Features

By Dr Gina Crivello

Approximately 90 per cent of the world’s 1.2 billion young people (aged 15-24) live in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs). They are navigating the coronavirus pandemic at a critical period in the life course when they are expected to set the foundations for their adult lives. Intersecting age, gender and economic vulnerabilities affect their varied experiences and capacities to cope and recover in this crisis. Yet the spread and scale of the coronavirus in LMICs and our understanding of how people at different life stages are being affected, and how, continues to evolve. And while older people and those with underlying health conditions are clearly the most vulnerable to COVID-19, the consequences of economic recession for marginalised youth is likely to be long-lasting.

The recent comparative study of Young Marriage and Parenthood (YMAPS) in four low- and middle-income countries underscores the need to identify how best to support young people coming of age in challenging settings, and which groups of youth might be particularly vulnerable in times of acute crisis. A collaboration between Young Lives (Ethiopia, India, Peru) and Child Frontiers (Zambia), YMAPS involved 345 individuals, prior to the coronavirus pandemic, including married, cohabiting, divorced and parenting male and female adolescents and youth (age 15-24), in interviews about their everyday life experiences, relationships and support needs.

The findings from this study indicate that the millions of young people in LMICs are managing the gendered responsibilities of first-time marriage, cohabitation and parenthood, already with limited economic resources and weak safety nets. They will struggle in the face of the global crisis. There is a real risk that the pandemic will exacerbate inequalities within their intimate relationships and family lives and create further social and economic divisions among this generation of youth. To avoid this, the findings from this study point to a range of possible secondary effects that need to be addressed for young people in LMICs in both the acute and recovery phases of the pandemic:

Economic Precarity: Young people faced economic precarity even before the pandemic. Most youth in these settings make their living from the informal economy, without written contracts, job security or benefits, including access to sick pay and unemployment. Prior to the current crisis, the families who reported the greatest number of economic and environmental shocks were also those with the fewest economic and social resources to cope. For young households, the pressures were already severe, often leading to separation or divorce, and sometimes to violence. We can expect economic recession to destabilise the already fragile livelihoods of young couples and young families in these settings.

Gender Inequality: Despite awareness of gender equality among the younger generation, young people continue to be socially conditioned to take on gender-stereotyped family roles, expecting men to be ‘breadwinners’ and girls and women to take on nearly all responsibility for unpaid housework and childcare - no matter if they also do paid work.

Above all else, [my girlfriend] looks after the baby and the house … [w]hat we are having to eat, she looks after everything […]. She takes care of her pots, her things. I take care of my cars […]. Before she makes any decisions, she has to talk to me.

- Young man, cohabited, age 20, peri-urban Peru

There are concerns that gender inequality is becoming further entrenched during the pandemic as women bear the brunt of additional unpaid workloads.

Even before stay-at-home measures were imposed in response to COVID-19, married girls and young women faced high levels of surveillance by husbands and in-laws, and their contact with childhood friends and family was also mediated by them. Young women in these circumstances found it difficult to seek help when they experienced domestic conflict or violence from their husbands, partners or in-laws. This was unfortunately common, and by several accounts, is already rising significantly in many countries during the pandemic.

Unintended Pregnancies: Young people’s aspirations to marry and have children in their 20s were thwarted by unintended pregnancies in their teen years. Early pregnancies led young people to marry or start living together even though many felt unprepared to take on these adult responsibilities.

Our research found that, even before the pandemic, adolescents and young people struggled to access modern contraception and contraceptive advice until after the birth of their first child, and safe abortion services were limited.

I came to know about these things only after becoming pregnant … I was not aware of these techniques before marriage … Even he [my husband] was not aware of the family planning methods.

- Young woman, married and became pregnant age 19, rural India

Access to contraceptives and other sexual and reproductive health services will be compromised in the context of lockdowns and travel restrictions, and in places with less effective health systems, potentially resulting in millions of unintended pregnancies and unsafe abortions in LMICs. Research on the 2014 Ebola outbreak in West Africa found that school closures contributed to an increase in adolescent pregnancies, and policies prevented pregnant girls from returning to school when they opened; the long-lasting effects on gender inequality are well documented. There are predictions the COVID-19 pandemic will result in an additional 13 million child marriages over the next decade, and an increase in unintended pregnancies.

