1

Author: Nothando Gazi

Research Title: Bridging the Gap between Relief and Early Recovery: The Role of Cash

Transfers in Rebuilding Livelihoods. A Case Study of Post-Typhoon Haiyan Recovery in the

Philippines.

2

Acknowledgements

This research paper would not have been possible without the amazing staff and lecturers from

the International Development department at the University of Birmingham. I especially would

like to thank my supervisor Nicolas Lemay-Hebert for his guidance and support.

I would also like to thank all the members of the Cash Working Group who offered me some

of their time and expertise in conducting this research. I also extend my gratitude to Cebu bible

seminary for sharing their experience in the Typhoon Haiyan response.

Last but not least, I am forever grateful for the unwavering support of my family. Thank you

Dumi and Mama for your encouragement to pursue my passion.

3

Abstract

The number of climate-related disasters are increasing more than ever before and cash is

becoming an increasingly important tool to deliver assistance during a disaster response due to

its flexibility and ability to cut across sectors, amongst other benefits. This research seeks to

explore the role of cash in linking the relief phase to the long-term recovery through the

promotion of sustainable livelihoods, by focusing on Typhoon Haiyan (known locally as

Yolanda) as a case study. The Philippines has high exposure and vulnerability to climate-related

disasters, however, it boasts of one of the most advanced social protection systems in the East

Asia Pacific region (Bowen, 2015). In order to reach the research objectives, the research

methodology employed involves a review of related literature, a field-based evaluation

involving interviewing humanitarian practitioners and the adoption of DFID’s Sustainable

Livelihood Framework (1999) as a framework of analysis.

The results show that cash based livelihood programming plays a vital role in leading the

transition from relief to recovery due the Value for Money (VfM) it delivers, role in

strengthening local market and supply chains and the positive economic multiplier effects that

benefit the wider community. Most interventions focus on asset creation, however investment

should be made into disaster risk reduction to reduce vulnerabilities that worsen the impact of

shocks on poor households. Also, to enhance the benefits resulting from cash programming,

supporting activities should be used in parallel with cash provision. Cash-for-training and

livelihood start-up grants can empower women by increasing their human capital and

introducing them to the formal economy. More work is required to transform the structures and

policies that disadvantage women through patriarchal power systems.

4

Table of Contents

Acknowledgements .................................................................................................................... 2

Abstract ...................................................................................................................................... 3

List of Abbreviations .................................................................................................................. 6

List of Figures ............................................................................................................................ 7

Introduction .............................................................................................................................. 8

Research structure ................................................................................................................... 9

Chapter 1 ................................................................................................................................. 10

Literature Review: The Cash Revolution ............................................................................ 10

1.0 Introduction .................................................................................................................... 10

1.1 Value for Money ............................................................................................................. 11

1.1 The Evolving Landscape of Humanitarian Aid .............................................................. 11

Chapter 2 ................................................................................................................................. 13

The Role of Cash in Livelihood Recovery ............................................................................ 13

2.0 Definitions of Social Protection and Cash transfers ....................................................... 13

2.1 Conceptual framework for the role of cash transfers ..................................................... 13

2.2 Types of livelihood programming .................................................................................. 14

2.3 Sustainable Livelihoods Framework .............................................................................. 15

2.4 Gender Mainstreaming ................................................................................................... 18

2.5 Cash Transfer Programming in the Philippines in a disaster response ........................... 19

2.5.1 Disaster Risk Reduction framework ........................................................................ 20

2.6 Summary of findings from the Literature Review.......................................................... 22

2.6.1 Research Gaps ............................................................................................................. 23

Chapter 3 ................................................................................................................................. 25

Methodology ........................................................................................................................... 25

3.0 Research Approach ......................................................................................................... 25

3.1 Framework of analysis.................................................................................................... 26

3.2 Research design .............................................................................................................. 26

3.3 Sampling ......................................................................................................................... 27

3.4 Data collection ................................................................................................................ 28

5

3.5 Ethical issues .................................................................................................................. 28

3.6 Limitations ...................................................................................................................... 28

Chapter 4 ................................................................................................................................. 29

Analysis ................................................................................................................................... 29

4.0 Introduction .................................................................................................................... 29

4.1 Contextual background ................................................................................................... 29

4.1.1 Impact of the Typhoon on Livelihoods .................................................................... 29

4.1.2 Humanitarian Response ........................................................................................... 30

Data Analysis ........................................................................................................................ 30

4.2 Livelihood Cash Programming ....................................................................................... 30

4.3 Gender ............................................................................................................................ 33

4.4 Vulnerability context ...................................................................................................... 36

4.5 Transforming Structures and Processes .......................................................................... 37

4.6 Motivations for using cash transfers ............................................................................... 38

4.4.1 Advantages of using cash transfers .......................................................................... 38

4.4.2 Challenges of using cash transfers ........................................................................... 40

4.7 Summary of findings ...................................................................................................... 42

Chapter 5 ................................................................................................................................. 44

Conclusion ............................................................................................................................... 44

Limitations ............................................................................................................................ 45

Recommendations ................................................................................................................ 46

Bibliography ........................................................................................................................... 47

Appendix 1 .............................................................................................................................. 54

6

List of Abbreviations

CCT Conditional Cash Transfer

CFW Cash-for-Work

CTP Cash Transfer Programme

CWG Cash Working Group

DFA Department of Foreign Affairs, Philippines

DFID Department for International Development

DRR Disaster Risk Reduction

DRM Disaster Risk Management

DSWD Department of Social Welfare and Development

FBO Faith Based Organisation

FSP Financial Service Provider

GoP Government of Philippines

INGO International Non-Governmental Organisation

UNISDR United Nations International Strategy for Disaster Reduction

NDRRMP National Disaster Risk Reduction and Management Plan

NGO Non-Governmental Organisation

ODI Overseas Development Institute

PWP Public Works Programme

UCT Unconditional Cash Transfer

UN United Nations

UNDP United Nations Development Programme

UNICEF United Nations Children’s Emergency Fund

VfM Value for Money

WASH Water, Sanitation and Hygiene

WFP World Food Programme

7

List of Figures

Label Description Page

Figure 1.0

Total number of reported natural disasters between 1975- 2015

10

Figure 2.0 A Conceptual Framework for Social Protection 13

Figure 2.1 DFID Sustainable Livelihoods framework 16

Figure 2.2 National Disaster Risk Reduction Management Framework 20

Figure 3.0 Flowchart illustrating research methodology 25

Figure 4.0 List of cash instruments used to restore livelihoods 31

Figure 4.1 OXFAM Gender Strategy for Typhoon Haiyan Response 34

Figure 4.2 Flowchart illustrating advantages of CTPs 39

Figure 4.3 List of challenges associated with CTPs 41

8

Introduction

Climate related disasters are occurring more frequently and affecting more people, with global

average annual losses from tsunamis, earthquakes and cyclones estimated to be at $314 billion

(Thomas and Lopez, 2015: 2; UNIDSR, 2015). The number of people requiring humanitarian

assistance has increased from 60 million to 125 million during the last decade (ODI, 2016: 1).

During the same period, the use of cash transfers in humanitarian spending has increased from

1% of total aid spent to 6% in 2015 (ODI, 2015: 9). This drive towards cash transfers has been

partly driven by the view that cash can be more cost-effective than in-kind transfers and can

provide economic multiplier effects that strengthen local markets. Market based programming,

such as the use of cash transfers, also helps humanitarian agencies reduce the vulnerability

experienced by disaster victims. Once immediate needs are met, cash transfers can be used to

help livelihood recovery. In some instances, immediate needs can be met whilst also supporting

the recovery of livelihoods. Additionally, there is evidence of cash being used to empower

women by strengthening their livelihoods (CARE, 2015a). In the Philippines, as they have a

well-developed social assistance infrastructure that is easily adaptable to deal with emergency

disaster situations.

The objective of this research is to explore the growing role of cash transfers to not only meet

immediate needs of individuals affected by disasters, but also their role in linking the relief

phase to the long-term recovery of the affected economy by supporting livelihoods recovery. A

case study of Typhoon Haiyan, known locally as Yolanda, will be used. The research will

include an extensive review of related literature and a field-based evaluation in the South-east

Asian country of the Philippines. The Philippines has been chosen as a research location due to

its high exposure and vulnerability to climate-related disasters. The government of Philippines

has developed one of the most advanced social protection systems in the East Asia Pacific

region, which is easily scaled up in the event of a disaster (Bowen, 2015: 12).

The main research question which this research seeks to answer is the following:

- To what extent do cash transfers contribute to the recovery of livelihoods in a post-

disaster setting?

The research will also seek to answer the following sub-questions:

- How can cash transfers be used to promote livelihood recovery following a disaster?

- How can cash transfers be used to empower women?

9

- Why are humanitarian actors choosing to use cash to meet programme objectives?

Research structure

Chapter 1 discusses disaster trends and evolving trends in humanitarian assistance and their

link to cash transfer programming and livelihood recovery. The chapter presents international

guidelines shaping the approach to aid provision and the importance of VFM and the results

agenda. It will also highlight the consequences of current practices.

Chapter 2 is the review of the literature on cash transfers and associated multiplier effects that

promote local economic recovery. The use of cash in recovering livelihoods after a disaster is

conceptualised using DFID’s Sustainable Livelihoods Framework (SLF). The role of the

framework is reducing women’s vulnerability is also discussed and the structure of the

Philippines disaster risk reduction policies and their linkages to social protection is discussed.

Chapter 3 is a summary of the research methodology employed in this study. The research

objectives are achieved with the use of an extensive literature review, semi-structured

interviews and the SLF framework of analysis to organise the findings. The limitations and

ethics of the study are also discussed.

Chapter 4 discusses the research findings and to what extent the data gathered answers the

research questions. The data is critically analysed and findings summarised in this section.

Chapter 5 is a conclusion of the research which summarises the findings, discusses research

limitations and provides recommendations that have resulted from the research.

10

Chapter 1

Literature Review: The Cash Revolution

1.0 Introduction

Disasters have increased in frequency and intensity over the past decade, especially natural

disasters, affecting more than 1 billion people and causing economic damage of over $1.3

trillion (UNISDR, 2015: 10). In 1975, 65 natural disasters were reported across all continents.

This increased to 527 natural disasters by the year 2000 (Figure 1.0). Development gains have

been diminished and inequalities exacerbated, as poor people tend to be the worst affected

following a disaster (Combaz, 2014). In the Philippines, Typhoons Ondoy and Pepeng nearly

doubled poverty levels in Rizal province in just three years, from 5.5% to 9.5% ODI (2014: 8).

The effect of disasters on economies has also been high in many cases, with the Haiti 2010

earthquake costing Haiti nearly 120% of GDP ODI (2014: 8).

Figure 1.0: Total number of reported natural disasters between 1975 and 2015. Source: CRED-EMDAT Database.

The increase in the number of disasters and economic impacts has led to development

practitioners seeking new ways to make the aid budget stretch further by finding more efficient

ways of responding to disasters. This is evident from the Value for Money (VfM) discourse in

11

the humanitarian and development aid agenda that emphasises the need to utilise resources as

effectively as possible in order to achieve maximum impact (Christian Aid, 2012: 1).

1.1 Value for Money

The Independent Commission for Aid Impact (ICAI) conceptualises VfM along the 3 E’s:

economy, efficiency and effectiveness; adding equity as a fourth component sometimes (ICAI,

2011: 4). Economy refers to getting the best value inputs; efficiency is concerned with

maximising the impact of those inputs; effectiveness is about assessing whether the inputs

achieve programme objectives; and equity is concerned with ensuring that beneficiaries have

equal access to the benefits (ibid: 4). Whilst humanitarian aid was traditionally provided in the

form of in-kind aid such as food donations, humanitarian actors are increasingly viewing cash

as the cost-effective alternative which delivers better VfM, especially in food security and

livelihoods programming (ODI, 2015: 7-8; ECHO, 2013: 10). During the first World

Humanitarian Summit this year, UN Secretary-General Ban-Ki Moon suggested that cash

should be the default method of aid if the right market conditions exist (UN, 2016: 13).

Evidence for the cost effectiveness of cash was demonstrated by a World Food Programme

(WFP) project in Ethiopia that reported that cash was more efficient than food aid by up to 30%,

whilst a project in Somali reported that more than twice the aid budget was able to reach

beneficiaries when cash transfers were used instead of food aid (ODI, 2015: 10). Margolies and

Hoddinott (2014) also found that an additional 18% of beneficiaries could be reached with aid

at no extra cost if cash was used instead of food aid. This is due to lower military protection,

transport, fuel and vehicle hire costs incurred by the implementing agency (Holmquist, 2010).

1.1 The Evolving Landscape of Humanitarian Aid

Humanitarian work is evolving from merely providing for immediate needs, to promoting

sustainable livelihoods so that the ability of individuals to cope with shocks is increased (UN,

2016). In a post-disaster setting, cash can be used to smooth the transition from the relief phase

to the recovery phase by promoting recovery of local markets1 (Jaspars et al, 2007: 6). This has

been done in examples such as the Indian Ocean tsunami response, Pakistan floods and

Typhoon Haiyan in the Philippines (ODI, 2015; Jaspars et al, 2007; Brown, 2015; Levine,

2014). The poor are usually the targeted beneficiaries for humanitarian aid because their low

1 Disaster relief is concerned with providing for people’s immediate and basic needs following a disaster.

Recovery is more concerned with helping people return to their normal lives by restarting livelihoods and

repairing or replacing assets. IFRC Introduction to Livelihoods Programming e-course

12

asset base is detrimental to their ability to deal with shocks (Samson et al, 2010: 4). Amartya

Sen famously argued that poor people are in poverty due to the lack of cash to afford basic

goods, not because there was no food available in markets in his ‘Poverty and Famines’ (1981)

and ‘Hunger in Public Action’ (1991) papers (ODI, 2015:15). The increasing body of evidence

agreeing with Sen’s conclusion is driving humanitarian agencies to using cash transfers in a

disaster responses, in what DFID call a ‘quiet revolution’ due to the way cash is changing the

humanitarian approach, especially in the case of food security (DFID, 2011: i).

In addition to the shift in the way humanitarian aid is used for early recovery following a

disaster, the humanitarian actors who provide aid are also increasing. Since the UN General

Assembly Resolution 46/182, which acts as a guideline for the coordination international

humanitarian assistance in the event of an emergency (UN, 1991), came into effect in 1991, the

“humanitarian system has grown exponentially into an industry valued at US $20 billion”

(IFRC, 2015: 20). This has coincided with the increase of actors providing humanitarian

assistance such as national and international non-governmental organisations (iNGOs and

NGOs), private sector actors, faith-based organisations (FBOs), bilateral actors, multilateral

actors and philanthropic individuals such as Melinda and Bill Gates (IFRC, 2015: 20; ODI,

2012; Hudson Institute, 2011). Although the growing number of actors willing to provide

assistance is a positive advancement given the enormity of the needs, it creates concerns about

coordination (Hudson Institute, 2011; ODI, 2012). For example, Macloban (2015) found that

in the typhoon Haiyan response in the Philippines in 2013, actors such as religious groups,

individuals and private sector actors were less likely to register their activities with government,

therefore making coordination difficult (IFRC, 2015: 30).

13

Chapter 2

The Role of Cash in Livelihood Recovery

2.0 Definitions of Social Protection and Cash transfers

The OECD defines social protection as “policies and actions which enhance the capacity of

poor and vulnerable people to escape from poverty and better manage risks and shocks.”

(OECD, 2009: 12). Cash transfers are ‘direct, regular, predictable non-contributory cash

payments to poor and vulnerable households’ which can be used to provide social protection to

disaster affected households (DFID 2011:2).

2.1 Conceptual framework for the role of cash transfers

Devereux and Sabates-Wheeler (2004: 10) conceptualise the role of social protection along

lines of prevention, protection, promotion and transformation, as illustrated in Figure 2.0.

Figure 2.0 - A conceptual framework for social protection. Source: Devereux and Sabates-Wheeler (2004:11)

Preventive measures aim to end poverty of through social insurance or direct cash payments to

vulnerable groups; protective measures are used to provide relief from poverty; promotive

14

measures help to create income generating activities; and transformative measures address

power relations that sustain vulnerabilities (Devereux and Sabates-Wheeler, 2004: 9-10). The

solid black lines demonstrates an obvious, direct relationship, for example, preventive

interventions have promotive effects because the reduction of risk enables individuals to seize

livelihood opportunities which they couldn’t do before; the thick dashed line indicates a more

subtle relationship, for example, some preventive measures are transformative; and the thin

dotted line illustrates a weak relationship between protective and promotive measures

(Devereux and Sabates-Wheeler, 2004:11-12).

The majority of emergency relief and recovery interventions lie within the protective and

promotive elements of Devereux and Sabates-Wheeler’s (2004) conceptualisation.

