Speakers at the recent National Conference on Social Security rightly underscored the urgency of expanding social safety net coverage in urban areas. Numerous studies over the years have shown that while rural poverty is on the decline, urban poverty is rising, driven largely by the continuous migration of rural people to cities in search of better opportunities.
Despite the growing poverty and vulnerability in urban centres, government social safety net initiatives have remained predominantly rural-focused. A new report by the think tank Research and Policy Integration for Development (RAPID) reveals that although city centres are grappling with poverty, joblessness and hunger, the urban poor make up only one-fifth of the total beneficiaries of government schemes.
The exclusion of the urban poor is even more striking among the extremely poor. Nearly half of extremely poor households across the country receive no social protection benefits at all. In urban areas, the exclusion rate is a staggering 64 per cent - far above the national average. These figures point to a glaring policy gap that risks leaving behind the very groups most in need of support.
As economist Mohammad Abdur Razzaque, Chairman of RAPID, has pointed out, Bangladesh's safety net programmes were historically designed to address hunger, vulnerability, and natural disasters in rural areas. Such schemes as have allowances for widows, deserted women, the elderly, and people with disabilities, as well as education stipends, continue to favour rural households.
The RAPID report highlights the imbalance: 23 schemes specifically targeting the urban poor account for just 4 per cent of the social protection budget, while 50 rural-only programmes command 27 per cent. For instance, education stipends at both the primary and secondary levels overwhelmingly benefit rural households. The same is true for allowances targeting widows, deserted women, persons with disabilities, and elderly citizens. In most of these schemes, more than 80 percent of recipients are rural. This mismatch reflects not only neglect of urban poverty but also of a failure to adapt policies to demographic change.
Today, urban centres are home to hundreds of thousands of vulnerable people facing unemployment, insecure housing, poor sanitation and rising living costs. Despite living close to city amenities, the urban poor are effectively shut out. Most reside in cramped, squalid slums, while the ultra-poor live on the streets. Slum dwellers lack formal access to electricity, clean water, healthcare and education - basic rights they are entitled to. The growing slum population is not only deepening their own misery but also creating wider social and public health risks.
For children of the urban poor, the future is especially bleak. Many cannot attend school and are forced into work at a young age, growing up without opportunities to break the cycle of poverty. Their lives are often more precarious than those of rural children, leaving an entire generation at risk of being lost.
Policymakers cannot dismiss this as an unavoidable reality of development. Unfortunately, neither government programmes nor NGO initiatives have adequately addressed the plight of the urban poor, and the situation is worsening with continued rural-to-urban migration. Long-term planning to improve the living conditions of slum dwellers must be prioritised on the national agenda.
The interim government was expected to take sustainable measures to reduce poverty, but no such steps have been evident over the past year. Social protection continues to run in a routine, business-as-usual manner. Many argue that current poverty alleviation efforts are too few or beyond the government's capacity. Even the funds allocated for social protection are often plundered by vested interests, with corruption siphoning resources away from the poor.
With elections now on the horizon, doubts remain about the government's ability to pursue long-term plans. At the very least, it could have implemented short-term measures or set the course for the next government to follow. More troubling, however, is the silence on tackling poverty, even though one after another studies are highlighting discouraging report regarding poverty, food insecurity and how corruption hindering poverty alleviation effort. Meanwhile, while political parties are stuck in endless debate over holding next general elections, they show little concern for the daily hardships of ordinary people. Citizens deserve to know what concrete programmes and policies the parties will adopt to combat poverty if they are elected.
The way forward demands both a reallocation of budget priorities and a redesign of social safety programmes. Expanding existing schemes to ensure urban coverage, introducing city-focused initiatives tailored to the needs of slum dwellers and improving coordination among ministries are essential. Equally critical is fixing errors through reliable data systems to ensure benefits reach those who need them most and root out corruption and undeserving beneficiaries from the whole process. The authorities cannot afford to leave the urban poor out in the cold indefinitely. A fair and inclusive social protection system, responsive to both rural and urban realities, is not just a moral imperative but a prerequisite for sustainable development.
aktuhin.fexpress@gmail.com