Priorities to assist young people in marriage and parenthood during & post COVID-19

Our findings point to a range of specific measures at national level that take what young people have told us into account. These might minimise the longer-term impacts of COVID-19 on this formative period in their lives. Short- and medium-term responses should do more than avoid exacerbating gender and other inequalities exposed by the pandemic; they should be designed to reduce them. They include:

• Step up child marriage prevention policies and practices after the lockdown to ensure that the numbers do not rise;
• Encourage and support young women and young men to return to school after pregnancy and marriage or cohabitation;
• Take account of married and cohabiting adolescents in poverty alleviation and livelihoods strategies directed at the poorest families;
• Improve protections for informal labourers and ensure that post the pandemic young people have access to decent work;
• Ensure affordable access to modern contraceptives and sexual and reproductive health rights and services;
• Address the sources of domestic conflict and ensure women can safely get help at all times;
• Promote women’s access to safe public spaces, when lockdowns are no longer in place;
• Ensure boys and men’s attitudes are more gender equal and that they contribute fairly to the share of unpaid work and caregiving within the home;
• Decrease women’s financial dependence by promoting access to education, suitable work opportunities, and quality affordable childcare;
• Strengthen systems supporting young families to confront existing and future risk.

We need to be aware of, and prepare for these measures now, not in several months’ time. Otherwise this unprecedented crisis threatens to set back decades of progress and blight the futures of the generation now growing up under the shadow of COVID.

Note: The comparative analysis from the four country ‘Young Marriage and Parenthood Study’ (YMAPS) and international policy recommendations are published on May 15th, and can be found alongside detailed country study findings on the Young Lives website here.

What can history teach us about tackling pandemics? How can they shape our response to climate change? These questions are being explored in a new series of live, virtual events from the Humanities Cultural Programme.

While physical events are not be possible in Oxford this term, the ‘Big Tent! Live Events!’ series will bring together Oxford academics, leading figures in the arts and even pop stars like Jamelia. They will discuss the biggest questions of our day through the lens of research.

Events will be streamed live at 5pm every Thursday, and the recording will be made available online shortly afterwards.

Dr Victoria McGuinness, Head of Cultural Programming, said: "Although it is disappointing not to be able to bring people together for these events, moving to digital actually lets us reach bigger and more global audiences than would otherwise be possible."

Thousands of people from around the world took part in the first events, and we invite everyone to tune in, listen and type out your thoughts and questions for our speakers every week from 5pm.”

Some of the events so far have been very relevant for our present circumstances. Last month, Professor Sally Shuttleworth (English Faculty) and Professor Erica Charters (History Faculty) explored the treatment of health and disease in the past, particularly in the 18th and 19th centuries when invalids were actively encouraged to travel.

Earlier this month, Professor Abigail Williams explained her research into the history of reading aloud and performance at home in the 18th century. Back then, drawing rooms regularly hosted book groups, tea parties, amateur dramatics and singing. In discussion with Giles Lewin, she gave her thoughts on the revival of domestic entertainment while we have been in lockdown.

Last month, Emma Smith, Professor of Shakespeare Studies, marked the Bard’s birthday in a discussion with Erica Whyman OBE, Deputy Artistic Director of the Royal Shakespeare Company.

Shakespeare, it turned out, did some of his writing while in quarantine to avoid the plague.

In the first event to be held, anthropologists Dr Elizabeth Ewart and JC Niala discussed human relationship to cities, and JC Niala’s doctoral research into 'guerrilla gardeners' who operate in cities such as London and Oxford.

Future events will include a discussion of the world after Covid-19 on 18 June. This will be a conversation between Professor Ngaire Woods (Dean of the Blavatnik School of Government) and Professor Peter Frankopan (History Faculty), who will bring together complementary expertise in present day governance and lessons from history.