Interventions with a promotive element, such as public works programmes, act as a transition

from emergency relief and the recovery phase of a disaster response, helping to build back

stronger infrastructure. Transformative interventions can also be used to increase resilience to

disasters and increases income levels by stimulating local markets (Jaspars et al 2007: 10). Cash

helps to stimulate local markets because poor people are likely to buy goods from local

suppliers, especially in rural areas (Ellaurd, 2015a). This helps to accelerate the recovery

process and can have economic multiplier effects such as stimulating production and increasing

supply and demand. Multiplier effects are spill-over effects that go beyond reaching

beneficiaries alone, but benefit the wider community (Infante-Villarroel, 2015:11; Setiawan

and Trousseau, 2016).

2.2 Types of livelihood programming

The goal of livelihood programming is to promote livelihood strategies that remove the

dependency on social protection, which Devereux and Sabates-Wheeler (2013: 912) refer to as

‘graduation’. The researchers point out that for graduation to enable sustainable livelihoods,

there should be effective coordination with development actors to smooth the transition of

livelihood programming from the recovery phase to the development phase, otherwise there is

a risk that livelihood productivity will be stable but low.

Post-disaster livelihood programmes have different objectives, which are dependent on the

context (Elluard, 2015a). The objective of the programme influences which type of livelihood

assistance is used and which cash instrument is used to provide the assistance. Cash instruments

15

fall into three categories: unconditional cash transfers (UCTs), conditional cash transfers

(CCTs), cash vouchers and cash-for-work or public works programmes (DFID, 2011). UCTs

consist of giving beneficiaries cash without requiring them to meet any specific conditions.

Alternatively, CCTs are provided to eligible individuals on the condition that they carry out a

particular action, such as investing in specific livelihoods assets. The various livelihood types

and instruments can be used from the relief phase, throughout to the early recovery and

development phases.

Jaspars and Maxwell (2009: 9) outline three types of livelihood programming: livelihoods

provisioning, livelihood protection and livelihood promotion. Livelihood programmes with an

objective of provisioning assets act as safety nets to prevent disaster victims from falling into

deeper poverty by meeting basic needs (IFRC, 2011: 26). They can be both protective and

promotive, depending on the size of the cash payment. Provisioning could be offered through

giving UCTs after a disaster or CFW programmes. Livelihood protection programming refers

to protecting assets and diversifying livelihoods in order to reduce vulnerability. Protection can

be achieved through cash-for-training initiatives that teach individuals new livelihood skills or

CFW to recover assets. Livelihood promotion refers to improving livelihood strategies and

access to supporting policies and institutions (Jaspars and Maxwell (2009: 9). Promotion can

comprise of improving access to markets, such as CFW to repair roads that lead to the markets.

Moser (1998) argues that increasing income and assets over time leads to sustainable

livelihoods, implying a linear relationship. A majority of livelihood programmes adopt this

approach, however, the process is not that simple. For example, extreme poor households will

need more provisioning than households who find themselves just under the poverty line as a

result of a disaster. Also, rural livelihoods can be often unpredictable due to weather trends and

variations in crop production, therefore social programmes need to acknowledge the complex

nature of vulnerability faced by rural households in order to achieve sustainable graduation

(Devereux and Sabates-Wheeler, 2013: 931).

2.3 Sustainable Livelihoods Framework

The role of cash transfers in building livelihoods can be conceptualised using DFID’s

Sustainable Livelihoods Framework (SLF) (DFID, 1999). Chambers and Conway (1992: 7)

define livelihoods as “the capabilities, assets, and activities required for a means of living; a

16

livelihood is sustainable if it can cope with and recover from stress and shocks, maintain or

enhance its capabilities and assets, and provide sustainable livelihood opportunities for the next

generation”. Scoones (1998: 5) builds on Chambers and Conway’s definition to define

livelihoods as “the capabilities, assets (including both material and social resources) and

activities required for a means of living. A livelihood is sustainable when it can cope with and

recover from stresses and shocks, maintain or enhance its capabilities and assets, while not

undermining the natural resource base”.

Figure 2.1: DFID Sustainable Livelihoods Framework. Source: Sustainable Livelihoods Guidance Sheets (DFID,

1999: 1)

Figure 2.1 illustrates the relationships between the main components that influence people’s

livelihoods strategies. The components of the SLF consist of livelihood assets which are

denoted by the pentagon; the vulnerability context which outlines the sources of people’s

vulnerabilities; transforming structures and policies are the organisations, institutions and laws

that influence livelihoods; Livelihoods outcomes are the goals pursued by people; and

livelihood strategies are the livelihoods people employ given their asset base (DFID, 1999: 1-

17; Elluard, 2015a: 8). Therefore, livelihoods can be seen as being hindered by a shortage of

human, social, financial, natural or physical capitals; whilst being restricted by the presence of

unfavourable structures and policies that limit access to or control over assets to create

sustainable livelihood outcomes (IFRC, 2011: 34). Environmental shocks, harmful trends such

as price fluctuations and seasonal fluctuations in income levels can also affect livelihood

sustainability (ibid: 34).

17

Cash transfers can be used to reduce livelihood constraints through disaster risk reduction

occurring at three levels: reducing poverty caused by shocks, reducing vulnerability faced by

the poor and strengthening coping mechanisms (Samson et al, 2010: 4). By reducing livelihood

constraints, positive livelihood outcomes such an increased food security, a more productive

use of assets and resilient livelihoods can be achieved (IFRC, 2011: 16; Elluard, 2015a: 8).

Although cash transfers can be used for each element of the SLF, most interventions focus on

protecting, repairing, strengthening or replacing productive livelihood capitals whilst

strengthening local markets (Elluard, 2015a: 8-9). Even if only provided on a short-term basis,

cash based programming used to support livelihoods is able to promote sustainability in a post-

disaster setting (IFRC, 2011). It is also important to note that in addition to the capital, the

institutions supporting them should also be sustainable for the livelihood outcomes to be

sustainable (Farrington et al, 1999: 6).

The SLF is praised for its holistic approach in identifying multiple sources of vulnerabilities

and constraints that influence livelihoods outcomes despite where these constraints occur,

which means that it’s applicable across sectors and social groups (Farrington et al, 1999: 4;

Kratz, 2001). Its dynamic approach acknowledges the reality that many poor households face,

especially rural families, of engaging in various livelihood strategies to make ends meet, for

example farming activities constitute roughly 40-60% of livelihood income sources for farmers

in South Asia (Ellis and Biggs, 2001: 445; Chambers, 1983; Chambers, 1995; Hussein and

Nelson, 1998). The approach also builds on people’s strengths by building on existing strategies

and empowers the poor to be ‘active decision makers’ in achieving their livelihood goals (Morse

and McNamara, 2013: 10; Kratz, 2001: 22).

On the other hand, critics point out that power relations underpinning poverty within a

community or household can be difficult for an outsider to see or change (Kratz, 2001: 24).

Mosse (1994) argues that even with participatory methods, people are unwilling to discuss

issues of power and influence as they are sensitive topics. Mosse (1994) and Humble (1998)

suggest that patriarchal power structures often lead to women’s views and vulnerabilities being

overlooked. Also, most interventions look at households as a single ‘decision making unit’ and

do not acknowledge how intra-household differences can affect vulnerabilities faced by various

members of the each family (Kratz, 2001: 25). DFID suggest collecting disaggregated data to

analyse vulnerabilities of different sexes, class groups, age groups or caste groups (DFID, 1999:

18

21). Farrington et al (1999: 5) also point that the SLF recognises the “trade-off between fully

capitalising on short-term income and saving it to safeguard against future vulnerabilities”,

however, there is no suggestion of how to reconcile this.

2.4 Gender Mainstreaming

In a large number of emergency interventions, including cash transfer programmes, gender

mainstreaming is often neglected. Gender mainstreaming is defined as “situating gender issues

at the centre of policy decisions, institutional structures and resource allocation” (Kanji, 2003:

1). It is becoming a more important aspect of cash transfer programming as can be seen in the

Sendai (2015) framework and Sphere Guidelines (2000). This is because women tend to suffer

more from the effects of poverty and gender based violence, which can be intensified in a post-

disaster setting. For instance, following the Haiti earthquake, over 240 rapes against women

were reported in relief camps within the first 150 days of the earthquake and partner rape went

up 16 times higher than the average following hurricane Katrina in the US in 2005 (ODI, 2014:

27).

Some cash transfer programmes provide payments directly to women in an attempt to empower

women (UNDP, 2013). Eyben et al (2008:6) describe empowerment as the “power of

individuals to change power relations and structures that keep them in poverty.” Brazil’s Bolsa

Familia CCT programme was able to increase women’s status in their households by providing

them with regular cash and their participation in the labour market also increased by 16%

compared to households not receiving the cash transfers (Suarez et al, 2006). In Mexico’s

Oportunidades cash transfer programme, cash was given directly to women and it helped to

increase their influence in household spending decisions (DFID, 2011: iii; Jaspars et al, 2007:

3). There are concerns that giving cash to women may increase household risks for women due

to conflict over the money, however, Thakur, Arnold and Johnson (2009) found no evidence of

this in Latin America or South Africa.

Empowerment can occur by taking a transformative approach to change structures that cause

women’s vulnerabilities. However, in reality, cash transfers may need to be implemented within

existing norms in order to reach women, then a transformative approach can be adopted later

on during the programme to further reduce vulnerabilities faced by women (Samson et al, 2010:

62-63). Structures can be challenged by assessing if women and men both have equal access to

19

CFW or other social transfers and by actively seeking ways to overcome any barriers, such as

other domestic responsibilities (ibid: 74). Cash transfer programme, such as emergency cash-

for-work programmes, can disadvantage women when they fail to take account of their

household burden by undervaluing the work they carry out in the domestic sphere. A gender

sensitive design can include providing childcare facilities and equal wages (UNDP, 2013: 37).

Adopting such measures helps to encourage women to be economically active, without adding

an additional burden to their household responsibilities.

Access and control over land can influence livelihood strategies and outcomes, especially for

rural households. Women working in agriculture are identified as being particularly vulnerable

as they usually have less control over land and are less likely to be included in support

programmes, despite accounting for 60% of food production (OCHA, 2014: 10). Recognition

of the impact that lack of land ownership has on waged labourers and women in agriculture is

crucial in order to ensure that they are not excluded from support programmes. Failure to

acknowledge that vulnerable groups, such as women, face barriers in equal access to

humanitarian assistance can lead them to be further disadvantaged (The Sphere Project,

2004:9).

Most research on gender effects of cash transfer programmes has been carried out on gender

roles, with evidence that instruments such as CCTs under the conditions of enrolling children

into school or taking children for vaccinations, can help to reinforce gender stereotypes (DFID,

2011). More research needs to be carried out to look beyond gender roles and examine how

gender relations are affected within households and communities.

2.5 Cash Transfer Programming in the Philippines in a disaster response

As a result of climate change, natural disasters have become more frequent and more

destructive, with hydro-meteorological disasters such as tropical cyclones being the most

frequent. During the decade of 1997 and 2007, 84 tropical storms affected the Philippines

leaving over 13,000 causalities and affecting 51 million families (GoP, 2012: 1). Given its

exposure and high vulnerability to natural disasters, the Philippines has developed an advanced

disaster risk management framework with strong linkages to social protection (Bowen, 2015:

34).

20

2.5.1 Disaster Risk Reduction framework

Figure 2.2: Philippines National Disaster Risk Reduction Management Framework. Source – Philippines National

Disaster Risk and Reduction and Management Framework (NDRRMF) 2011-2028

The framework emphasises the role of disaster preparedness in reducing loss of life and damage

to social, economic and physical infrastructure. The importance of a coordinated emergency

disaster response is also highlighted as helping to reduce the vulnerability of those affected by

disasters and helping to build back stronger structures that contribute to sustainable

development (GoP, 2012: 3). Gender sensitivity in responding to emergencies is also a central

part of the plan.

The Department of Social Welfare and Development (DSWD) coordinates the national disaster

response in the Philippines, whilst OCHA is responsible for coordination of international

efforts, creating two parallel coordination systems (ACAPS, 2014: 5). Cash transfers play a big

part in disaster relief and recovery programmes. Cash transfers to poor households were used

in emergency responses to Typhoon Ketsana (2009), Typhoon Washi (2011), Typhoon Bopha

(2012) and Typhoon Haiyan in 2013 (OCHA, 2015: 1). Since DSWD introduced the Pantawid

Pamilyang Pilipino Program (or 4Ps) social welfare programme in 2008, the GoP and INGOs

21

such as WFP have used its targeting system to identify the poorest beneficiaries in the aftermath

of a disaster (OCHA, 2015: 1). The 4Ps is a CCT programme which runs in all 17 regions in

the Philippines, reaching 1,484 municipalities (Zimmerman and Bohling, 2013: 13). The 4Ps

provides conditional cash grants to poor households with children aged between 0-14years in

the poorest barangays2 located within the poorest provinces, on condition of parents ensuring

children meet healthcare and school attendance targets (DSWD, 2006: 8). This well-developed

social assistance infrastructure can be scaled up to deal with emergency disaster situations, with

conditions being temporarily removed.

The Philippines use a cluster system to organise their disaster response. Clusters are allocated

to emergency response sectors such as shelter, food security and early recovery and livelihoods.

The role of the Early Recovery and Livelihoods Cluster is to provide livelihoods assistance

whilst promoting the recovery of the whole economy. In the Philippines, this is often done

through CFW, skills training by cluster partners and conditional livelihood recovery grants

(USAID, 2014: 1). However, early recovery projects are often underfunded (ibid: 1). The

Philippines government disaster response mechanisms have received high praise for their high

level of organisation (Tran, 2014). Since Typhoon Haiyan, the regional cash working group

(CWG) has been re-established, led by a dedicated cash coordinator whose remit is to provide

“coordination support and strategic inputs” to organisations using cash transfers in their

response (Smith, 2015: 8).

Despite the presence of the two coordination systems, UNICEF (2015) point out that there is

still a need for harmonisation of donor efforts as coordination issues during the Typhoon Haiyan

response meant that there was a duplication of efforts in some communities and other

communities were unreached altogether. (ACAPS, 2014: 5) also reports that previous disasters,

such as Typhoon Ketsana (2009), have shown that some national and international agencies

still do not understand the mandate of coordination system, therefore better clarification should

be provided.

2 A barangay is the smallest administrative unit in the Philippines, which is overseen by the barangay captain,

who is the highest elected official within that barangay.

22

2.6 Summary of findings from the Literature Review

Climate-related disasters are on the increase (UNIDSR, 2015);

The use of cash transfers in disaster responses is on the increase; rising from 1% to 6%

in the last decade (ODI, 2015);

The trend towards cash is driven by the VfM cash offers as it often more cost-effective

than in-kind aid. Cash can also empower victims of disasters and have positive

economic multiplier effects (ECHO, 2013);

Humanitarian work is going beyond providing for basic needs and also including re-

establishing livelihoods (UN, 2016);

There is an increase in the number of actors providing aid, with individual

philanthropists, the private sector and religious organisations playing a larger role

(Hudson Institute, 2011);

Cash transfers can be used to protect, promote and strengthen livelihoods; with

humanitarian work prioritising protective and promotive approaches (IFRC, 2011);

Cash is not suitable for all contexts, therefore careful market assessment should assess

its suitability (Elluard, 2015a);

There is still a need to increase the role of DRR is livelihood programming in order to

build the resilience of households (Jaspars et al, 2007);

The vulnerabilities faced by poor households are complex, therefore there is a nonlinear

relationship between an individual’s asset base and the sustainability of their livelihood

strategies (Devereux and Sabates-Wheeler, 2013);

The majority of livelihood programming focuses on asset creation, however, more

should focus on transforming the structures that negatively affect poor people’s

livelihood strategies (Devereux and Sabates-Wheeler, 2013);

The Sustainable Livelihoods Framework offers a holistic approach on how livelihood

assets, vulnerabilities and structures and institutions influence livelihood strategies,

however, inter-household differences need to be acknowledged (Kratz, 2001);

Power relations that increase vulnerabilities faced by women may be difficult to notice

for an outsider, therefore difficult to change (Moose, 1994);

Cash transfers can be used to empower women to make household spending decisions,

as seen in Mexico’s Oportunidades (DFID, 2011);

23

Women suffer disproportionately from disaster induced poverty and gender based

violence than men (ODI, 2014);

Lack of land ownership rights can disadvantage rural women more than men (OCHA,

2014). A transformative approach to livelihood programming can challenge the

structures and policies that disempower women;

The Philippines has an advanced DRM framework due to their high vulnerability to

natural disasters (Bowen, 2015);

Cash is a main component of the disaster response in the Philippines. The Early

Recovery and Livelihoods Cluster often use CFW programmes to repair damage to

assets and support local market recovery, however, early recovery is still underfunded

(USAID, 2014);

The Philippines CWG is helping to improve the coordination of NGOs using CTPs as

part of their disaster responses, however, there’s still some work to be done to improve

harmonisation of humanitarian actors (Smith, 2015).

