From Social Assistance to Economic Inclusion: Are Tunisia’s Poverty-Reduction Programmes Helping Families Break Out of the Cycle of Poverty?
A Documentary Investigation into Tunisia’s “AMEN” Social Protection System and the Transition from Cash Assistance to Sustainable Livelihoods
Prepared and Published by: Mohamed Chaieb Barhoumi
ATEP MED – Arab Digital Center for Media & Development
Investigation Areas: Poverty | Social Protection | Economic Inclusion | Employment | Women | Children | Regional Inequality | Public Policy
1. The Central Question
For years, Tunisia’s social protection system has represented an essential safety net for poor and vulnerable groups and for families facing economic and social difficulties. The “AMEN” programme has become one of the main mechanisms used by the state to protect families from poverty and economic shocks through cash transfers, social assistance, healthcare, family allowances and other forms of support.
But social protection raises a more difficult question: What happens after assistance begins?
Does a family remain dependent on social transfers for many years, or can social assistance become a bridge toward employment, self-employment, the creation of sustainable livelihoods and greater economic independence?
This is the question this investigation seeks to explore.
The objective is not to question the importance of social assistance, as official evidence confirms that the “AMEN” system plays an important role in protecting vulnerable families. Rather, the journalistic question is whether, alongside protecting families, the social protection system succeeds in moving a significant number of beneficiaries who are able to work from a cycle of assistance into economic activity and sustainable income.
2. The Scale of the “AMEN” System
The “AMEN” system has significant social and financial importance in Tunisia. According to data published by the World Bank, permanent cash transfers have expanded to reach more than 386,000 beneficiary households.
The broader social protection system also includes healthcare support for low-income groups and family allowances for children in poor and vulnerable households.
During the COVID-19 pandemic, exceptional cash transfers reached more than 895,000 households, demonstrating the ability of the social protection system to reach large numbers of citizens during periods of crisis.
Under the new phase of World Bank support, family allowances are expected to expand to cover approximately 450,000 children aged between 6 and 18 from poor and low-income households, alongside support for a national disability fund, the digitalisation of the social protection system and the development of a unified beneficiary registry.
But the most important point for this investigation is the growing focus on economic inclusion through pathways combining self-employment and wage employment.
Here, the direction of social policy appears to be gradually changing:
from protecting families from poverty to helping them build sustainable sources of income.
3. Assistance Is Not the Same as Economic Independence
A monthly cash transfer can protect a family from hunger and extreme poverty, help meet basic needs, and contribute to keeping children in school and ensuring access to healthcare.
Social assistance can also prevent a temporary economic shock from becoming a long-term crisis.
But a cash transfer does not, by itself, create a job.
This is one of the most important points from which the investigation should begin.
A family may receive social assistance while continuing to face unemployment, informal work, low agricultural income, a lack of productive assets, difficulty accessing finance, skills shortages or limited access to markets.
Therefore, the fundamental question cannot simply be:
How many households receive assistance?
The more difficult question should be:
How many households have experienced sustainable economic improvement as a result of the interventions directed towards them?
4. From Beneficiary to Economic Actor
The new economic inclusion policy is particularly important because it seeks to address the causes that keep some families trapped in poverty rather than simply providing financial support.
Official documents refer to a range of tools that may form part of economic inclusion pathways, including productive assets, training, individual support, employment and self-employment pathways, and connecting beneficiaries with economic opportunities.
This represents an important shift in the philosophy of intervention.
A person living in poverty may need money, but money alone may not be enough.
Someone seeking to establish a small economic activity may need, at the same time:
Training + equipment + finance + support + market access + follow-up.
The investigative question therefore becomes:
Do economic inclusion programmes provide this complete chain, or do some interventions remain fragmented?
5. The Missing Question: What Happens After the Grant?
One of the most important issues the investigation should focus on is what happens after a beneficiary receives economic support.
If a beneficiary receives a grant or equipment to establish a small business, what happens six months later?
What happens after one year?
What happens after two years?
Does the activity survive?
Does it generate regular income?
Does it provide employment for its owner or for other people?
Does the activity become capable of withstanding crises?
Does the household become less dependent on social assistance?
