Search

Zimbabwe’s social policy response to Covid-19 unfolded in a context of enduring socioeconomic and political crises. Its main instruments were temporary food relief and cash transfers, though it also included healthcare measures, an economic stimulus package, pension benefits, and “cushioning allowances”. The expansion of food relief and cash transfers was based on existing social protection programmes, and beneficiaries were, at least in theory determined through means-testing and targeting. Local and international civil society organisations supported the government’s response. While the breadth and timing of Zimbabwe’s social policy response are noteworthy, it remained largely inadequate and temporary.

Uruguay’s social policy response to Covid-19 built on a strong social protection system and a favorable social situation that existed before the pandemic arrived. The country’s favorable position in the region enabled the government to gradually reformulate key existing social policies to cover a broad proportion of the population. The newly installed government’s response occurred within the country’s structurally divided social protection architecture, which covers both formal workers and families not covered by the social security system. However, efforts in the two parts of the system have not been equally effective and there remains a portion of the population not covered by any of these social protection policies.

Argentina's initial social policy response to Covid-19 focused on protecting employment, wages and basic living conditions. Key policies included cash transfers and food programs for vulnerable families, wage subsidies for private sector workers and subsidized loans for firms and self-employed workers. The government also dictated a set of new regulations on employment, prices and housing, among others, to reduce the social costs of the pandemic. This paper offers an overview of Argentine social policy response measures taken up until September 2020. It focuses on the social policy instruments specifically oriented to the most vulnerable workers and families, including a new cash transfer program for adults with no regular income (Emergency Family Income or IFE), reaching about 8.6 million people in the first round. Overall, Argentina's social policy response involved multiple instruments aimed to operate on several fronts; however, the social and economic costs remain very high and are still unfolding.