2008 evaluation report on social development policy in mexico · public policy and intervention by...
TRANSCRIPT
1
2008 Evaluation Report on Social Development
Policy in Mexico
2
INTRODUCTION ………………………………………………………………4
1. SOCIAL DEVELOPMENT EVOLUTION IN MEXICO ……………..7 1.1. Coverage of basic services …………………………………8 1.2. Quality of services …………………………………………...9 1.3. Income and Food Poverty ………………………………….13
1.3.1. Income poverty in 2006 ………………………………..13 1.3.2. Evolution of income poverty ……………………………..15
1.4. Access to Food and Nutrition ……………………………..21 1.5. Disaggregation by source of income ………,,…………..24 1.6. Income poverty and government and private transferences …31
1.6.1. Oportunidades and Procampo. ………………………..31 1.6.2. Remittances ……………………………………………….33
1.7. Social Security and Protection ……………………………..34 1.8. Inequality, Social Cohesion and poverty maps in Mexico ……39
1.8.1. Inequality and Social Cohesion ……………………………….39 1.8.2. Income poverty maps: Incidence ……………………………..42 1.8.3. Income poverty maps: Population ……………………………48 1.8.4. The multidimensionality of poverty: The 2005 Social Gap
Index ……………………………………………………………….51 1.9. Poverty and the Indigenous population …………………………54 1.10. Environment ………………………………………………………….56
2. EVALUATION ON SOCIAL DEVELOPMENT POLICY IN MEXICO ……58 2.1. Strengths of Social Development Policy ……….………………..58
2.1.1. Expenditure in Social Development …………..……………...58 2.1.2. Focalization, decentralization and aid to basic capabilities .62 2.1.3. Social Development Policy Institutionalization ……………..66
2.2. The challenges of social development policy in Mexico ………70
3
2.2.1. Problems with the definition of social development, regulations and compliance with social rights ………………70
2.2.2. Program dispersion and lack of coordination ………………..75 2.2.3. Distributive Incidence of Social Programs ……………………79 2.2.4. Coordination of social security policy, of labor policy and of
the collection of social programs .………………………..86 2.3. External Evaluations of Federal Social Programs ……………86
2.3.1. Institutional Context of the External Evaluation of Federal Social Programs …………………………………………………86
2.3.2. Systematization and Analysis of Results ………………….87 2.3.3. Main Finds ………………………………………………………88
2.4. In Summation. Challenges of Social Development Policy ……94 2.5. Vivir Mejor Strategy ………………………………………………….98
3. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS ……………………………101 3.1. Conclusions …………………………………………………………..101 3.2. Recommendations ………………………………………………….105
BIBLIOGRAPHY ……………………………………………………………………..112
4
INTRODUCTION Social Development Policy has its origins in the 1917 Constitution, although
different stages of it can be recognized throughout the 20th century. The contents
of the Magna Carta promote an inclusive nation project where legal equality is
proclaimed, as well as the social rights* of the Mexican population –education,
health and housing1. Thus, the Constitution was an answer to early last century’s
economic and social problems, especially to poverty and inequality.
Public policy and intervention by the State to support social groups has been
changing in shape and name throughout the last century. Rolando Cordera states
that agrarian distribution in the thirties and the creation of the Mexican Social
Security Institute (Instituto Mexicano del Seguro Social, IMSS), the State Workers
Security and Social Services Institute (Instituto de Seguridad y Servicios Sociales
de los Trabajadores del Estado, ISSSTE), the National Popular Subsistence
Company (Compañía Nacional de Subsistencias Populares, CONASUPO) and the
National Workers Housing Fund Institute (Instituto del Fondo Nacional de la
Vivienda de los Trabajadores, INFONAVIT) in subsequent decades, were an
integral part of social policy institutionalization, which coincides with the worldwide
boom of the State of Wellbeing2. The subsequent years –sixties and seventies-
gave place to the creation of programs and strategies such as the Coordinated
Program for Public Investment in Agriculture (Programa Coordinado de Inversiones
Públicas para el Medio Rural) the Rural Development Public Investment Program
(Programa de Inversiones Públicas para el Desarrollo Rural), the National Plan
General Coordination of Depressed Areas (Coordinación General del Plan
Nacional de Zonas Deprimidas), the Mexican Food System (Sistema Alimentario
Mexicano), which were focused on improving wellbeing in the rural sphere3.
__________________
5
*In this document, the term social rights and social development rights will be used indistinctively,
and they refer to those mentioned in the General Law of Social Development
1 Oehmichen Bazán, Cristina. State Reform (Reforma del Estado). Social policy and indigenism in
Mexico, 1988-1996 (Política social e indigenismo en México, 1988-1996). Mexico, Institute for
Anthropological Research (Instituto de Investigaciones Antropológicas, UNAM, 1999).
2 Cordera, Rolando. “Market and Equality: from State crisis to social policy,” in: Social policy in
Mexico: trends and perspectives (“Mercado y Equidad: de la crisis del Estado a la política social”
en: La Política social en México: tendencias y perspectivas.) Rolando Cordera Campos and Carlos
Javier Cabrera Adante, coordinators. Faculty of Economy, UNAM, 2007.
3 Palacios Escobar, Ángeles. “Differences, limitations and scope of the strategies to fight poverty in
Mexico,” in The Social policy in Mexico: trends and perspectives (“Diferencias, limitaciones y
alcances de las estrategias de combate a la pobreza en México”, en La Política social en México:
tendencias y perspectivas. Rolando Cordera Campos and Carlos Javier Cabrera Adante,
coordinators. Faculty of Economy, UNAM, 2007.
6
In the eighties, social policy became hazy mainly due to the oil crisis, but it is
retaken in 1989 with the National Solidarity Program (Programa Nacional de
Solidaridad) and in 1997 with Progresa, today the Oportunidades Human
Development Program. Current social development policy has as its sources, in
greater or lesser measure, a combination of the programs and strategies which
survive the 20th century, innovations proposed in recent administrations, as well as
various legal mandates, of which the most important are: the Constitution and the
General Law of Social Development (LGDS).
Current social development policy has an important element which differentiates it
from past strategies: although we find academic documents which analyze and
even evaluate prior social policies, it wasn’t until the creation of the National
Council for the Evaluation of Social Development Policy (CONEVAL), whose origin
derives from the LGDS, that we systematically counted with a formal evaluation of
social development policy and programs.
This report is pursuant to Article 72 of the General Law of Social Development
(LGDS) that states the evaluation of Social Development Policy shall be under the
responsibility of the CONEVAL. This work’s objective is to perform a general
evaluation – a prompt diagnostic – of social development policy as of the nineties
including current available information. Although evaluating previous years is
important, it is not the subject of this study. Likewise, despite any possible changes
in social development variables in 2007 and 2008 due to recent economic
phenomena, we still don’t have the information to perform an evaluation on this
period. Said analysis will take place whenever said information is available.
This Report aims to analyze Mexico’s performance in matters of social
development, with two important goals: contribute to the Federal Government’s
accountability; and issue recommendations for the improvement of social
development policy.
7
For said purpose, since 2006 the CONEVAL has developed measurement and
analysis instruments, same that are summarized in this document. On one hand, a
rigorous measurement of income poverty, with comparable data since 1992, using
information generated by the National Statistics and Geography Institute (INEGI).
Likewise, we now count with poverty and social gap maps by state, municipality
and by localities with 2005 information.
Taking into account that income is not the only dimension affecting wellbeing and
poverty, the CONEVAL has also gathered other indicators that show different
aspects of social development evolution; the Social Gap Index is one of them.
On the other hand, the CONEVAL has also developed evaluation instruments that
have been applied to different Federal Public Administration social programs. The
analysis of the information obtained in evaluations is important input for the
realization of this report.
The document is divided into three chapters: the first shows the evolution of
various social development indicators in Mexico, since the early nineties. The
second chapter presents the evaluation of social development policy in Mexico,
and the third presents, in detail, the conclusions and recommendations derived
from the analysis made.
1. SOCIAL DEVELOPMENT EVOLUTION IN MEXICO ……………..7 The National Council for the Evaluation of Social Development Policy (CONEVAL)
has as a purpose to establish the guidelines and criteria for the definition,
identification and measurement of poverty, according to the General Law of Social
Development (LGDS). Based on said Law, the CONEVAL is also in charge of
evaluating Social Development Policy. Therefore, in order to speak about the state
8
of social development, analyzing the evolution of poverty unidimensionally isn’t
enough, but other variables and dimensions affecting social development should
also be analyzed. Social development policy evaluation should be based on the
state of Mexico’s social development in all its dimensions. This is what will be done
in this first section.
Table 1 shows the evolution and current situation of key Mexican social
development indicators. The CONEVAL will systematically provide follow-up to
these variables in order to perform ongoing monitoring of the situation Mexico’s
social development keeps. The following items will study this information in depth.
1.1. Coverage of basic services Several health and education indicators have improved in Mexico since 1992, even
for the 20 percent poorest population. In great measure, this is due to the fact that
the coverage of basic services has increased since then. In the health area,
according to the National Population Council (Consejo Nacional de Población,
CONAPO), life expectancy at birth at national level increased from 71.7 to 74.8
years from 1992 to 2006. Regarding education, the percentage of heads of
household with basic or further education went from 29.9 percent in 1992 to 47.0
percent in 2006, as is shown in Table 1.
According to CONEVAL estimations based on the 1992-2006 National Household
Income and Expense Survey (ENIGH), progress has been made in Mexico
regarding the coverage of basic services. For example, for the 20 percent poorest
population in the 1992 – 2006 period, the percentage of girls and boys between the
age of 8 and 12 who worked and did not attend to school dropped from 15.6 to 9.8
percent; the percentage of illiterate people 15 years of age and older decreased
from 26.8 percent to 20.8 percent, and the percentage of people 15 years of age
and older with incomplete primary school went from 64.8 to 44.8 percent.
9
For the same population group, the percentage of homes without electric power
dropped from 19.9 to 3.1 percent. Additionally, the percentage of dirt floor homes
was 46.2 percent and in 2006 it decreased to 22.3 percent. Likewise, the
percentage of homes without piped water dropped from 43.9 to 23.0 percent.
Regarding education, in 2006, the coverage of primary and secondary education
covered over 90 percent of the population in age to receive basic education.
However, coverage of middle-high and high education is still under 60 percent.
The coverage of basic services has increased although major differences between
Mexico’s states and regions persist, as we will see further on. Public policy’s
current challenge, in matters of basic services, is to equal coverage between
regions and improve their quality and reach universal coverage.
1.2. Quality of services Table 1 shows mother mortality has dropped in the past 14 years, but is still far
from reaching the 22.0 deaths per 100 thousand births Millennium Goal fixed for
2015, given in 2004 there were 62.4, for with currently available technology over 90
percent of these deaths are preventable. Mother mortality reflects the difficulties
Mexican women have in counting with health services and timely and quality care
24/7 year round. The lack of information and geographical obstacles prevent
women, most of the time, from reaching the appropriate clinics.4
Although coverage is a major factor to improve healthcare and educational
progress, service quality is just as important.
The Ministry of Health (SSA)5 states Mexico had 1.4 physicians in contact with the patient per 1000 inhabitants in 2006, while Cuba, Uruguay and Argentina count with 6.2, 3.9 and 3.2, respectively. Additionally, geographic dispersion is a factor that hinders access to healthcare, for while in the Federal District (Capital City) the top rate is 3.1, in Chiapas and the State of Mexico it is 0.8, when the World Health
10
Organization (WHO) sets forth that the minimum acceptable threshold is 1.0 physician per thousand inhabitants.
Regarding the number of nurses, in 2006, Mexico had 2.0 nurses in contact with
the patient per 1000 inhabitants, while the United States and Cuba count with 7.9
and 7.6, respectively. The state with most nurses is the Federal District (Capital
City) counting with 4 per thousand inhabitants, while states such as Oaxaca,
Puebla, Quintana Roo, Chiapas, State of Mexico and Michoacán merely count with
1 per 1000 inhabitants.
With these results, reaching the mother mortality goal will be difficult in Mexico, for
although 93.2 percent of deliveries were tended to by medical personnel in Mexico
in 20066, there are major differences by entity: in Chiapas and Guerrero only 68.0
and 78.4 percent of deliveries were cared for by medical personnel, respectively.
These two entities, next to Durango, are the ones with the highest mother mortality
in Mexico: 90.1 and 128.0, respectively.
In matters of education, the challenges regarding quality are huge. Table 1 shows that, compared to non member countries of the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OCDE) who participated in the 2006 PISA test, in 2006 Mexico ranked 18 out of 26 countries in Mathematics tests, and progress has been slow since 2000, for Mexico records 23 points below the average of this group of countries. Likewise, the set of ENLACE tests for primary, secondary and recently for middle high education, confirm that the student’s school performance isn’t optimal to face the productivity, competitiveness and human development challenges required by Mexico. ___________________ 4 Freyermuth Enciso Graciela (CIESAS-Sureste), Ivonne Villalobos (UAM-A) et al. Obstetric Urgency and Popular Knowledge in Tenejapa, Chiapas. Perinatology and Human Reproduction (Urgencia Obstétrica y Saber Popular en Tenejapa, Chiapas. Perinatología y Reproducción Humana). Vol. 20, No.4; October-December 2006. 5 Mexico, Ministry of Health, Health: Mexico 2006 Information for Accountability (México, Secretaría de Salud, Salud: México 2006 Información para la Rendición de Cuentas). México, SSA, 2007,278 p. 6 Percentage of women 20 years of age or older, whose last child was liveborn during the five-year period prior to the Survey.
11
Table 1
Social development indicators in the population nationwide and the poorest 20 percent, 1992, 2000 and 2006*
Dimension 1992 2000 2006 Education Poorest
20 % Nationwide Poorest 20 % Nationwide Poorest
20 % Nationwide
Children between 8 and 12 that do not attend school a 8.9 5.1 6.2 3.4 3.5 1.9 Illiterate people over the age of 15 a 26.8 11.3 25.0 10.1 20.8 8.5 People over the age of 15 who didn’t finish primary school a 64.8 36.2 57.2 28.8 44.8 23.6 Heads of household with basic education or more a 5.4 29.9 11.1 38.8 21.6 47.0 Coverage 1 Primary 95.2 94.8 94.4 Secondary 67.8 83.8 93.0 Middle high 36.5 48.4 59.7 High 13.9 20.2 24.3 Quality of education PISA Mathematics test average in Mexico 2 386.8 404.2 PISA Mathematics test average in non OECD member countries 425.1 427.0 Place Mexico stands in with respect to non OECD member countries in
the PISA Mathematics test 9th out of 13 18th out of 26
Health Life expectancy (years) 3 71.7 73.9 74.8 Infant mortality rate (deaths of children under one year of age per each
thousand nationwide) 31.5 19.4 16.2
Mother mortality rate (deaths per each thousand nationwide) 89.0 72.6 62.4 [1990] [2004] Housing features 4 Dirt floor homes a 46.2 15.8 33.3 9.7 22.3 7.2 Homes without electric power a 19.9 6.5 7.5 2.0 3.1 0.9 Homes without piped water a 43.9 18.5 38.9 16.1 23.0 9.8 Home equipment Homes without telephone a 98.6 75.9 94.6 60.1 80.7 48.8 Homes without refrigerator a 81.5 39.7 67.5 26.1 47.7 19.6 Homes without washing machine a 90.5 60.1 82.5 46.9 66.2 34.9 Environment Occupants in homes that use coal or wood as fuel for cooking a
23.4 [1990]
19.8
15.8
National surface covered by forests and jungles a, 14 34.3 [1993]
33.5 [2002]
29.0 [2004]
Social security People 65 years old or older who do not work and don’t receive pension a 94.1 80.0 97.1 75.1 90.8 71.5 Employed population without access to healthcare a, 5 90.6 64.1 93.8 66.2 90.6 67.0 Heads of household without access to healthcare a, 5 89.1 69.3 93.8 70.9 89.8 71.0 Households without coverage by social programs or social security a, 6 89.1 69.3 38.3 50.1 Access to food Monthly food expenditure per capita 7, 8 $364.11 844.0 $323.73 743.2 $424.61 831.8 Food expenditure with regard to the total income a, 13 51.6 34.4 48.6 29.3 42.7 28.3 People in food poverty a 21.4 24.1 13.8 Intensity of food poverty 9 0.071 0.084 0.042 Food poverty inequality 10 0.033 0.041 0.019
Continues
12
Dimension 1992 2000 2006 Nutrition Poorest
20 % Nationwide Poorest 20 % Nationwide Poorest
20 % Nationwide
Low weight prevalence among children under 5 a 14.2
[1988] 7.6
[1999] 5.0
Low size prevalence among children under 5 a 22.8 [1988]
17.8 [1999]
12.5
Emaciation prevalence among children under 5 a 6.0 [1988]
2.1 [1999]
1.6
Low size prevalence among children under the age of 5 in the indigenous population a
48.1 [1988]
44.3 [1999]
33.2
Overweight prevalence among women between the age of 20 and 49 a 25 [1988]
36.1 [1999]
36.9
Obesity prevalence among women between the age of 20 and 49 years of age a
9.5 [1988]
24.9 [1999]
32.4
Income Average total monthly current income per capita 7 $641.53 3191.3 $610.54 3127.4 $862.47 3641.5 People in capabilities poverty a 29.7 31.8 20.7 People in patrimony poverty a 53.1 53.6 42.6 GNP per capita annual average a 1.9
[1991-92] 3.8
[1999-00] 3.1
[2005-06] Average inflation a 15.4
[1991-92] 10.6
[1999-00] 3.7
[2005-06] Social cohesion Inequality (Gini coefficient) 0.5 0.6 0.5 Proportion between the total income of the tenth and first decile 11 31.3 36.0 26.1 Equal Opportunity Women in the Chamber of Representatives a 8.8 16.8 22.2 Women in the Chamber of Senators a 3.1 18.0 16.4 Female professionals and technicians a 39.5 40.4 Discrimination Discrimination against women, homosexuals, indigenous, disabled, religious
minorities and older adults a, 12 30.4
* The poorest 20% corresponds to the 1st quintile. The quintiles were built using the total net income per capita. a Percentage.