On 7 May, Professor Philip Bullock (Modern and Medieval Languages) and Dr Leah Broad (Music Faculty) celebrated the 180th anniversary of the birth of Tchaikovsky with a discussion of how the Russian composer became such a revered figure.

The full list of past and upcoming events can be found here:

https://torch.ox.ac.uk/article/launch-big-tent-big-ideas

The Humanities Cultural Programme is part of the Stephen A. Schwarzman Centre for the Humanities. It will benefit from state-of-the-art facilities including a 500-seat auditorium, when the building the opens, which is schedule for the academic year 2024/25.

By Dr Kate Orkin

COVID-19 and the related government-led lockdowns have resulted in widespread economic shock and job loss, in the UK and around the world. Governments, including in low and middle-income countries, have responded with economic interventions to cushion the shock. The most widely-used government tool has been cash transfer programmes: the World Bank finds 234 measures involving expanding cash transfer programmes worldwide, as well as 100 food or voucher schemes.

In the past, some governments have been concerned that transfers would increase dependency on the state and, in particular, that cash transfers would not be used well because it is hard to monitor how people spend them. Many governments used instead to provide food aid or subsidise basic food items.

So why have governments shifted to using cash in low and middle-income countries?

Why have governments shifted to using cash in low and middle-income countries?

In most situations, there is strong evidence that money, not food, is the most efficient and effective way to distribute emergency aid and social programmes. This particular question, on how poor people use cash transfers, is one of the most studied in development economics.

The finance ministry in Mexico did one of the first conditional cash schemes in 1997. To evaluate the programme, they ran a randomised trial. They could not roll out the programme all at once, so they randomly selected some communities to receive it first and compared them to those who did not. This is a similar process to how drugs are tested, but with a social programme. Since then, many countries' governments in low and middle income countries have implemented similar studies.

In most situations, there is strong evidence that money, not food, is the most efficient and effective way to distribute emergency aid and social programmes.

Poor people spend cash grants well. The bulk of transfers are spent on food anyway. For example, a review of 165 studies by the Overseas Development Institute found that recipients of cash grants have better dietary diversity and are less likely to face food insecurity. A World Bank review found grants improve growth and cognitive development in small children. Cash also has the added benefit of giving people autonomy to spend on what they need most. It also stops distortions arising in local markets, where bringing in free food can lead to price decreases that hurt local producers.

Poor people spend cash grants well

Emergency, fast cash is a smart investment in long-term poverty alleviation

Numerous studies, from China and India to Ethiopia and Malawi show that economic shocks have severe long-term consequences. Poor households often take short-term decisions that leave them in deeper long-term poverty. The decision most feared is that households reduce children’s nutritional intake.

Setting aside moral arguments, malnourished children have lower schooling attainment and lower earnings throughout their lives. A World Bank review found grants improve growth and cognitive development and later outcomes in small children. It is harder to find a smarter investment.

When households face economic shocks, women may enter into transactional sexual relationships: during the outbreak in West Africa, a study by anti-poverty organisation BRAC found young women had older partners, higher rates of pregnancy and did not return to school. Both responses to poverty could be mitigated by cash transfers.

But studies also show that, when facing a short deep shock, desperate households often sell productive assets such as cows, vehicles or phones or dip into meagre savings which they usually use to search for work. Losing the means of earning can lead to many additional years of poverty. Temporary cash grants can help. Studies in Bangladesh and Malawi found recipients of grants are less likely to sell assets when they face shocks.

There are anecdotes of welfare queens: people spending their welfare money poorly. But the anecdotes just do not bear out the reality

In low and middle income country settings, cash transfers also mostly do not affect whether, or how much, people work. In some studies they increase job search because they give people money for transport costs and airtime. For example, one South African study found youngsters in households with a pension recipient are more likely to find jobs. 