2.6.1 Research Gaps The literature on the impact of cash transfers is mostly based on small-scale, individual

programme evaluations. A large amount of the data on the long-term effects of cash transfer

programmes is gathered from Latin America where robust monitoring and evaluation are inbuilt

when cash transfer programmes are first implemented with little evidence from Sub-Saharan

Africa (DFID, 2011).

Despite the increasing use of cash transfers, there are still key questions regarding appropriate

targeting, the ideal amount to issue, and the ideal duration of time to provide cash transfers and

how to cater for the needs of vulnerable groups such as women, orphans and disabled persons.

Research on the effects of cash transfer programmes on gender relations is scarce, with most

studies focusing on how women are disadvantaged by cash transfer programmes, but not on

empowerment (DFID, 2011). According to Browne (2014), much of the work written on this

topic relies on assumptions or is not evidence-based.

Gender mainstreaming isn’t prioritised in emergency cash transfer programmes, although some

programme evaluation papers have a short section considering the gender impact. Evaluations

24

many look at how men and women use cash differently but not the wider gender impacts, such

as how it affects social and household relations. The evidence is unclear whether cash improves

women’s bargaining power within the household (Hidrobo et al, 2012). There are also research

gaps in regards to evidence demonstrating the effects of public works programmes and the

potential of cash transfers to transform gender relations, as most studies have only analysed

how gender roles are affected (Holmes and Jones, 2010). Despite the increasing use of cash

transfers by aid agencies such as the UN, the Red Cross, governments and international NGOs,

they still only constitute 6% of total humanitarian spending today (ODI, 2015: 9).

Addressing Research Gaps

As according to the research gaps identified, this research seeks to address these gaps by

conducting a review of multiple programmes instead of adding to the vast amount of research

on individual evaluations. The research also seeks to focus on how women can be empowered

with cash transfers and how that affects intra-household and community level relationships.

Lastly, the significance given to gender mainstreaming practices by humanitarian actors is also

explored. By doing so, this research acts as a positive contribution to topics that have been

overlooked in research on cash transfers.

25

Chapter 3

Methodology

The main research objective is to analyse the extent to which cash transfer programmes

contribute to the recovery of livelihoods, following a disaster. As the Philippines is a

predominantly cash based economy, cash transfers are expected to play a central role in

livelihood recovery. In this section, the methodology adopted in this research is discussed.

3.0 Research Approach

Figure 3.0 illustrates the methodology employed in order to meet the research objectives.

Firstly, a review of relevant literature on disasters and cash transfer programming is conducted.

The emerging themes resulting from the literature review inform the research topics discussed

during the semi-structured interviews with key research informants. The conceptual framework,

DFID’s Sustainable Livelihood Framework (1999), acts as lens of analysis to organise data

gathered during the interviews and communicate effectively in the data analysis section.

Figure 3.0: Flowchart illustrating research methodology

26

3.1 Framework of analysis

DFID’s (1999) Sustainable Livelihoods Framework is used as the framework of analysis in this

research. Cash transfers can promote sustainable livelihoods by encouraging asset repair or

creation across five asset groups, therefore reducing the vulnerabilities faced by individuals and

households. The five asset groups are physical, natural, financial, human and social capital. The

data analysis focuses on how cash transfer programming managed to strengthen the asset base

of beneficiaries following Typhoon Haiyan and how the resilience of beneficiaries to recover

from future shocks was increased, especially women who are often more vulnerable than men

following a disaster. However, as the framework illustrates, asset creation alone is not sufficient

to address the vulnerability faced by poor households. Policies, institutions and processes

denote the influence that power relations have on promoting sustainable livelihoods because

they determine who has access to and control over assets required for livelihood strategies.

3.2 Research design

In an attempt to answer the research question, this paper adopts a case study research design

which analyses the emergency response to Typhoon Haiyan which occurred in the Philippines

in 2013. A case study design was chosen because it provides an opportunity to do an in-depth

study of an emergency response to a single disaster, especially given the limited time to carry

out the research. This approach also helps to focus the research, as ‘cash transfers’ is a broad

area of study. The research will also be comparative, as it seeks to compare cash transfers to in-

kind transfers in reconstruction and rebuilding livelihoods.

The Philippines was chosen as the research location as it has one of the highest climate-related

disaster risks in South East Asia. The government of Philippines (GoP) also have a well-

developed social assistance infrastructure with strong links to a disaster risk framework. Data

will be gathered from Cebu and Manila, which have been identified as the locations of NGOs

and government district offices that implemented cash transfer programmes. It has been three

years since Typhoon Haiyan occurred, therefore the researcher anticipates that is a good amount

of time to analyse the effects of cash transfer programmes (CTPs) implemented after the

disaster, especially to analyse their effectiveness in rebuilding sustainable livelihoods.

27

3.3 Sampling

The research is composed of an extensive literature review and a field-based evaluation. During

the field-based evaluation, a purposive sampling method was used to identify respondents from

humanitarian agencies that responded to Typhoon Haiyan using cash transfers. This sampling

technique involves identifying individuals who the researcher believes will provide the relevant

information required to answer the research questions (Cobley, 2015: 44). Strategic purposive

sampling was identified as the most appropriate as it allows the researcher to conduct an in-

depth study of a small sample group of NGOs, whilst focusing on a particular aspect of

assistance provided, cash transfers. It is also ideal due to the limit in time and resources

available.

An estimated 45 humanitarian agencies responded to Typhoon Haiyan using a component of

cash transfer programming (Carden and Clements, 2015:3). A large number of those

organisations have a permanent national presence in the Philippines and are members of the

Philippines Cash Working Group (CWG), which was re-established in 2013 and became

operational following Typhoon Haiyan3. The CWG is a forum for the sharing of technical

expertise on CTPs, which encourages preparedness and the coordination of humanitarian actors

using cash transfers in disaster responses. The sample of respondents for this research was

identified by contacting members of the Philippines CWG and arranging interviews with

informants who respondent to interview requests. The CWG is comprised of 55 members,

including 19 Financial Service Providers (FSPs). The group meets on a quarterly basis. The

steering committee of the group is comprised of 11 members who meet once a month. The

group is led by OCHA, with member organisations alternating to chair the meetings. Semi-

structured interviews were conducted with 9 humanitarian organisations and 1 FSP who are

members of the CWG: OXFAM, Catholic Relief Services (CRS), Tearfund, World Vision,

OCHA, World Food Programme (WFP), CARE, Philippine Red Cross, Christian Aid and

MLHuillier Financial Services. Interviews were also conducted with a local Faith Based

Organisation (FBO) in Manila, which preferred to remain anonymous, and Cebu Bible

Seminary. Various members of DSWD were contacted with interview requests, however, it was

not possible to meet representatives from the department due to organisational changes which

coincided with the appointment of the new president, Rodrigo Duterte, on the 30th of June 2016.

3 See http://www.cashlearning.org/philippines-cwg/philippines-cwg

28

3.4 Data collection

Primary qualitative data was gathered through semi-structured group and one-to-one interviews

with informants identified during the sampling stage. Open-ended questions were utilised

during the interviews to allow the respondents to share as much relevant information as they

felt appropriate. An example of a question asked is “How were cash transfers used to help those

affected by Typhoon Yolanda to recover their livelihoods?” however more information on the

questions used can be found in Appendix 1. The qualitative data gathered is crucial in

understanding the local context and a wide range of views expressed by respondents based on

their personal experiences (Yin, 2009). In order to triangulate the data gathered during

interviews, the researcher also used grey literature produced by iNGOs, including some that

was discussed in the literature review chapter. This includes programme evaluations of cash

based interventions and cash guidelines from donor and government agencies.

3.5 Ethical issues

As the research was conducted in a foreign country to the researcher, it was imperative to be

aware of cultural norms in order to avoid behaviour that may be offensive to locals and

respondents. Research respondents were made aware of the research objectives in order to allow

them to provide their full consent to take part in the research. Respondents were given the right

to withdraw at any point and the right to anonymity if preferred. Moreover, as the research

focuses on a disaster that killed many people and destroyed the lives of many, a high level of

sensitivity was employed by the researcher by avoiding any sensitive personal questions

regarding the respondent’s own private experience with the Typhoon.

3.6 Limitations

As a result of time and financial constraints, the amount of data gathered is insufficient to make

any robust policy recommendations, however, it provides a valuable insight into the use of

CTPs in the Philippines following a disaster. Furthermore, the research findings are largely

influenced by the framework of analysis utilised, the sample of respondents and the qualitative

data shared by the respondents. As purposive sampling was used, the findings can be subject to

researcher bias. Moreover, the views expressed in the interviews represent individual views and

not the views of the organisations represented. Data triangulation through the review of grey

and academic literature contributes to the reduction of researcher bias. Language barriers may

also affect the way that data is interpreted.

29

Chapter 4

Analysis

4.0 Introduction

In this chapter, the data gathered from the review of literature and field based evaluation is

analysed. The data will be used to answer the overall research question - To what extent do cash

transfers contribute to the recovery of livelihoods in a post-disaster setting? The chapter will be

divided into four main parts in order to organise the findings. The first part will aim to analyse

the motivations of humanitarian actors in using cash transfers in a disaster response, the

associated challenges and the steps taken to mitigate risks. The second part will analyse the

livelihood programming methods employed by the humanitarian actors and the perceived

benefits they yielded. The third part will analyse how gender equality was promoted in cash

transfer programmes. The fourth part will discuss the payment mechanisms employed and their

potential for improving cash transfer programmes. The fifth part will discuss the criticisms and

limitations of the findings. The final part will discuss recommendations for future livelihood

programming in a post-disaster setting.

4.1 Contextual background

4.1.1 Impact of the Typhoon on Livelihoods

Super-typhoon Haiyan made landfall in the Philippines on the 8th of November 2013 –

registering as a category 5 typhoon – one of the strongest ever tropical cyclones recorded in the

Philippines. The typhoon affected over 12 million people and killed over 6,200 (Lemke, 2015).

More than 1.1 million homes were destroyed or damaged and 5.9 million people lost their

sources of income (CARE, 2015b: 2). Tacloban, in region VIII, was one of the worst affected

with 90% of building destroyed or damaged (Pohl, 2014). Agriculture and fisheries were the

worst affected livelihoods, especially along coastal areas where fishing is the main livelihood

strategy for 15% of households and 45% of households inland depend on farming for their

livelihood (OCHA, 2014: 10). Over 33 million coconut trees were destroyed, which severely

affected the livelihood strategies of over a million farming household (OXFAM, 2014: 1;

DEC/HC, 2015).

30

4.1.2 Humanitarian Response

Super-Typhoon Haiyan triggered a Level 3 (L3) emergency disaster response which indicates

the highest level of humanitarian crisis. The markets were functioning two weeks after the

typhoon hit, which is why cash transfers were appropriate for use in the emergency response.

In the first critical days after the disaster, DSWDs 4Ps programme was used to identify families

that could be enrolled for various rehabilitation programs, such as the cash-for-work and cash-

for-asset rebuilding (Bowen, 2015).

45 international humanitarian agencies used cash transfers in their emergency response,

reaching 1.4 million affected people (Carden and Clements, 2015:3). Cash transfer programmes

targeted the most critical needs of those affected, such as providing food security, shelter and

livelihoods recovery. The key implementing partners were UNICEF, the United Nations World

Food Programme (WFP), OXFAM International and Philippines Red Cross. These 4

humanitarian agencies provided cash transfers of a combined estimated value of $36 million

(P1.5 billion) to 1.4 million people, with 759,000 affected individuals receiving unconditional

cash transfers.

Cash was provided through emergency employment, cash-for-work, livelihoods recovery

interventions and unconditional cash grants. Unconditional cash transfers were 23% of the cash

transfer programmes, with 77% being conditional cash transfers (CCTs). Short-term

employment through CFW was considered a way to restore the economy and provide

vulnerable families with income (OCHA, 2013: 1-3). UNICEF and WFP used DWSD’s social

safety net programme infrastructure, 4Ps, as an emergency cash delivery mechanism (OCHA,

2014).

Data Analysis

4.2 Livelihood Cash Programming Immediate support to livelihoods was provided in the form of conditional grants to support

small enterprises and shelter repair, CFW to clear debris and coconut trees, asset replacement

grants to replace fishing assets such as boats, intercropping technical training and seeds to

restart agricultural livelihoods (OCHA, 2014: 6). Figure 4.0 illustrates the cash transfers that

were used in the Typhoon experience, grouped by which capital they strengthened or protected.

31

Figure 4.0: List of cash instruments used to restore livelihoods, grouped by capital

During the relief phase, CFW and UCTs were the main instruments used to protect livelihoods

by provisioning for immediate needs and reducing negative coping mechanisms. CRS ran a

large-scale CFW programme that targeted 20,000 families for shelter repair by providing them

with conditional cash grants to build their own home (Ahmed and Hrybk, 2016: 4).

Beneficiaries also had an option of a direct build but 88% of beneficiaries overwhelmingly

chose the cash option. By using cash for livelihood provisioning, beneficiaries were able to

meet their urgent needs whilst restoring a physical asset. In another project, WFP found that

even without explicitly placing conditions on usage, monitoring revealed that on average, 60%

of the UCT value was used to provision for basic needs, and the remaining amount was used

for livelihoods recovery and education4. This supports the notion that beneficiaries are able to

prioritise their own needs appropriately, as discussed in the literature review. An important

detail to note is that expenditure of cash by beneficiaries is highly dependent on the cash transfer

amount. Basic needs must be met first before cash is used for other needs, therefore if the

amount is insufficient to cover basic needs, then livelihoods could be adversely affected because

individuals are likely to resort to negative coping mechanisms such as selling productive assets.

4 See Appendix 1, interview 7 with WFP

32

As the relief phase was evolving into early recovery, more conditions were placed on cash

assistance (USAID, 2014)5. This may due to the fact that livelihood grants are generally of a

larger amount than cash used for meeting basic needs.

Human and financial capital were strengthened through capacity building training combined

with conditional livelihoods grants. The Philippine Red Cross provided a livelihood grant on

the condition that a household’s livelihood proposal was approved by the Barangay Recovery

Committee6. Tearfund implemented a similar programme whereby a livelihoods cash grant of

12,850PhP was given to 2,000 vulnerable families on the condition that beneficiaries complete

technical training on a chosen livelihood strategy and cash management training7. They found

that those who were more creative with their livelihoods were more successful. While barangay

committees were composed of different members of the community to ‘reduce favouritism’8,

it’s not clear if beneficiaries agreed that the selection process wasn’t biased. Even if members

of the community are represented equally, it doesn’t necessarily translate to equal voice due to

the complex nature of power dynamics. These entrenched power relations within society are

difficult to change, however, the inclusion of representatives from the local community is a

positive step.

Physical assets were recovered through asset rehabilitation projects that provided cash to create

and repair assets such as boats and agricultural tools9. CRS provided cash grants of $230 to

blacksmiths to produce tools, such as sundangs (local machetes) to be sold in input fairs as part

of their Livelihood Early Recovery Support to Agricultural Households programme (CRS,

2015). By targeting market intermediaries such as blacksmiths, they were able to restart

livelihoods of the blacksmiths and also restart livelihoods of individuals who required the tools

for their livelihood strategies. Agricultural livelihoods were also strengthened by providing

vouchers to purchase high quality seeds at the input fairs. CFW was also used to repair physical

assets such as roads that were used for access to markets. For vulnerable groups such as persons

with disabilities (PWDs), pregnant and lactating women and the elderly, UCTs were provided

5 See USAID Fact Sheet on Typhoon Haiyan/Yolanda in Philippines. Available at:

[http://iipdigital.usembassy.gov/st/english/texttrans/2013/11/20131112286248.html#ixzz4IYFj6RTR]. 6 See Appendix 1, interview 2 with Philippine Red Cross 7 See Appendix 1, interview 4 with Tearfund 8 See Appendix 1, interview 2 with Philippine Red Cross 9 See Appendix 1, interview 7 (WFP), interview 1 (CRS)

33

as financial capital or they were paid for childminding for individuals who were able to work.

The payment was at the same rate as those participating in CFW programmes.

Agricultural households often employ multiple livelihoods strategies to make enough money to

feed their families because rural wages are lower than urban wages (Dario, 2015). Therefore

when affected by disaster, it is no surprise that CFW is more widely used and accepted by the

community, compared to other cash instruments because communities are so accustomed to

being active. This was reflected when OXFAM’s CFW programme was accepted by a disaster

affected community over an unconditional cash grant offered by another organisation10.

