Just when we're hearing of factories closing at a calamitous rate as the global economic crisis squeezes countries in Asia, we learn of Pan Nan getting hired by one in Cambodia this month. This should be good news. Her family has been eating leaves and scavenging for snails and crabs in the rice paddies.

But Pan Nan is only 16. She lied about age on her application and then quit school to take the job in the capital city, two hours from her village. She and her widowed mother are counting on the US$10 after expenses she will send home each month to pay debts and frequent medical bills. Her four siblings are regularly ill these days with fever, diarrhoea and abdominal pains.

In the Asia and the Pacific region, where about 600 million people live in poverty -- on $1 a day or less -- the impact of the food and economic crises has been devastating and years of progress in poverty alleviation, child survival and education attainment are in jeopardy. According to recent research analysis, a 10 percent increase in food prices has pushed an estimated 105 million more people into poverty -- a reversal of about seven years' work of poverty reduction. In most countries, actual price increases of food consumed by people who are poor have been greater than 10 percent.

Poor families in Asia spend 40-60 percent of their income on food. Analysis of the impact of the multiple crises of food, fuel and finance on children's lives commissioned by UNICEF shows that a 20 percent increase in food prices is enough to push them to the very brink of survival.

In response and in expectation of worsening situations, UNICEF is bringing together some 150 decision makers including finance ministers, senior government officials, academics and other experts for a conference addressing the impact of the crises on children this week at the Lee Kuan Yew School of Public Policy, National University of Singapore, with the support of the Singaporean Ministry of Foreign Affairs.

The UNICEF-commissioned researchers have looked at the lessons learned from previous financial emergencies, such as the Asian crisis of 1997-1998, and will make the case for investing in children and social protection when tough budgeting choices come calling. They will use the evidence to show that now is not the time to cut back on social spending. Now more than ever we need to maintain -- or scale up -- measures to protect children.

We know from the Asian financial crisis experience that many families were unable to keep up their strong cultural commitment to education and that many children were forced to drop out of school. Secondary school enrollment in Indonesia dropped by 11 percent during the 1997-1998 crisis and by 8 percent in the Philippines.

When large numbers of children like Nan Pan leave school to help their family buy food or pay for medical care, their long-term development suffers, as do the prospects for their countries' sustained socio-economic development.

Also, according to UNICEF's commissioned research, the mortality rate among children younger than 5 years in severely affected countries in Southeast Asia and the Pacific could increase by an estimated 3-11 percent due to the crises.

The analysts have further noted that the recent crises, if unaddressed, could increase the prevalence of low birth weight by 5-10 percent. Rates of childhood stunting (already high in this region) could rise by 3-7 percent and wasting by 8-16 percent. Stunting, or low height for age, is caused by long-term insufficient nutrient intake and frequent infections. Stunting generally occurs before age 2, and its effects, which include delayed motor development, impaired cognitive function and poor school performance, are largely irreversible. Wasting, or low weight for height, is a strong predicator of mortality among children younger than 5 years. It is usually the result of acute food shortage and/or disease.

With 28 percent of children younger than 5 years already underweight, the region is far behind its United Nations Millennium Development Goal of reducing hunger. The crises will no doubt grossly impede efforts to reach that hunger-reduction goal.

At a time when social spending and investment in programs protecting children are most needed, they may be the first to be cut -- if the experiences of the past crises are echoed. During the Asian financial crisis, for example, public health spending was reduced. In Thailand it declined by 9 percent in 1998 compared to the previous year, while total public health expenditures in Indonesia fell by 7 percent in 1998 and another 12 percent the following year.

Most of the governments in this region have responded to the food price spikes with social protection schemes such as price controls, subsidies, cash transfer for food, food rations, school feeding programs, guaranteed compulsory education, inclusive education or financial incentives for teacher education. Many have built on existing social protection systems, reflecting a growing consensus on the importance of social protection.

But inadequate coverage is still an issue. According to the UNICEF-commissioned research, most countries in the region -- including the poorest ones -- have only limited coverage if they have a social protection program at all. And many programs are not prepared to cope with the "new poor" -- the previous "near poor" who have been pushed into the mire of poverty.

The Asian financial crisis of 1997-1998 illustrated that household coping strategies will sustain considerable pressure for a while. But for how long this time?

Policies and interventions designed to prevent poverty traps from persisting are of critical importance to preserve past gains as well as further advance economic and human development. Reduced social spending could not only derail countries' progress towards achieving the Millennium Development Goals, it could also have a large opportunity cost in terms of relinquished improvements in human capital and countries' growth trajectories.

Scaling up social protection systems can help boost economies by funding jobs for teachers, health care workers, child care workers and social workers. The World Bank reported two years prior to the current crises that interventions to improve child nutrition outcomes could generate benefits that are 5-200 times the cost of the interventions.

The critical next step for many countries is to maintain, strengthen or develop social protection systems so that they address both the structural features as well as the shock-related challenges that amplify child vulnerability. There is a strong case for placing children at the center of social protection systems because reaching them is critical for breaking the cycle of poverty.

The Convention on the Rights of the Child, which all countries in the region have ratified, reinforces that case. Children, it says, should have first call on all available resources to ensure their rights to survival, development and protection. This is no less true in times of economic challenge.

"The future of my children is a big concern for me, but it is out of my control," Nan Pan's mother said several days ago, looking out over the last of her four paddy fields that had not yet been sold to cover bills.

We need to give her back that control. Nan Pan's village neighbors, who are also struggling against the doubling of prices for food, petrol and fertilizer, help out her mother by giving her noodles or hiring her to help with their harvests.

If a weakened village community can do it, why can't a national government? Economic predictions for the region have growth slowing -- but it is still growth. There is no good economic reason to deny programs or services for the vulnerable -- especially for children.

The writer is Regional Director of UNICEF East Asia and the Pacific.

Popular

Kadin urges stability after Constitutional Court ruling

Jokowi says transition to new government to begi

BCA loan disbursement surges 17.1 percent yoy in first quarter