Or does the activity stop after a short period and the household return to the same economic situation?
These questions are more important than simply announcing the number of grants or projects launched.
The number of activities created measures reach or outputs, but it is not sufficient on its own to measure impact and sustainability.
6. What Does It Cost to Move a Family Out of Vulnerability?
A serious development investigation should also raise the financial question.
When public money or international funding is used to finance economic inclusion programmes, it becomes important to know the cost of achieving a sustainable economic outcome.
When official data are available, the investigation can compare:
Total expenditure on economic inclusion ÷ number of households that achieved sustainable economic improvement.
This differs from calculating:
Total expenditure ÷ number of beneficiaries.
The second calculation measures the scale of the programme.
The first attempts to estimate the cost of achieving an outcome.
For this reason, it is important to seek official data on total expenditure, the number of beneficiaries who received economic support, the number of activities created, the number of activities that remained operational after one year and after two years, the average income generated by them, and the number of jobs created.
If such data are not available, their absence itself becomes an important question in terms of monitoring, evaluation and transparency.
7. Women: Social Protection or Economic Empowerment?
Women occupy an important position within the “AMEN” system, and data published by the World Bank indicate that women head a significant proportion of households benefiting from permanent cash transfers.
This raises another investigative question:
Does social protection contribute to strengthening women’s economic independence, or does it primarily protect households from poverty without changing women’s position in the labour market?
The investigation should examine the number of women who have moved from receiving assistance into economic activity, the number who have launched businesses, the number who have obtained paid employment, the income generated by these activities, their sustainability, and women’s ability to control income and productive assets.
There is a major difference between:
A woman receiving financial assistance
and
A woman who has a sustainable source of income.
8. Children and Breaking the Cycle of Poverty
The social protection system is not limited to helping families in the present; it is also connected to the future of children.
Family allowances aim to help vulnerable households provide better conditions for their children and improve access to education, healthcare and essential services.
This raises a long-term question:
Can social protection today prevent poverty from being transmitted from one generation to the next?
Answering this question requires monitoring indicators such as school attendance, dropout rates, healthcare, nutrition, transition to secondary or higher education, vocational training and, eventually, integration into the labour market.
The real impact of social assistance may not become visible in the first or second year. It may emerge years later, when a child becomes a young adult capable of working and generating an independent income.
9. Poverty Is Not the Same Across All Regions
It cannot be assumed that the results of a national social programme will be identical in all regions.
The economic opportunities available to a family in Greater Tunis or in a coastal area are not necessarily the same as those available to a family living in an inland or rural region.
Families in less-developed areas may face additional difficulties, including limited employment opportunities, weak transportation, distance from markets, low private investment, water scarcity, agricultural risks, limited training opportunities and poor access to digital services.
The investigation should therefore include a regional dimension.
The question is:
Do economic inclusion programmes operate with the same level of effectiveness in areas where economic opportunities are already limited?
10. Digitalisation: Better Targeting or a New Barrier?
Social protection reforms in Tunisia are moving towards greater use of digital tools and the creation of a unified beneficiary registry.
Digitalisation can help improve targeting, reduce errors and duplication, accelerate services and improve information management.
But digitalisation also raises a social question:
Can the most vulnerable citizens actually access the digital system?
The investigation should therefore examine the ease of registration, data updating, access to information, internet connectivity in rural areas, administrative assistance, grievance mechanisms and the possibility that some beneficiaries may be excluded because of administrative or technical difficulties.
Digitalisation can improve efficiency, but it must not become a barrier for the most vulnerable people.
11. Who Leaves the Assistance System?
This may be one of the most important questions the investigation can raise.
A strong social protection system must protect people who are unable to work or who face severe vulnerability.
But for people who are economically able to work, there is growing interest in transforming social protection into a bridge towards economic participation.
The investigation therefore proposes focusing on the concept of:
Economic Transition Rate
This indicator could initially be defined as:
The proportion of beneficiary households with working capacity that move from long-term dependence on transfers to sustainable economic activity or stable paid employment.
This indicator may provide a more meaningful measure of economic mobility than simply knowing the number of people receiving assistance.
12. A Proposed Scorecard for the “AMEN” System
The programme can be analysed through five main dimensions:
Coverage: How many vulnerable households does the system reach?