However, with CFW, it’s important to structure programmes in a way that doesn’t disrupt the

labour markets by taking people away from their permanent jobs. Furthermore, setting the right

wage may be challenging. By setting wages at a low rate, this ensures that only the really poor

participate. However, during the typhoon response, a private sector Buddhist organisation, Tzu

Chi foundation set the wage significantly above minimum wage, whilst other organisations kept

wages at minimum wage11. In reality, this makes sense because prices of goods had risen after

the disaster, therefore people would require more money to buy the same quantity of goods.

However, this could divert people away from their jobs if it pays less than the CFW value.

Diligence must be taken to ensure beneficiaries are aware that the project is short-tem.

4.3 Gender

Assessing attitudes to gender mainstreaming revealed widely varied approaches to gender

equality. OXFAM integrated gender equality into their overall response objectives by running

gender awareness sessions for staff and partners and also ran research assessing gender roles in

order to create a gender snapshot, which was shared with other agencies12. OXFAM’s gender

strategy is illustrated below in Figure 4.1. CARE also focused a large amount of their response

on empowering women (CARE, 2015a).

10 See Appendix 1, interview 5 with OXFAM 11 See Appendix 1, interviews 5 and 8 with OXFAM and World Vision (respectively) 12 See Appendix 1, Interview 5 with OXFAM

34

Figure 4.1: OXFAM Gender Strategy for Typhoon Haiyan Response. Source: (House, 2016: 62)

Humanitarian Quality Assurance: Philippines. Evaluation of Oxfam’s humanitarian response to

Typhoon Haiyan (Yolanda).

In sharp contrast, one respondent stated that “gender inequality isn’t much of a problem in the

Philippines”13. Interestingly, official data shows that the labour force participation rate was 50%

for women and 77% for men in 2015 (ILO, 2015)14. Also, official data from the Philippine

Department of Labour and Employment states that “men dominate the workforce by accounting

for more than 60% of those employed” (GoP, 2011: 12). The number of women who are part

of the informal economy or vulnerable employment, is higher than that of men at a national rate

of 44%, which increases to 59% in typhoon affected areas (OCHA, 2013: 16). Nevertheless,

another respondent highlighted that, in the domestic sphere, women usually make decisions on

food, however, most other household decisions are made jointly indicating that women’s

household decision making power is just as strong as men’s, if not stronger15.

CFW initiatives encouraged gender equality by informing the target community that both

women and men were eligible to participate in programmes as long as they had the physical

ability to perform the tasks required. Despite that, participants generally stuck to usual gender

13 See Appendix 1, Interview 8 with World Vision 14 The labour force participation rate expresses the labour force as a percent of the working-age population. For

more information, see http://www.ilo.org/. 15 See Appendix 1, Interview 7 with WFP

35

norms with only men participating in construction work in Tearfund’s cash-for-shelter

programme in spite of physical signs erected to emphasise that both men and women were

welcome16. Some men were concerned about women’s ability to do as much work as the men

and some construction managers were worried that women would hurt themselves at

constructions sites. Comparably, WFP had a target of a 50/50 representation of male and female

beneficiaries in the cash-for-assets programme, with women generally carrying out lighter tasks

such as clearing and weeding or supervisory roles17. The promotion of the equal representation

of men and women in CFW programmes is positive, however, an active effort must also be

made to ensure that women’s workload in the domestic sphere is also reduced so that they don’t

have to be disadvantaged by a ‘double burden’ (Agarwal, 1997: 23)18. CARE tackled this by

running gender equality sessions for men and women in which men were actively encouraged

to share household duties with women during the male-only sessions19.

When asked how cash transfers were used to transform gender relations, one of the

humanitarian practitioners stated that “changing gender practices and culture was not part of

the programme objectives”.20 This remark raises an important question: are humanitarian

response programmes the appropriate forum to address cultural norms and structures that

determine gender roles within a society? Perhaps those types of issues should be dealt with in

a wider development context. The tangible benefits of humanitarian programmes that aim to

get men and women to carry out gender reversed roles is questionable. It is highly likely that

women and men would just go back to performing traditional roles once the programme is over

because social attitudes and traditions take a long time to change. Nonetheless, this doesn’t

suggest that an effort shouldn’t be made to encourage women and men to take on roles that they

don’t traditionally take during a disaster response. There can be many benefits to that, for

example, a man looking after the children or cooking whilst his wife attends a meeting with a

female-led cooperative can lead to increased income for that household21. However,

development practitioners should be realistic about the benefits of such programmes and be

willing to acknowledge that incremental gains achieved from such initiatives can only be

sustained in the long-term if there is a smooth transition from the recovery programme to longer

16 See Appendix 1, Interview 4 with Tearfund 17 See Appendix 1, Interview 7 with WFP 18 The term “double burden” is used to refer to women’s formal participation in the labour market whilst also

engaging in unpaid domestic labour. 19 See Appendix 1, Interview 6 with CARE 20 See Appendix 1, Interview 8 with World Vision 21 See Appendix 1, Interview 5 with OXFAM

36

term development initiatives working to transform social attitudes, structures and institutions

that create gender equality.

Gender empowerment of women often took place by increasing their human capital through

livelihoods and skills training sessions22. There was a sense of empowerment expressed by

women who acquired training on new skills. Some reported feeling more respected by

community members because of their increased knowledge, therefore increasing their human

capital but also their social capital. Women were the main attendants at skills training sessions

because men culturally travel for work23. Paris et al (2009) report that male migration in the

Philippines can empower women as they are involved in more decision making when their

husbands are away. This resulted in a diversification of women’s livelihoods due to new skills

and led to more women entering formal employment. CARE reported that 53% of women were

leading livelihoods and trying livelihood activities such as retail, vending and sari-sari24 stores

for the first time and 60 female entrepreneurs were supported and empowered to boost their

own enterprises (CARE, 2015a: 8, 11).

DFID Sustainable Livelihood Framework implies the importance of power relations in the

structures, policies and institutions part of the framework. Therefore, more work should be done

to focus on gender relations instead of gender roles alone. OCHA reiterate this point by

suggesting that when discussing gender mainstreaming, it’s important to not just focus on

women but look at both sexes to determine power dynamics25.

4.4 Vulnerability context

Elluard (2015a: 8) notes that the Sustainable Livelihoods Framework demonstrates how cash

can be effective at each level of the framework, however, the data gathered shows that the

majority of livelihood interventions are focused on increasing livelihood capitals. CRS,

Tearfund and World Vision provided cash-for-training, which in turn allowed households to

diversify their livelihoods and reduce vulnerability to shocks26. Livelihood strengthening was

also used to reduce vulnerabilities by making livelihoods more sustainable through teaching

22 See Appendix 1, Interviews 1, 4, 5 and 6 with CRS, Tearfund, OXFAM and CARE 23 See Appendix 1, Interview 1 with CRS 24 Sari-sari stores are small convenience stores 25 See Appendix 1, Interview 9 with OCHA 26 See Appendix 1, Interviews 1, 4 and 8 with CRS, Tearfund and World Vision

37

improved farming techniques to farmers or business management training to small business

owners as part of cash-for-training projects (CRS, 2015).

The Government of Philippines developed a Reconstruction Assistance on Yolanda (RAY) plan

to provide guidance on the recovery and reconstruction of the economy and livelihoods, with

the theme of building back better. The RAY recommended building more disaster-resilient

homes and relocating households from disaster prone areas to reduce vulnerability (GoP, 2013:

19). Similarly, CARE’s livelihood programme trained 500 community carpenters to rebuild

more disaster resilient homes and OXFAM trained staff on disaster resilient building techniques

as part of their cash-for-shelter programme (CARE, 2015a: 2; House, 2016). Combaz (2014: 1)

reports that disaster resilience is more cost-effective and sustainable than disaster relief and

development aid, therefore there should be more of a drive to invest in disaster risk reduction

(DRR) strategies in order to protect livelihoods.

4.5 Transforming Structures and Processes

As mentioned in the SLF, policies and laws influence people’s livelihoods strategies. This was

evidenced during the initial employment of CFW programmes to repair physical assets. Under

Filipino law, CFW programmes are required to follow labour rights laws and conditions such

as providing health insurance, tetanus vaccinations and a workers must own a social security

account (Brown, 2015). Once realising that the process would take months to complete for all

beneficiaries, the Inter-Cluster coordination group worked with the government to waive some

of the policies but still adhere to mandatory requirements. This relaxation of guidelines

provided access to livelihood provisioning income to many people who would have been

otherwise excluded. This demonstrates the influence structures, policies and institutions have

on access to the capitals.

A well-designed government structure that was used to provision livelihoods is the 4Ps

infrastructure. WFP were able to utilise DSWDs 4Ps mechanism to quickly identify poor

households who were in disaster affected areas and provide a top up payment to complement

money received from the government (Lim, 2014). 4Ps recipients were targeted because the

beneficiaries were already among the poorest people in society, therefore if they were in a

disaster affected region, their ability to cope with the shock was low27. To enhance the cash-

27 See Appendix 1, Interview 7 and 9 with WFP and OCHA (respectively)

38

for-assets project, WFP also partnered with the Department of Agricultural Reform to provide

tools and seeds for livelihood recovery to promote food security. By utilising an existing

structure, WFP were able to reach beneficiaries quicker in order to reduce their vulnerability

and increase their financial capital.

4.6 Motivations for using cash transfers

There are many humanitarian and pragmatic reasons for using cash transfers in a disaster

response, some of which have been discussed in the literature review section. Whilst the reasons

provided by the research informants were in agreement with the literature, there was a

unanimous agreement that the benefits and challenges associated with cash transfer

programming are all context specific, depending on a myriad of factors. A respondent from

OCHA emphasises that “every emergency has a different profile, therefore, a thorough needs

and market assessment should be carried out to check if markets are sustainable through the

supply chain and determine what approach is best for the people”28. The impact of a cash

injection on local markets should also be considered. If performed well, cash can have multiple

advantages for implementing agencies, beneficiaries and the population.

4.4.1 Advantages of using cash transfers

The responses from the research respondents about the potential advantages of using cash

transfers are illustrated in Figure 4.2. The advantages are grouped according to who they

benefited: the implementing agency, project beneficiaries or the wider population. The

advantages experienced by agencies are associated with saving money, time and increased

security compared to in-kind aid. Whereas advantages experienced by beneficiaries were

attributed to increased empowerment to be in control of their recovery process, increased

ownership of the cash projects and flexibility of cash to meet multiple needs. Multiplier effects

of cash were thought to be experienced by the wider population as a result of stronger markets,

including better access to markets through CFW programmes aimed at clearing debris or

repairing market access roads, which in turn strengthen the local economy.

28 See Appendix 1, interview 9 with OCHA

39

Figure 4.2 Flowchart illustrating advantages of CTPs

The potential of cash transfers to strengthen the economy was the overwhelmingly frequent

reason cited for using cash transfers, mentioned nearly by all respondents. Jermaine from

OXFAM highlighted that the Philippines economy is cash based, that’s why cash transfers are

so important in recovering livelihoods following a disaster. He went on to say “…people have

no food after a disaster mainly because of 3 reasons: the markets are down, they have no money

or their livelihoods are affected. Cash transfers provide an answer to these three issues.”29

An advantage of using cash transfers in the Philippines, in particular, is that Financial Service

Providers (FSPs) already have experience using cash because of 4Ps infrastructure and history

of cash transfers being utilised by DWSD in many post-disaster settings, which is becoming the

“new normal” method of delivering assistance.30 An unexpected response was that cash

29 See Appendix 1, interview 5 with OXFAM 30 See http://odihpn.org/magazine/are-cash-transfers-the-%C2%91new-normal%C2%92-in-the-philippines-

challenges-and-opportunities-from-typhoon-haiyan/

40

transfers can improve the negotiating position of recipients31. This benefit is likely to be

minimal since negotiating in markets is part of an everyday occurrence for many households,

therefore the ability to negotiate shouldn’t theoretically be increased by one cash transfer

programme. However, by increasing cash and implementing asset recovery programmes,

households can benefit from increased collateral for accessing loans from banks and financial

institutions.

As noted in the literature, CRS (2015) found that cash was more cost-effective as a method of

assistance than in-kind support because it cost £18.50 to deliver cash, but the cost increased to

$23 for the direct build approach in the cash-for-shelter programme. Tearfund also reported that

they were able to provide a second payment tranche to beneficiaries, which wasn’t part of the

original programme, because of the money saved by using cash transfers instead of in-kind

aid32. A noteworthy observation that emerged is that all agencies interviewed used a

combination of cash transfers and complementary in-kind aid to help beneficiaries meet

immediate needs and recover their livelihoods. Therefore it was less about a choice between

cash or in-kind, but more about what the right combination of cash and in-kind support was

appropriate for the targeted communities.

4.4.2 Challenges of using cash transfers

Figure 4.3 lists the challenges of using cash transfers, as identified by the research respondents.

These are grouped according to which stage of monitoring they are identified in: process or

impact monitoring. Process monitoring evaluates a programme’s appropriateness, relevance

and design to judge whether it meets the needs of beneficiaries; whilst impact monitoring

examines the effect of the programme33.

The most common challenge identified was the misuse of funds by beneficiaries for uses that

are not aligned with programme objectives, however, there is an acknowledgement that

slippages can’t completely be avoided if beneficiaries are given the power to prioritise their

own needs with cash transfers. As a respondent from Christian Aid points out, some

organisations are hesitant to give cash because of the perception that people will use it for

31 See Appendix 1, interview 6 with CARE 32 See Appendix 1, interview 4 with Tearfund 33 E-learning course ‘Introduction to Cash Transfer Programming’. IFRC Learning portal. Available at:

http://www.cashlearning.org/capacity-building-and-learning/introduction-to-ctp-online

41

unintended purposes34. The risk of anti-social spending can be mitigated by an efficient

targeting system that ensures that cash is given to beneficiaries who really need it35.

Figure 4.3: List of challenges associated with CTPs

Time to mobilise CTPs and security risks associated with large-scale cash transfer programmes,

such as those carried out during the Typhoon Haiyan response, were also cited as common

challenges. It’s interesting that the two main advantages, time and security, were also cited as

some of the top challenges. Mobilisation of CTPs takes time, especially when targeting is not

universal. Targeting during Haiyan was especially difficult due to the large number of people

affected by the typhoon. Identifying potential beneficiaries who had gone below the poverty

line as a result of the typhoon was challenging as they were not already part of DSWDs 4Ps

safety net programme36. The appeal of cash also brought increased risk of theft and diversion.

Security risks of carrying large amounts of money can be mitigated in ways such as increasing

security at disbursment locations, using remittance companies to pay out cash, or using

vouchers or mobile money transfers to pay beneficiaries37. Whilst employing risk mitigation

strategies or investing in technological innovation to enhance payment systems, caution must

34 See Appendix 1, interview 3 with Christian Aid 35 See Appendix 1, interview 7 with WFP 36 See Appendix 1, Interview 9 with OCHA 37 See Appendix 1, interview 10 with MLHuillier

42

be taken to ensure costs incurred by beneficiaries are kept at a minimum, such as transport costs

to withdraw money from an ATM38.

Lack of coordination between humanitarian actors was also a significant problem. This resulted

in some areas receiving large amounts of assistance, with some receiving very little or none at

all. The local churches and grassroots organisations were vital in helping people in devastated

areas which hadn’t received humanitarian aid areas39. In order to promote better coordination

in future disaster responses, the Philippines CWG has been established as a forum to share

experiences and guidelines and encourage better harmonisation of humanitarian actors using

market based responses (Smith, 2015)40.

4.7 Summary of findings

Cash transfers were used in livelihood programming focused on increasing human,

natural, physical, social and financial capitals;

Cash intervention was often combined with other interventions such as capacity

building and agricultural tools provision;

During the relief phase, CFW and UCTs were the main instruments used to in livelihood

provision and protection;

Conditional livelihood grants were used more frequently during the transition from

relief to recovery. This may be due to livelihood grants being larger payments than

grants for basic needs;

Cash transfers are popular in livelihood programming because they can cater to the

diverse livelihood strategies people employ;

Cash transfer programming for livelihood recovery is important in a cash-based

economy such as the Philippines;

Women were empowered through membership in a barangay committee, although it is

not clear if they had an equal voice to the men in the committees;

38 See Appendix 1, Interview 7 with WFP 39 See Appendix 1, interviews 11,12 and 13 with Cebu Bible Seminary and Interview 14 with a Manila based

FBO 40 Smith (2015) reviews the cash coordination of the Typhoon Haiyan response and suggests that OCHA assume

a cash coordination role in the Philippines and deploy a ‘dedicated surge role’ when a L2 or L3 emergency

occurs.