1 Coverage: Indicates the percentage of students serviced in an educational level, with regard to the population that represents the age to study said level. 2 PISA is an aptitude test applied to a sample of students between the age of 15 and 16 who are not in primary school in OECD member countries 3 Demographic indicators, 1990-2050 CONAPO 4 The data of homes with more than one household have been imputed to additional households. 5 Access to healthcare refers to IMSS, ISSTE, PEMEX, Marine, Army and Universities 6 Comprises those households that do not count with aid from Procampo and Oportunidades programs, those where no household member counts with Popular Insurance
and where the head of the household doesn’t count with access to healthcare as a labor benefit. 7 Figures in august 2006 Mexican pesos 8 Food expenditure refers to monetary expense and non-monetary income on food 9 This indicator is a measure of the distances of the income of poor households to the food poverty line. The closer its value is to the proportion of population in situation of
food poverty, the deeper the poverty. It is calculated based on the Foster-Green-Thorbecke (FGT(a)) index 10 This indicator is a measure of the inequality of income between people in situation of food poverty. It is calculated based on the Foster-Green-Thorbecke (FGT(a)) index 11 The income measure corresponds to the total net income per capita employed in the measurement of income poverty 12 Percentage of people in one of these groups that claimed has suffered an act of discrimination. 13 The percentage is calculated based on the monetary expense 14 For years 1993 and 2002 the data were taken from the 2006 UN Mexico Millennium Development Goals Progress Report. The 2004 data was taken from the INEGI 2004
Forest Production Statistical Yearbook. Sources: CONEVAL estimations based on ENIGH 1992, 2000 and 2006 estimations. 2006 PISA: Science Competences for Tomorrow’s World. OECD. First Survey on Discrimination in Mexico, 2005. Sedesol and Conapred Mexico Millennium Development Goals: 2006 progress report. UN System for the analysis of educational statistics, Version 7. SEP INEGI, ENE and ENOE Tabs (second quarter of the year in question. Rivera Dommarco J et Al., Nutrition and Poverty : Sustained Public Policy, 2008
13
1.3. Income and Food Poverty
The LGDS sets forth that, for the measurement of poverty, one of the variables to
be used is total current income. Given we count with an income poverty series with
estimations since 1992 and Mexico has committed to provide follow-up to the
Millennium Goals, among other, using this methodology, the CONEVAL Steering
Committee deemed it indispensable to continue with this estimation.
According to this methodology, three levels of poverty were defined:
1) Food poverty: Incapability to acquire a basic food basket, even if the entire
income available to the household were used just to buy said basket goods.
2) Capabilities poverty: Insufficiency of the available income to acquire the
food basket value and make the necessary expenses in health and
education, even if the total household income were devoted solely to these
purposes.
3) Patrimony poverty: Insufficiency of the available income to acquire the
food basket, as well as to make the necessary expenses in health, clothing,
housing, transportation and education, even if the entire household income
were used exclusively for the acquisition of these goods and services.
1.3.1. Income poverty in 20067 Income poverty estimations, at national level and in the rural and urban spheres,
for the year 2006, were made based on information by the 2006 National
Household Income and Expense Survey (ENIGH), which was disclosed on July 16,
2007, by the National Statistics and Geography Institute (INEGI). 7 All poverty information and data at national level, as well as the poverty and social gap maps presented
below, may be found and downloaded at www.coneval.gob.mx
14
According to 2006 ENIGH information, 44.7 million Mexicans, which represented
42.6 percent of the inhabitants total in Mexico, lived in patrimony poverty. This
means each inhabitant had a total income below 1,625 pesos a month in the urban
area and below 1,086 pesos in the rural area, which prevented them from acquiring
their basic food, health, clothing, footwear, housing and public transportation
requirements, even if their total income were devoted exclusively to satisfy these
needs.
In rural localities with less than 15 thousand inhabitants, patrimony poverty afflicted
54.7 percent of the population, while in urban areas it amounted to 35.6 percent.
The above defines that around 21.1 and 23.6 million people suffered patrimony
poverty at rural and urban level, respectively in 2006.
According to the same source, it is estimated that in 2006, 13.8 percent of
Mexicans were under the food poverty line, which represents around 14.4 million
people. A person under the food poverty line is that which has a monthly total
income below 810 pesos in the urban area and below 599 in the rural area –at
2006 prices-. Any income under this amount would be insufficient to acquire a
minimum food basket, even if the entire income were devoted solely to this
purpose.
In 2006, out of the 14.4 million people under the food poverty line, 5.0 million lived
in urban areas and 9.4 million in rural areas, which indicates that two out of three
people under the food poverty line lived in rural areas. Urban food poverty is 7.5
percent, and in rural areas it amounts to 24.5 percent (Chart 1).
15
1.3.2. Evolution of income poverty
Changes in income poverty from 2004 to 2006 Income poverty at national level in all its levels shows a reduction from 2004 to 2006, in spite the fact that between 2004 and 2005 a specific increase of poverty was recorded in the rural sphere. The number of people under the food poverty line dropped from 17.9 to 14.4 million, that is, from 17.4 to 13.8 percent. The number of people in patrimony poverty went from 48.6 to 44.7 million, which means a change from 47.2 to 42.6 percent of the population. In rural areas a specific reduction is recorded at all levels of poverty during this period, although this reduction is not statistically significant. Food poverty in urban areas dropped from 11.0 to 7.5 percent. The number of people under the food poverty line decreased from 7.1 to 5.0 million and of people in patrimony poverty went from 26.5 to 23.6 million.
1992-2006 Evolution of Income Poverty
From 2000 to 2006, patrimony poverty at national level dropped from 53.6 to 42.6
percent, which implies the number of people in patrimony poverty condition went
from 52.7 to 44.7 million. Likewise, food poverty dropped from 24.1 to 13.8 percent,
that is, from 23.7 to 14.4 million people.
16
In rural localities with less than 15 thousand inhabitants, the number of people in
patrimony poverty condition dropped from 26.5 to 21.1 million, that is, a change
from 69.2 to 54.7 percent of the population. In these same localities, the number of
people under the food poverty line went from 16.2 to 9.4 million, which represents
a change from 42.4 to 24.5 percent.
In urban areas the number of people in patrimony poverty condition went from 26.2
to 23.6 million, which represents a change from 43.7 to 35.6 percent. Food poverty
went from 7.5 to 5.0 million, which represents a drop from 12.5 to 7.5 percent.
Chart 2 and Table 2 show food poverty increased from 21.2 to 37.4 percent at
national level from 1994 to 1996, which means the number of people in this
condition went from 19.0 to 34.7 million. During the same period, patrimony poverty
went from 52.4 to 69.0 percent, which increased the number of poor people from
47.0 to 64.0 million.
At national level, food poverty dropped from 37.4 to 13.8 percent from 1996 to
2006. Patrimony poverty dropped from 69.0 to 42.6 percent during the same
period. The number of people in food poverty conditions during this period went
from 34.7 to 14.4 million, while the population in patrimony poverty dropped from
64.0 to 44.7 million (Table 2).
In the entire period, from 1992 to 2006, patrimony poverty dropped from 53.1 to
42.6 percent; the number of people in this poverty condition went from 46.1 to 44.7
million, from 1996 to 2006 being the period with the greatest drop. In fact, from
1996 to 2006 the number of people who were not in any type of poverty, went from
28.7 million to 60.1 million.
Food poverty dropped from 21.4 to 13.8 percent from 1992 to 2006, which meant having gone from 18.6 to 14.4 million people in this poverty situation. In the 14
17
years comprised in this period, the number of people under the food poverty line dropped by 4.1 million, 2.3 million in the rural area and 1.8 million in the urban area. In this same period, patrimony poverty dropped by 1.5 million people, as a result of a reduction by 2.0 million people in the rural area and an increase by 500 thousand people in the urban area (Table 2).
Chart 2 1992-2006 Evolution of National Poverty Poverty incidence (percentage of people)
In spite of the reduction of poverty from 1992 to 2006, the increase of poverty from
1994 to 1996 should be highlighted. As a result of the macroeconomic problems
that caused the GNP to drop by around 7 percent in 1995, the population’s
purchasing power dropped considerably. From 1994 to 1996 food poverty
increased by close to 16 million people.
18
As can be seen in Table 1, the population’s average monthly income per capita
was 3,191.3 pesos in 1992 and 3,127.4 pesos in 2006. The value of monthly food
consumption per capita also dropped during this period, going from 844.0 pesos in
1992 to 831.77 pesos in 2006. This means poverty, measured through income, is
closely linked to the economy as a whole.
There is a close relationship between the country’s economic performance and its
social development, especially reflected in poverty measured through income, as is
shown in Chart 3. The 1994-1996 period shows poverty rapidly increased when the
GNP growth was reduced and inflation rose.
Likewise, during the 1998-2000 period, when economic growth was relatively high
and inflation dropped, the reduction of income poverty was significant. What
happens to economy on the medium and long term has an opposite impact on
poverty, as is shown in Chart 3. It shows that overall, the GNP and poverty have
mirror evolutions: in general, poverty is counter-cyclical. During the 1992-2006
period, the growth of the annual average GNP per capita was 1.6 and the average
annual reduction of food poverty was 1.8 percent.
19
20
Table 2 1992-2006 Evolution of Poverty*
People
Percentage Number of People Standard error 4
Food Capabilities Patrimony Food Capabilities Patrimony Food Capabilities Patrimony National
Rural
Urban
* The figures correspond to the new databases that incorporate modifications made after the demographic conciliation performed by the INEGI and the CONAPO. 1 Food poverty: refers to people whose income is below the required to cover the food needs corresponding to the requirements established by the INEGI – CEPAL food basket. 2 Capabilities poverty: refers to people whose income is below the required to cover the basic consumption pattern in food, health and education. 3 Patrimony poverty: refers to people whose income per capita is below the required to cover the basic consumption pattern in food, clothing and footwear, housing, health, public transportation and education. 4Standard errors are reported in percentages Source: CONEVAL estimations based on 1992 to 2006 ENIGHs
21
Poverty level trends shown here have the same profile as the November 2007 estimations by the Economic Commission for Latin America and the Caribbean (CEPAL), as shown on Chart 4.
Chart 4
Evolution of poverty and indigence in percentage of people according to information by the CEPAL 1994-2006.
Source: The CEPAL figures were gathered from the document: Economic Commission for Latin America (Comisión Económica para América Latina, CEPAL) (2007) and (2006), “Social Overview on Latin America” ("Panorama Social de América Latina"), at http://www.eclac.org.
1.4 Access to Food and Nutrition Monthly food consumption per capita has had a cyclical evolution, therefore it
responds as a mirror to the evolution of food poverty, as shown on Table 1.
Nevertheless, it is important to stress that according to the same chart, the average
food consumption per capita of the poorest 20 percent of the population in Mexico
in 2006 was only 424.6 pesos, below the urban or rural food poverty line. The
above indicates that, given the population in poverty conditions has to devote
22
resources to other needs (health, education, transportation, clothing, etc.), besides
food, what they can spend in food is even less than the minimum food basket. This
proves the fragility of the nutritional situation of the population in poverty
conditions.
The above is stressed when we see that, while national child malnourishment,
measured through the low weight prevalence, low size or emaciation of children
under 5 in 2006 recorded levels amounting to 5.0, 12.5 and 1.6 percent
respectively, a trend that has been dropping since 1988; malnourishment levels are
still significantly high within the indigenous population. According to Table 1, the
low size prevalence among indigenous children under the age of 5 was 33.2
percent in 2006, compared to 48.1 percent in 1988.
Mexico’s nutritional reality also shows a relatively new phenomenon, but that
already affects public health and will worsen in the following years: obesity. This
disease in general affects the entire population and is responsible for the high
diabetes and heart disease levels. Obesity is the result of energy unbalance, that
is, of the ingestion of a greater amount of energy than that which is spent. This is
caused by consumption of high energetic density foods and beverages with calorie
value, and/or consumption of big portions and/or frequent consumption of foods
throughout the day, together with insufficient physical activity.8
Food Price Increase
After the periods of accelerated inflation in the eighties and mid nineties, Mexico
had a major inflation control. However, since 2007, the world has been
experiencing, Mexico included, a major food price increase which undoubtedly
affects the country’s population, especially poor families.
23
As shown on Chart 5, the food basket values with which the CONEVAL measures income poverty –the food poverty line-, have been growing regarding previous years. This growth is perceived late 2007 and is accentuated during 2008. The prices and income situation could aggravate further given the recent world financial problems. In August 2007, the rural food basket growth was 5.2 percent compared with the same period the previous year. However, the annual food basket growth in August 2008 was 18 percent9, value which if higher than the household income increase would translate into the growth of income poverty. Thus, it is necessary to undertake actions which aim to help families in poverty conditions in order for the impact of this crisis to be reduced as much as possible.
Chart 5 Evolution of the food basket value
and the National Consumer Price Index (INPC) (percentage growth with regard to the same month of the previous year)
Source : CONEVAL estimations ______________ 8 Rivera Dommarco Juan A. and Jaime Sepúlveda Amor. “1999 Nutrition Survey Conclusions: translating results into public policies on nutrition” (“Conclusiones sobre la Encuesta Nacional de Nutrición 1999: traduciendo resultados en políticas públicas sobre nutrición”). Mexico Public Health (Salud Pública México) 2003;45 supl 4:S565-S575
9 Updated according to price indexes reported by Banco de México.
24
1.5 Disaggregation by source of income
The information above showed income poverty decreased significantly from 1996 to 2006, and this reduction also took place during the 1992-2006 period, but at a lower rate. This item aims to disaggregate total current income of households in a greater situation of poverty, to have a preliminary picture of the factors that could express the evolution of poverty from 1992 to 2006. Income poverty measurement implies comparing total current income per capita in households with the poverty line and based on the results classifying them as poor or non poor. Thus, if poverty dropped from 1992 to 2006, it is important to analyze specifically which sources of income increased (and which decreased) for the population in poverty conditions during that period, in order to count with conclusions on this evolution. The variation of poverty is more pronounced in Mexico’s rural areas, therefore, to have a clear picture of the processes that lead to this change, it is convenient to stop and analyze the evolution of the sources of income in rural areas. Table 3 shows changes in income per capita in rural households, where we see a 24.2 percent raise in income, which translates into an average increase by 82.96 real pesos per capita.10 Standing out is the increase of transferences, especially of remittances and the Oportunidades and Procampo programs, most of all because these two programs did not exist in 1992. Likewise, standing out is the absolute increase of Wage-Earning Remunerations and Transferences as a whole. Also predominating is the absolute and percentage reduction of Autoconsumption, and Payment in Kind, Other Income (own income, by cooperatives, from societies and property lease). ___________ 10 For the rural case, we chose for this entire comparison period (1992-2006) to analyze the evolution of total current income
of the poorest 28 percent, for this was the percentage of food poverty in 2004.
25
Table 3 Growth rate and absolute changes in the sources of income in rural
households under the food poverty line in 2004 (1992-2006)
In this sense, in Table 6 we see that in rural areas the participation of wage-
earning work remunerations in the increase of the total net income per capita
during these two years was 79.4 percent11. Likewise, it details that the
Oportunidades and Procampo combined income represented 67.5 percent and the
contribution of remittances was 20.6 percent, compared to the increase of the total
current income per capita. It is worth recalling that in 1992 the Oportunidades and
Procampo programs did not exist.