Adequacy of assistance: Does the support provide genuine protection against poverty and deprivation?
Economic transition: How many beneficiaries move towards sustainable income?
Sustainability: How many economic activities remain operational after one or two years?
Regional equity: Do people in poor and rural areas receive comparable opportunities for economic inclusion?
This approach shifts the investigation from the question:
How much did we spend and how many beneficiaries did we reach?
to the question:
What has actually changed in the lives of beneficiaries?
13. What Do the Official Documents Establish?
The available World Bank documents establish several important facts.
First, the “AMEN” system has become a major component of Tunisia’s social protection system.
Second, the system has expanded significantly in terms of the number of beneficiary households.
Third, exceptional transfers during the COVID-19 pandemic demonstrated the system’s capacity to reach large numbers of households during a crisis.
Fourth, current reforms are moving towards digitalisation, improved targeting and the development of economic inclusion mechanisms.
Fifth, official documents place economic inclusion among the tools that can help beneficiaries who are able to work develop sustainable livelihoods and reduce dependence on transfers.
However, these facts alone do not prove that a large number of households have permanently escaped poverty.
Proving this requires additional data and field-based follow-up.
This is where the role of investigative journalism begins.
14. What Still Needs to Be Investigated?
Through administrative data, interviews and fieldwork, the investigation should seek precise answers to the following questions:
How many “AMEN” beneficiaries have joined economic inclusion programmes?
How many have received productive assets, grants or equipment?
How many projects remained active after one year?
And how many remained active after two years?
What is the average income generated by these activities?
How many beneficiaries obtained paid employment?
How many reduced their dependence on assistance?
How many left the assistance system because their economic situation improved?
What proportion of economic inclusion beneficiaries are women?
What proportion are young people?
Do beneficiaries in rural and inland areas receive the same opportunities?
How are failed projects recorded?
Are discontinued activities evaluated to understand the reasons for failure?
What happens to a beneficiary when a project fails?
Is there a second support mechanism to help the beneficiary start again?
These are the questions that transform a description of a programme into a genuine journalistic investigation.
15. From Numbers to People
The investigation should not remain confined to documents and statistics.
The next stage should be field-based, through the selection of cases representing different outcomes.
Case One: A beneficiary who successfully moved from assistance to sustainable economic activity.
Case Two: A beneficiary who established an economic activity but was forced to close it.
Case Three: A beneficiary who received economic assistance but still has no stable employment.
Case Four: A woman who succeeded in transforming support into a sustainable source of income.
Case Five: A rural household that attempted to establish an economic activity but faced problems related to water, transportation, markets or infrastructure.
These cases are not intended to generalise the experiences of five people to all beneficiaries.
Rather, they aim to connect official figures with the human and social reality behind them.
16. The Accountability Question
Development and social protection programmes are often evaluated through the number of beneficiaries, the number of grants, the number of activities launched and the amount of funding.
But journalism should ask a more difficult question:
What changed?
If 1,000 economic activities are created but only a limited number remain operational after two years, the number of activities launched does not provide the full picture.
If thousands of people receive training but only a limited proportion obtain employment, the number of trainees alone cannot be considered evidence of the success of an employment policy.
If thousands of households receive social transfers but remain in the same economic circumstances for many years, the number of beneficiaries is not enough to demonstrate economic mobility.
This is where the difference between:
Outputs
and
Impact
becomes clear.
17. The Bigger Question for Social Policy in Tunisia
Tunisia faces a difficult equation.
The state is required to protect families that cannot overcome poverty on their own, while at the same time developing mechanisms that help those who are able to work build more sustainable sources of income.
The answer cannot simply be to reduce social assistance.
Nor can it be to maintain permanent assistance without measuring economic mobility.
The real challenge is to build a reliable bridge between:
Social Protection → Skills → Economic Activity → Employment → Sustainable Income → Reduced Vulnerability.
This is the essence of the transition that development journalism should monitor.
18. Proposal for a Field Investigation
ATEP MED proposes developing this documentary investigation into a field investigation combining several tools.
Official documents: World Bank documents, project implementation reports, government data, social protection statistics and documents relating to economic inclusion programmes.