43

Women also felt empowered through cash-for-training initiatives as they felt that they

gained more respect from their community;

Both men and women had access to CFW programmes, based on ability. Men typically

did the manual labour whilst women supervised or did smaller tasks;

There was a wide range of views on the importance of gender mainstreaming with some

respondents stating that it was central to their overall response, whilst other views

expressed that gender inequality is not an issue in the Philippines;

The vulnerability context was addressed in cash-for-shelter programmes by building

more disaster resilient homes. Cash for training to improve farming techniques was also

used to reduce seasonal vulnerability;

The role of religious organisations and grassroots organisations in responding to the

needs of disaster victims with cash and in-kind support in areas that received little

humanitarian coverage was recognised.

Advantages and disadvantages of using cash transfers were identified as being context

specific, however, some risks such as security risks, can be mitigated through the use of

FSPs or mobile technology to provide cash payments. Correct targeting can minimise

anti-social spending.

44

Chapter 5

Conclusion

The use of cash transfers in disaster responses is increasing, particularly for food security and

livelihood recovery. Owing to the growing body of evidence on the pragmatic and humanitarian

benefits of cash transfer programming, such as the cost-effectiveness of cash, positive economic

multiplier effects and flexibility to provide multi-sectoral support, the ‘cash revolution’ is

growing at a significant rate.

The evidence reviewed has demonstrated that cash based livelihood programming plays a vital

role in leading the transition from relief to recovery by supporting market recovery, replacing

or strengthening livelihood assets and diversifying livelihood strategies. So as to enhance the

benefits resulting from cash programming, supporting activities should be used in parallel with

cash provision. For instance, the provision of cash grants to restart agricultural livelihoods can

be supplemented by provision of agricultural tools and seeds. In order for sustainable graduation

to occur, considerable progress should be made in integrating disaster risk mechanisms and

livelihood programming to reduce vulnerability to shocks.

The empowerment of women can through changing cultural perceptions of their roles within

their households, as decision makers, and in their communities as respected community leaders.

Capacity training and diversification of livelihoods can have transformative effects of

introducing women into the formal economy. Nonetheless, vulnerabilities faced by women as

a result of existing power dynamics can be difficult, if not impossible to change in short-term

recovery programmes, however, the gains made in the empowerment of women should be

sustained through ongoing development work. A transformative approach to livelihood

programming can challenge the structures and policies that disempower women.

45

Limitations

1. This research has predominantly focused on the role large NGOs in providing cash

transfers for livelihoods, which excludes other significant actors such as the private

sector and religious organisations, which often contribute a substantial amount, but

many provide aid outside the local and national government systems. Understanding the

role of religious organisations can be particularly important for the Philippines

considering that it is a highly religious country with over 90% of the population being

Christian and 5% Muslim (CIA, 2016). They can play a large role in being the first

responders and also help those in areas that are not reached by the government and

humanitarian agencies.

2. Owing to the combination of cash and in-kind aid to supplement livelihood recovery

programmes, it is difficult to attribute results to cash alone. Also, if disaster affected

individuals receive aid from a variety of organisations, their spending habits and

livelihood strategies can change, therefore it’s difficult to attribute positive livelihood

results to a single programme.

3. In relation to the primary data analysed; it is based on individual views and perceptions,

therefore it is important to note that it might not reflect reality. Triangulation of

responses with evaluation reports minimises this responder bias but doesn’t remove it

entirely.

4. As qualitative data was gathered, conclusions can’t be made about the actual impact of

programmes, especially conclusions on the sustainability of the livelihoods strategies.

It is difficult to judge if livelihood sustainability was increased through the projects

without comparing losses incurred during Haiyan to losses incurred in a similar style

disaster, which hasn’t occurred yet in the Philippines at this moment in time. That is the

complexity with DRR. It is impossible to tell if it’s effective until a similar shock is

experienced.

46

Recommendations

Recommendation 1: A shift should occur from focusing on just increasing an individual’s asset

base to integrating more DRR into programming. Therefore cash should be used to use more

livelihood strengthening activities and early warning systems

Recommendation 2: For livelihoods to be sustainable, local actors should be given a larger role

to play so that development programmes can sustain gains made through early recovery.

Recommendation 3: More investment should be made into DRR to reduce losses caused by

shocks. Rather solely focusing on increasing the various capitals, vulnerability needs to be

reduced.

Recommendation 4: Coordination is still an issue, however, institutionalisation of the CWG is

a positive steps. There is scope to carry out training or invite small national NGOS and FBOs

to cash training events to increase their capacity to provide cash, their knowledge of different

types of cash programming and encourage integration with local and national DRM systems.

Recommendation 5: There is still more work to be done with gender mainstreaming. Baseline

information should be collected before a disaster and compared with primary data gathered after

the disaster takes place to create a gender snapshot. More attention should be on power relations

and less on gender roles.

Recommendation 6: Technical innovation should continue to focus not only on more effective

methods for delivering cash, but also methods of promoting financial inclusion of the poor and

providing access to credit markets. More initiatives should bring the poor, especially those in

rural areas, into the formal economy.

47

Bibliography

ACAPS (2014). PHILIPPINES Typhoon Yolanda: Secondary Data Review. [Online].

Available from:

http://library.pcw.gov.ph/sites/default/files/140111%20SDR%20Yolanda%20Philippines%20

final.pdf. [Accessed: 3 September 2016.]

Agarwal, B. (1997). Bargaining and Gender Relations: Within and Beyond the Household.

Feminist Economics. 3 (1): 1-51.

Ahmed, M., and Hrybk, A. (2016). Pintakasi – A review of shelter/WASH delivery methods

in post-disaster or recovery interventions. Catholic Relief Services

Bowen, T. (2015). Social protection and disaster risk management in the Philippines: the case

of typhoon Yolanda (Haiyan). World Bank Policy Research Working Paper, (7482).

Brown, A. (2015). Are cash transfers the ‘new normal’ in the Philippines? Challenges and

opportunities from typhoon Haiyan. Special Feature. The Typhoon Haiyan Response.

Humanitarian Exchange No.63. Pp29-32

Browne, E. (2014). Evidence on impact of emergency cash transfers on gender and

protection. Helpdesk Report. GSDRC

Carden, D. and Clements, A.J., (2015) Coordinating the Response to Typhoon Haiyan.

Special Feature. The Typhoon Haiyan Response. Humanitarian Exchange No.63. Pp3-5

CARE (2015a). Two years after Haiyan. Empowered Women & Girls, Resilient

Communities. CARE Philippines Annual Report 2014-2015

CARE (2015b) Household Cash Transfer Assessment: Typhoon Haiyan Recovery Response.

Promoting Resilient and Sustainable Livelihoods. CARE Philippines.

Chambers, R., and Conway, G, (1992). Sustainable Rural Livelihoods: Practical concepts for

the 21st Century. IDS Discussion Paper 296, IDS, Brighton.

Christian Aid (2012). How Christian Aid Assesses Value for Money in its Programmes.

Value For Money. [Online] Available from: christianaid.typepad.com/files/13-432-j443-

value-for-money-aw-web-2.pdf. [Accessed: 18 August 2016]

48

CIA (2016). Philippines Country Profile. CIA World Factbook. [Online] Available from:

[https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/geos/rp.html. [Accessed: 9

September 2016]

Cobley, D. (2015). IDD Dissertation Handbook. International Development Department.

University of Birmingham.

Combaz, E. (2014) Disaster Resilience Topic Guide. GSDRC.

CRED (2009). The International Disaster Database. EM-DAT. [Online]. Available from:

http://www.emdat.be/. [Accessed 20 August 2016]

CRS (2015). Support to the Local Tool Market Post-Typhoon Haiyan. Study Brief.

Dario, B. (2015). Poverty in the Philippines: Lack of Vision, Yet New Solutions? [Online]

Available from: http://www.poverties.org/blog/poverty-in-the-philippines. [Accessed: 1

September 2016]

DEC/HC (2015). Haiyan Response Review. Humanitarian Coalition. Disasters Emergency

Committee and Humanitarian Coalition.

Devereux, S. and Sabates-Wheeler, R., (2004). Transformative social protection. IDS

Working Paper 232

Devereux, S. and Sabates-Wheeler, R. (2013) Sustainable Graduation from Social Protection

Programmes. Development and Change. Vol 44, Issue 4. Pp911-938

DFID (2011) Cash Transfers: A literature review. Evidence Paper. Policy Division. DFID:

London

DFID (1999). Sustainable Livelihoods Guidance Sheets. Department for International

Development.

ECHO (2013). The Use of Cash and Vouchers in Humanitarian Crises: DG ECHO Funding

Guidelines. European Commission.

Ellis, F. and Biggs, S. (2001). Evolving themes in rural development 1950s‐

2000s. Development policy review, 19(4), pp.437-448

Elluard, C. (2015a). Guidance Notes. Cash Transfers in Livelihood Programming – West

Africa. CaLP.

Elluard, C. (2015b). Guidelines on Cash Transfers and Livelihoods – Latin America. CaLP.

49

Eyben, R., Kabeer, N., and Cornwall, A. (2008). Conceptualising empowerment and the

implications for pro poor growth. A paper for the DAC Poverty Network. IDS

Farrington, J., Carney, D., Ashley, C., and Turton, C. (1999). Sustainable Livelihoods in

Practice: Early applications of concepts in rural areas. Overseas Development Institute. Vol.

42

GoP (2012). Primer: The National Disaster Risk Reduction and Management Plan

(NDRRMP) 2011-2028. Government of Philippines. [Online] Available from:

http://www.dilg.gov.ph/PDF_File/reports_resources/DILG-Resources-2012116-

ab6ce90b0d.pdf. [Accessed: 3rd June 2016].

GoP (2011). The Philippine Labor and Employment Plan 2011-2016. Inclusive Growth

through Decent and Productive Work. Department of Labor and Employment. Government of

Philippines.

GoP (2013). Reconstruction Assistance on Yolanda. Build Back Better. National Economic

and Development Authority

Hidrobo, M., Hoddinott, J., Margolies, A., Moreira, V. and Peterman, A. (2012). Impact

Evaluation of Cash, Food Vouchers, and Food Transfers among Colombian Refugees and

Poor Ecuadorians in Carchi and Sucumbíos. Washington, DC: International Food Policy

Research Institute.

Holmes, R. and Jones, N. (2010). Rethinking social protection using a gender lens. ODI

Working Paper, 320.

House, S., (2016). Humanitarian Quality Assurance: Philippines. Evaluation of Oxfam’s

humanitarian response to Typhoon Haiyan (Yolanda). Effectiveness Review Series 2014–15.

OXFAM

Hudson Institute (2011). The Index of Global Philanthropy and Remittances. [Online].

Available from:

[http://www.hudson.org/content/researchattachments/attachment/1229/2013_indexof_global_

philanthropyand_remittances.pdf. [Accessed: 1 September 2016.]

Humble, M. (1998). Assessing PRA for Implementing Gender and Development. Irene Guijt

and Meera Kaul Shua (eds). The Myth of Community: Gender issues in participatory

development. IT Publications.

50

Hussein, K., and Nelson, J. (1998). Sustainable Livelihoods and Livelihood Diversification.

IDS Working Paper 69, IDS, Brighton.

ICAI (2011). ICAI’s Approach to Effectiveness and Value for Money. Independent

Commission for Aid Impact.

IFRC (2011). IFRC guidelines for livelihoods programming. International Federation of Red

Cross and Red Crescent Societies.

IFRC (2015) World Disasters Report 2015. Focus on local actors, the key to humanitarian

effectiveness.

Infante-Villarroel, M (2015). Building Resilience, Equity and Opportunity in Myanmar: The

Role of Social Protection. Framework for the Development of Social Protection Systems:

Lessons from International Experience. World Bank Group.

Jaspars, S., Harvey, P., Hudspeth, C., Rumble, L., and Christensen, D. (2007). A Review of

UNICEF’s Role in Cash Transfers to Emergency Affected Populations. Summary working

paper. UNICEF.

Jaspars, S., and Maxwell, D. (2009). Food Security and Livelihoods Programming in Conflict:

A Review. Humanitarian Practice Network. ODI. No. 65.

Kratz, L (2001). The Sustainable Livelihood Approach to Poverty Reduction. An

Introduction. SWEDISH INTERNATIONAL DEVELOPMENT COOPERATION AGENCY

Levine, S., 2014. Did the 2004 Tsunami Change Aid Forever? [Online]. Available from:

http://www.developmentprogress.org/blog/2014/12/15/did-2004-tsunami-change-emergency-

aid-forever. ODI publications. [Accessed: 1st May 2016]

Lim, A.C., (2014). Philippines: A Year after Typhoon Haiyan, Survivors Rebuild their Lives.

United Nations World Food Programme. [Online]. Available from:

https://www.wfp.org/stories/year-after-typhoon-haiyan-survivors-rebuild-their-lives.

[Accessed: 12 August 2016.]

Morse, S. and McNamara, N., (2013). Sustainable livelihood approach: A critique of theory

and practice. Springer Science & Business Media.

Moser, C. (1998). The Asset Vulnerability Framework: Reassessing Urban Poverty Reduction

Strategies. World Development 26(1): 1–19

51

Mosse, D. (1994). Authority, Gender and Knowledge: Theoretical reflections on the practice

of participatory rural appraisal. Development and Change Vol.25.

OCHA (2015). Cash Transfer Programming: Philippines Infographic. [Online] Available

from: http://reliefweb.int/sites/reliefweb.int/files/resources/phl-ocha-

cash_transfer_programming_infographic-2015.pdf. [Accessed: 4th June 2016].

OCHA (2014). Early Recovery, Livelihood and Agriculture Plan – The Philippines.

UNOCHA

OCHA (2012). General Assembly Resolution 46/182. UNOCHA

OCHA (2013). Multi-Cluster Initial Rapid Assessment. Philippines Typhoon Haiyan.

[Online]. Available from:

https://www.humanitarianresponse.info/en/system/files/20131129_MIRA_Report_-

_Philippines_Haiyan_FINAL_0.pdf. [Accessed on 4th August 2016.]

ODI (2015). Doing Cash Differently. How Cash Transfers Can Transform Humanitarian Aid.

Report of the High Level Panel on Humanitarian Cash Transfers. Centre for Global

Development.

ODI (2012). Old Puzzles, New Pieces: Development Cooperation in Tomorrow’s World.

Overseas Development Institute.

ODI (2014). The Future framework for Disaster Risk Reduction. A guide for decision makers.

ODI. Climate and Development Knowledge Network.

ODI (2016). World Humanitarian Summit. Briefing May 2016. Overseas Development

Institute.

OECD (2009) Promoting Pro-Poor Growth Social Protection. Policy Statement. OECD

OXFAM (2014). Rebuilding Better for Coconut Farmers. Post-Haiyan Reconstruction in the

Philippines. OXFAM and Fair Trade Alliance Joint Briefing Note.

Paris, T.R., Luis, J., Villanueva, D., Rola-Rubezen, M.F., Chi, T.N. and Wongsanum, C.,

(2009). Labour out migration on rice farming households and gender roles: synthesis of

findings in Thailand, the Philippines and Vietnam. In FAO-IFADILO Workshop on Gaps,

trends and current research in gender dimensions of agricultural and rural employment:

differentiated pathways out of poverty (pp. 221-224).

52

Samson, M., van Niekerk, I., and Mac Quene, K (2010). Designing and Implementing Social

Transfer Programmes. Economic Policy Research Institute (EPRI). Second edition.

Scoones, I., (1998) Sustainable Rural Livelihoods: A Framework for Analysis. IDS Working

Paper 72

Setiawan, C., and Trousseau, V., (2016) A case for cash: crisis and disaster- affected

populations’ perspective. CaLP and IFRC

Smith, G. (2015). Cash Coordination in the Philippines: A review of Lessons Learned during

the Response to Typhoon Haiyan. UNHCR and CaLP.

Suarez, M. et al. (2006). The Bolsa Família Programme and the tackling of gender

inequalities.

The Sphere Project (2004). Humanitarian Charter and Minimum Standards in Disaster

Response. [Online] Available from: http://www.ifrc.org/Docs/idrl/I283EN.pdf. [Accessed: 9th

May 2016]

Thomas, V. & Lopez, R. (2015). Global Increases in Climate-Related Disasters. Asian

Development Bank Economics Working Paper Series, No. 466.

Tran, M. (2014). Typhoon Haiyan disaster response: how the relief effort worked. The

Guardian. Available from: https://www.theguardian.com/global-development/poverty-

matters/2014/feb/07/typhoon-haiyan-disaster-response-philippines-relief-effort. [Accessed: 28

August 2016.]

UNDP (2013). Livelihoods & Economic Recovery in Crisis Situations. Bureau for Crisis

Prevention and Recovery.

UNICEF (2015). Evaluation of UNICEF-supported child-friendly spaces in the aftermath of

Typhoon Haiyan (Yolanda) November 2013–November 2014. UNICEF Philippines. Child

Frontiers. [Online] Available from:

http://www.unicef.org/evaldatabase/files/UNICEF_Philippines_Haiyan_CFS_Evaluation_Rep

ort.pdf. [Accessed 9th June 2016].