There are anecdotes of welfare queens: people spending their welfare money poorly. But the anecdotes just do not bear out the reality in large samples of people. There is really no good evidence of waste. A review of 19 studies by the World Bank found cash grant recipients did not increase spending on alcohol or cigarettes. In some countries, which only give the grants to parents, there have been arguments that the grants are incentives for women to have children. But there is little rigorous evidence of this. For example, trials in Nicaragua and Malawi found that women in households are less likely to fall pregnant; a trial in Mexico found no effects. 

An increase in cash grants may also help stimulate the economy. In a trial in Kenya, the NGO GiveDirectly evaluated an intervention which gave the poorest people, in some randomly selected villages, large lump-sum cash transfers. They found that people living near to villages, where the poorest received cash transfers, also had higher food consumption, partly because recipients spent money in their businesses. There were no meaningful inflationary effects.

Most striking of all, the study estimates a ‘fiscal multiplier’ of 2.6 for this area of Kenya, implying that every $1 invested in fiscal stimulus will grow the local economy by $2.60. That is even larger than in such multipliers the US during a recession. These were much, much bigger transfers than most governments in poor countries give out, equivalent to about $1,800, if spent in the US. So we do not know if the same effects occur from smaller transfers, but in principle the mechanism might work in the same way.

Cash is also usually cheaper to distribute than food. It can often be transferred to bank accounts or mobile money accounts. It does not go off

Cash is also usually cheaper to distribute than food. It can often be transferred to bank accounts or mobile money accounts. It does not go off, and governments don’t have to worry about having the wrong type of cash in the wrong place. There are worries that cash might be more fungible and possible to divert, but there is also evidence on how to prevent ‘leakage’, in particular by paying directly to beneficiaries, requiring biometric identity verification and being very clear about who is getting what benefits on what schedule. It is obviously difficult to set these systems up from scratch, but many countries have them in place already. And cash is much better for social distancing than food parcel queues, if it can be sent to bank accounts.

There can be cases where food aid makes more sense, for example if there is disruption to the food supply chain or if prices go up rapidly. Sometimes beneficiaries say they prefer food. But in general, it is fair to say that a cash system can work better than a food system.

South Africa is an interesting recent example. They had an emergency food parcel system before the crisis and it got completely overwhelmed. They just could not scale up fast enough to reach everyone who needed it. The authorities eventually admitted that the food parcel system was not working, so instead they increased the amount of their pension and child grant, where people were signed up already. They have also added a new cash grant for the unemployed.

Dr Orkin is a labour economist at the Blavatnik School of Government, University of Oxford

Robert Burton was a scholar at the University of Oxford 400 years ago. He drew on the collections of the Bodleian Library and Christ Church, where he was himself Librarian, to seek to understand the human condition, in its full emotional range.

But his declared subject was 'melancholy'. The Anatomy of Melancholy, first published in 1621, is an extraordinary and enormous attempt to grapple with the causes, symptoms, and treatments of that universal human experience. 

Four hundred years later, when clinical depression is stated to be the leading cause of global disability, and there are many challenges to our mental health, a new radio series for BBC Radio 4 is asking: how far have we come? And is there anything we can learn from Burton’s Anatomy of Melancholy to help us today?

Amy Liptrot and Kathryn Murphy at the Bodleian Library

With Burton as a guide, the series hears from leading experts in mental health research today, and from those who manage their struggles with sadness and depression in a variety of ways - including the gardener and broadcaster, Monty Don, pioneering cell biologist and author of Malignant Sadness: the anatomy of depression, Lewis Wolpert, and a young survivor from the Manchester Arena attack.

John Geddes and Amy Liptrot at Christ Church

Each episode takes on a different theme from Burton's Anatomy, covering causes such as: genetics ('an hereditary cause'), inflammation ('inflammations of the head'), inequality ('poverty and want'), trauma ('terrors in the night') and possible 'cures' such as nature, 'merry company', ‘divine music’, sleep, friends, exercise. 

Bust of Robert Burton at Christ Church Cathedral

‘We've explored the part of melancholy in the human condition, how it can be alleviated and lived with - and the unique voice of Burton has been a brilliant guide though it all.’