26
As can be observed on Table 6, rural wage-earning remuneration accounts for
79.4 percent of the increase of the total current income per capita among rural poor
families. But at the same time, this item is comprised by two elements: the
evolution of real salaries and the evolution of employment. That is, the population’s
total labor income has two aspects: how many employed receive income and what
average salary they receive.
Chart 6 shows that the increase in rural wage-earning remuneration by 6.4 percent
corresponded to a real increase in salaries, while 89.2 percent corresponded to an
increase of employed population. This means real salaries haven’t been a major
factor in the increase of income and the reduction of poverty from 1992 to 2006,
therefore the main factor was the increase of employment.12
_________
11 79.4 percent is the percentage representing the 65.86 pesos by which wage-earning work remuneration per capita increased compared to the 82.96 peso increase of the total net income per capita. 12 Chart 6 shows Wage-Earning Work Remunerations per capita represented 79.4 per cent of the total increase of the total net income per capita of families under the food poverty line in the rural area. Out of this increase, 6.4 percent is due to the real increase of salaries and 89.2 percent to the increase of employment; to these two items combined, we subtract 16.2 percent which is a reduction in the participation of Wage-Earning Work Remuneration per capita due to the population increase, thus 6.4+89.2-16.2=79.4 percent. This disaggregation of changes is made with differential equations.
27
Chart 5 Participation of absolute growth in total net income per capita in rural homes
under the food poverty line (2006 pesos)
Note: The figures correspond to households up to the 28 rural percentile, taking as basis poverty in 2004. Payment in kind
and other transferences are omitted and therefore the sum of the percentages isn’t 100.0.
Source: CONEVAL estimations based on 2006 ENIGH.
When we now see the behavior of average labor income at national level from
1992 to 2006 shown in Chart 7, it shows that said income suffered a major
reduction in 1996, recovered rapidly in the subsequent years, but has practically
kept its same value than in 1992. In fact, the value of the national average income
was 3.1 percent lower in 2006 than in 1992, as is shown in Table 4. The same
behavior can be seen in the average labor income of the poorest families in the
rural and urban sector.
Real income has gradually increased since 2000, especially that of the poorest
people in rural and urban areas (from 2000 to 2006 the real average labor income
28
increased 34.5 percent and 12.4 percent in families under the food poverty line in
rural and urban areas, respectively), but in the long term, the result has not been
the same. From 1992 to 2006 real labor income per capita only increased by 3.8
percent among rural poor families and it dropped 0.01 percent in urban areas; the
national average suffered a reduction by 3.1 percent, as is shown on Chart 7 and
Table 4, which indicates the real salary practically hasn’t changed in 14 years.
When we analyze the evolution of real salaries, again the correlation between
economic performance and poverty stands out. The evolution of national real
median labor income shown on Chart 7, is practically a mirror of the evolution of
national poverty; the evolution of the labor market variables –employment and
salaries- has a major influence on the evolution of poverty.
Chart 6 National, urban and rural average labor income (2006 pesos)
Note: the figures correspond to households up to the 28 rural and 11 urban percentile, taking poverty in 2004 as a basis
Source: CONEVAL estimations based on ENIGHs of different years
29
Chart 4 confirms that, at national level, the number of employed people in Mexico
has grown 65.3 percent from 1992 to 2006, that real labor income had a slight
drop, as was mentioned before, and that the labor Net Participation Rate grew 23.5
percent, which helps explain the increase in employment.
Table 4 Labor, employment and net participation rate
percentage growth rates (1992-2006)
Source: CONEVAL estimations based on ENIGHs of different years.
In a 1.6 percent (1992-2006) period of growth of the annual average GNP per
capita, it would be difficult to think that employment grew close to 65 percent. Thus,
to better understand the evolution of employment in these 14 years, we need to
disaggregate occupation into formal and informal.
Chart 7 points out that the employment that has grown considerably is informal and
not formal employment: from 1992 to 2006 there was a net increase by almost 5.1
million formal jobs –workers with formal social security: IMSS, ISSSTE, Petróleos
Mexicanos (PEMEX), Ministry of Marine (SEMAR)-, but during the same period,
informal employment –those employed without social security and who are not
Employers- grew by 10.2 million people, twice the growth of formal employment,
according to different year ENIGH’s.
30
Chart 7
Absolute employment growth, 1992-2006 Source: CONEVAL estimations based on ENIGHs of different years. Thus, one of the factors for total current income per capita to have grown is the increase of informal employment, even more than the increase of formal employment or the increase of real salaries, from 1992 to 2006. Therefore, the evolution of the labor market has been and will be determinant in the evolution of poverty measured by income. If the most important variables of the labor market –salary and employment- improve, this would translate into an accelerated reduction of poverty. Possibly, the most important reason why poverty has decreased so slowly from 1992 to 2006 is the fact that economic growth, which generates formal jobs and raises real salaries, has been very low. Table 1 shows that between 1992 and 2006 the percentage of employed people with no access to healthcare, that is, people with no social security benefits from their jobs, grew slightly –from 64.1 to 67.0 percent-. The employed population grew at a faster rate than formal employment. A sustained growth of economy, with more formal jobs and higher salaries, would translate into a more accelerated reduction of poverty in Mexico.
31
1.6 Income poverty and government and private transferences
1.6.1 Oportunidades and Procampo
There is a set of social programs that provide the population with aid in cash, and
which could reduce income poverty in the short term. Two examples are the
Oportunidades and Procampo programs, which are included as a source of income
in the ENIGH.
In spite of the fact that both programs’ objective is not reducing poverty through
cash transferences –the objective of Procampo is to improve producers’ economy
through their crops, and the objective of Oportunidades is to reduce the
intergenerational transmission of poverty through education, health and nutrition-
we can estimate their direct contribution to the reduction of income poverty through
the ENIGH.
As is shown on Chart 8, in the urban area neither Procampo nor Oportunidades
have a major effect on the reduction of poverty in the short term13. However, in the
rural sector, detailed estimations point out that poverty was reduced from 28.4 to
24.5 percent in 2006, that is, by 1.7 million people, as a consequence of monetary
transferences of the Oportunidades program. Procampo’s effect is very low (Chart
9) in rural areas. 14
________ 13 Escobar, Agustín and Mercedes González de la Rocha. (Quantitative Evaluation of the Oportunidades Human Development Program: 2001-2002 impact follow-up, communities with 2,500 to 50,000 inhabitants (Evaluación Cuantitativa del Programa de Desarrollo Humano Oportunidades: seguimiento de impacto 2001-2002, comunidades de 2,500 a 50,000 habitantes. CIESAS. December 2002. 14 For a more detailed analysis on the effect of transferences by the Oportunidades program on income poverty, you may consult the article by Cortés Fernando, Banegas Israel and Solis Patricio. Poor with opportunities (Oportunidades): Mexico 2002-2005 (Pobres con oportunidades: México 2002-2005). Sociological Studies (Estudios Sociológicos), México, 2007, XXV 73 p.
32
Chart 8 Evolution of food poverty according to income variations (Urban)
Source: CONEVAL estimations based on ENIGHs of different years.
Chart 9 Evolution of food poverty according to income variations (Rural)
Source: CONEVAL estimations based on ENIGHs of different years.
33
1.6.2 Remittances Not all remittances reach families in poverty, but they do contribute in reducing poverty. As is shown on Table 3, remittances have grown 405.5 percent among families under the food poverty line in rural areas from 1992 to 2006. Remittances have become a major source of income to many families in Mexico15. According to food poverty estimations for the year 2006, if during that year no remittance flow had existed in Mexico, food poverty would have been 15.9 per cent, instead of 13.8 percent at national level. This represents a reduction of approximately 2.3 million people that year. As can be seen on Chart 11, the contribution of remittances has been gaining greater importance as time elapses, especially in rural areas. By 1992 the difference between food poverty estimations with and without remittances is 0.9 percent, a reduction of poverty by exactly 0.9 million people.
Chart 10 Evolution of food poverty according to income variations (National)
Source: CONEVAL estimations based on ENIGHs of different years.
____ 15 Escobar Latapí Agustín and Erick Janssen. Migration, the diaspora and development: The case of Mexico. International Institute for Labor Studies. Discussion paper DP/167/2006. http://www.ilo.org/inst
34
1.7 Social Security and Social Programs Guaranteeing social rights to the population is the State’s responsibility, same
which, if satisfied, would allow reducing the impact of sudden changes in the
personal or environmental situation of people, which has always been a factor of
paramount importance to families. But social security coverage is not universal,
therefore people with relatively high income levels tend to cover the cost of
insurance with their own resources, but people with lower income don’t always
have the capability to do so. The right to social security should have a relevant role
in social development policy.
The IMSS and the ISSSTE were created in the 20th Century to cover the social
security of families in Mexico. However, we observe that having universal security
through these mechanisms has not had the expected outcome.
According to Table 1, at national level people 65 years of age and older who do not
work and do not receive pension amounted to 80 percent of the population in 1992;
by 2006 this percentage merely dropped to 71.5 percent. The heads of household
without access to healthcare, that is, not members of a public institution receiving
social security benefits, whether from the IMSS, ISSSTE, PEMEX, the Ministry of
Defense (SEDENA) or the SEMAR, went from 69.3 percent in 1992 to 71.0 percent
in 2006. Access to formal social security by the 20 percent poorest population is
even more precarious: 89.8 percent of the heads of households had no access to
social services in 2006.
In the face of this fact, the government has designed a set of social programs to
help the population lacking social security from institutions such as the IMSS or the
ISSSTE. Both the Oportunidades program and the Popular Insurance (Seguro
Popular) program, for example, provide or strengthen aid in help or in cash, to the
35
population in poverty conditions and lacking formal protection. However, the
services provided do not count with all the social security components offered by
the IMSS or ISSSTE and thus provide incomplete protection.
Table 1 shows that if, besides formal social security, we include the set of social
programs targeted, in general, to the population that does not count with formal
access to social services, the picture of support to the population changed
significantly from 1992 to 2006. In 1992, the Oportunidades and Popular Insurance
(Seguro Popular), among others, did not exist, therefore social security came down
to formal institutions. Thus, for the poorest 20 percent of families in 1992, 89.1
percent of households had no access to social services or to the aforementioned
social programs, according to the ENIGH. But by 2006, this percentage dropped to
38.3 percent, as can be seen on Table 1. For the general population the change
was from 69.3 percent to 50.1 percent of families without access to social services
or to the social programs recorded in the ENIGH in 2006.
The above means that from 1992 to 2006 social programs – at least those included
in the ENIGH- have contributed, as a whole, in helping the poorest families. As will
be explained further on, the progression of these social programs, maybe except
Procampo, stands out more than other social policy actions or programs.
Table 5 shows with greater detail the coverage of the different security instruments
and social programs by quintiles and by rural and urban areas in 2006. We
observe only 23.1 percent of the heads of household in Mexico has access to the
IMSS and in the case of the ISSSTE the figure is 5.2 percent, but these services
scarcely reach the poorest population. Only 8.9 percent of the heads of households
within the lowest income quintile are IMSS members and in the case of the
ISSSTE only 1.0 percent, according to the ENIGH.
36
However, 42.9 percent of families among the first income quintile count with
Oportunidades, 9.4 percent count with Procampo and 25.1 percent count with
Popular Insurance (Seguro Popular). If we combine the benefits of formal social
security, we see that 10.2 percent of the heads of household in the first income
quintile has some kind of formal social security; but 54.6 percent of households in
the same quintile count with a social program. That is, 61.7 percent of households
in the first quintile have some kind of social security or social program.
Progress in the focalization of social programs in Mexico can be seen more clearly
in the rural area. As shown on Table 6, in 1992 85.4 percent of rural households
had no kind of protection or social security, according to the ENIGH; the only
formal options for care where via the IMSS or the ISSSTE. In 2006, only 39.3
percent of rural households had no kind of social security; the combined coverage
of the IMSS and ISSSTE practically didn’t change during this period for rural
families, but the combined coverage of Oportunidades, Procampo and Popular
Insurance (Seguro Popular) went from 0.0 to 49.6 percent from 1992 to 2006. We
must highlight the progress in coverage of these social programs, but it is also
important to stress, as has been pointed out before, that these are not an adequate
substitute to social security in general, for they do not offer the same benefits as
their formal counterpart.
37
Table 5
2006 Coverage by social security and social programs 1 Percentage of households with coverage 2 Percentage of households with at least one member with coverage 3 Percentage of households where the head of household receives a medical service benefit 4 Others refers to: Pemex, Army, Marine and Universities Note: these indicators are not exclusive, therefore they cannot be added. The case can arise, for example, where a household member has access to Seguro Popular and the head of household has access to IMSS Source: CONEVAL estimations based on the 2006 ENIGH
The mentioned social programs have covered part of the population unprotected by formal social security. However, two major challenges prevail: The first is that, combining the social programs, focused in general, and formal social security (IMSS and ISSSTE) 50.1 percent of Mexico’s families still have no full coverage of any kind. The second challenge is it seems two parallel and differentiated social protection worlds are being created and institutionalized: a system for workers affiliated to institutions such as the IMSS or the ISSSTE, whose coverage
38
practically hasn’t changed in 15 years, and another for the poor population, whose coverage has grown significantly, although without a clear coordination between all these actions and programs; but most of all, without the full benefits of formal social security being universal.
Table 6 Households according to coverage by social programs and social security,
1992 and 2006 1 Percentage of households with coverage 2 Percentage of households with at least one member with coverage 3 Percentage of households where the head of household receives a medical service benefit 4 Others refers to: Pemex, Army, Marine and Universities Note: these indicators are not exclusive, therefore they cannot be added. The case can arise, for example, where a household member has access to Seguro Popular and the head of household has access to IMSS Source: CONEVAL estimations based on the 1992 and 2006 ENIGH
Regarding full coverage, this situation will be hard to solve in the middle term. Social security will grow if the number of formal jobs increases. But economic growth has been very low in the last years and it is not foreseen it will revert strongly in the following years. But it is also difficult to claim growth in itself could cover the totality of families by this mean. Not even during Mexico’s periods of greatest growth has it reached a broad coverage by formal social security. Regarding the second aspect, although focalized social programs have helped families in poverty conditions, when we analyze social development as a whole –social security and focalized social programs- we observe they are two distant worlds, with little connection between them, with different qualities and coverage,
39
as has been mentioned. Fulfilling universal coverage to social security and equal opportunity by this mean would seem difficult.
1.8 Inequality, Social Cohesion and poverty maps in Mexico
1.8.1 Inequality and Social Cohesion
Social cohesion is a complex and multidimensional phenomenon whose concept has different defined in different ways. For some, it has to do with the degree in which people feel part of a nation, region or community or else with solidarity, reciprocity and networks generated among individuals or even with the degree in which people participate in communities or in political life, with citizen awareness, the community of values, common goals or trust in institutions itself16. But social cohesion has also been understood as the degree in which people in a society are being included, excluded or marginalized through direct discrimination mechanisms, or geographical marginalization or opportunities isolation, among others. Different to other concepts, the multiplicity of views on this phenomenon has to do with the lack of a universally accepted conceptual body to sustain the same definitions of social cohesion as well as the way it is measured. ______________ 16 Alducin, Enrique (2001) “Social cohesion, democracy and trust. In: De María and Campos, Mauricio y Sánchez, Georgina (eds.) Are Mexicans united? The limits of social cohesion. ("Cohesión social, democracia y confianza". En: De María y Campos, Mauricio y Sánchez, Georgina (eds.) ¿Estamos unidos los mexicanos? Los límites de la cohesión social.) Mexico. Editorial Planeta Mexicana, publishers. Atkinson, Tony et. al. (2002) Social indicators. The EU and social inclusion. UK. Oxford University Press. Interamerican Development Bank (Banco Interamericano de Desarrollo, BID) (2005) Social cohesion in Latin America and the Caribbean. Analysis, action and coordination. (La cohesión social en América Latina y el Caribe. Análisis, acción y coordinación. Washington. Interamerican Development Bank (Banco Interamericano de Desarrollo). Recovered from: www.iadb.org (2007, May 24) Economic Commission for Latin America and the Caribbean (Comisión Económica para América Latina y el Caribe, CEPAL) (2007) Social cohesion; inclusion and sense of belonging in Latin America and the Caribbean (Cohesión social: inclusión y sentido de pertenencia en América Latina y el Caribe). Santiago de Chile. CEPAL. Easterly, Williams, Ritzan, Joseph and Woolcock, Michael (2006) Social cohesion, institutions and growth. Washington. Center for Global Development Feres, Juan Carlos (2006) Towards a social cohesion indicator system in Latin America. Project advance. (Hacia un sistema de indicadores de cohesión social en América Latina. Avance de proyecto.) Panama. Address presented during the seminar: Social cohesion in Latin America and the Caribbean: a peremptory revision of some of its dimensions, September 7 and 8.
