The limits to cash‐plus provision in protracted crises

Abstract Motivation Cash‐plus programmes have succeeded in places where different provisions (e.g., health, education, nutrition) are able to complement each other while augmenting a regular cash transfer payment. The institutional capacity to deliver an integrated support package has marked the effective functioning of these programmes. However, in contexts of conflict and protracted crisis and the associated disruptions of infrastructure damage, insecurity, distrust, and violence, the necessary institutional scaffolding for a well‐functioning cash‐plus programme becomes unstable and may collapse altogether. Despite this, cash‐plus programmes continue to be implemented in these contexts. Purpose We assess whether cash‐plus programmes are designed and delivered to reduce vulnerability and promote livelihoods in protracted crises, and if their outcomes resonate with their objectives. Approach and Methods We develop a multidimensional indicator of protracted crisis, incorporating conflict, displacement, and climate change vulnerability, and map this against the strength of national social protection systems. We review 97 cash‐plus programmes in 16 countries, examining design features, objectives, and outcomes. Findings The review exposes the weakness in relying on the usual small‐lift aims of cash‐plus interventions (such as the provision of seeds or poultry, or basic training in business) in contexts where household‐level barriers to improving livelihoods are dwarfed by macro‐level structural, political, and social ruptures. The evidence demonstrates that most cash‐plus interventions are not designed or delivered in ways suitable for crises. Policy Implications Household‐level objectives will be stymied by institutional and political disruptions; therefore, programmes must also seek to help reshape the context in which people live. During active conflict (as compared to intermittent violence), cash‐plus may simply be impossible: it may be better to focus on providing for basic needs, such as through humanitarian aid.