modalities of cash based interventions were and still are being used according to the context that is suitable to such interventions. Emergency Market Mapping and Assessment (EMMA) in three affected provinces was carried out to assess the feasibility for cash transfer programming. These reports suggested several modalities of cash transfers specific to the contexts of the local areas. The government of Pakistan also used cash transfer programming, paying cash grants to affected people using WATAN cards (debit cards).

---

Objectives and main features of cash transfer programming

• Cash is being used as an alternative to in-kind assistance as part of the overall humanitarian response to disasters, as an intervention in emergency situation and in the case of recovery situations
• Currently, cash transfer programming are used in the relief effort mainly focusing on food security.
• The main modalities being used are Cash for Work (CFW), conditional and unconditional cash grants, enterprise cash grants and agriculture cash grants.
• In the recovery phase, more organizations (including International Organization of Migration (IOM), UNHCR and UNHABITAT) are considering different options including cash for shelter grants.
• Payment modalities differ depending upon the local context, for example in Cash for Work (CFW) the cash is distributed mainly by hand.

Priorities for cash based intervention in Pakistan

• Capacity building of stakeholders in cash based interventions (designing and implementation).
• Establishing coordination mechanisms and strengthening it specifically for cash based interventions.
• Advocacy for policy changes or developing policy for such interventions.
• Development of context specific tools, delivery mechanisms and approaches.
• Extending capacity to the provincial and district levels.
• Incorporating cash transfer programming into longer-term contingency and preparedness plans for Disaster Risk Reduction (DRR).