Rethinking the beggars’ well-being: Rehabilitation or eviction?

You are walking down a busy street or waiting for a bus, and a person approaches you with a bowl in hand, asking for money. The person sometimes is a man, a woman and sometimes even a child. It is a common experience for many of us in Bangladesh, whether living in a bustling city or a quiet village. I am, of course, talking about beggars. 

With the growing number of beggars roaming the streets for sustenance, the issue of beggary has received considerable attention from policymakers and stakeholders alike. Unfortunately, despite efforts, a sustainable solution remains elusive.

Some advocate eradicating beggary through the law, while others denounce such measures as violating human rights. 

Although policy analysts suggest that halting almsgiving and ousting beggars from cities could push them towards work-for-pay, it could also give rise to societal ills such as crime and theft. 

Furthermore, persuading people to stop giving alms is a formidable challenge, given the widely held belief that it is a religious virtue. Additionally, managing alternative means of subsistence for vulnerable groups such as the homeless, destitute and physically challenged is a significant obstacle.
So, what can we do?

The persistence of this problem underscores the need for a comprehensive and compassionate approach.

The issue of beggary cannot be addressed solely by law enforcement measures. Instead, it requires a nuanced understanding of the root causes and the development of strategies that consider the needs and well-being of beggars. 

For instance, we can talk about how some beggars are forced into begging by intermediaries who spin the wheel behind a veil, forcing children and physically challenged people into the begging business. If any law is required, it should target such intermediaries rather than imposing regulations for the eviction of beggars.

In the policy discourse, the first and widely agreed strategy is prioritising the expansion of social safety net schemes, such as the widow allowance, old allowance and disability allowance, which help to support vulnerable groups and can reduce begging rates. 

Although the upcoming fiscal plan allocates Tk 126,272 crores to the social safety net programme,  marking an 11% rise in the value year-on-year, the spending for the poor is expected to be lower as a hefty amount will be used for government pensions, interest subsidy, agriculture subsidy, health risks and to combat national shocks. 

In addition, including beggars separately in the safety net disbursement process remains a significant challenge in policy discourse. One of the main obstacles to this approach is the overlap with existing government allowance recipients who also beg to improve their living conditions. 

To overcome the challenge, a comprehensive survey is required to separate the genuine beggars from the current government allowance receivers. 
Although this needs an assessment survey, which would be challenging to conduct throughout the country, it can expedite and successfully run another strategy—the rehabilitation programme. 

Several such programmes have already been piloted and executed by the government, but they have failed to keep up with the growing number of beggars. To be effective, these programmes need to address several challenges first. For example, there is often random disbursement of income-generating appliances, which leads to the ineffective use of supplied resources—giving a sewing machine to a physically challenged or a female beggar who is inept in sewing is unlikely to add any value to her daily earnings. 

The need assessment survey, in this case, can help determine who is truly in dire need and who needs what kind of support.  

Another challenge after implementing rehabilitation programmes is the return of beggars to the begging. In most cases, recipients convert these appliances into cash, which enables them to return to begging, as evidenced by a recent study conducted in Khulna City. 

A dedicated monitoring and evaluation scheme must be revised to meet the intervention goal. An independent body of monitoring and evaluation teams can remove the problem by ensuring proper resource allocation and regular follow-ups. 

Any successful beggar rehabilitation programme induces numerous dynamics, including identifying and categorising the needy, addressing the drawbacks in asset disbursement and beggars' fast mobility, conducting follow-ups and extending social safety net support. 

These are undoubtedly complex challenges, but they are not insurmountable. Lessons from other nations that have successfully implemented similar projects to manage decent livelihoods for beggars can be helpful, especially in countries that have effectively implemented rehabilitation programmes aimed at reducing begging rates and helping beggars rebuild their lives. 

For instance, alongside financial assistance and basic needs, such as food, shelter, and healthcare, India provides job and skills development training for beggars, enabling them to secure long-term employment. Different non-govt welfare organisations also volunteered for the pilot projects. 

Therefore, short-term projects and policies, along with collaboration with other bodies to promote skill training, will be a vital part of the rehabilitation programme to reduce poverty and enhance employment among beggars. The goal of the rehabilitation scheme should not only be to eradicate beggary, for instance, by rolling out any law or eviction but also to focus on the sustainable livelihoods of beggars. 

Bangladesh will require significant skilled personnel to overcome the prolonged problem of beggary through rehabilitation, with the local government playing a critical role in this regard. Merely placing billboards with the slogan "a beggar-free state" on the fronts of cities or municipalities is a self-congratulatory act that is unlikely to achieve the goal of rehabilitation intervention. Without a deep understanding of the contexts and challenges, rehabilitating beggars will remain difficult, and debates surrounding the issue will not change the status quo.

Md. Karimul Islam is a Research Associate at the BRAC Institute of Governance and Development (BIGD), BRAC University.

Disclaimer: The views and opinions expressed in this article are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the opinions and views of The Business Standard.