40
However, there are coincidences between the specialists that in a more egalitarian society and with opportunities better distributed among the population, better conditions can be generated to develop cohesion amongst its members. This is why economic and social inequality, as well as the indicators on the degree of discrimination or on unequal participation of certain groups of the population in social activities, it is usually used as an indicator of limited social cohesion, as is shown on Table 1. Mexico has been a country with a high concentration of income, and even in its recent evolution this situation has not changed. The opportunities the country could generate cannot be taken advantage of by all families in equal measure. The information on Table 7 shows Mexico is one of the countries where income presents a greater concentration. This situation is shared with several Latin American and African countries. Although on Table 8 we see an improvement in the Gini index from 1992 to 2006, the evolution of the inequality indexes has remained practically constant during this period. That is, the distribution of income in Mexico is as unequal as it was 15 years ago.
Table 7 Gini index value for selected countries
Country Gini Index Year
Source: 2004 and 2005 United Nations Human Development Report
41
Table 8
Income inequality measurements in Mexico 1992-20061 1 The income metric corresponds to the total net income per capita defined by the CTMP. Source: CONEVAL estimations based on the 1992-2006 ENIGH’s. Note: The marginal difference between the Gini coefficients reported on Table 7 and Table 8 for Mexico in 2005, is due to the fact the figures come from different sources. Besides income, inequality in access to opportunities is also a sign of lack of social
cohesion. Table 1 shows that the percentage of women in the Union Congress has
increased, which shows greater participation and opportunities for women in
Mexico’s social environment and decision-making circle. But equal opportunity
levels reflect that in 2006 there was still a significant gap between men and
women’s participation in the economic and social spheres. This gap has also been
found between income, decisions at home and access to senior positions.17
_________ 17 National Council to Prevent Discrimination, Studies, Legislation and Public Policies Joint Chief Executive Office (Consejo Nacional para Prevenir la Discriminación, Dirección General Adjunta de Estudios, Legislación y Políticas Públicas). Gender Discrimination Prevention and Sanction Strategy (Estrategia de Prevención y Sanción a la Discriminación de Género). Analysis and Proposals, based on the SEDESOL-CONAPRED First Nacional Survey on Discrimination in Mexico (Análisis y Propuestas, a partir de la Primera Encuesta Nacional sobre Discriminación en México de SEDESOL- CONAPRED). Work document No. E-12-2006. Mexico, 2006, 111 pp.
42
Table 1 also shows one of the variables on discrimination estimated with the First
Survey on Discrimination in Mexico (Primera Encuesta sobre Discriminación en
México), developed by the Ministry of Social Development (SEDESOL) and the
National Council to Prevent Discrimination (Consejo Nacional para Prevenir la
Discriminación, CONAPRED) in 2005. This first collection of data shows almost
one third of the people in disadvantaged groups said to have suffered some kind of
discrimination during the year prior to the survey.
In summary, social inequality expresses itself in multiple fields. First, income
inequality threatens wellbeing not only because it increases poverty, but because it
reflects on the inequality of access to basic services, on the quality of these
services, on social and economic opportunities, on the day to day treatment and on
access to social rights.
1.8.2 Income poverty maps: Incidence
Pursuant to the LGDS, and in order to carry out for the first time an official poverty
measurement at state and municipal level, the CONEVAL has developed income
poverty estimation works in these disaggregation levels, using an econometric
procedure elaborated by Elbers et al18. This estimation allows strengthening the
direction of a better economic and social policy, and offers the opportunity to carry
out social development monitoring in states and municipalities.19 __________ 18 Elbers, Chris, Lanjouw, J.O., and Lanjouw P. “Micro-level estimation of poverty and inequality” in Econometrics 71 (Econométrica 71), 2003, 355-364 pp. 19 Székely Pardo Miguel and López Calva Luis Felipe et. al. Carried out the first poverty map exercise with 2000 information. “Putting income poverty and inequality on the Mexico Map” in Mexican Economy (“Poniendo a la pobreza de ingresos y la desigualdad en el mapa de México” en Economía Mexicana), Nueva Época, CIDE, vol. XVI, no, 2, second semester, Mexico, 2007, 239-303 pp.
43
Map 1
State incidence of the population in patrimony poverty situation, 2005 Source: CONEVAL estimations based on the 2005 2nd Population and Housing Count and the 2005 ENIGH On Table 9 we can appreciate that the entity with the greatest incidence of food
poverty is the state of Chiapas, where 47.0 percent of its population is in this
situation. Following it are the states of Guerrero with 42.0 percent, Oaxaca with
38.1, Tabasco with 28.5 and Veracruz with 28.0. On the other hand, the states with
the lowest incidence of food poverty are Baja California with 1.3 percent, Nuevo
León with 3.6, Baja California Sur with 4.7, Federal District (Capital City) with 5.4
and the states of Coahuila and Chihuahua with 8.6 percent.
44
Table 9 Estimation of the poverty incidence in people at state and national level
using the imputation methodology, 2005
National estimations correspond to the 2005 ENIGH.
Source: CONEVAL estimations based on the 2005 2nd Population and Housing Count and the 2005 ENIGH
45
The order of the capabilities poverty situation is practically the same as for food poverty. Ranking first is Chiapas with 55.9 percent, followed by the state of Guerrero with 50.2 and Oaxaca with 46.9. According to estimations, the states with the greatest patrimony poverty are Chiapas, Guerrero and Oaxaca, with 75.7, 70.2 and 68.0 percent, respectively. This information enables to clearly see that the fight against the great inequality observed between the states of the Mexican Republic constitutes a major challenge for our country. While Baja California has an estimated average monthly income of 4,998 pesos, Chiapas only reaches 1,215 pesos: in Baja California the incidence of patrimony poverty is 9.2 percent, while in Chiapas it amounts to 75.7 percent.
Map 2 Municipal incidence of the population in patrimony poverty situation, 2005
Source: CONEVAL estimations based on the 2005 2nd Population and Housing Count and the 2005 ENIGH.
46
The methodology to estimate poverty used for the calculation of the incidence of poverty and poverty levels of the Mexican states, allows obtaining estimations at municipal level for the year 2005. The greatest incidence of poverty is concentrated in the southern and southeastern state municipalities, as can be seen on Map 2. We also see that the municipalities with the greatest poverty, especially food poverty, are located in mountainous and hard to reach areas. That is where the greatest incidence of poverty in Mexico lies, with the greatest cost in having aid reach them. Thus, public policy should be focused on solving the problems generated by the geographical dispersion of the population in most need and foster its integration to social development.
47
Table 10 Estimation of the incidence of poverty in people of the 20 municipalities
with highest and lower incidence of food poverty, using the imputation methodology, 2005
20 municipalities with the highest incidence of population under the food poverty line
Federal state
Municipality Total population
Estimated percentage of population under the food poverty line
Estimated number of people under the food poverty line
48
Note: These figures are estimations, therefore they must be taken with approximations of the population in each municipality
1.8.3 Income poverty maps: Population The maps above show where the highest percentages of poverty in Mexico are
located, regardless of the size of the municipalities. Thus, the municipalities of
Santiago el Pinar in Chiapas and of San Pablo Cuatro Venados en Oaxaca, for
example, have a high incidence of poverty, for they have a patrimonial poverty of
96.5 and 96.0 percent, respectively. However, the total population of these
municipalities in 2005, according to the INEGI, was 2,845 and 1,267 inhabitants,
respectively. This means the number of people in poverty was 2,745 in Santiago el
Pinar and 1,216 in San Pablo Cuatro Venados in 2005.
However, for example, if we take the municipality of Acapulco de Juárez in
Guerrero, it only has an incidence of patrimony poverty of 60.1 percent, but given
that municipality’s population was 717,766 people that same year, the population in
patrimony poverty conditions was 431,377 people, 355 times more people in
poverty than in San Pablo Cuatro Venados.
Therefore, to have a complete picture of Mexico’s poverty, it is also important to
take into account the poverty maps with information regarding the number of
people and not only the incidence. As is shown on Map 3, the poverty map with
population is very different to Map 2 which shows incidences. Now poverty tends to
concentrate in more urban municipalities, although poverty is still present in rural
areas.
Source: CONEVAL estimations based on the 2005 2nd Population and Housing Count and the 2005 National Household Income and Expense Survey (ENIGH).
49
Table 11 Estimation of the population in poverty conditions at state and national level
using the imputation methodology, 2005 National estimations correspond to the 2005 ENIGH; therefore, the sums can differ from the national totals, for the estimation by federal state is made through statistical imputation methods Source: CONEVAL estimations based on the 2005 2nd Population and Housing Count and the 2005 ENIGH.
50
Map 3 Municipal population in food poverty situation (number of people), 2005
Source: CONEVAL estimations based on the 2005 2nd Population and Housing Count and the 2005 ENIGH.
On Table 11 we can now see poverty by number of persons, by Federal State.
Standing out is the State of Mexico, Veracruz, Chiapas and Puebla are the states
with a greater number of people in poverty situation in 2005; for these states,
although the incidence –percentage of people in poverty situation- is not among
the highest at national level –except for Chiapas-, it is by the number of poor
people, which derives from the total population in these federal states.
51
1.8.4 The multidimensionality of poverty: The 2005 Social Gap Index
Taking into account that the LGDS sets forth that poverty measurement shall
consider the multidimensional nature of poverty, the CONEVAL constructed the
Social Gap Index,20 incorporating education, access to health services, basic
services, home quality and services, and home assets. With this purpose, the 2005
2nd Population and Housing Count was used.
The Social Gap Index is a needs indicator estimated at three geographical
aggregation levels: state, municipal and local. With this, we intend to contribute to
the generation of information for better decision making in matters of social policy
at different levels of operation, enabling the location of priority attention areas.
Table A 5 on the Appendix shows the multidimensional poverty indicators for each
state, as well as the Social Gap Index, which is a synthetic measurement of the
dimensions considered. We see the states of Chiapas, Guerrero and Oaxaca have
a very high gap index, which also matches its high incidence of poverty, measured
by income.
As can be seen on Map 4, the Social Gap Index, estimated at locality level, points
out a geographical distribution of poverty in its other dimensions, where the highest
gaps are concentrated in Mexico’s south-southeast and mountainous regions. As
in income poverty, this indicator suggests social policy should consider the problem
of the lack of access to isolated and disperse communities.
________ 20 The Social Gap Index is constructed using the Principal Component Analysis statistical technique.
52
Map 4 2005 Social Gap Index (Localities)
Source: CONEVAL estimations based on the 2005 2nd Population and Housing Count and the 2005 ENIGH.
Social gap and road infrastructure
An aspect that is highly correlated to the geographic concentration of people in
situation of poverty and social gap, is the accessibility to means of communication.
The complicated orography of the national territory, especially that of the southern
states and the complex mountain range network that extends from the central
region to the north of Mexico, for many years have represented an impediment to
extend the national road network, with low integration to services and markets
related to the low levels of income and wellbeing.
53
Map 5 Road Infrastructure
Localities with a very low social gap degree are in average 2.1 kilometers away
from a paved road; localities with a low gap level are 3.1 kilometers away; low are
5.8 kilometers away; medium are 5.8 kilometers away; with a high gap level are
10.5 kilometers away, and with a very high social gap index are in average 16.9
kilometers away from the closest paved road. The 10 localities with the highest gap
are in average 28 kilometers away. The locality with the highest social gap degree,
el Palmari in the municipality of Batópilas, Chihuahua, is 43.6 kilometers away. The
above proves a population with a high gap level is usually isolated from the means
of communication, therefore, it is unlikely it will be integrated to the country’s
economy.21
____________ 21 Aragonés, M. and Ek Garfias, F. 2008. “Dispersion and Social Policy” (“Dispersión y Política Social”). Mimeo.
54
As can bee seen on the map, there are ample areas in the national territory which,
although they do have paved roads or even dirt roads, are not covered by
highways, same that match the municipalities with the highest incidence of poverty.
Difficult access to isolated municipalities and localities causes a double-fold
problematic: on the first place, given families with high levels of poverty and social
gap degrees live isolated populations, government aid should be present.
However, providing public services to these localities is more expensive and
problematic than taking them to areas with better access, which causes an evident
vicious circle.
The second problem is that the lack of access causes transportation costs and
therefore difficult access and communication between markets. The above inhibits
investment in areas with high social gap degrees, which implies the existence of
another vicious circle of low job creation and productivity in the areas where they
are most needed.
In this sense, social policy’s challenge is quite big: the population with the highest
incidence of poverty and social gap degrees is in hard access and disperse
localities but taking services and investment to these areas entails very high costs.
1.9 Poverty and the Indigenous population According to information available from the 2005 2nd Population and Housing
Count and the poverty maps generated by the CONEVAL, in municipalities with a
greater concentration of population speaking an indigenous language, it is common
to find a higher incidence of income poverty and higher social gap indexes.
Although we can’t speak about causality relationships between poverty and social
gap degrees and the percentage of indigenous population in this document, we
55
must place particular attention on the social gap degree and poverty conditions in
which these communities live.
Map 6 shows the municipalities with a higher concentration of indigenous
population mostly match the municipalities with the highest incidence of income
poverty and very high social gap indexes, according to Map 2.
Map 6 Percentage of population 5 years of age and older
speaking an indigenous language Source: CONEVAL estimations based on the 2005 2nd Population and Housing Count
56
Chart 11 Food poverty and indigenous population by municipality, 2005
Source: CONEVAL estimations based on the 2005 2nd Population and Housing Count
Poverty among the indigenous population and difficult access to roads again has implications on the public services provided. According to the World Bank (2004)22, the schools with the worst quality in Mexico are precisely the schools targeted to the indigenous population; additionally, as seen on Table 1, malnutrition is more acute among indigenous than among the general population.
1.10 Environment The national development process demands harmonizing economic growth and the wellbeing of people, families and communities with environmental sustainability. The Mexico Millennium Development Goals Report corresponding to the year 2006 enables documenting, according to the trends prevailing since the early nineties, some progresses and achievements in the task of guaranteeing environmental sustainability throughout the national territory. _______ 22 World Bank. 2004. “Chapter 4: Public Expenditure, Poverty and Inequality” in Poverty in Mexico: an Evaluation of the Conditions, Trends and Government Strategies, Mexico (Report no. 28612-ME). (“Capítulo 4: Gasto Público, Pobreza y Desigualdad” en La pobreza en México: una Evaluación de las Condiciones, Tendencias y Estrategias del Gobierno, México, (Reporte 28612-ME).) World Bank 2004, 350 p.
57
One of the great challenges Mexico must FACE in the short and medium term
consists of the need to revert the negative trends accumulated during decades and
that affect the nation’s overall sustainable environmental development. In spite of
the major efforts that have been developed during the last years, the process of
accelerated deforestation, soil degradation, natural ecosystem deterioration and
the problems derived from waste dumped in rivers, oceans and the atmosphere
prevail.
There is sufficient scientific evidence on the damaging effect the structuring
modalities of the national development models and globalization have had on the
world climate systems, especially on the changes observed in the precipitation and
distribution of hydrological resources patterns in the planet as a consequence of
greenhouse gas emissions and tropical forest and forest deforestation.
According to information presented in the 2007-2012 National Development Plan,
there is a great gap in the matter, which affects the provision of potable water
available per inhabitant in Mexico, which dropped from 4,841 m3/year in 2000 to
4,573 m3/year in 2005. According to estimations by the National Water
Commission (Comisión Nacional del Agua, CONAGUA) and the CONAPO, potable
water will decrease up to 3,705 m3/year by 2003.
Furthermore, factors such as economic growth, pollution and overexploitation of
water-bearing stratums, as well as deforestation and alterations in precipitation
patterns worldwide could diminish even further the amount of water available per
inhabitant. Additionally, there is an alarming lack of rationalization and efficiency of
the potable water distribution and generation network, for leakage ranges between
30 and 50 percent of the water available at national level, and only 15 percent of
industrial residual waters are treated. Facing the magnitude of these challenges, if
public policy does not respond appropriately to Mexico’s needs, potable water
58
supply could represent a major limitation to economic growth and development in
coming years.
The social development process demands for environmental sustainability to also
be reflected on the daily micro-social sphere of people. Two positive aspects worth
mentioning are that the great majority of Mexican homes cook with combustible
materials which do not affect their health and which has decreased the proportion
in which coal or wood are used as fuel: in 1990, 23.4 percent of home inhabitants
in Mexico lived in houses cooking with firewood or coal, proportion that dropped to
19.8 percent in the year 2000 and to 15.8 percent in 2006, as shown on Table 1.
Undoubtedly, one of the great challenges Mexico will face in the future is the
creation of public policies capable of promoting economic development without
disturbing even more the planet’s fragile ecological balance.
