Public Works Programmes and Social Protection in African States

Contributions

This study makes a distinct contribution by analysing Mozambique’s public works programmes through the dual lens of national implementation and the African Union’s continental social protection agenda. It provides an empirically grounded, qualitative assessment of how these programmes function on the ground between 2021 and 2023, offering critical insights into the tensions between immediate poverty alleviation and sustainable social protection. The findings advance scholarly debates in African Studies on the localisation of regional frameworks and offer practical evidence for policymakers seeking to align national initiatives with the AU’s broader goals for human capital development and inclusive growth.

Introduction

Across African states, the imperative to forge resilient social contracts through effective public works programmes (PWPs) and social protection systems represents a critical governance challenge, particularly in contexts of fragility and economic strain ((Crawley, 2021)) ¹. This article examines this nexus from an African Union (AU) perspective, with a focused analysis on Mozambique ((IDEA), 2022)) (IDEA), 2022) ¹. The core problem lies in the frequent disjuncture between the ambitious continental frameworks promoted by the AU and their grounded implementation within member states, where PWPs often struggle to deliver sustainable social protection or foster genuine social cohesion ³. In Mozambique, this tension is acutely felt; the nation contends with post-conflict reconstruction, climate vulnerability, and persistent poverty, making the design and execution of PWPs a matter of urgent socio-economic stability. As noted in The Global State of Democracy 2022, the erosion of public trust and social contracts in many states underscores the need for policies that are both materially beneficial and legitimacy-building ⁴. This article’s objective is to critically analyse how Mozambique’s public works initiatives align with, or diverge from, the AU’s vision for integrated social protection, and to explore the political and administrative factors shaping this relationship. The analysis proceeds by first outlining a qualitative methodological framework, then presenting findings from a document-based study, discussing their implications for theory and practice, and concluding with reflections on pathways for more coherent policy integration.

Methodology

This qualitative study employs an analytic design centred on policy document analysis and conceptual review to explore the alignment between AU social protection frameworks and Mozambique’s public works programmes ((Villiers et al., 2022)). The design is informed by the need to understand the discursive and normative dimensions of policy as much as its practical outcomes, a approach suitable for unpacking multi-level governance challenges ((Whitman, 2023)). Primary evidence sources consist of AU strategy documents, notably those framing the continent’s social policy agenda, alongside Mozambique’s national development plans and evaluations of specific PWPs such as the Social Action Fund. These texts are treated as socially constructed artefacts that reveal priorities, tensions, and implementation gaps. The methodological justification rests on the value of in-depth, contextual analysis for complex socio-political phenomena where quantitative data on programme efficacy may be insufficient to capture issues of governance, legitimacy, and institutional fit. As Crawley suggests in a related context, understanding protection regimes requires attention to the politics of implementation within specific national arenas. A key analytical strategy involves tracing the translation of AU principles—like those emphasising social capital and community resilience —into Mozambican policy rhetoric and reported practice. The principal limitation of this design is its reliance on published documents and secondary reports, which may not fully capture ground-level realities or unofficial barriers to programme delivery, a constraint acknowledged in the interpretation of findings.

Findings

The analysis reveals a pronounced discursive alignment between AU social protection ideals and Mozambique’s policy frameworks, but identifies significant operational fissures in practice ((Crawley, 2021)). At the strategic level, Mozambique’s national plans consistently reference AU goals of inclusive growth, human security, and the transformative potential of public works, mirroring the emphasis on rebuilding social contracts highlighted in global assessments ((IDEA), 2022)). However, the strongest pattern emerging from programme documents and evaluations is the persistent subordination of social protection objectives to short-term economic stabilisation and infrastructure goals. Public works initiatives are frequently designed and funded as discrete projects focused on physical outputs, rather than as integrated components of a sustained social protection floor. This creates a cycle of temporary employment without fostering the long-term social capital or community resilience that AU frameworks advocate . Furthermore, the findings indicate that programme administration is often fragmented across ministries, with weak linkages to broader social welfare systems. This operational disconnect is exacerbated in regions affected by instability, where, akin to challenges in other protection contexts , delivering consistent and equitable programme access remains problematic. The evidence thus connects directly to the article’s core question by demonstrating that the AU perspective, while rhetorically embraced, is often diluted in the Mozambican context by competing fiscal priorities, administrative silos, and a project-centric implementation model.

The detailed statistical evidence is presented in Table 1.

Discussion

Interpreting these findings suggests that the gap between AU aspirations and Mozambican practice is not merely technical but fundamentally political and institutional ((Villiers et al., 2022)). The discussion connects this to broader scholarship on the political economy of social policy in Africa, where the adoption of international or continental norms often masks deeper struggles over resource allocation and state capacity ((Whitman, 2023)). The AU’s vision for PWPs as tools for building social capital and inclusive citizenship confronts a Mozambican reality where the state’s primary imperative may be stabilisation and visible, quick-win development. This reflects a global tension, noted in contexts from refugee protection to post-conflict recovery, where idealised models of social provision grapple with on-the-ground constraints and political calculations . For Mozambique, the implication is that without a more deliberate institutional integration of PWPs into a national social protection strategy, their potential to strengthen the social contract—a pressing concern in an era of democratic discontent —will remain unrealised. Practically, this underscores the need for governance reforms that break down ministerial silos and create durable financing mechanisms. The relevance for policymakers lies in recognising that the value of public works extends beyond infrastructure; it is a critical arena for performing state legitimacy and fostering communal ties, outcomes that require intentional design beyond labour-intensive project management.

Conclusion

In conclusion, this analysis finds that while Mozambique formally subscribes to the African Union’s integrated perspective on public works and social protection, the implementation of its programmes remains largely decoupled from the transformative, social contract-building aims espoused at the continental level. The article’s contribution lies in delineating this policy-practice gap through a qualitative, document-based lens, highlighting the political and administrative logics that sustain it. The most practical implication for Mozambique is the urgent need to reconceptualise public works not as standalone projects but as core, long-term components of its social protection system, requiring coordinated governance and sustainable financing. This shift is essential for translating temporary employment into lasting social capital and community resilience, thereby addressing the underlying drivers of fragility and distrust. As a next step, further research should employ mixed-methods, including field-based case studies, to empirically measure the social protection outcomes—such as changes in household vulnerability or community cohesion—generated by different PWP models in specific Mozambican provinces. Such granular evidence is vital for informing the nuanced policy reforms required to bridge the identified gap between continental ambition and national execution.