Evaluation Approach And Effective Adaptation Interventions Will Undermine The Potential For Welfare Gains

The effects of the 1996 welfare reform bill helped declined caseloads on the social and economic well-being of fragile families, single mothers, and children. Although, the welfare reform was documented for making several positive changes such as reducing poverty rates, lowering the out of-wedlock childbearing, and formulated a better family structure, it is undeniable that poverty remained high among single mothers and their children. The reality of the matter was that most welfare recipients experienced serious barriers to maintain a stable employment due to their lack of skills, not having anyone available to take care of their young children when they leave for work as well as not gaining long-time employment with decent pay to help foster the family. As a result, most poor women and children were faced with the instability of economic and social future as welfare eligibility exhausted their efforts of supporting their families.

When most people think of the average welfare recipient they most likely imagine someone who is a slacker; unambitious and one who is not a hard worker, someone who lazes around waiting until their welfare check comes in so that they can spend it all on whatever frivolous thing they want, and wait until the next check arrives. Sometimes people think of a mother and her children in a poor neighborhood, who wants more money to spend on expensive clothes and electronics, so she gets her welfare checks and buys the expensive yet unnecessary items without using the money to get out of a bad financial situation, contented to live this way without working towards anything better. Nobody would be in support of a system that gives undeserving people their own tax money. However, that is not what welfare looks like. Welfare looks like overworked parents who are doing the best they can, but still don’t have enough to put a meal on the table. Welfare looks like people afraid to lose their homes and willing to do almost anything to just keep living. Welfare looks like the mentally disabled, who despite trying their hardest, need more help. This is what welfare looks like; people in need who strive to live a better life. Welfare helps families in need not only by giving them money but by aiding them with every aspect of their lives such as food, shelter, and more to improve the quality of their life.

They hope that the recipients will work towards someday leaving the program. While this is the goal, many recipients will not attempt to find work or the job is consider too low paying for them. Therefore, they continue to be a welfare recipient or are forced out of the program. There have been many changes in the welfare system and how to deal with the poor and less fortune. If you are having a difficult time paying your medical bills, housing and most important food for yourself and your family, you are definitely not alone even in 2014. Temporary assistance for needy families TANF replaced the traditional welfare programs known as Aid to Families with Dependent Children ( AFDC) . The welfare system would be an unlikely model for anyone designing a welfare system 1996. The type and amount of aid available to individuals and dependent children varies from state to state. Failure to comply with work requirements could result in loss of benefits . Current

Welfare is a program in the United States that provides economic support to citizens who are unemployed or underemployed. This program was started during the 1930’s to help out the millions of people who were affected by the great depression. By the 1960’s the welfare program was not being used the same and many believed it was being misused. The welfare program in the United States should be abolished because it costs more than it helps, it is a waste of money, it is abused, and because it teaches bad work ethics.

Former president Obama and the Obama administration attempted to pass a work waiver, unfortunately it was not passed by the congress. Republicans said that the waiver was an effort to “gut welfare reform” but they said it would make the requirements for work flexible.

Welfare should not be removed completely, for some actually need it, but it should be limited to prevent people from abusing the system and cheating taxpayers out of their money.

The effects of welfare reform on children’s development encompass factors across a variety of settings in families’ lives as per Yoo, J., Slack, K. S., & Holl, J. L. (2010). According to Yoshikawa, psychologists and sociologists might suggest that changes in welfare policy might affect family income, which also affects children’s development and well-being through changes in parental well-being and quality of parenting. This can be stated as reward and punishment toward the children in parenting. Social capital-based theories on the other hand would suggest that changes in welfare policy might affect neighborhood-level poverty and income, which will affect the children’s development through changes in the availability of positive role models, social networks, or collective

During the past two decades, predominantly since the mid-1990s, congress has intensely restructured the nation’s system of cash welfare assistance for low-income families. The welfare system was intended to be a safety net for those facing economic poverties in order to help workers get back on their feet. However, welfare programs seem to have spiked the unemployment percentage and increased expenditure on social welfare programs at expeditious rates. Although supporters believe that welfare helps unemployed workers and stimulates the economy, welfare programs cause people to become dependent on the government and is killing our economy.