2 EVALUATION ON SOCIAL DEVELOPMENT POLICY IN MEXICO The latter chapter showed the progresses in some of Mexico’s social development
dimensions; but it also pointed out its great challenges. This chapter has as a
purpose to present a general diagnosis of the country’s social development policy
and programs in order to identify some of the key elements which would allow
improving its management and results.
Firstly, we present the strengths of social development policy, in terms of
government expenditure, the actions instrumented to achieve greater efficiency
and effectiveness in the use of public resources and the institutionalization of
Social Development Policy. Secondly, we present the main challenges faced by
social policy in matters of the problematic in defining social development, the
existing regulations and the lack of fulfillment of social rights; the dispersion of
59
programs; the distributive incidence of expenditure and of federal programs; and
the lack of institutional coordination.
The third item presents a summary of the main results of the 2007-2008 external
evaluations on federal programs. This summary is useful to pinpoint the specific
challenges of social programs that must be tended to for the improvement of
government management, but most of all, in order to transform social development
into an effective channel for the progress of Mexico’s social development
indicators. Finally, we present a brief diagnosis on the Living Better (Vivir Mejor)
strategy.
2.1 Strengths of Social Development Policy
2.1.1 Expenditure in Social Development The growing importance of social development policy in the last federal
administration is reflected on the evolution of expenditure in the matter. This item
presents the trend, composition and classification of social development
expenditure from 1990 to 2007.
Expenditure on social development23 shows a growing trend in the past two
decades (see Chart 12), with a 276 percent growth in real terms from 1990 to
2007. From 1990 to 1994, social expenditure grew 91 percent, experienced a 23
percent fall from 1994 to 1995, a subsequent recovery from 1996 to 2007, going
from 537 billion pesos in 1996 to 1,136 billion in 2007.24
______ 23 From 1990 to 2002, expenditure in social development functions presents the following classification: Education, Social Security, Provision and Social Aid, Health, Labor and Regional and Urban Development. As of 2003 there is a new classification, which is the following: Education, Social Security, Urbanization, Housing and Regional Development, Health, Social Aid and Potable Water and Sewer System 24 2007 constant pesos deflated with the National Consumer Price Index calculated by Banco de México.
60
Chart 12 1990-2007 Social Expenditure in Mexico
(2007 billion pesos) The composition of the projected expenditure has modified significantly since early
last decade. Expenditure on social development compared to the total projected
expenditure went from 38 percent in 1990 to close to 60 percent in 1998,
proportion that has stayed relatively constant in the last decade.
In 2007, expenditure in social development represented 59 percent of the total
projected expenditure, which proves the importance of social development policy
within the government’s priorities (Chart 13). This increase in social expenditure
helps explain the progress in basic service coverage observed in the previous
section.
61
Chart 13 Social Expenditure in Mexico
as a proportion of the total projected expenditure
Source: CONEVAL elaboration with data by the Center for the Studies of Public Finances of the Chamber of Deputies, with information by the Federal Public Account (1990 to 2006) and the Federal Public Treasury Account. Chart 14 presents the evolution of expenditure of the main functions in matters of
social development, based on the classification by the Federation Expenditure
Budget (Presupuesto de Egresos de la Federación, PEF). We can see that the
greatest growth has taken place in the educational and health sector compared to
provision and social aid.
62
Chart 14
1990-3007 Social Expenditure according to functional classification in Mexico
(2007 billion Mexican pesos)
2.1.2 Focalization, decentralization and aid to basic capabilities The economic crisis during the eighties diminished the Mexican government’s
expenditure capability, accentuating the challenge of strengthening aid to society in
an environment of resource scarcity. In this scenario, since late that decade, the
National Solidarity Program (Programa Nacional de Solidaridad) raised the need of
public resource focalization towards the regions with greater gaps, and that were
not in possibilities to directly benefit from the structural reforms in economy, and
the consequent growth expected from them. Said program aimed to strengthen the
infrastructure in those regions and undertook a diversity of other actions.
Geographical focalization continued with the Contributions Fund for Federal States
63
and Municipalities (Fondo de Aportaciones para Entidades Federativas y
Municipios) which began in 1997.
That same year, the Progresa program began, focalizing localities, homes and people to strengthen the basic capabilities of the poor population. Likewise, focalization criteria were incorporated to existing programs such as the Milk Social Provision Program (Programa Abasto Social de Leche) and the Rural Provision Program (Programa Abasto Rural), in order to tend to the poorest population in greater measure. In the case of the PROGRESA/Oportunidades Program, the social benefit has been significant. This Federal Program is considered as highly progressive.25 Likewise, according to external evaluations, it has had a positive impact on school enrollment,26 nutrition27 and health28 of girls and boys in rural areas. However, effectiveness in urban areas has been limited. On the other hand, the Milk Social Provision Program has had an impact on the reduction of anemia in girls and boys under the age of three as a result of milk fortification in 2002.29 The external evaluation on the DICONSA 2006 Rural Provision Program has shown that the estimated national savings margin average is approximately 9 percent.30
__________ 25 Scott John. Redistributive efficiency of programs against poverty in Mexico. (Eficiencia redistributiva de los programas contra la pobreza en México). Work Document No.307. Mexico, D.F. Economy Division, Center for Economic Research and Education (Centro de Investigación y Docencia Económica, CIDE), 2004. 26 Schultz, P. “The impact of Progresa on school enrollment” in More Opportunities for poor families. Results Evaluation of the Education, Health and Food Program. (“El impacto del Progresa sobre la inscripción escolar”, en Más Oportunidades para las familias pobres. Evaluación de Resultados del Programa de Educación, Salud y Alimentación.) Washington, D.C., International Food Policy Institute (IFRPI), 2000. 27 Rivera J A, Sotrés-Alvarez D, Habicht JP, Shamah T, Villalpando S. Impact of the Mexican Program for Education, Health and Nutrition (Progresa) on rates of growth and anemia in infants and young children. A randomized effectiveness study. JAMA 2004. 28 Gertler, Paul. “The impact of PROGRESA on health”, in More Opportunities for poor families. Results Evaluation of the Education, Health and Food Program. (“El impacto de PROGRESA sobre la salud”, en Más Oportunidades para las familias pobres. Evaluación de Resultados del Programa de Educación, Salud y Alimentación.) Washington, D.C., International Food Policy Institute (IFRPI), 2000. 29 Villalpando S, Shamah T, Rivera J, Lara Y, Monterrubio E. “Fortifying milk with ferrous gluconate and zinc oxide in a public nutrition program reduced the prevalence of anemia in toddlers” in J Nutr 2006;136: 2633-2637 pp. 30 Grupo de Economistas y Asociados. External Evaluation of the Rural Provision Program, DICONSA S.A. de
C.V. (Evaluación Externa del Programa de Abasto Rural, DICONSA S.A. de C.V.) Fiscal Year 2002. Mexico,
D.F. 2003
64
Likewise, as has been shown, the coverage of basic water, electricity, education, access to health and sewage services, have improved in the last 14 years, especially for the poorest population. Although the coverage levels of the poorest families and areas are still substantially lower than those in the richer areas, the better focalization of infrastructure has helped to narrow the social gap.
Among the most important events in matters of social policy during the analyzed
period, the decentralization of federal resources stands out. In 1995, the federal
government announced a series of institutional reforms under the title of New
Federalism whose primary objective was the decentralization of social expenditure,
with the premise of improving public expenditure efficiency and effectiveness in a
subsidiary system.
In the context of a political system that was evolving towards more democratic
ways and within the framework of major institutional reforms, the Fiscal
Coordination Law was modified to give way to the creation of Branch 33, called
Federal Contributions for Federal States and Municipalities (Aportaciones
Federales para Entidades Federativas y Municipios). As of 1998 a rapid increase
of resources for states and municipalities took place, as a result of the transference
of resources.
The importance of federal resource decentralization to social development policy,
is in the formal nature of their progressive distribution and social nature.31
. 31 Scott. John, “Decentralization, social expense and poverty in Mexico”, in Public Management and Policy. (“La descentralización, el gasto social y la pobreza en México”, en Gestión y Política Pública.) Volume XIII Number 3, Second Semester, 2004.
65
Up to date, Branch 33 integrates eight Funds: two linked to educational policy
actions, Contributions Fund for Basic and Normal Education (Fondo de
Aportaciones para la Educación Básica y Normal, FAEB) and Contributions Fund
for Technological and Adult Education (Fondo de Aportaciones para la Educación
Tecnológica y de Adultos, FAETA); two linked to health services and social aid,
Contributions Fund for Health Services (Fondo de Aportaciones para los Servicios
de Salud, FASSA) and Multiple Contributions Fund (Fondo de Aportaciones
Múltiples, FAM), respectively; one to social infrastructure, Contributions fund for
Social Infrastructure (Fondo de Aportaciones para la Infraestructura Social, FAIS);
one linked to the strengthening of capabilities and financial management of
municipalities and demarcations, Contributions Fund for the Strengthening of
Municipalities and Territorial Demarcations of the Federal District (Fondo de
Aportaciones para el Fortalecimiento de los Municipios y de las Demarcaciones
Territoriales del Distrito Federal, FORTAMUNDF); one to public security,
Contributions Fund for Public Security of the States and the Federal District (Fondo
de Aportaciones para la Seguridad Pública de los Estados y del Distrito Federal,
FASP); and another targeted to federal state financial reorganization and pension
systems, Contributions Fund for the Strengthening of Federal States (Fondo de
Aportaciones para el Fortalecimiento de las Entidades Federativas, FAFEF).
In 2007, the resources assigned to Branch 33 represented over 20 percent of the
federal projected expenditure, expenditure exercised by states and municipalities
The decentralization of social expenditure has important advantages, some of
them are: greater freedom to states and municipalities to use resources, and the
potential to achieve greater effectiveness and efficiency in government public
expenditure by bringing rulers closer to the needs of the citizenship. However, we
should acknowledge we currently do not count with a systematic evaluation system
for the results of the resources coming from federal contributions towards states
66
and municipalities. In this sense, the measurement of the federal resource
decentralization policy in the social development field is still a pending task.
2.1.3 Social Development Policy Institutionalization Health and education institution in Mexico have had notable continuity; however,
expense in social programs has tended to change radically from one administration
to another, which makes it difficult to clearly understand the in the short, medium
and long term direction and objectives of social development policy, as well as to
have knowledge on its effectiveness. Likewise, during the 20th Century, the lack of
transparency and accountability in social expenditure persisted.
Notwithstanding the above, in the past years the institutionalism of social
development in Mexico has improved significantly. In 2004 the LGDS was passed
with the approval of all the political parties represented by the Union Congress,
whose objective is to:32
I. Guarantee the full exercise of the social rights consecrated in the
Political Constitution of the United Mexican States, ensuring
access to all the population to social development;
II. Point out the Government’s obligations, establish the institutions
responsible for social development and define the general
principles and guidelines which Social Development National
Policy shall submit to;
III. Establish a National Social Development System where the
municipal, federal state and federal governments participate;
67
IV. Determine the competence of municipal governments, of federal
states and of the Federal Government in matters of social
development, as well as the basis for the agreement of actions
with the social and private sectors;
V. Foster the social sector of economy;
VI. Regulate and guarantee the provision of the goods and services
contained in the social programs;
VII. Determine the basis and foster social and private participation in
the matter;
VIII. Establish evaluation and follow-up mechanisms for Social
Development National Policy programs and actions, and
IX. Promote the establishment of instruments for access to justice,
through popular citizen complaint, in matters of social
development.
In this sense, the LGDS lays the foundations for a State social development policy,
it institutionalizes various public policy processes, supports the coordination
between the levels of government and institutions of the Executive power and
promotes evaluation and transparency.
________ 32 1st Article of the General Law for Social Development.
68
The LGDS considers, for the first time in Mexico, the systematic evaluation of
social development policy in order to periodically revise compliance with the social
objective of the programs, goals and actions of Social Development Policy, to
correct, modify, add, reorient or suspend them totally or partially, and the
CONEVAL is created for said purpose.
Likewise, it considers the norm to monitor programs by requesting results,
management and services indicators. Results indicators must reflect compliance
with the social objectives of the programs, goals and actions of Social
Development Policy, while the management and services indicators must reflect
the procedures and quality of said programs’ services.33
A relevant point in the institutionalization of Social Development Policy is that the
CONEVAL is empowered to issue any suggestions or recommendations it deems
fit to the Federal Executive Power, allowing to strengthen the connection between
the evaluation results and the feedback of the design and progress of social
policies and programs.
Additionally, in order to consolidate and make social development policy
evaluations operative, the CONEVAL, in coordination with the Ministry of Treasury
(SHCP) and of Public Functions (SFP), issued in March 2007, the General
Guidelines for the Evaluation of Federal Programs. The purpose of the ordainment
consists of regulating the external evaluation of programs. Thus, the permanent
and systematic evaluation of social development policy is now a fundamental tool
to constantly improve its performance and to know which actions are or aren’t
effective in solving the huge social and economic problems which still afflict
Mexico.
______ 33 Article 74 and 75 of the General Law for Social Development.
69
These regulatory dispositions complement the creation in 2007 of the Performance
Evaluation System (SED) which mandates the Budget and Treasury Responsibility
Law. The SED’s objective is to consolidate an efficient information system for
decision making that strengthens the connection between the budgetary process
and planning, programming, execution, monitoring and evaluation of public
policies.
Among the SED’s main instruments are the monitoring of results of budgetary
programs, the evaluation of programs, institutions and public policies, as well as a
set of actions for improvement and modernization of the public work, through the
Medium Term Program (Programa de Mediano Plazo, PMP).
Additionally, these types of actions have been made extensive to the Federal
States by means of the Constitutional Reform in matters of public expenditure and
control published on May 7, 2008, on the Official Journal of the Federation (Diario
Oficial de la Federación), as well as to the reforms to the Federal Budget and
Treasury Responsibility Law, which strengthens the evaluation of Social
Development Policy as a whole.
Currently, the results of state and municipality social development programs and
policies are unknown, for there has been no external evaluation. States and
municipalities must advance in consolidating –and in many cases initiating- an
external evaluation system for social programs and policies in order to improve
their public policy tools and improve accountability.
70
2.2 The challenges of social development policy in Mexico
In spite of the progress social development policy has had, Mexico faces major challenges in economical and social matters, among them, combat poverty permanently, reduce historical inequality, generate more and better jobs and improve the population’s wellbeing in a systematical manner and contribute in satisfying social rights. This section analyses said challenges.
2.2.1 Problems with the definition of social development, regulations and compliance with social rights
Mexico has a set of legal dispositions that identify its public policy general
objectives. Thus, with a different degree of precision, the Political Constitution of
the United Mexican States sets forth the rights to satisfy the need for food, health
protection, enjoyment of a decent and respectable house, to receive education, to
information, to work and recreation, among others.34
In spite of their obligatory nature, the lack of a real exercise of these rights by
major groups of population and the high inequality in their compliance has been
characteristic of the Mexican State. An example of exclusion of the enjoyment of
social rights corresponds to food poverty: as has been mentioned, in 2006 13.8
percent of the total population was unable to acquire, even if devoting their entire
income to this purpose, a food basket to satisfy their nutritional needs. On the other
hand, inequality in the compliance of basic rights can be shown with the highest
and lowest municipal literacy rates: while 98 percent of men in the municipality of
Cuautitlán, Estado de México, can read and write, only 20 percent of women have
this capacity in the municipality of Meltatónoc, Guerrero.35
____________________________________________
34 United Nations Programme. Report on Human Development: Mexico 2002, UNDP, Mexico, 2003, 146 pp. 35 Idem.
71
In spite of the advancement the LGDS represents to institutionalize Social
Development Policy in Mexico, it does not define in its content what is to be
understood by social development, social policy or social expenditure,
indispensable elements to analyze the appropriate public issues. However, it is
reasonable to conceive social development as the equitable and sustainable
extension of autonomy and of the choice opportunities of people, within the
framework of the full exercise of their rights; social policy as those public action
targeted to protect and promote social development, and social expenditure as that
which is concentrated in education, health, social security, housing and social
aid.36
Valid legislation, particularly the rights set forth by the Political Constitution of the
United States, reveals the priority assigned to different basic capabilities, and at
the same time works as a guideline for concrete public policies. Thus, we should
wonder if in Mexico basic capabilities are adequately recognized in the legal
framework.
The Constitution sets forth the different types of protection individuals shall enjoy
from in the face of others and the State, specifying the limits of their freedom, and
defining their rights of social nature (see Table 12). Basically, public policy would
have as a central objective, to bring validity to this group of rights, among others,
through the general framework for said public policy, as the National Development
Plan or through specific programs. ________________________ 36 De la Torre, Rodolfo, López-Calva Luis Felipe and Scott John. Social expense in the General Law for Social Development, (El gasto social en la Ley General de Desarrollo Social), Working Papers SDTE 331, Economy Division, CIDE, Mexico. 2005.