UNISDR (2015). Sendai Framework for Disaster Risk Reduction 2015 – 2030.

United Nations (2016). One Humanity: Shared Responsibility Report of the Secretary-

General for the World Humanitarian Summit. United Nations General Assembly.

53

United Nations (1991). Strengthening of the coordination of humanitarian emergency

assistance of the United Nations. UN General Assembly. [Online]. Available from:

http://www.un.org/documents/ga/res/46/a46r182.htm. [Accessed on 19 August 2016.]

USAID (2014). USAID Fact Sheet on Typhoon Haiyan/Yolanda in Philippines. Available

from:

http://iipdigital.usembassy.gov/st/english/texttrans/2013/11/20131112286248.html#ixzz4IYFj

6RTR. [Accessed: 27 August 2016].

Yin, R.K (2009) Case study research: design and methods. Sage.

Zimmerman, J. M., and Bohling, K (2013). Striving for E-payments at Scale: The Evolution

of the Pantawid Pamilyang Pilipino Program in the Philippines. CGAP

54

Appendix 1

List of Interviewees

Interview Organisation Interviewee Position

1 Catholic Relief

Services (CRS)

Anna Response Programme Coordinator

2 Philippine Red Cross Yhen Cash Transfer Programming Officer

3 Christian Aid Eric Staff member

4 Tearfund Marina Programme Effectiveness Advisor

5 OXFAM Jermaine EFSVL Coordinator*

6 CARE Madel MEAL Manager**

7 WFP Eileen Senior Programme Associate – Cash and

Vouchers

8 World Vision Felix Cash Preparedness Coordinator

9 UNOCHA Rowena Humanitarian Affairs Analyst

10 MLHuillier 3 anonymous

employees

employees

11, 12, 13 Cebu Bible Seminary 20 students Students

14 Manila FBO Rasty Pastor

*EFSVL = Emergency Food Security and Vulnerable Livelihoods

**MEAL= Monitoring, Evaluation, Accountability and Learning

55

Interview 1

Interview with Anna Hrybyk from CRS (Response Programme Coordinator)*

8th July 2016

Programme and cash instruments used: Pintakasi programme included cash-for-work,

cash-for-shelter, livelihood grants (mainly for coconut farmers) and cash-for-WASH.

Beneficiaries were given the choice of in-kind support or cash for shelter. 20,000 house were

rebuilt through the programme. The programme was a direct implement by CRS, instead of

going through the Catholic church. The majority of the staff were nationals, therefore knew

the environment well.

Questions

In your view, during the Typhoon Yolanda (Haiyan) was there any advantage of using cash

transfers instead of in-kind transfers? Increased ownership for recipients

Behaviour around construction changed

Less support staff are required for cash programmes than in-kind and procurement

costs are lower.

Were there any disadvantages in using cash transfers? There were vulnerabilities that could not be supervised

Misuse of cash by a few people

Vulnerable people not able to buy the materials or too busy were given an in-kind

alternative. People included in vulnerable groups were single working mothers, elderly

and disabled people.

Time to complete the rebuild/repair on house was slow because the cash was released

in phases, and there had to be an inspection of the standard of the build before the

second payment was released.

People wanted to build back what they had before, which wasn’t possible with the

cash provided. The cash was meant for a transitional build, not a permanent house.

This was dealt with by arranging meetings between beneficiaries and engineers to

discuss the design of the house and agree on a budget before the building work

commenced.

The decision-maker was not always the one who came to the orientation meetings

Cash transfers make take more time to mobilise than in-kind aid due to mobilisation

required

How do cash transfers help those affected by Yolanda to rebuild their livelihoods? Livelihood grants provided to help rebuild livelihoods of those affected by the

typhoon

Were household and community gender dimensions considered in the planning and

implementation of Cash Transfer Programmes (CTPs)? One person per household was required to attend orientation meetings with

construction advice and cash management. This was open to both women and men,

however women usually attended as men culturally travel for work elsewhere.

What measures were taken to ensure men and women had equal opportunities in cash-for-

work programmes?

56

It was clearly communicated that both women and men could take part in cash-for-

work programmes, as long as they were physically able to perform the required tasks.

How can cash transfers be used to empower women? In our programme, women who attended orientation meetings were empowered

through increased knowledge in construction. They learnt new skills and gained extra

income through cash for work initiatives.

How do cash transfers transform gender power relations at household and community

levels? The women who received new skills and gained extra income for their household

through cash-for-work. As a result, some women reported having an increased role in

making household decisions.

Which payment mechanisms did you use to disburse the cash transfers?

We ran a trial using cards to payout cash to beneficiaries through BanKo but a lot of

people lost their cards, but the most efficient payment method for our programme was

using a remittance company, Palawan Express.

The disadvantage was that they couldn’t process as many payments as we would have

liked at the speed required due to the large scale of the programme. However, the time

taken queueing for payouts at the Palawan shops was used as an opportunity for

education via televised adverts in the shops.

The advantages of using a remittance company to pay out cash include: decreased

fraud; role of cash disbursement is taken away from our programme staff, therefore

increases their security; and the remittance company act as a third party that can

account for where the money went during audits.

Does the use of technology, such as e-mobile/scans have any positive or negative effects on

the outcomes of CTPs?

Mobile technology can be good in areas where the infrastructure is already setup and

largely successful, such as Kenya.

Additional comments:

Environmental area in the Philippines made in hard to implement WASH because it caused

more harm to implement pit latrines

For rebuilding: some people chose cash whilst others chose direct build

*Disclaimer: The views expressed in this interview represent the individual interviewee’s

opinion and not the opinion of his/her organisation

57

Interview 2

Interview with Yhen Kai Javier from Philippine Red Cross*

10th August 2016

Programme used and cash instruments: PRC used modalities the unconditional cash transfer

during the emergency phase and conditional cash transfer for household & community

livelihood assistance and shelter repair assistance and cash for work for shelter, latrine and

school constructions

Questions

In your view, during the Typhoon Yolanda (Haiyan) was there any advantage of using cash

transfers instead of in-kind transfers?

During the implementation, the use of cash transfer over in-kind transfer was viewed by the

beneficiaries positively. One of the advantages was the flexibility and choice in meeting the

basic needs such as food, shelter materials, medicines etc. It was immediately addressed. Also,

the cash allowed beneficiaries to prioritize their needs and purchase main commodities not

covered by in-kind. It was quick to distribute and minimal administrative burden. But it doesn’t

mean that cash will always be appropriate at all times and in all places. It is still depends on the

context of the program and the appropriateness if cash is feasible or not. We can also consider

having a combination of in-kind and cash as interventions.

Were there any disadvantages in using cash transfers?

There were some disadvantages that have been experienced all the way through the

implementations during emergency are such as duplicate entries in the beneficiary list, lack of

identification documents and poor mobile/internet connection when sending list to head office

for disbursement request.

In addition, there were instances that during our distributions the identified local financial

service providers (FSP) were not available due to their limited no. of branch in remote areas

and inflexible in the process. Since PRC was partnered to other remittance company. The last

resort was utilized and mobilized other service provider in the nearby cities/municipalities to

accommodate the distributions. The capacity, speed and coverage of the FSP were mainly

important to have a successful cash transfer programming and meet the objectives. But overall,

PRC has reached the largest and fastest CTP operations in the history of the Red Cross

Movement, in beneficiaries reached and total amount disbursed

How do cash transfers help those affected by Yolanda to rebuild their livelihoods?

A Conditional Cash Grant was provided in two instalments (60:40) for a livelihood proposal as

proposed by each beneficiary household. The choice of the livelihood and proposal for

assistance is up to the beneficiary. To ensure the effectiveness of the program, PRC has formed

a Barangay Recovery Committee (BRC) comprised by members from different sectors of the

community, such as barangay officials, religious leaders, civil society leaders, youth leaders,

teachers, and representative of senior citizens so as to eliminate bias and favouritism. Regular

visit and orientation were executed every livelihood activities. PRC had conducted a post

58

distribution monitoring one to two weeks after the cash distribution. As a result, the

beneficiaries were able to re-establish, to restart and to regain their livelihood assets disrupted

by the typhoon.

Were household and community gender dimensions considered in the planning and

implementation of Cash Transfer Programmes (CTPs)?

One of the principles of PRC when implementing a cash transfer programming is to ensure that

all population groups are involved in the planning, implementation and monitoring of the

programmes. Specifically, the programme will reflect cross-cutting themes including gender

roles, responsibilities, needs, interests and capacities of men, women, boys and girls, diversity

concerns such as age, ability and ethnicity, and social as well as environmental protection,

which often contribute to the vulnerability to disasters.

What measures were taken to ensure men and women had equal opportunities in cash-for-

work programmes?

Equal participation of women, men and person with disability in the community in the scheme

is always considered. This was made through proper assessment, identification and selection

by means of the level of worker’s participation in appropriate activities, their availability,

duration, the scope and nature of the work and the vulnerability of the household, physical

ability and commitment of members of the household. The list of skilled and unskilled workers

were then validated by PRC representative and shared with the Barangay

authorities/communities. For women and PWD, special arrangements were made depending on

the nature of the work

How can cash transfers be used to empower women?

Women are known for being responsible and disciplined when it comes to spending, budgeting,

saving and other financial concerns within their households. Through the cash transfer, it allows

women to perform their obligation on how to spend the cash appropriately securing that every

member of the household will benefit.

How do cash transfers transform gender power relations at household and community

levels?

Cash transfers were acknowledged by men and women as an avenue to help households and

communities in emergency. The head of the household either male/female or both have agreed

how the grant was spent. There was no reported conflict between the households and

communities. But most of the communities expressed that it would be better if women will

receive the cash assistance because it will surely used for household purposes.

Which payment mechanisms did you use to disburse the cash transfers?

The PRC used existing pre-agreements in two remittance companies, LBC and G Xchange Inc.

(GCash) Cash, as the third party distributor. Cash Learning Partnership (CaLP) previously

assessed the functioning delivery mechanisms in the Philippines and categorized LBC and

GCash. These remittance companies were selected as cash delivery mechanisms due to pre-

existing contracts, as well as the confidence the Philippine Red Cross had in these providers

from their experience in previous emergencies.

59

Does the use of technology, such as e-mobile/scans have any positive or negative effects on

the outcomes of CTPs?

Today, the uses of technologies are providing innovative ways to deliver the services hassle

free. It is important to consider that either positive or negative it should not affect the service,

not lead to develop poor delivery system and delaying the assistance. We have to know how to

manage the risk such as fraud and error. The security in the system, safety in the distribution

site and ability to monitor are always in place and priority.

Additional comments:

*Disclaimer: The views expressed in this interview represent the individual interviewee’s

opinion and not the opinion of his/her organisation

60

Interview 3

Interview with Eric J Matela from Christian Aid*

8th August 2016

Programme and cash transfer instruments: conditional cash grants, unconditional cash

grants, cash-for-work, cash-for-livelihoods; please note that Christian Aid works with local

partner organizations and does not do direct implementation.

Questions

In your view, during the Typhoon Yolanda (Haiyan) was there any advantage of using cash

transfers instead of in-kind transfers?

Cash transfers helped determine the most appropriate intervention to provide per household

based on their felt needs and the resources they have at the time of distribution since decision

making was left to target beneficiaries on what to prioritise. This helped them uphold their

dignity as human beings. Cash transfers also has lower logistics costs and have incidental

benefits such as beneficiaries may be able to establish credit lines with banks (in the case of

Oxfam’s visa project), setup savings accounts (such as Mercycorps and Banko partnership).

This can be the beneficiaries’ entry point to a formal economy.

Were there any disadvantages in using cash transfers?

There were security risks related to cash handling – both to the aid providers and for the

beneficiaries. Also, there is no 100% guarantee that the beneficiaries will be using the cash

provided to answer their needs. Furthermore, prices of commodities sometimes go up during

the period when cash is already transferred to intended beneficiaries.

Perceptions run high also that cash will be used for wants and not needs. Some of our partner

organisations were hesitant to give cash to beneficiaries because of this.

How do cash transfers help those affected by Yolanda to rebuild their livelihoods?

Cash transfers helped households defray food, water, medicine and other provident expenses

thus freeing up whatever cash or resources they have to engage in quick gestating income

generating ventures. Conversely, cash provided for livelihood allowed households to use

whatever cash and resources they have to help meet basic needs. With limited resources per

household, cash transfers can go different ways according to their needs. The flexibility of

cash makes it easier for people to rebuild their livelihoods in a way that in-kind transfers will

not be able to do.

Were household and community gender dimensions considered in the planning and

implementation of Cash Transfer Programmes (CTPs)?

Gender is taken in consideration in programming of interventions including CTPs. For

example, most women hold the household budget so we make sure that women receive the

cash grants in most areas.

61

What measures were taken to ensure men and women had equal opportunities in cash-for-

work programmes?

The different needs of men and women were taken into consideration from the start – during

assessment and analysis which became the basis of targeting and programme designing. Work

assignments were also discussed with the affected communities. For example, we partner

with a WASH organisation on cash-for-work where men were assigned to pipe installation

while women did admin tasks.

How can cash transfers be used to empower women?

At the outset, there has to be appropriate assessments that take into consideration the different

needs of all gender groups. Any programme intervention, including CTPs, should consider

whether actions are adding to present burdens or whether they marginalise or exclude certain

gender groups. We should remind ourselves that cash and cash transfer is a tool towards

empowerment and our programmes should be mindful of this.

How do cash transfers transform gender power relations at household and community

levels?

Cash transfers are a good entry at introducing gender and power equality since the cash

inflow does not come from the perennial breadwinner. Programming and implementation

must however be mindful of not abruptly breaking existing power relations as these may

result to violence, psychosocial problems or other negative coping mechanisms resulting from

a possible shift in power.

Which payment mechanisms did you use to disburse the cash transfers?

Our partners procured the services of a remittance company who have better measures in

mitigating security risks and in handling large sums of cash. There are however affected

areas where our partners have to do the distribution themselves. In this case, we make sure

that a risk assessment has been conducted and there is a security plan in place.

Does the use of technology, such as e-mobile/scans have any positive or negative effects on

the outcomes of CTPs?

While our partners did not employ such technologies in the CTPs, a positive effect is bridging

communities to technological advances. On the other hand, a wide technology gap may

alienate communities resulting to people shying away further from advancing their

knowledge. The use of technology may also be difficult in areas where, for example, mobile

phone signals are difficult.

*Disclaimer: The views expressed in this interview represent the individual interviewee’s

opinion and not the opinion of his/her organisation

62

Interview 4

Interview with Marina Kobzeva from Tearfund*

14th July 2016

Programme and Cash instruments used: Region 6 (Western Visayas) and 8 (Eastern

Visayas) were the worst affected and there were very few Tearfund partners located there,

therefore Tearfund opted to use a direct approach due limited capacity of local partners.

There were 3 cash components: cash-for-work, cash-for-shelter repair kits and cash-for-

livelihoods. For the shelter component, one unskilled labourer from each household could

participate and they were supervised by someone skilled. They were provided with building

materials, a cash grant to cover transport costs and cash to cover labour costs.

Questions

In your view, during the Typhoon Yolanda (Haiyan) was there any advantage of using cash

transfers instead of in-kind transfers?

- We were able to do more with the cash we had available to us: 555 houses were constructed,

350 shelter repair kits were provided

- With the time constraints, cash was a better alternative as in-kind assistance for livelihoods

wouldn’t have reached as many people as we reached with cash, in the time that we had

- Cash reduces the burden of some logistics issues such as transportation of aid and storage

costs and other conditions, such as quality control, that are associated with in-kind aid

- Surveys conducted showed that people overwhelmingly preferred cash. Some people even

turned down Tearfund’s Emergency Shelter Assistance (ESA) of housing costing about £2,000

because they were desperate for cash from the government amounting to a few hundred GBP.

This is because DSWD has requested for a list of beneficiaries receiving assistance so that they

wouldn’t also get cash from them.

- The market analysis we conducted indicated that the market was running within a few days of

the disaster so cash was ideal

- Ownership was increased by giving beneficiaries the power to purchase what they wanted and

needed

- Cash gives people the choice to decide on what their most urgent needs are and the power to

address those needs. For example, some people spent some of their cash assistance on repaying

debts.

- It was cheaper for us to provide cash assistance as it cost us about 80-90 pesos per transaction,

therefore the value of the cash provided was more than the in-kind value.

Were there any disadvantages in using cash transfers?

63

- Vulnerable groups such as the elderly and disabled did not have the capacity to participate in

cash-for-work or cash-for-shelter initiatives, therefore they chose in-kind support instead

- Beneficiaries with partners that gambled or people they didn’t trust with money in their

household also chose in-kind support

- Some people who received cash were bullied into sharing it with family or community

members who were not eligible, for example pressured to invest in a printer that can be used by

many (disguised as a business idea)

- Some barangay captains charged individuals 5,000pesos as a tax for ‘getting their names on

the beneficiaries list’ – which was untrue as they did not decide on beneficiary list. When

Tearfund discovered this, it was reversed immediately.