It is becoming increasingly certain that climate change will have severe adverse effects on the environment in years to come. Addressing this issue poses a serious challenge for policy makers. How we choose to respond to the threat of global warming is not simply a political issue. It is also an economic issue and an ethical one. Responsible, effective climate change policy requires consideration of a number of complex factors, including weighing the costs of implementing climate change policies against the benefits of more environmentally sustainable practices. Furthermore, this analysis must take place amidst serious gaps in the existing research and technology concerning the developing climatic condition.

Climate is inherently variable. Climate changes from place to place and it varies with time. The world now faces one of the complex and important issue it has ever had to deal with: climate change. Climate change today is one of the biggest concerns of human beings on the planet and the effects of climate change are undeniable and it may cause environmental, social, and economic threats to the planet. We already know and easily can highlight several signs of climate change. They are: rising global sea level, widespread melting of snow and ice, rapidly changing ocean and global temperatures, and other signs. So, what are the causes of climate change? Is it natural or do human beings cause it? Well, in both cases we would be right. The climate change can be affected by natural factors, such as solar output, volcanic eruptions, and the Earth’s orbit around the Sun. Also, climate change can be affected by human activities such as, deforestation, burning fossil fuels, causing ozone hole, and building mass destructive weapons and using them on earth that causes a huge radioactivity on earth. Currently, the threat of global climate change does not threaten some nations to the extent of others. Compare the United States with the rest of African countries. We live in prosperity and in much easier time than the rest African countries. Most African countries cannot grow anything on their lands because of climate change. At the end, climate change might affect everyone on

When evaluating if a target is measurable, one would have to assess the magnitude of effort of each desired action. Therefore, looking at target 13.1, which focuses on creating a type of defense mechanism for countries vulnerable to climate related hazards and natural disasters, one would first consider how large the number is of geographical areas that are in need of resilience and adaptation. Nowadays, due to technological advances and an exponential improvement in the engineering of man-made structures and shelters, most first world countries do not experience much of an encumbrance from climate change. This narrows down our number and allows the UNFCCC to focus mainly on developing countries which leaves our target potentially achievable. After taking measures, one can gauge if the desired target is accomplished by observing statistics such as the heaviness in the number of casualties or the amount of wreckage subsequent to a climate related hazard and/or natural disaster occurs. With that said, one can argue that this target (13.1) is in fact measurable. The following target (13.2) requires governments to implement so changes in its national policy. This can be done if no measures conflict with its current goals. Citizens would have to comply with these measures which may result to a decrease in climate change thus leading to less hazards and natural disasters. This target is thus also measurable as it is visible if it leads to the accomplishment of our objective.

Goal 7 of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) sustainability goals (2014) is to take urgent action to combat climate change and its impacts.In breaking down this goal, a number of specific targets have been generated to make the goal more attainable. The first of which is being able to strengthen resilience and adaptive capacity to climate related hazards and natural disasters in all countries. This target is difficult to assess because it is not directly measurable. The second target involves integrating climate change measures into all national policies, plans and strategies. It is easy to determine whether progress is being made with this objective because as more countries implement climate change

I have critiqued the current monitoring and evaluation systems of climate change adaptation interventions in three ways. In the first way, I conveyed the differences in logical approaches of current systems to

Every government has its own saying on how its economy needs to be run. Thus these political powers cannot be forced to take measures in favor of climate change so there is a need to make national and international policies and laws for the effective working on targets irrespective of will, to bring about emergency measures. Goal 13 ensures proper disbursement of resources through proper funding from various sources not only channeling the funds in the right path but also spreading the word to other countries about the need to take part in this sincere effort through awareness by education. This investment is measurable by the fact that funds collected from various sources can be calculated and tallied. Transparency into implementation will be particularly important since different countries have different production patterns and consumptions (data taken from surveys) thus strategies obtained from promotion of climate change planning will ensure proper disposal of funds and thus progress of targets can be monitored keeping in view the rapid urbanization and providing policy recommendations on the investment. Teaching young children about the growing need for the adaptive measures will surely bring future leaders who would give significance to such environmental issues.

The Clean Development Mechanism (CDM) is defined under the Kyoto Protocol to enable industrialized countries meet binding greenhouse gas emissions reduction targets through the implementation of emission reduction projects in developing countries, while contributing to sustainable development in these developing countries at the same time. Growing scientific evidence of anthropogenic interference in the world climate system and the ubiquitous civic concern about the environment in mid 1980s necessitated the establishment of science expert-led Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) tasked to assessing the state of scientific knowledge concerning climate change, evaluating its potential environmental and socio-economic impacts and