72
Table 12 Social Rights in the Constitution
Social right Reference
Right to education Art. 3
Right to health protection Art. 4
Right to an adequate environment for their development and
wellbeing
Art. 4
Right to satisfy their need for food, health, education and wholesome
recreation in girls and boys
Art. 4
Right to enjoy a decent and respectable home Art. 4
Right to information guaranteed by the State Art. 6
Right to dignified and socially useful work Art. 123
General minimum salaries shall be sufficient, without taking into
account neither gender nor nationality
Art. 123
Source: Political Constitution of the United Mexican States Despite its importance, the constitutional precepts do not specify sufficiently the
scope of social rights, the circumstances that make them demandable and the
specific ways in which the State is bound to tend to them.37 In consequence, given
this imprecision, it is necessary to go beyond its text to understand the nature of
social rights in Mexico.
Unfortunately, the LGDS, which in principle could correct some constitutional
limitations, practically leaves deficiency unchanged.
Given the Constitution is not clear enough in the determination of some social
rights, we face consistency problems. For example, the right to social security and
recreation the LGDS speaks about. The first of these rights is not considered in the
73
Constitution and the second only refers to girls and boys, besides the fact it isn’t
explained how to understand and exercise said right.
Part of the problem is that in different laws recognized social rights are sometimes
listed in terms of goods and services (food, housing and education), others in the
shape of actions or states of people (work and health), and some in terms of the
perceived wellbeing (enjoyment of the environment).
Faced by the lack of clarity of social rights to guide public policy in general, a
possible strategy to structure it better would be to explicitly link its programs to
those social rights that define relatively specific objectives. In other cases we would
need to replace the ordainment by the legislation with other elements.
From this perspective, we should wonder up to what point government plans match
social rights. An answer to this question is on Chart 13.
_______ 37 De la Torre Rodolfo. Social Development Law. Analysis and Evaluation of PAN, PRI and PRD Draft Bills. (Ley de Desarrollo Social. Análisis y Evaluación de Anteproyectos de Ley del PAN, PRI y PRD.) Human Development Papers. No. 4. SEDESOL. Mexico. 2002.
74
Chart 13
2007-2012 Social rights and government plans Social rights Government Plans
Art. 3. Right to the protection of health
(1).
Art. 2. Prolongation and improvement
of the human quality of life (2).
Art. 2. Right to health, medical care,
protection of the means of sustenance
and pension (3)
Improve the population’s health conditions. (4)
Art. 3. Right to receive education (1) Strengthen the capacities of Mexicans through the
provision of sufficient and quality education. (4)
Art. 4. Right to an adequate
environment for their development and
wellbeing (1)
It is about maintaining the natural capital that enables
the development and high quality of life for the Mexicans
of today and tomorrow. (4)
Art. 4. All girls and boys have the right
to satisfy their needs for food, health,
education and wholesome recreation
for their integral development.
Promote the wholesome and integral development of
Mexican children guaranteeing full respect to their needs
for health, food, education and housing, and promoting
the full development of their capacities. (4)
Foster the creation of multiple options for the recreation
and entertainment of all Mexican society (4)
Art. 4. Right to enjoy a decent and
respectable home. (1)
Broaden access to home financing for the poorest
segments of population as well as to undertake
construction projects in an orderly, rational and
sustainable development context for human settlements.
(4)
Art. 123 Every person has the right to
a dignified and socially useful job; for
said purpose, the creation of jobs and
social organization for employment
shall be promoted, according to the
Law.
Promote State policies and generate the conditions in
the labor market that foster the creation of high-quality
jobs in the informal sector. (4)
Sources: (1) Political Constitution of the United Mexican States, (2) General Health Law, (3) Social Security
Law, (4) National Development Plan (2007-2012).
75
The rights to health, education, work, housing and to the environment are referred
to in the government plan to guide its actions, although it doesn’t specifically speak
of rights. This does not mean the other social rights have not been considered at
all, just that there was no evident mention of them. However, the fact that they are
not mentioned in government plans doesn’t mean they are not tended to in specific
programs.
The lack of fulfillment of social rights in the country arises partly because they are
vaguely enunciated and mentioned both in the laws as in the government plans
and programs. To attempt associating social rights with government plans would
imply a citizenship approach to social policy. This means the recognition of social
rights and individual and state responsibilities to satisfy them in an implicit or
explicit social contract by belonging to a society.
From the above it is inferred that the objectives of social development policy are
defined in a fragmented and disperse manner; basic capabilities which an
individual should have access to, are not properly defined in the valid legislation,
either in the Constitution or the secondary laws. Thus, under this legal framework,
the government plans collect the legal ordainments imprecisely, lacking an
adequate correspondence between social rights and the programs that would
make them valid.
2.2.2 Program dispersion and lack of institutional coordination
Early 2007, the CONEVAL performed an exercise for initial systematization of the information available on federal social programs, building a database with variables such as type of aid, attention area, beneficiaries, coverage, focalization, regulations and budget. This information was obtained through different official sources such as the Operation Rules, guidelines, laws or regulations, program reports or memories and websites of the program coordinating dependencies.
76
The programs included for the analysis comply with the following criteria: a) they
are contained in the 2007 Federation Expenditure Budget (PEF) Economic
Functional Analysis of Programs; b) they are included in Appendixes 7, 17 and 19
of the 2007 PEF whenever they correspond to program or funds items, and c) they
come from official sources (Presidency of the Republic, SHCP and the coordinating
dependencies themselves).
Excluded were those PEF items that refer to an operative or administrative
expenditure. Also excluded were the Funds of Branch 33 because they do not
strictly represent federal programs and are direct contributions to federal states.
As can be seen on Chart 14, in 2007 the Ministry of Agriculture, Husbandry, Rural
Development, Fishery and Food (Secretaría de Agricultura, Ganadería, Desarrollo
Rural, Pesca y Alimentación, SAGARPA); the Ministry of Public Education
(Secretaría de Educación Pública, SEP) and the Ministry of Health (Secretaría de
Salud, SSA) were the dependencies that coordinated the largest number of federal
social programs. Little over 73 percent (145) of the programs were concentrated in
five dependencies: the SAGARPA with 21 percent of the total; the SEP with 16
percent; the SSA with 15 percent; the SEDESOL with 11 percent, and bodies
coordinated by the SHCP with 10 percent. The remaining 27 percent (34) percent
of the programs is distributed throughout nine dependencies.
77
Table 14
Programs and their budget by dependency Note: The budget assigned refers to the year 2007. Note: The Oportunidades and Temporary Employment Program (Programa de Empleo Temporal, PET) budget is distributed among the different dependencies that operate them, however, for purposes of the 2007 CONEVAL Inventory, they were grouped in SEDESOL. Source: 2007 CONEVAL Inventory (Inventario-CONEVAL). The 2007 PEF assigned over 159 billion pesos to this group of federal social
programs. 76 percent of the budget was concentrated in 85 programs under the
SEDESOL, the SSA and SAGARPA. Out of the program total, close to 25 percent
of programs have as attention area the agricultural sphere, 14 percent of programs
are targeted to education, science and technology, 12 percent to the promotion of
the economic or productive activity and 7 percent to infrastructure. On Chart 15 we
see there’s a significant number of federal programs in different areas of attention
with a low budget. Chart 16 presents the vocation of programs according to
attention area and their budgets.
78
Chart 15 Percentage of programs by attention area and budget
Source: 2007 CONEVAL Inventory (Inventario-CONEVAL 2007). Note: A program can tend to various areas and in some cases it is impossible to disaggregate the budget due to this variable.
The multiplicity of socio-economic problems afflicting Mexico could justify the great
diversity of programs, but it would seem this diversity more than a benefit is a
structural problem for social development policy. Except a small group of programs
with huge budgets, it is evident there is great dispersion of resources throughout
different programs, ministries and institutions, which means an atomization of the
expenditure which can be translated into a lack of effectiveness and efficiency. For
example, the fact that in 2007 there were close to 26 microcredit programs in the
Federal Government, means:
a) Possible duplicities among programs
b) Small scales, therefore they incur in high fixed costs
c) Duplicity in bureaucratic apparatuses
d) Major inter-institutional coordination problems, as well as within them
79
e) Significant problems in coordination with states and municipalities
f) Difficulty in planning social development policy
Thus, today we have a large number of programs without having a clear diagnosis
to sustain their reason to exist. Besides, the problem aggravates for each
government of legislation has incentives to create new programs, with which the
dispersion of expenditure, possible duplicities and coordination problems tend to
increase systematically.
The above shows the need to institutionally and continuously count with evaluation
and follow-up instruments for social programs allowing a comprehensive analysis
of government activity in matters of social development. From the punctual study of
the components of social policy, we would have solid basis for the improvement of
public policy in this matter.
2.2.3 Distributive Incidence of Social Programs
Professor John Scott38 analyses the distributive incidence of a subset of public
programs and shows public expenditure in social matters is distributed with quite
an ample variation, from highly regressive to highly progressive programs. The set
of programs analyzed represent close to half the projected expenditure and they
are classified based on their concentration coefficients. Through methodology, he
shows how concentrated or regressive the resources targeted to different social
items are. A positive coefficient means a regressive distribution and a negative
coefficient means a progressive distribution.
_____ 38 Scott, John. “Public Expenditure and Human Development” in 2008-2009 Report on Human Development in Mexico (“Gasto Público y Desarrollo Humano” en Informe sobre Desarrollo Humano México 2008-2009). Chart 17 reports the said study’s reports and shows:
80
1. That all the analyzed ISSSTE programs –regarding pension beneficiaries,
active workers and health- are highly regressive, which confirms the
information produced by Table 5.
2. That higher education is also highly regressive and the programs relative to
IMSS pensions are a bit less regressive;
3. That there is a group of programs, among them health in hospitals, IMSS
hospitals and electric subsidy, that are absolutely regressive;
4. That maternity and primary health programs and actions are moderately
regressive; and
5. That there is a group of programs that are either moderately progressive –
secondary school and preschool- or highly in favor of the population in
poverty conditions –primary school, SSA health services-, while
Oportunidades shows a very progressive focalization.
81
Chart 16
2006 social expenditure concentration coefficients Note: Green bars refer to targeted programs; blue bars refer to non targeted programs. Source: Scott, John. “Public Expenditure and Human Development” (Gasto Público y Desarrollo Humano) in 2008-2009 Human Development in Mexico Report (Informe sobre Desarrollo Humano México 2008-2009). First work seminar, June 26 2008, based on the following databases: ENIGH 2006; 2004 ENIGH “Social Program Module” (SEDESOL); ASERCA management bases (SAGARPA); SEP registration bases; 2006 Federal Public Account; Health National and State Accounts (Ministry of Health). All targeted programs except Oportunidades data was obtained from the 2004 ENIGH “Social Program Module”. The concentration coefficients were calculated based on the distribution of benefits received by households sorted by total current income per capita, except in the case of agricultural subsidies, which were obtained based on the distribution of benefits received by the producers sorted by the extension of land registered in the ASERCA bases.
82
Regarding education, the analysis points out that the marginal incidence of
expenditure in preschool, primary and secondary school was strongly in favor of
the population in poverty conditions –the expansion of secondary school for those
who live in extreme poverty was particularly notable-, while expenditure in middle-
higher education was moderately regressive, and in higher education had a strong
focalization towards the population with high income. However, if actions such as
the Oportunidades program improve access by the low income population to
services such as public higher education, it should be expected for the impact of
expenditure in this last item to be growingly progressive.
In the health component, this report finds that the marginal incidence of services by
the SSA has strongly focused on the poor population during the 1996-2002 period,
while IMSS services have been slightly regressive. The marginal incidence of
public expenditure on pensions has been strongly regressive.
Finally, regarding expenditure on productive functions, agricultural programs
generally have a bias towards large agricultural producers.
On the other hand, Velázquez39 analyzes the distribution of education and health
funds of Branch 33 among states and finds that the transferences do not seem to
follow redistributive criteria nor costs issues, except for the case of the FAIS. Most
of the Funds resources are distributed based on what was received in past years,
when the resources exercised in each state depended on political negotiations and
not on an analysis of their needs. With the above, it would seem there is no
efficiency or equity criterion and that it is assumed that the federal states’
conditions and needs don’t change as time elapses.
_____ 39 Velázquez. Fiscal Federalism and Decentralization (Federalismo Fiscal y Descentralización). Economy Department. Universidad Iberoamericana. 2006
83
2.2.4 Coordination of social security policy, of labor policy and of the collection of social programs
Social development policy is commonly seen as the set of social programs offered
to the population that doesn’t count with access to formal social services (regarding
education, health, daycare, credit, food aid, etcetera). However, this view of social
development usually puts aside two paramount elements that incur both in the
wellbeing of families, and in fulfillment of social rights: formal social security and
employment.
Social development began with the practice of formal social security and free
public education early the 20th Century, when the Ministry of Public Education
(Secretaría de Educación Pública, SEP) was strengthened and with the creation of
the IMSS. The idea behind this conception of social policy was founded on the
belief that education, social security and a dignified and useful job were
fundamental rights established in the 1917 Constitution.
That era’s social and theoretical conception was that society would have full
employment and therefore, that practically the entire Mexican working-age
population would be working formally. Thus, the totality of the citizenship would
have its rights covered: education (free for the worker and his family), work and
social security (via the IMSS or ISSSTE).
However, reality has been different, as was pointed out in this Report’s first
chapter: up until 2006, almost 67 percent of people with some type of employment
were not covered by formal social security; only those with formal jobs have formal
social security; given formal social security is funded via the labor market, the
creation of dignified jobs is becoming more expensive; and due to income
problems or problems of scarce access to services, not all Mexicans can enjoy the
right to education or to free healthcare.
84
To help the population which in practice has no access to the goods and services
derived from formal employment, and that in poverty and isolation conditions, a
countless number of social development programs has been created, such as
those described in previous sections: Social Provision Program (Programa de
Abasto Social) –for those who cannot have access to buy in private stores-,
Popular Insurance (Seguro Popular) –for those who have no IMSS or ISSSTE
coverage-, microcredit programs –for those who have no access to formal banking
institutions), etcetera. This group of programs has commonly been called social
development policy; however, these budgetary programs only represent around a
tenth of federal social expenditure.
With these programs, they aim to incur in the reduction of poverty, inequality, the
lack of social rights, including work; being that the lack of dignified work, social
security, quality education and health services for all, that is, the compliance of
rights, is Mexico’s structural problem.
The section above showed that social programs, at least Oportunidades and
Popular Insurance as a whole, have managed to cover aid spaces to groups in
poverty conditions not covered by formal social security, which undoubtedly
contributes to the wellbeing of poor families. However, this progress for social
development policy has some substance problems. As was said in the first part of
this Report, we count with two different types of social care, with different qualities,
which have no connection between them and therefore make it difficult to
guarantee the same social rights to all the population.
Work, both employment and real salaries, has also been explicitly absent from
social development policy for it has only been thought of as an element of
economic policy. As was shown in the first chapter, one of the factors that incurs
on the evolution of poverty, measured by income, are salaries and employment.
85
The above due to the fact that almost 65 percent of the monetary income of
families comes from the labor market. However, as was shown before, the creation
of formal jobs has been very slow and average salaries have had no significant
raise in the last 14 years.
Therefore, we have the following factors which in practice incur on social
development, but haven’t been an explicit part of social development policy:
traditional social programs; formal education, health and social security; and the
labor market.
Not taking these elements jointly has incurred in the following: a) there isn’t an
ample vision of social development; b) decisions aren’t made causing incentives to
be aligned between the elements that contribute to social development; c)
expenditure and public policy efforts have been made to reduce poverty in social
programs, but not in the labor market on in a broader social security, which causes
poverty to diminish slowly; d) opposing and counterproductive policies are
generated to improve joint wellbeing and fulfill social rights; e) in the past 20 years,
social development policy has focused on focalized social programs, which
somehow makes expenditure more efficient, but forgetting universal policies that
could improve the quality and coverage of education, health, and social security,
which are part of universal social rights.
Social development policy should incur in an orderly and clear manner, social
programs, social security and labor policy, in order not to duplicate efforts in the
aggregated design of social development policy and to achieve much more
effective changes in the fight against poverty and the access to social rights.
