Sudan Informal Social Protection

During and in the aftermath of crises, communities are often their own first responders. Informal support from family, friends, neighbors, and other groups is frequently more essential to households’ survival than formal support from aid actors and governments. This is particularly salient in Sudan where IDPs are often hosted by communities, dependent on diaspora contributions and initiatives by Mutual Aid Groups (MAG) such as Emergency Response Rooms (ERR) and Communal Kitchens (CKs).

However, protracted crises can exhaust ISP networks, as resources become scarce and households’ capacities to share material support erodes. When these networks become strained it may signal worsening humanitarian conditions, as households are left without a crucial source of resilience. This may also lead to increasing reliance upon external assistance.

The Sudan ISP monitoring mechanism leverages experiences from Mercy Corps Currency of Connections research and the Lebanon Crisis Analysis Team (LCAT) to offer approaches to measuring and evaluating ISP on a regular basis so as to efficiently identify shifts in patterns of need, uncover “hidden” vulnerabilities, and identify changes in humanitarian crisis trajectories.

Key findings

• Informal social protection mechanisms are a reliable and consistent form of support for households across Sudan but struggle with limited resources, with providers pessimistic about their ability to continue providing support over the next 6 months.
• Food security has a strong relationship with the type of ISP households’ access. Households experiencing worse food security scores are significantly more likely to be dependent on support from communal initiatives, while those with the best scores are more likely to be receiving direct support from friends and family at home and abroad. 
• Most informal social protection is channeled through direct social connections such as via friends and family, employers or community and religious bodies and leaders. This has left social protection networks fractured along communal and socio-economic lines and risks leaving behind vulnerable groups such as internally displaced people, women-headed households, youth households and un- or under-employed households who have weak or deteriorated social networks and are far more dependent on mutual aid groups.
• Mutual aid groups often act to fill gaps left by state support, formal aid and alternate informal protection channels. These groups are dependent on charitable giving and intermittent formal funding, leaving them structurally precarious and incapable of serving the high levels of need in communities.
• Informal social protection networks are self-reinforcing, i.e. households that receive certain kinds of support via specific channels are more likely to then provide similar support through those same channels. This effect is particularly strong when resources are channeled by communal initiatives, friends and family within Sudan, employers and community leaders.
• Small and medium enterprises, play oversized roles as providers of informal support both directly to staff members and indirectly in the form of loans, credit and services and credit to customers.