The series shines a light on common experiences and connections over time and the ways in which science is catching up with the intuitions and understanding from 400 years ago and beyond.

Robert Burton talks about his own struggles with melancholy and reveals a personal vulnerability when he says: 'I write of melancholy, by being busy to avoid melancholy.' The series explores the potential of writing and reading to give purpose, better understand one's experiences and connect with others. Perhaps there has never been a better moment to pause and reflect on melancholy: ways to understand it, alleviate it and accept it.

The actor Simon Russell Beale narrates sections of Robert Burton’s text throughout the series.

Professor John Geddes is series consultant for The New Anatomy of Melancholy.

Dr Kathryn Murphy’s book Robert Burton: A Vital Melancholy will be published in 2021.

The Bodleian Library is curating an exhibition based around The Anatomy of Melancholy, due to open in the autumn, 2021.

The 10-part series The New Anatomy of Melancholy begins on BBC Radio 4, Monday 11 May 2020 at 1.45pm.

Listen here: https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/m000j1jq

Research at Oxford has shown music brings people together and makes them feel better - and social distancing has provided overwhelming support for such academic music theories.

To celebrate music of the lockdown, Oxford’s music faculty is today inviting entries for a unique competition focusing on safe collaboration, networking and virtual collectivity

To celebrate music of the lockdown, Oxford’s music faculty is today inviting entries for a unique competition focusing on safe collaboration, networking and virtual collectivity. At the same time, Oxford music students are giving an online performance tonight [24 April] for the YoungDementia UK charity.

The EMPRES Award 2020 invites creative, collaborative responses to the global challenge, of making music and art during the Covid-19 pandemic. Entries can come from any member of the University of Oxford and their creative associates. This could include filmmakers, writers, visual artists, composers and musicians. 

Meanwhile, Oxford musicians became involved with the Oxfordshire-based charity as part of the Turtle Song project. The aims is to reach out to people with dementia and engage with them socially and creatively. Music is proven to be of great physical and emotional benefit to people living with dementia.

The work was cut short by the lockdown. But the whole group, include those living with dementia, came together by Zoom last Friday and hope to ‘meet’ regularly during this difficult time. According Turtle Song project director Carolyn von Stumm: ‘The joy at the group being reunited as we all sang and danced in our living rooms was palpable.  A wonderfully, uplifting, positive story with a very human perspective.’

Oxford music students are giving an online performance tonight [24 April] for the YoungDementia UK charity

Will Prior, an Oxford music student who has been involved with the project, says: ‘Volunteering...has been eye opening and inspirational in equal parts....it is a great shame that we were not able to meet as a group in person for the (final performance) we have found a way, through the wonder of Zoom, to connect with each other...Although the social dynamic is vastly altered...there’s something rather special about seeing a group of people...dancing round their living rooms without a care in the world whilst belting out...songs that you wrote together.’

The EMPRES competition is also aimed at engaging people with music during these challenging times. The Music faculty’s electronic music studio manager and EMPRES artistic director, Daniel Hulme, comments: 'We are living through times inconceivable just a few months ago, that will no doubt resonate for many years to come. This is both an extraordinary crisis, and potentially an extraordinary stimulus to do something remarkable.'

This is both an extraordinary crisis, and potentially an extraordinary stimulus to do something remarkable

 The deadline for submissions is Monday 15 June. There are two broad categories:

•  Experimental Electronic Music and
• Sound Art.

Submissions in both categories are welcomed from collaborations with other artists, researchers and disciplines. There will be prizes in both categories and online publication – with a live performance of selected works later in the year.  A key requirement is that the works are deliverable within the current UK guidelines around social distancing – and could include a digital experience or a web-based installation. And they must be no longer than eight minutes.

Submissions for the EMPRES, Electronic Music Research, competition should be sent via WeTransfer (or another web transfer service) in a single ZIP file to [email protected]. 

Turtle Song has run 28 projects throughout the UK over the last 11 years, involving 800 participants, 150 music students and 10 universities and music colleges. You can see their performances at  https://www.turtlekeyarts.org.uk/turtle-song.