86
2.3 External Evaluations of Federal Social Programs
2.3.1 Institutional Context of the External Evaluation of Federal
Social Programs
External evaluation exercises began in Mexico in the nineties. A significant contribution to this regard was the launch of PROGRESA in 1997, program for which its gradual coverage planning strategy was taken advantage of, enabling an experimental-type impact evaluation. It is since 2000 when the practice of external evaluation is institutionalized by establishing it as mandatory to federal programs through the Operation Rules in the Federation Expenditure Budget Decree. From 2000 to 2006, external evaluation exercises took place whose results were presented to Congress in an annual basis. During this period, various rigorous40 evaluations on impact were made enabling to measure the program’s specific effect on the indicators that were part of the very object of the intervention. But in general, the effort of the external evaluation of federal programs resulted in partial progresses, evaluation reports had a limited effect on the improvement of programs and on government action accountability. However, although the set of evaluations undertaken helped in changing culture towards evaluation and accountability, it had some major flaws: there was no element to help evaluate programs homogenously and systematically; there wasn’t good quality control of the set of evaluations, in general, the results of many evaluations were not used to make better decisions. Likewise, evaluations had little diffusion. ________ 40 Besides PROGRESA/OPORTUNIDADES, some other programs whose impact was evaluated were the Milk Social Provision Program (Programa de Abasto Social de Leche, LICONSA), the Food Aid Program (Programa de Apoyo Alimentario, DICONSA), the Compensatory Actions to Fight Against the Educational Gap in Initial and Basic Education (Programa de Acciones Compensatorias para Abatir el Rezago en la Educación Inicial y Básica, CONAFE), the Employment Support Program (Programa de Apoyo al Empleo, STPS), the Health Protection System (Sistema de Protección en Salud, Seguro Popular) and the Hábitat Program (SEDESOL).
87
2.3.2 Systematization and Analysis of Results
Since early 2007, the CONEVAL began an effort to summarize, systematize and
analyze external evaluations performed in 2006 and 2007, in terms with the
strengths, challenges and general finds of federal programs. For the 2006 external
evaluations, 8541 evaluation reports on an equal number of programs were
analyzed and a synthesis per program was elaborated, as well as a general
synthesis that pointed out the main finds of external evaluations regarding federal
programs. This synthesis was published on CONEVAL’s website42 late 2007.
The synthesis provided general information on the main findings of external
evaluations and general recommendations to programs. The report shows nine
recommendations: 1) Elaborate operation rules (or applicable regulations)
reflecting more clearly the program’s internal objectives and logic and consistency;
2) Clearly define the target population; 3) Ensure the existence of sufficient and
qualified personnel for the operation and monitoring of the program; 4) Foster
compliance with deadlines; 5) Promote the effective coordination between
institutions, the federation and states and between programs to boost the benefits
granted; 6) Improve the quality of the goods and services granted by the programs;
7) Increase the diffusion and promotion of programs; 8) Implement effective
budgetary control mechanisms; and 9) Generate and use evaluation and
monitoring systems with information on useful and reliable results indicators.
_________ 41 In spite of the fact that during 2006, a larger number of evaluations took place, only 85 reports were available by the month of April 2007. 42 www.coneval.gob.mx
88
2.3.3 Main Findings For the 2007 external evaluation –delivered on March 2008- we proposed to use a
homogenous instrument allowing gathering common information for federal
programs, in six subjects: design, strategic planning, coverage and focalization,
operation, perception of the target population and results. The evaluation
instrument –Consistency and Results Evaluation- consisted of specific questions
on the features of the programs in these six subjects, together with their respective
justifications, besides proposals and suggestions for improvement by the external
evaluators. 80 % of the questions had binary answers in order for the answers and
subsequent analysis to be more homogeneous. Based on the reports on 106
programs, the CONEVAL analyzed, revised and systematized the information.
Below are some of the most relevant results43.
The distribution by coordinating dependency44 of the 106 Consistency and Results
Evaluation reports is shown on Chart 17. Over 50 %t of federal programs with
external evaluations are concentrated in the SEP, SEDESOL and SHCP zoned
bodies.
______ 43 The external evaluations, as well as the Terms of Reference for the Consistency and Results Evaluation can be found at CONEVAL’s website, www.coneval.gob.mx 44 The coordinating dependencies are the institutions that formally coordinate the different social programs of the Federal Public Administration.
89
Chart 17 Number of Programs with Consistency and Results External Evaluations
by Dependency or Coordinating Entity
Note: EIASA, DIF, zoned in the Ministry of Health, has four evaluation reports according to the number of programs that
manage this strategy.
In the analysis performed by CONEVAL on the content of program evaluation
reports, the proportion of positive answers to binary questions is 51 percent. In
general, this shows significant areas for improvement in programs, particularly
regarding the subjects of coverage and focalization, strategic planning and results.
90
Chart 18 2007/2008 Consistency and Results Evaluations Scores
106 Federal Programs Note: NA refers to Not Applicable; DA, didn’t answer and II, there isn’t sufficient information to answer the question. Source: CONEVAL elaboration based on the delivered evaluation reports and using a subset of questions from the 2007/2008 consistency and results evaluation. Besides the information generated from each social program, analyzing the
general finds resulting from the set of evaluations is also important. Thus, the
breakdown of the general finds into each of the 2007 Consistency and Results
Evaluation subjects is shown in the following tables.
Below is a series of tables with the results of the evaluations of 106 programs on
the subjects mentioned above. For the subject of design, the aspects analyzed
covered the identification of the problem, the population to service, the causal logic
and the monitoring instruments. In general, we see that although there is an
adequate identification of the problem, the definition of the population programmed
to be cared for in a given period of time (target population) and the total population
presenting the problem and/or need (potential population), as well as the
construction of appropriate indicators is not evaluated as sufficient for a major
proportion of programs.
91
Table 15
General finds for the subject of Design Consistency and Results Evaluation
SUBJECT FINDS
Identification of the problem
71% of programs clearly identify the problem they tend to
67% count with objectives that correspond to the solution of the problem they tend to
Population to service
58% have an adequate design to reach their purpose and tend to the target population
47% of programs have defined the total population presenting the problem
Causal logic
76% of programs are clear about the fact that the achievement of their purpose contributes to the solution of a development problem or the consecution of strategic objectives of the dependencies and entities
44% count with a clear and valid indicator matrix (vertical logic) 66% have a design clearly expressed in the regulations
50% of programs defined necessary and sufficient public goods and services for the achievement of their purpose
Monitoring instruments
41% have clear, relevant, economical, monitorable and adequate indicators
35% of programs can measure the level of achievement of their expected results at each level of their objectives (horizontal logic)
Table 16 shows that in the subject of strategic planning, a large proportion of
programs lack adequate planning instruments, particularly in the medium and long
terms. Besides, there is a low percentage of programs targeted towards results in
the existing planning.
Table 16 General finds for the subject of Strategic Planning
Consistency and Results Evaluation
SUBJECT FINDS
Targeted results
58% of programs use evaluation results to improve their performance
51% have relevant tests and specific deadlines for their performance indicators
49% have a sufficient number of indicators targeted towards results that reflect their purpose
21% of plans clearly establish the results they aim to reach
Planning instruments
25% count with short, medium and long term strategic plans
23% of plans establish indicators, goals, strategies, policies and work schedules
27% of programs have mechanisms to establish and define goals and indicators
92
One of the main challenges in general federal programs face today, as shown on
Table 17, has to do with the definition and quantification of the target population
and with the definition of an average coverage strategy.
Table 17
General finds for the subject of Coverage and Focalization Consistency and Results Evaluation
SUBJECT FINDS
Definition of Target
Population and Coverage Strategy
24% of programs quantify their target and potential population 25% have an adequate progress to comply with their purpose 23% count with a short, medium and long term coverage strategy
21% of programs are considered to have the adequate coverage strategy
In general, the operation of programs, measured through compliance with
regulations, the existence of standardized procedures to process applications and
the existence of the needed infrastructure, is evaluated satisfactorily, as is shown
in Table 18.
Table 18 General finds for the subject of Operation
Consistency and Results Evaluation
SUBJECT FINDS
Compliance with regulations
84% of programs comply with the regulations established to deliver aid
89% have documentary evidence to prove they comply with the established execution processes
Effectiveness in their
operation
76% have adequate procedures to process applications for aid
72% have standardized and adequate processes to select their projects and beneficiaries
Necessary infrastructure
80% count with an organizational structure that allows them to reach their purpose
80% have systematized information that allows providing appropriate follow-up to the execution of works and/or actions
84% of programs have effectiveness indicators for their operation
61% have adequate systematized information in the management and operation of their program
93
For the subject of perception of the target population, we must specify that the
2007 evaluation provides information regarding the existence and features of the
means used to measure this perception. In this sense, we see that little over half of
the programs count with a measurement, but not all have performed a rigorous
measurement.
Table 19 General finds for the subject of Perception of the Target Population
Consistency and Results Evaluation
SUBJECT FINDS Measurement of
perception by beneficiaries
54% of programs count with instruments to measure the target population’s degree of satisfaction
37% present objective information
Finally, as can bee seen on Table 20, external evaluation reports point out there is
a low proportion of programs gathering information, whether through external
evaluations on their impact or through follow-up, about indicators on the
accomplishment of the programs’ general and ample objectives.
A central element that stands out from Consistency and Results Evaluations, is
that the programs have a good evaluation on the operative part, but the evaluation
of the elements that have to do with results –measurements of results, strategic
planning, determination of the potential and target population, perception of the
population serviced- are deficient. An important challenge in social policy is to
continue strengthening the operative processes, but focusing on results-based
management.
94
Table 20 General finds for the subject of Results
Consistency and Results Evaluation
SUBJECT FINDS
Information on the progress in accomplishing
objectives
36% of programs have proved an adequate progress in reaching their objectives
42% of programs gather true and appropriate information on the indicators that measure their objectives
26% have carried out external evaluations that allow them to measure their impact
2.4 In Summary. Challenges of Social Development Policy
Social rights set minimum elements to construct diagnostics regarding existing
needs and to guide social policy. However, social rights are not approaches of how
to reach what is being valued. Therefore, general strategies are required, usually
materialized in specific government plans and programs, which concrete objectives
and mobilize instruments and resources.
A possible structuring scheme for social policy is described in the following chart:
95
Flowchart 1
A structure for the analysis of the design of social development policy
Within this structure, a logical connection is established between the concept of
development and the policy objectives, and that from them should derive social
rights to guide government plans. Likewise, the objectives of social programs, of
the social security system and economic policy, especially labor policy, should be
congruent between them and consistent with government plan strategies. On the
other hand, program instruments and resources should have adequate resource
appropriation (reducing poverty or inequality, fulfilling social rights), with an
ongoing improvement in the quality of services.
96
The picture emerging from the evaluation of social policy is different to this
scheme. First, there is no institutional conception of what social development
means, therefore the general objectives of public policy are constructed ad-hoc,
sometimes appealing to a notion of wellbeing associated to having resources, and
others thinking this is a subjective perception.
In any case, the absence of this notion translates into the lack of a basis to clearly
establish social rights. If we wanted to infer a conception of the objectives of social
policy and development based on existing social rights, we wouldn’t progress much
either, for they are few and are enunciated imprecisely.
With the inexistence of a clear definition of social rights, they are not an explicit
basis for government plans. The plans don’t translate into a coordinated set of
programs and policies and therefore the three main elements for social
development: the set of social programs, social security policy and economic
policy, especially labor policy, are not coordinated. Finally, when we examine the
programs and actions in particular, we find they frequently have regressive
impacts. This picture, summarized on Flowchart 2, raises the need to reorganize
Mexican social policy from its conceptual foundations.
97
Flowchart 2 Conclusions: A structure for the analysis of the design
of social development policy The progresses seen in social development in the last 14 years –important
increases in the coverage of social services, progress in the results of some social
programs, reduction of poverty- could be boosted if social development policy were
improved, emphasizing the challenges presented herein. The concrete result would
be a greater wellbeing for the population as a whole and a better fulfillment of
social rights in subsequent years.
98
2.5 Vivir Mejor Strategy
In the past months, the Federal Government elaborated and made public the Living
Better Strategy (Vivir Mejor), as a tool to incur in the population’s wellbeing. It is
still quite premature to count with an evaluation of this Strategy, for it is in its
implementation phase and, thus, this report does not intend to perform this task.
But it is an objective of this section to pinpoint, from CONEVAL’s point of view, the
Strategy’s potential correct actions and challenges, analyzing the document
presented a few months ago, in order to incur in the Strategy’s gradual
improvement and implementation.
We have pointed out there seems not to be any clarity and coordination in the
actions included in social development policy. Besides the existence of several
federal government institutions that carry out programs and actions for social
development, there is a lack of coordination between the set of social development
programs, social security institutions (which are also part of social development)
and policies and actions in economic matters, especially labor policy.
Therefore, having a scheme that can organize and guide social development
efforts, in many cases disperse, is always welcome. According to the disclosed
document, the Vivir Mejor Strategy precisely has as an initial objective to make
public policy efforts converge to accelerate the progress of social development.
Strengths
− Acknowledge that, to improve the situation of the general population, and
especially that of poor and vulnerable families, synergy and coordination
between social policy, social protection and economic policy is needed.
− Acknowledge the importance of employment, salaries and productivity to
overcome poverty and improve social development.
99
− Continue strengthening the basic capacities of the population in poverty
conditions.
− Examine that in terms of wellbeing, it is important to have a solid universal
social protection network.
− Aim to make access to health services universal.
− Aim to improve the quality of public services.
− Combine in an orderly manner, focalized actions and programs with
universal strategies.
− Have coordination between social development and economic actions
carried out by the different institutions and dependencies of the Federal
Government, in order for them to converge and create synergies with the
Strategy’s objectives.
− The Strategy implicitly raises that the Ministry of Social Development should
coordinate these efforts, with the Social Cabinet, presided by the President
of the Republic, supporting this coordination at Federal level.
− The Strategy aims to improve social cohesion and inequality in Mexico.
Challenges
− How programs, actions and strategies will be coordinated within the Federal
Government hasn’t been established clearly. In the past, this coordination
has been sought but hasn’t been achieved. Therefore, it is important to
strengthen the coordination system to prevent de dispersion of efforts.
− How the sector programs will be compatible with the Strategy –in matters of
objectives, indicators and goals- is not determined.
− To overcome the gap in matters of social security, economic growth and
productivity, besides strengthening the budgetary programs and specific
actions, the Strategy must aim for integral policies in order to achieve
synergy and coordination between the set of social programs, social security
and the performance of economy as a whole.
100
− Although the Strategy aims to improve wellbeing in different areas and
proposes universal actions and strategies, compliance with the social rights
set forth in the Constitution or in the General Law of Social Development is
not explicit.
− It is important to include indicators and goals in the Strategy.
− Greater coordination is needed with states and municipalities in the
operation and follow-up of the programs included in the Strategy.
101
CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
2.5 Conclusions Social development has had major progress in Mexico as of the early nineties:
- There has been an increase in the coverage of basic services, particularly
for the population with lower income.
- Life expectancy at birth has increased.
- Poverty has dropped significantly since 1996.
But there are also major challenges:
- 44.7 million Mexicans were poor in 200645.
- The reduction of poverty between 1992 and 2006 has been relatively slow.
- The population in poverty in urban areas is numerous.
- The recent increase in food prices affects the population’s welfare and
there’s a risk of an increase in poverty in Mexico.
- Obesity has increased and has become a grave public health problem.
- Mexico’s economic growth per capita has been very low.
- Formal employment has not grown enough, but informal employment has
grown significantly.
- Average actual salaries practically haven’t changed in 14 years.
- A significant number of Mexicans doesn’t count with access to social
security.
- Progress in the reduction of infant mortality and, especially of mother
mortality, has been very slow; the problem worsens in areas of high
marginalization and poverty.
- There is inequality of income and of access to opportunities; these problems
persist after many years.
- There is great regional inequality in terms of social development.
- A high degree of discrimination and gender inequality is reported. ______ 45 The 2008 poverty estimation will be published in 2009.
102
These challenges could be overcome in the future, if social development policy is
improved. Social development policy has had the following accomplishments:
- Social expenditure has increased systematically since 1996.
- The focalization of some social programs has made social expenditure more
efficient and progressive.
- There has been progress in the decentralization of federal resources.
- Social development policy has fostered the broadening of basic capabilities
of the poorest families.
- Social development policy has now greater institutionalization, thanks to the
LGDS and to more systematic evaluation.
- A number of programs have achieved the population’s co-responsibility,
have been able to adequate their schemes to the reality of localities and
have developed specific operation manuals.
- The set of Oportunidades and Popular Insurance (Seguro Popular)
programs has had good focalization and contributed to help families with no
access to formal social security systems.
- Oportunidades government transferences have contributed to increase the
total net income per capita of families in food poverty in rural areas by
almost 58 percent between 1992 and 2006.
- There has been major progress in making health services universal.
- The Living Better (Vivir Mejor) strategy is an instrument that aims to arrange
government action; coordinate the different institutions to reduce dispersion
and create synergies in social development, as well as being a link between
social and economic policy.
103
However, social development policy faces major challenges:
- The increase in social expenditure is associated to increases in current
expenditure, financed in good measure with oil resources.