How do cash transfers help those affected by Yolanda to rebuild their livelihoods?

A livelihood survey was conducted to assess people’s preference of livelihoods and find out

who already had experience running a business. Beneficiaries were identified from the results

of the survey. For the livelihoods component of our programme, a cash grant was given to 2,000

families who were identified as being the most vulnerable following a needs assessment survey.

The cash grant was conditional to completing technical training for the chosen livelihood and

cash management training. Payment was provided as one lump sum of 12,850 pesos. 80% of

beneficiaries used the cash grant almost fully on livelihoods. People who were more creative

with their livelihood strategies were more successful. However there were some drawbacks, for

example, the most common livelihood idea was raising piglets, but some inexperienced

beneficiaries lost all their piglets due to disease because of not vaccinating them. Others sold

all their pigs once they were ready to sell and spent the money instead of re-investing it into

their business. If pigs had been provided directly, then we would have procedures to make sure

they were vaccinated. We supported up to a 1,000 people per affected city to avoid triggering

a rise in inflation due to the cash injection into the markets.

Were household and community gender dimensions considered in the planning and

implementation of Cash Transfer Programmes (CTPs)?

We asked communities who should be the representative for each household – this was usually

the woman of the household as men were usually working away. This meant most beneficiaries

who received the cash were women. Once they attended the cash management and livelihoods

training, they received the money. Some women chose not to tell their husbands about the

money in order to avoid conflict or misuse, however this was a case-by-case basis, not a general

trend.

What measures were taken to ensure men and women had equal opportunities in cash-for-

work programmes?

The cash-for-work element was the shelter programme. Each household would nominate

someone from the house to work to construct the house – it was open to both men and women.

There were two pay rates: one for unskilled labourers and a higher one for skilled. Although

the building programmes were open to both men and women, they were generally no women

64

on construction sites. Some construction managers said they didn’t want ‘women’ to hurt

themselves and some men felt that women wouldn’t carry their load. Tearfund printed a sign to

say women are welcome but there were no reports of women joining the construction sites after

the sign was printed. Some construction managers tricked some people to volunteer for 1,000

hours for free before getting a house. The people were paid for the ‘voluntary’ time they had

worked once Tearfund discovered this.

How can cash transfers be used to empower women?

We ran savings groups for women which helped to make them feel more in control of their

finances. Women were empowered due the new skills they learnt in technical training sessions.

How do cash transfers transform gender power relations at household and community

levels?

The women who attended the cash management and/or technical livelihoods training reported

feeling a greater sense of importance and felt ‘in-the-know’, which in turn gained them more

respect in their communities.

Which payment mechanisms did you use to disburse the cash transfers?

- We considered Smart cards, but they have more requirements for ID than just barangay ID –

they require at least two forms of ID. Also, there a fewer points of sale to swipe smart cards in

order to pay out the cash.

- Therefore the cash payments were made using a remittance company, Palawan pawnshop and

all cash was paid out within 10 days of the cash programme commencing.

- Beneficiaries didn’t have to withdraw all their money in one transaction – however, most of

them did.

Does the use of technology, such as e-mobile/scans have any positive or negative effects on

the outcomes of CTPs?

- Emergency mobile cash transfers would be conducive somewhere like Kenya, where the

infrastructure is already present.

- In our programme, we used mobiles for data collection to find out to what degree the

beneficiaries used cash and that data was available on the cloud, which resulted in us saving

some money on the monitoring aspect of the programme. The money saved was used to

provide a small cash grant of 500pesos for marriage certificates for about 20 couples who

were cohabitating so that they could get some help from the government, which was only

offered to married couples.

Additional comments:

*Disclaimer: The views expressed in this interview represent the individual interviewee’s

opinion and not the opinion of his/her organisation

65

Interview 5

Interview with Jermaine Bayas from OXFAM*

Role: EFSVL Coordinator (Emergency Food Security and Vulnerable Livelihoods)

20th July 2016

Programme and cash instruments used: conditional cash grants for livelihoods were used.

OXFAM had programmes in 32 municipalities, including 5 in Cebu and 7 in Tacloban. 600

barangays were reached and 100,000 people reached, therefore it was a large scale response.

There was blanket targeting for the first 6 weeks to ensure our response was quick, instead of

spending a lot of time validating beneficiaries.

Questions:

In your view, during the Typhoon Yolanda (Haiyan) was there any advantage of using cash

transfers instead of in-kind transfers?

- 40% or more of emergency response budget used on CTPs focusing on recovering

livelihoods and WASH initiatives.

- Cash transfers are a market based programming approach. Their advantages is that

they help the market to recover quickly. They provide people with the immediate

capacity to access goods

- Most beneficiaries prefer cash compared to in-kind support

- Response quicker using cash

- Cash is more cost-effective, for example the cost of transporting goods is eliminated.

- If you give people cash, they know where to buy certain goods that are more difficult

for humanitarian agencies to procure. For example, some WASH support goods were

not available in Cebu city (some items were hard to deliver and track), however

people knew where to buy them in their community once they had the cash.

- Philippines is a largely cash-based economy, therefore it’s important to establish a

supply chain very quickly after a disaster

Were there any disadvantages in using cash transfers?

- People have their own priorities which are not always aligned with OXFAM’s

priorities

- Small percentage of people use cash to buy liquor and cigarettes.

- A strong market analysis should be carried out by any organisation intending to use a

cash based response. This is vital to check if the market has the capacity to cope.

- There are security risks with transporting large amounts of money in bags using any

method of transportation. It’s also vital to secure the offices and locations where

money is stored. Using remittance companies to process the payouts will reduce that

risk, however OXFAM do not shy away from providing direct cash-in-hand using our

staff if it is more convenient – we just manage the risks involved.

How do cash transfers help those affected by Yolanda to rebuild their livelihoods?

It was impossible for the logistics team to cater for all livelihoods, therefore giving

people cash empowered them to source the tools they required to recover their

66

livelihood activities. We look at food security from a livelihoods approach, therefore

it’s important to look at the market analysis. People have no food after a disaster

mainly because of 3 reasons: the markets are down, they have no money or their

livelihoods are affected. Cash transfers provide an answer to these three issues. It

damages the economy to provide food aid long after the markets have recovered.

Were household and community gender dimensions considered in the planning and

implementation of Cash Transfer Programmes (CTPs)?

Gender was at the centre of our response. There was a very specific petition made by

the response management team to centre the response on gender equality and

empowering women. Childminding: women who weren’t working looked after

children of the women who wanted to work. OXFAM ran gender awareness sessions

with staff and some partner beneficiaries to discuss gender dimensions in the

community. We ran research assessing the different roles men and women take after a

disaster. This information was used to create a gender snapshot distributed to many

agencies

What measures were taken to ensure men and women had equal opportunities in cash-for-

work programmes?

We created a matrix of various jobs that could be done in the community (about 15-20

activities) and assessed who was capable of doing these jobs. We explained to the

community that the cash-for-work programmes were short term (to ensure that those

with full time jobs don’t abandon them for this). Households were empowered to

decide who in the family would take part in cash-for-work programmes. Vulnerable

groups received unconditional cash transfers at the same rate as that paid for the cash-

for-work programmes. 15,000 families participated in OXFAM’s cash for work

programmes over a period of two weeks.

How can cash transfers be used to empower women?

Fisher folks – men and women are both involved in fishing, boating repair and vending of

the fish. We communicated to women that they are also entitled to help traditional help

given to men. There were some programmes for women for example cash for training

(certified for carpentry), construction of houses. Worked with women’s organisations after

Haiyan to create cash based self-help groups in which women received the space to talk

about their Haiyan experience as a way to get psychological help. They were given money

when they attended the therapy. The money was then used for things like vegetable

farming, in which we provided the seeds. 3,000 women were reached with this project.

How do cash transfers transform gender power relations at household and community

levels?

Women became more confident within their families and communities due to the new

skills they learnt. In some areas, there was some resistance initially for women to go to

work, but this was reduced when men started to realise the extra income that was

67

coming in. Some men even took some roles that women traditionally do, such as

cooking, in order to allow the women to go out and bring home extra income.

Which payment mechanisms did you use to disburse the cash transfers?

- In first 4 weeks cash-in-hand was provided, with payments made using remittance

companies Muhuay and Palawan Express.

- Using a remittance company reduces some of the security concerns regarding our staff

carrying around large amounts of cash.

- We used visa cards towards the tail-end of our Haiyan cash response to payout the

cash. Moving forward, we will be using more visa pre-paid cards in certain areas.

Does the use of technology, such as e-mobile/scans have any positive or negative effects on

the outcomes of CTPs?

Visa card technology is evolving to add savings and microfinance benefits for cash transfer

beneficiaries. This will help beneficiaries gain more access to financial markets

Additional information:

Oxfam have a long history of using cash in Philippines dating back to 2005. The first large

scale use of cash in the Philippines was a category 2 emergency response to a typhoon in

2009. Tacloban was hit hard by the typhoon, with the market taking 3 weeks to recover. In

Cebu, the market was functioning after a week, therefore for the first 6 weeks of our response,

we used cash-for-work.

From our market analysis, we saw that the banking sector was still functioning after the

disaster. Coordination was a problem in some areas. However, at the municipal level

coordination was quick, for example in North Cebu. New organisations to the Philippines

were assigned to areas by mayors. Unfortunately some organisations pledged support but

didn’t follow through. Some organisations only wanted easy access areas

One of the first to respond to the typhoon in the Tacloban area was the Tzu Chi foundation,

which used cash straight away. Tzu Chi foundation offered daily wage above the minimum

wage, which was about 500 pesos, with minimum wage before the typhoon being about

280pesos.

During the initial response phase, it was easy to tell which areas had CFW programmes

running as debris would be cleared. Oxfam went to one of the islands affected with another

NGO – we pitched to the community about running a CFW programme and the other NGO

pitched about providing unconditional grants. After both organisations spoke, the community

were invited to choose which programme they preferred. They chose CFW!

**Disclaimer: The views expressed in this interview represent the individual interviewee’s

opinion and not the opinion of his/her organisation

68

Interview 6

Interview with Madel Montejo from CARE Philippines*

26th July 2016

Cash instruments used: cash for livelihoods and cash-for-shelter

cash-for-shelter: building materials were provided to repair housing that was damaged and

money was provided with it to pay for the labour. Payment was given in two tranches: the

first tranche was 3,000 pesos to repair sleeping quarters of the main house. The second

payment was to be used for repairing walls. The beneficiaries were chosen based on the state

of their house.

In your view, during the Typhoon Yolanda (Haiyan) was there any advantage of using cash

transfers instead of in-kind transfers?

- Communities are given more control

- It promotes local markets as beneficiaries tend to but what they need from local

markets

- It improves the negotiating position of beneficiaries as they trade their money for

goods in the market

- Cash transfers also reduce procurement issues for NGOs because we save time,

transport costs and don’t have to worry about quality control and guidelines for in-

kind goods

- Partner cooperatives distribute cash onsite, which helps us to avoid security risks

for our staff

- There are disadvantages, but advantages weigh those out

Were there any disadvantages in using cash transfers?

- Selection of beneficiaries is time consuming

- We can’t stop beneficiaries who chose to spend their cash transfer for unintended

purposes therefore slippages can’t be completely avoided

How do cash transfers help those affected by Yolanda to rebuild their livelihoods?

Beneficiaries were chosen based on their income and vulnerabilities. We helped to fund

groups registered with labour associations and the labour organisation. We supported

community enterprises and individual women’s enterprises

Were household and community gender dimensions considered in the planning and

implementation of Cash Transfer Programmes (CTPs)?

Gender was part of the proposal template which considers the participation of men and

women in the enterprise. There was specific training provided for women and gender

empowerment sessions for both men and women where gender roles were outlines within the

household, enterprise and community. Men were encouraged to share household

responsibilities with women during men-only sessions.

What measures were taken to ensure men and women had equal opportunities in cash-for-

work programmes?

Men were encouraged to take up traditionally women’s jobs such as basket weaving

69

How can cash transfers be used to empower women?

From February 2015, we had cash-based programmes promoting women-led community

enterprises. All community members attended cash training, therefore women were also

learning new skills.

How do cash transfers transform gender power relations at household and community

levels?

More women than men participated in training because men were busy with their main

livelihoods. Men attended technical training sessions. Community: Mobilisers (nominated by

the community) were mainly female. Their role was to give advice to other community

members on how to build back safer. This increased the women’s confidence and respect in

the community. Households: By creating opportunities for women to make money outside of

the home, it promoted division of labour in some households. Both men and women

expressed a desire to have shared responsibilities in the household.

Which payment mechanisms did you use to disburse the cash transfers?

Cash-in-hand distribution

Does the use of technology, such as e-mobile/scans have any positive or negative effects on

the outcomes of CTPs?

Technology helps to explore other ways of providing payments, however it is important to

make assessment as to whether it is suitable for the community.

Additional information:

Region 8 was the most heavily affected

In region 6 markets recovered quickly

*Disclaimer: The views expressed in this interview represent the individual interviewee’s

opinion and not the opinion of his/her organisation

70

Interview 7

Interviewee with Eileen Tufay from United Nations World Food Programme (WFP)*

28th July 2016

Cash instruments used: unconditional cash transfers, conditional cash transfers. WFP used

the existing social protection infrastructure of DSWD, the 4Ps, and topped up the amount that

DSWD provided them with. By leveraging an existing system, WFP were able to provide

cash to 500,000 beneficiaries within two weeks. $6million was provided in unconditional

cash transfers. Conditional cash transfers were provided to non 4Ps recipients in 2nd phase (3

months after Yolanda) through a cash-for-assets programme. Community participants worked

on projects to create or rehabilitate assets. There were paid for their participation in the

projects.

Unconditional Cash Transfers were also provided to a percentage of beneficiaries that could

be reached with the available resources, who were part of vulnerable groups such as pregnant

women, the disabled, lactating women.

The objective of all WFP projects is to increase food security and nutrition

Questions:

In your view, during the Typhoon Yolanda (Haiyan) was there any advantage of using cash

transfers instead of in-kind transfers?

- Before any cash transfer programme is considered, it is important to conduct a

market analysis to check 3 things: if the market is functioning; if the market can

handle the cash injection; and if beneficiaries can access the food that WFP is

advocating.

- Cash provides a higher choice to beneficiaries

- The nutritional value of food that can be bought with the cash is higher than what

we can provide for the same cost (WFP can only give rice in the Philippines)

Were there any disadvantages in using cash transfers?

- There was some difficulty reaching non-4Ps beneficiaries who were also affected

by the typhoon because there were not already part of the existing government

social protection network.

- For non-4P beneficiaries, WFP had to contract their own financial service provider

to create a payment system for them, which took a long time. The contracting

process was lengthy as it took months.

- Lengthy reconciliation process with financial service providers

- Reconciliation with DSWD also lengthy as they have their own bureaucratic

processes

- Lack of coordination between agencies (for both cash and in-kind transfers)

How do cash transfers help those affected by Yolanda to rebuild their livelihoods?

The cash-for-assets programme – community based projects in disaster or conflict affected

areas. Beneficiaries are paid to rehabilitate assets and the money can be used to start up own

business. Also, with community gardening, the produce can be sold and used to generate

71

money. WFP had no direct livelihoods recovery projects, but some beneficiaries use their

money for livelihoods, which has been proven through monitoring.

Were household and community gender dimensions considered in the planning and

implementation of Cash Transfer Programmes (CTPs)?

There was a baseline assessment carried out before the project which analysed who made

household decisions for different activities. Women usually made food related decisions,

however for most other decisions, both men and women usually made joint decisions,

therefore there isn’t much of a gender bias. Outside of emergency contexts, gender

mainstreaming is done through gender markers that examine how gender sensitive your

project is. In hindsight, gender tools can also be used in the early recovery phase of an

emergency response. Protection related research is conducted in the design phase of a project

to ensure it doesn’t create tensions in communities or households

What measures were taken to ensure men and women had equal opportunities in cash-for-

work programmes?

Firstly it was important to identify the needs of the village and identify which beneficiaries

are willing to participate. Once that was done, they would start work once the inputs of tools

are ready from the local government unit. Some of the work included: rehabilitation of farm-

to-market roads; creation of community gardens; debris clearing in irrigation canals of rice

fields. All projects were in relation to increasing food security. The target for cash-for-assets

programmes was 50% female, 50% male beneficiaries with lighter work such as clearing and

weeding assigned to women. Manual labour such as construction, building and clearing debris

is often done by the men. Pregnant women are allowed to participate during the early stages

of pregnancy.

How can cash transfers be used to empower women?

Women were encouraged to be a part of the management committee (leadership positions).