Beneficiary interviews: Listening to beneficiary households from different regions, with a focus on differences in outcomes and experiences.
Institutional interviews: Interviews with social affairs officials, employment services, local authorities, civil society organisations and officials responsible for economic inclusion programmes.
Data analysis: Comparing the number of beneficiaries, the amount of assistance, the number of people receiving economic support, the number of activities created, the number that remained operational, the jobs they generated and the income they produced.
Longitudinal follow-up: Following selected cases for 12 to 24 months whenever access to data and beneficiaries makes this possible.
19. Investigation Hypothesis
This study does not begin with the assumption that the “AMEN” system has failed.
Available evidence confirms that the system has become an important element in protecting vulnerable groups in Tunisia.
The investigation hypothesis is more precise:
The success of social protection should be measured not only by the number of households receiving assistance, but also by the extent to which beneficiaries who are able to work succeed in moving towards sustainable livelihoods.
This is the process that the investigation seeks to document.
20. Conclusion
The “AMEN” system has demonstrated that social protection can provide an important safety net for poor and vulnerable households.
But the next challenge is more complex.
It is to determine whether social protection can be transformed from simply a means of survival into a bridge towards economic independence.
The new focus on economic inclusion, employment, digitalisation and improved management of the social protection system represents an important opportunity.
But an opportunity is not an outcome.
The real evidence will not be found only in the size of funding, the number of beneficiaries or the number of grants distributed.
It will be found in what happens afterwards.
Has household income increased?
Has employment become more stable?
Has the economic activity survived?
Has dependence on assistance declined?
Has the household become more capable of coping with crises?
And have children been able to build a better future than that of their parents?
Ultimately, the central journalistic question remains:
Does social protection help Tunisian families break out of the cycle of poverty, or does it mainly help them remain within it with greater security?
This is the question that Investigative Report No. 3 places before policymakers and social programme managers, development journalism, and society as a whole.
Methodological Note
This investigation is a documentary investigative framework and does not accuse the “AMEN” system, the World Bank or any implementing institution of wrongdoing.
The investigation distinguishes between officially published data, findings that require independent verification, and questions requiring administrative data and field interviews.
No finding should be considered final before it has been verified through original documents, statistical data, beneficiary testimonies and field follow-up.
Key Documentary Sources
World Bank — New Support to Strengthen Social Protection for Vulnerable Families in Tunisia, 27 March 2026.
World Bank — Tunisia’s Social Protection System and the “AMEN” Programme.
World Bank — Tunisia Social Development Support Project and Additional Financing.
World Bank — Social Protection and Economic Inclusion Programmes in Tunisia.
Ministry of Social Affairs — Official data and documents relating to the “AMEN” Programme and social protection.
Investigative Methodology & Accountability Focus
This investigation examines whether Tunisia’s social protection system is effectively helping vulnerable households move from social assistance toward sustainable economic inclusion.
The reporting focuses on the transition from social assistance to employment, self-employment, income generation and greater economic independence.
Rather than measuring success only by the number of beneficiaries or the amount of assistance provided, the investigation examines what happens after support is received.
The key questions are:
Do beneficiaries obtain employment?
Do they create sustainable income-generating activities?
Does household income increase?
Do economic activities survive after 12–24 months?
Does dependence on social assistance decrease?
Are women and young people benefiting from genuine economic opportunities?
Are disadvantaged rural and regional communities receiving comparable opportunities?
The investigation follows the chain:
Assistance → Support → Economic Activity → Income → Sustainability → Economic Inclusion.
Using official programme documents, available statistics, implementation information and documentary cross-checking, the reporting distinguishes between announced targets, reported outputs, measured outcomes and independently verified impact.
The investigation also proposes following real beneficiaries over time in order to compare official programme objectives with their actual economic situation.
The central accountability question is:
How many people are actually moving from social assistance toward sustainable employment, income and greater economic independence?
This reporting approach combines document-based investigation, data analysis, beneficiary-level evidence, field reporting and accountability-focused development journalism.
A document- and data-based investigative report
Prepared and published by: Mohamed Chaieb Barhoumi
ATEP MED – Arabic Digital Center for Media & Development
No comments:
Post a Comment