This meant that they could be part of each process of the projects including identifying

beneficiaries, monitoring, etc. Recipients of 4Ps DSWD social protection programme are

mainly women as they want to empower women to make decisions, therefore the majority of

our beneficiaries of unconditional cash transfer were also women since we used the 4Ps

infrastructure.

How do cash transfers transform gender power relations at household and community

levels?

The appropriate protection related research should be carried out before a cash transfer

programme to avoid creating tensions in communities and households. WFP encourage joint

decision making in the household. The Philippines has a culture of sharing, therefore

assistance is usually shared with wider family and community members

Which payment mechanisms did you use to disburse the cash transfers?

WFP have experience using the following payment types: cash-over-the-counter; prepaid

cards and mobile wallet payment.

Does the use of technology, such as e-mobile/scans have any positive or negative effects on

the outcomes of CTPs?

72

The general view of e-payments is that they are cheaper than cash over the counter. They are

also viewed as safer for beneficiaries as they are not carrying large amounts of cash. The

process of providing e-payments is faster than queueing up to receive money. They can also

be used to make beneficiaries more financially included.

In hard to reach areas, it’s difficult to make technology more efficient. People would rather go

to a municipal hall and get cash in hand than bear the cost of going into town to withdraw

cash. Financial Service Providers (FSPs) also charge after 3 withdrawals in a month

There are also challenges of using technology. With mobile payments, if people don’t have

smart phones, the FSPs also has a cost of providing the device. In remote areas, most people

only have simple phones for calling and texting, without internet. The cost of beneficiary

orientation training to use new technologies can also be expensive.

Technology is good but can be logistically difficult to implement, especially somewhere like

the Philippines due to geographical logistics. The Philippines is a group of over 7,000 islands,

some of which are hard to reach, especially after a disaster like Yolanda where planes are

cancelled, boats destroyed and roads blocked.

Scope is a new technology WFP have been using since 2015. It is a tool that can be used

throughout the project phase from beneficiary registration, creation of food list, through to

monitoring and tracking redemption of cash and food. The lists can be open to local

government and financial service providers. Scope can be used to identify duplicate

beneficiaries with partner organisations as it’s a centralised list

Additional information

The impact of Yolanda was so big that it was difficult to tell who was more affected and less

affected, therefore WFP used the government’s 4Ps network to target beneficiaries. This was

based on the fact that the 4Ps list is the poorest of the poor, therefore they would be the most

vulnerable if they lived in Haiyan areas. WFP worked in coordination with local government

units to target beneficiaries, for example, the Department of Agricultural Reform (DAR)

would provide tools and seeds for community gardens and WFP would pay the beneficiaries

for the work they did in the gardens. To help better coordination of agencies, the Philippines

have institutionalised the cash working group to encourage coordination of agencies based in

the Philippines. Beneficiary targeting is important to get correct to ensure that money is

received by those who actually need it. This reduces anti-social spending. What monitoring

has shown us is that roughly 60% is spent on food, a portion on education and another

percentage to rebuild livelihoods.

*Disclaimer: The views expressed in this interview represent the individual interviewee’s

opinion and not the opinion of his/her organisation

73

Interview 8

Interview with Felix Cinco from World Vision*

27th July 2016

Cash instruments used: Unconditional cash transfers in partnership with WFP. Conditional

cash transfers through cash for work. Cash for livelihoods, shelter and WASH. We provided

blanket distribution in Panay and Cebu.

Questions

In your view, during the Typhoon Yolanda (Haiyan) was there any advantage of using cash

transfers instead of in-kind transfers?

- Cash gives beneficiaries the flexibility to buy what they need

- In rural areas it’s harder to have a stable market than in urban areas, therefore it’s

easier to give cash in urban areas

- Tzu Chi was very appreciated by people in Tacloban.

Were there any disadvantages in using cash transfers?

- Can’t control anti-social spending

- It’s difficult to monitor exact individual household expenditure

- The process of paying out the cash can be time consuming

- Banks are not orientated to emergencies, therefore we have to make them

understand the value of cash transfers

- There are some security concerns about staff carrying money if we are paying out

the cash transfers ourselves

How do cash transfers help those affected by Yolanda to rebuild their livelihoods?

World Vision provided cash for training whereby beneficiaries received money

based on how many days of training they attended. A large number of

beneficiaries used cash for livelihoods to start sari-sari stores (small local

convenience stores)

Were household and community gender dimensions considered in the planning and

implementation of Cash Transfer Programmes (CTPs)?

A key criterion for the selection of beneficiaries was to encourage all sectors

within the community to take part in our programmes, including women, men,

elderly citizens, local leaders, farmers, etc.

What measures were taken to ensure men and women had equal opportunities in cash-for-

work programmes?

Women and men were both encouraged to take part based on their ability in cash

for work, which included tasks such as creating communal gardens and clearing

debris. People were assessed on their suitability for the job. Women were typically

given monitoring roles, whilst men took more manual labour roles. Child headed

households were given small tasks and paid

74

How can cash transfers be used to empower women?

Cash for work given to vulnerable groups by limiting conditions so that they can

participate

How do cash transfers transform gender power relations at household and community

levels?

There isn’t a huge problem with gender equality in the Philippines, so it depends

on the context. Changing practices, values and culture was not part of the

programme objectives

Which payment mechanisms did you use to disburse the cash transfers?

World Vision uses Last Mile Mobile Solutions (LMMS) to register beneficiaries

and e-vouchers in partnership with Mastercard for the payment of cash transfers.

Does the use of technology, such as e-mobile/scans have any positive or negative effects on

the outcomes of CTPs?

- Challenges of new technology is that it may be hard for beneficiaries to use as it’s

new to them.

- The eVoucher platform is user friendly. It is also easier to track and monitor how it

is used. When used in sari-sari stores, it shows what specific items are used,

therefore helps us to analyse the popular things that are purchased. It’s more

difficult to consolidate paper cash vouchers

- Worked in partnership with BanKo through BPI who provided savings accounts

and cards for beneficiaries, therefore beneficiaries used ATMs to access money.

It’s technology that not everyone in the province is familiar with using.

- We also have a partnership with remittance company Palawan Express who have a

huge presence even in the rural areas

-

*Disclaimer: The views expressed in this interview represent the individual interviewee’s

opinion and not the opinion of his/her organisation

75

Interview 9

Interviewee with Rowena Dacsig from UN OCHA*

28th July 2016

OCHA coordinates humanitarian actors responding in an emergency by creating a platform

for discussions, helping to mobilise resources and information collection management.

Questions

In your view, during the Typhoon Yolanda (Haiyan) was there any advantage of using cash

transfers instead of in-kind transfers?

- The benefits of using cash are context specific. They depend on the stability of the

market and the supply chain. Every emergency has a different profile.

- A thorough needs and market assessment should be carried out to check if markets

are sustainable through the supply chain and determine what approach is best for

the people. The movement of goods and people should also be understood before

starting a cash transfer programme.

- In the Haiyan example, the government of Philippines already had a good structure

in place, therefore it could be used immediately. Financial service providers also

have good experience with cash.

- With the right assessment and right targeting, cash can be very effective in an

emergency response.

What are the challenges associated with using cash transfers in the Typhoon Haiyan

response?

- Natural disasters or armed conflict can be a trigger for gender based violence,

therefore it is important to look at cultural situations before any intervention

- Carrying out consultations and observations will help to discover things that are

not going as planned so that they can be corrected.

- There were some challenges with coordination of humanitarian agencies

- It was also challenging having to work within government mechanisms as the

Philippines government have certain policies that iNGOs have to adhere to.

How do cash transfers help those affected by Yolanda to rebuild their livelihoods?

- Cash for livelihoods is not usually used within first 3 weeks of an emergency

response, but during the early recovery and long-term rehabilitation stages.

How important is it to consider household and community gender dimensions in the

planning and implementation of Cash Transfer Programmes (CTPs)?

- The best time for gender analysis is during the preparedness stage, before an

emergency takes place. Gender dimensions should be considered when choosing

which modalities to use, deciding on beneficiaries to target and when conducting

the needs assessment.

76

- The assessment on the onset of a disaster will be used as primary information and

compared to secondary information gathered during the preparedness stage

- Cultural sensitivity should be a big part of gender analysis

- It’s important not to just focus on women but look at: the population ratio; how

religion affects gender roles; and power relations.

How important is the role for innovation and new technologies in improving the outcomes

of CTPs?

- Communication and electricity are usually the first to go during an emergency.

The fastest organisations have been able to mobilise resources through technology

in two weeks.

- During the preparedness phase, there is room for innovation with technology.

Humanitarian agencies can bargain for certain requirements from financial service

providers (FSPs).

- Technology can help to make response faster in some instances

Additional information

The 4Ps mechanisms working well. The poorest of poor were assisted during the Typhoon

Haiyan response due to help going to 4P beneficiaries in typhoon affected areas. However, it

was more difficult to get help for those who were not part of the 4P system but became poorer

(below the poverty line) as a result of the typhoon.

Typhoon Haiyan was the first time the global community used cash capacity, hosted by

OCHA.

During the response, guidelines for FSPs were relaxed and lawyer-customer requirements

were also relaxed during the emergency response in order to avoid delays in providing aid for

humanitarian agencies.

Conditions were also relaxed for cash-for-work, asset recovery and food during the disaster

response.

The cash working group that was established are working to document mechanisms and put

procedures in place of how to use a cash response in future disasters. Globally, cash is

becoming the new normal because of the Haiyan experience.

Remittance companies that are strategically located can reduce operation costs for CTPs if

they are located in the area where beneficiaries are located. We don’t want the process of

getting cash transfers to cost beneficiaries a lot, so we always try to reduce any costs to them.

Palawan Express remittance company has a high presence in rural and remote areas, whereas

MLHuillier has more branches in cities.

*Disclaimer: The views expressed in this interview represent the individual interviewee’s

opinion and not the opinion of his/her organisation

77

Interview 10

Interviewees: 3 anonymous company representatives from Michel J.Lhuillier (MLHuillier)

Financial Services Inc*

22nd July 2016

Questions

What was your role, as a remittance company, in the cash transfer response?

We provide payment solutions including company to individual payments – which is the

service humanitarian agencies used in the typhoon response. We have a huge network of

branches and were providing payouts within two days of the typhoon (money from families

abroad and NGOs). We worked with local NGOs in the Visayas region and international

NGOs to payout cash from their cash transfer programmes.

The NGO gives us a list of beneficiaries (they carry out the screening). In order to provide the

payout, the beneficiaries present a form of ID or the humanitarian agency in question verifies

their ID. For example, some beneficiaries presented to us an OXFAM issued ID or had an

OXFAM representative verify their ID.

During the response, we carried out about 1,000 payouts per day which meant that we had to

prepare a payment schedule in order to make sure that we had enough cash in stock

We have branches in the Philippines, including in remote areas.

Why do you think more humanitarian agencies are using cash transfers instead if in-kind

aid?

It gives people the power to prioritise the needs that are more important for them, whether it’s

food, livelihoods or housing.

What are the benefits to the humanitarian agency of using a remittance company to make

the payouts, compared to other methods?

- Remittance companies already know the area well and cash handling policies

- We have strong established relationships with local banks as we’ve been running for

over 50 years. We also have established relationships with the government as we are

one of the companies that pay out cash from the 4Ps social welfare programme to

beneficiaries.

- Location is safer for beneficiaries to reach because they already know where the

branches in their community are

- The security concern of carrying around cash are removed from the humanitarian

agency and transferred to the remittance company

- In audit, the agency have a third party to verify how money was used.

- It saves time for the humanitarian agency as they don’t have to prepare an operation to

distribute cash

- Humanitarian agencies can take advantage of the location of remittance companies as

branches are widely spread through the country, therefore they are able to reach a lot

78

of beneficiaries. Some banks that are located in the city even use MLH’s services to

transport cash to the province.

What were the challenges faced by your organisation when paying out cash during the

typhoon Yolanda response?

Transporting cash was difficult, especially in the worst affected regions

Some members of staff were affected by Haiyan, therefore it was a challenge to get them to

work.

During the typhoon response, some of the banks were closed so our area managers had to

travel using helicopters to personally get the money from the bank and transport it to our

branches.

Does the effect of technology such as smart cards, e-mobile payments have any positive or

negative impacts on the payment of cash transfers?

- For cards, you need to withdraw cash using ATMs which can be far to travel for

beneficiaries. Most banks are in the cities, which may be difficult to travel to after a disaster.

Also, in the aftermath of typhoon Haiyan, a lot of cash machines were down.

- For mobile payments, this would be a challenge too as mobile networks and electricity are

one of the first to lose outage in a disaster, especially one the size of typhoon Haiyan.

- Therefore cash-in-hand is usually a more suitable method of payment of cash transfers in the

initial period after a disaster, compared to other technological options.

Additional information

The NGOs does the market analysis, monitoring and evaluation of the cash transfer

programmes. The remittance company doesn’t get involved in that, nor do they play an

advisory role. Their only role is to pay the cash out to beneficiaries.

The payout location is chosen where most beneficiaries are and agreed with the humanitarian

agency implementing the cash transfer programmes.

*Disclaimer: The views expressed in this interview represent the individual interviewee’s

opinion and not the opinion of his/her organisation

79

Interviews 11, 12 and 13

Interviewees*: Group 1 – SA, GO, LA, AP, JC, GG, JA, WT

Group 2 – AJV, CM, RM, IC, JJ, JL, AR

Group 3 – DS, SY, JB, JRM, MS

Organisation: Cebu Bible Seminary

21st July 2016

Questions

1. How did the church respond to Typhoon Yolanda (Haiyan)?

2. How is the church response different to that of the government and NGOs

Group 1

Church members and community in Leyte used the church to gather when their homes were

destroyed by Yolanda. Therefore church leadership and other local churches came together to

help those who were affected in the immediate aftermath of the typhoon. It was quicker to get

help from the church than wait for the government and NGOs.

The church response is quicker as they don’t have the administration and bureaucratic

procedures to go through before offering help. The church just helps those who reach out for

help, as according to the church’s capacity.

The church response was also vital in areas that NGOs or the government didn’t reach,

especially areas that were physically hard to get to.

We helped at least 400-500 people by providing them with food, clothes and money. Besides

providing for physical needs, the church has an additional role of proving a sense of comfort

for the soul in such a highly religious society.

Group 2

Many boats were destroyed after typhoon Yolanda so fisher folks lost their livelihoods

There was no water and electricity in some areas for up to a month

Tacloban was the most affected area, however many people didn’t receive help from the

government. There was a lot of news about international help from many countries but there

was not enough help reaching those affected by the typhoon.

The livelihoods of coconut farmers were badly affected because a lot of coconut trees were

destroyed.

The church filled that gap that the government and NGOs failed to fill. We directly reached

out to those in need without the help of an agency in order to avoid corruption issues.

80

Group 3

One of our church members’ family received some help from the government to repair the

rood of their house. They also received money and food. Money was the best option instead

of materials because it was easier to buy what they needed.

The church also provided food and shelter, although their response was on a smaller scale

compared to the government and international organisations.

The motive of the church for responding is different to that of international agencies.

*Disclaimer: The views expressed in this interview represent the individual interviewee’s

opinion and not the opinion of his/her organisation

81

Interview 14

Interview with Rasty from a local Faith Based Organisation in Manila*

7th July 2016

In your view, during the Typhoon Yolanda (Haiyan) was there any advantage of using cash

transfers instead of in-kind transfers?

Safer to transport vs food because smaller chance of ambush due to less visibility.

Transport logistics: no need to hire vehicles to transport food. Plus save on fuel prices

as they skyrocketed after typhoon. (litre of gasoline went from 50pesos to 500pesos in

some areas, therefore too expensive to transport a lot of in-kind assistance)

Able to give more to those in need using cash. Food aid was 3kg rice and some canned

food amounting to 300pesos. With cash, gave 500pesos for people to use as

appropriate

Able to reach areas that the government didn’t reach due to strong grassroots links and

community links of the church

Food quality: some people complained about the poor quality of government food aid

given, so cash gave them the option to buy food of their own taste

Were there any disadvantages in using cash transfers? No control over what the money is used for but benefits outweigh any disadvantages

because beneficiaries were given more choice of how to use the money to address

needs which in-kind aid didn’t always cover

How do cash transfers help those affected by Yolanda to rebuild their livelihoods? V.small scale programme, didn’t monitor or have specific livelihoods programme.

Cash was given just to meet immediate basic needs of families affected by Yolanda.

(4-9. Questions not applicable to small scale project)

Additional information about the programme

The local churches were used as local meeting points to access information, in-kind

and cash-based assistance

117 families reached

Some agencies decided to stay out of the government cluster system and to give out

cash personally due to perceived mistrust of the government.

*Disclaimer: The views expressed in this interview represent the individual interviewee’s

opinion and not the opinion of his/her organisation