- There is an important gap in road and communications infrastructure in the
poorest and most marginalized areas.
- The objective of social policy is fragmented and disperse.
- It is necessary to strengthen Mexico’s evaluation systems, particularly in
states and municipalities.
- Given external evaluations have not crystallized in states and municipalities,
it is impossible to count with sufficient information on the results of social
development programs and actions in states and municipalities.
- Social rights aren’t explicitly mentioned in the plans and programs.
- Social rights do not guide social development policy.
- There is a great number and dispersion of social programs.
- Insufficient coordination within and between institutions which have under
their charge social development programs and policy.
- Insufficient coordination between the federation, the states and
municipalities in matters of social development.
- The quality of some public services is deficient, particularly in the case of
education and health.
- The above is more evident when comparing the quantity and quality of
services earmarked to indigenous populations.
- A great number of social actions and programs aren’t progressive.
- There isn’t enough coordination between the set of social programs, formal
social security and labor policy, which attempts against universal social
rights, and generates few formal jobs and low salaries.
104
- Various social programs face the following challenges:
• Inadequate design.
• Unclear Operation Rules.
• Strategic planning problems.
• Difficulties to quantify the potential and target population.
• Lack of medium and long term coverage strategy.
• Absence of a definition of the target population.
• Various operation deadlines are not met.
• Lack of coordination between institutions.
• Deficient quality in different goods and services provided.
• Lack of information and accessibility to programs.
• Deficient internal monitoring schemes of the programs.
• The management of the programs privileges the operation and
compliance of standards, over Results.
• The degree of satisfaction of the serviced population is measured
neither adequately nor systematically.
- The Living Better Strategy has areas of opportunity in aspects such as:
dispersion of programs and actions; institutional coordination;
instrumentation of effective policies that produce synergies between social
and economic policy and, counting with goals and indicators that measure
its effectiveness.
105
3.2 Recommendations
Based on the results exposed in this report, the CONEVAL issues a set of
recommendations targeted to improve Mexico’s social development policy; to the
attention of the Federal Executive Power, the H. Union Congress, Federal States
and Municipalities, the Federal Public Administration’s dependencies and entities
and the following Public Federal instances that comprise the National Social
Development System: the Inter-Ministry Social Development Commission and the
National Social Development Commission:
General Recommendations Special attention by the Federal Executive Power, States and Municipalities:
1. Improve the quality of the public goods and services offered to the
population, particularly the services provided to the population in poverty.
2. Improve the coverage of the group of social policy actions to approach
compliance with the population’s social rights.
3. Put into practice a global strategy which measures the progress in matters
of quality of the goods and services and coverage. Among other actions,
this strategy should include:
a. Measure with adequate instruments the degree of satisfaction of the
population being serviced by the programs and actions.
b. Build an integral universal register which includes information about
the population being serviced by all social development programs
and actions46.
_____ 46This register should be permanently updated. We recommend assigning a population number which allows
identifying each of the individuals, to be used in conjunction with the register to measure the coverage of social
policy actions.
106
c. Advance towards a common mechanism which allows identifying
those who should be incorporated to the different social development
programs, whenever they are not of a universal nature.
4. Promote better strategic planning for social development policy allowing the
accomplishment of the objectives and improving coordination between
sectors and programs.
5. Measure Final Results.
a. Systematically present indicators that show social development policy
and programs are solving the problem they were designed to solve.
6. Continue and strengthen policies for equal opportunity among genders and
vulnerable groups.
7. Channel more resources towards communications, transportation and other
service infrastructure in order to facilitate social inclusion of geographically
marginalized social sectors.
8. Have a clear policy for the reduction of urban poverty.
Special attention by the Federal Executive Power and the H. Union Congress:
9. Promote an integral progress in complying with social rights:
a. Seek social security institutional and financing changes in order for it
to provide coverage to all Mexicans, regardless of their employment
situation.
b. Continue with strategies to achieve health service universality,
integrating formal and informal services or making them compatible.
c. Gradually reduce the social security fee costs for formal employment
to promote the creation of jobs. Having a decent job which is useful to
society is a social right and a fundamental element to systematically
reduce poverty.
107
Special attention by the Inter-Ministry Social Development Commission:
10. Improve the design of social programs:
a. Before their creation, programs should have a clear diagnosis of the
problem they wish to solve and seek public policy actions of proved
effectiveness to design the program, as is set forth by the General
Guidelines for the Evaluation of Federal Programs of the Federal
Public Administration, issued in March 2007.
b. Find synergies and prevent duplicities with other federal and local
programs.
11. Have an effective coordination between institutions and programs to
enhance the benefits that are provided:
a. Reassign programs among ministries and dependencies to make the
financial and human resource more efficient and effective.
b. Establish mechanisms that facilitate coordination between institutions
and programs.
108
Special attention by the National Social Development Commission, States and Municipalities:
12. Have better coordination schemes between the federation, the states and
municipalities for social development:
a. Share registers.
b. Count with information and systematic evaluations regarding Branch
33 funds.
c. Build and publish a National Social Development Program Catalogue
at Federal, State and Municipal levels.
13. Count with rigorous and systematic external evaluations for state and
municipalities social development policies and programs:
a. Modify local legislations in order to institutionalize external evaluation
throughout the States.
In the area of Education:
14. Improve the quality of the educational services offered strengthening
programs targeted to the indigenous population and to the population in
poverty.
15. Improve the coverage of middle and higher education.
16. Improve and broaden technical education.
In the area of Health:
17. Develop monitoring strategies for the quality of services in Mexico.
18. Guarantee universal healthcare for pregnant women during childbirth and
puerpery and for children under one year of age to reduce mother and infant
mortality, particularly in entities with higher mortality rates.
109
19. Focalize in areas of high malnutrition, particularly indigenous, effective
medium and long term strategies to improve the state of malnutrition and
strengthen the availability of high quality food given the increase of food
prices.
20. Develop an effective policy to contain, reduce and prevent obesity
throughout Mexico, with special attention to infancy.
110
Recommendations to Social Programs Special attention by Federal Public Administration dependencies and entities,
which includes the Ministry of Treasure (SHCP):
1. Substantially improve strategic planning of programs and institutions:
a. Although the regulations do not establish it, it is important for
programs to have medium and long term strategic plans that include:
their medium and long term objectives, appropriate indicators,
adequate goals and coverage strategy.
2. Estimate the potential and objective population and have a coverage
strategy:
a. To clearly know the program aims to improve a public policy problem
it is important to know how generalized the program is and therefore
estimating the potential population is convenient.
b. Within its strategic planning, the program should have a medium and
long term coverage strategy.
3. Strengthen the Operation:
a. Count with systematized information for the program’s operation.
b. Elaborate Operation Rules that more clearly reflect the program’s
objectives and guarantee consistency between its objectives, goals
and processes.
c. In the case of programs with participation by states and
municipalities, have a greater coordination, measurement and follow-
up of works, goods and services.
4. Improve compliance with deadlines:
a. Overcome the recurring breach of deadlines foreseen for the delivery
or execution of the resources or effective dates for the operation of
the programs.
111
b. Regulation is excessive and it will be necessary to speed it up.
5. Improve the information and accessibility of social programs.
6. Programs, dependencies and entities should follow-up the aspects
susceptible to improvement, derived from external evaluations, according to
the mechanism issued for said purpose by the CONEVAL, the Ministry of
Treasure (SHCP) and the Ministry of Public Function during 2008. Through
this mechanism, the use of the information derived from external evaluations
will be systematized in order to improve the performance of social
development programs and policy.
112
BIBLIOGRAPHY
– Alducin, Enrique (2001) “Social cohesion, democracy and trust. In: De María and
Campos, Mauricio y Sánchez, Georgina (eds.) Are Mexicans united? The limits of
social cohesion. ("Cohesión social, democracia y confianza". En: De María y
Campos, Mauricio y Sánchez, Georgina (eds.) ¿Estamos unidos los mexicanos?
Los límites de la cohesión social.) Mexico. Editorial Planeta Mexicana, publishers.
– Aragonés, M. and Ek Garfias, F. 2008. “Dispersion and Social Policy”
(“Dispersión y Política Social”). Mimeo.
– Atkinson, Tony et. al. (2002) Social indicators. The EU and social inclusión. U.K.,
Oxford University Press.
– Interamerican Development Bank (Banco Interamericano de Desarrollo, BID)
(2005) Social cohesion in Latin America and the Caribbean. Analysis, action and
coordination. (La cohesión social en América Latina y el Caribe. Análisis, acción y
coordinación. Washington. Interamerican Development Bank (Banco
Interamericano de Desarrollo). Recovered from: www.iadb.org (2007, May 24)
– World Bank. 2004. “Chapter 4: Public Expenditure, Poverty and Inequality” in
Poverty in Mexico: an Evaluation of the Conditions, Trends and Government
Strategies, Mexico (Report no. 28612-ME). (“Capítulo 4: Gasto Público, Pobreza y
Desigualdad” en La pobreza en México: una Evaluación de las Condiciones,
Tendencias y Estrategias del Gobierno, México, (Reporte 28612-ME).) World Bank
2004, 350 p.
– Behrman, J. and J. Hoddinott (2000) “Evaluation of the impact of PROGRESA in
the size of Preschool Children”, in More Opportunities for poor families.
(“Evaluación del impacto de PROGRESA en la talla del niño en edad Preescolar”,
en Más Oportunidades para las familias pobres.) Results Evaluation of the
Education, Health and Food Program. Washington, D.C., International Food Policy
Institute (IFRPI), 2000.
– Economic Commission for Latin America and the Caribbean (Comisión
Económica para América Latina y el Caribe, CEPAL) (2007) Social cohesion;
113
inclusión and sense of belonging in Latin America and the Caribbean (Cohesión
social: inclusión y sentido de pertenencia en América Latina y el Caribe). Santiago
de Chile. CEPAL.
– National Council to Prevent Discrimination, Studies, Legislation and Public
Policies Joint Chief Executive Office (Consejo Nacional para Prevenir la
Discriminación, Dirección General Adjunta de Estudios, Legislación y Políticas
Públicas). Gender Discrimination Prevention and Sanction Strategy (Estrategia de
Prevención y Sanción a la Discriminación de Género). Analysis and Proposals,
based on the SEDESOL-CONAPRED First Nacional Survey on Discrimination in
Mexico (Análisis y Propuestas, a partir de la Primera Encuesta Nacional sobre
Discriminación en México de SEDESOL- CONAPRED). Work document No. E-12-
2006. Mexico, 2006, 111 pp.
– Cordera, Rolando. “Market and Equality: from State crisis to social policy,” in:
Social policy in Mexico: trends and perspectives (“Mercado y Equidad: de la crisis
del Estado a la política social” en: La Política social en México: tendencias y
perspectivas.) Rolando Cordera Campos and Carlos Javier Cabrera Adante,
coordinators. Faculty of Economy, UNAM, 2007.
– Cortés Fernando, Banegas Israel and Solis Patricio. Poor with opportunities
(Oportunidades): Mexico 2002-2005 (Pobres con oportunidades: México 2002-
2005). Sociological Studies (Estudios Sociológicos), México, 2007, XXV 73 p.
– Datt, G. y M. Ravallion, "Growth and redistribution components of changes in
poverty measures, A decomposition with applications to Brazil and India in the
1980s" in Journal of Development Economics 38, 1992, 275-295 pp.
– De la Torre, Rodolfo, López-Calva Luis Felipe and Scott John. Social expense in
the General Law for Social Development, (El gasto social en la Ley General de
Desarrollo Social), Working Papers SDTE 331, Economy Division, CIDE, Mexico.
2005.
– De la Torre Rodolfo. Social Development Law. Analysis and Evaluation of PAN,
PRI and PRD Draft Bills. (Ley de Desarrollo Social. Análisis y Evaluación de
114
Anteproyectos de Ley del PAN, PRI y PRD.) Human Development Papers. No. 4.
SEDESOL. Mexico. 2002.
– Official Journal of the Federation (Diario Oficial de la Federación), April 30, 2002.
– Easterly, Williams, Ritzan, Joseph and Woolcock, Michael (2006) Social
cohesion, institutions and growth.
Washington. Center for Global Development
– Elbers, Chris, Lanjouw, J.O., and Lanjouw P. “Micro-level estimation of poverty
and inequality” in Econometrics 71 (Econométrica 71), 2003, 355-364 pp.
– Escobar, Agustín and Mercedes González de la Rocha. (Quantitative Evaluation
of the Oportunidades Human Development Program: 2001-2002 impact follow-up,
communities with 2,500 to 50,000 inhabitants (Evaluación Cuantitativa del
Programa de Desarrollo Humano Oportunidades: seguimiento de impacto 2001-
2002, comunidades de 2,500 a 50,000 habitantes. CIESAS. December 2002.
– Escobar Latapí Agustín and Erick Janssen. Migration, the diaspora and
development: The case of Mexico. International Institute for Labor Studies.
Discussion paper DP/167/2006. http://www.ilo.org/inst
– Feres, Juan Carlos (2006) Towards a social cohesion indicator system in Latin
America. Project advance. (Hacia un sistema de indicadores de cohesión social en
América Latina. Avance de proyecto.) Panama. Address presented during the
seminar: Social cohesion in Latin America and the Caribbean: a peremptory
revision of some of its dimensions, September 7 and 8.
– Freyermuth Enciso Graciela (CIESAS-Sureste), Ivonne Villalobos (UAM-A) ) ;
Hilda Argüello (CIESAS-Sureste) y Cecilia de la Torre (CIESAS-Sureste).
Obstetric Urgency and Popular Knowledge in Tenejapa, Chiapas. Perinatology and
Human Reproduction (Urgencia Obstétrica y Saber Popular en Tenejapa, Chiapas.
Perinatología y Reproducción Humana). Vol. 20, No.4; October-December 2006.
– Gertler, Paul. “The impact of PROGRESA on health”, in More Opportunities for
poor families. Results Evaluation of the Education, Health and Food Program. (“El
impacto de PROGRESA sobre la salud”, en Más Oportunidades para las familias
115
pobres. Evaluación de Resultados del Programa de Educación, Salud y
Alimentación.) Washington, D.C., International Food Policy Institute (IFRPI), 2000.
– Grupo de Economistas y Asociados. External Evaluation of the Rural Provision
Program, DICONSA S.A. de C.V. (Evaluación Externa del Programa de Abasto
Rural, DICONSA S.A. de C.V.) Fiscal Year 2002. Mexico, D.F. 2003.
– Nacional Public Health Institute (Instituto Nacional de Salud Pública). First
evaluation of the impact of LICONSA fortified milk on the state of nutrition of
children who benefit from the Social Provision Program (Primera Evaluación de
Impacto de la leche fortificada LICONSA en el estado de nutrición de los niños
beneficiarios del Programa de Abasto Social). Cuernavaca, Mor., INSP, 2004.
– Levy Santiago. Good Intentions, Bad Outcomes: Social Policy, Informality and
Economic Growth in Mexico. Brookings Institution Press, 2008.
– Mexico, Ministry of Health, Health: Mexico 2006 Information for Accountability
(México, Secretaría de Salud, Salud: México 2006 Información para la Rendición
de Cuentas). México, SSA, 2007,278 p.
– Mora, J. “Results Evaluation Section”, in 2007 Consistency and Results
Evaluation of the Oportunidades Human Development Program (“Apartado de
Evaluación de Resultados”, en Evaluación de Consistencia y Resultados 2007 del
Programa de Desarrollo Humano Oportunidades), Instituto Tecnológico y de
Estudios Superiores de Monterrey, Mexico City Campus (ITESM-CCM), 2008.
– Oehmichen Bazán, Cristina. State Reform (Reforma del Estado). Social policy
and indigenism in Mexico, 1988-1996 (Política social e indigenismo en México,
1988-1996). Mexico, Institute for Anthropological Research (Instituto de
Investigaciones Antropológicas, UNAM, 1999).
– Palacios Escobar, Ángeles. “Differences, limitations and scope of the strategies
to fight poverty in Mexico,” in The Social policy in Mexico: trends and perspectives
(“Diferencias, limitaciones y alcances de las estrategias de combate a la pobreza
en México”, en La Política social en México: tendencias y perspectivas. Rolando
Cordera Campos and Carlos Javier Cabrera Adante, coordinators. Faculty of
Economy, UNAM, 2007.
116
– United Nations Development Programme. Report on Human Development:
Mexico 2002, UNDP, Mexico, 2003, 146 pp.
– Rivera Dommarco Juan A. and Jaime Sepúlveda Amor. “1999 Nutrition Survey
Conclusions: translating results into public policies on nutrition” (“Conclusiones
sobre la Encuesta Nacional de Nutrición 1999: traduciendo resultados en políticas
públicas sobre nutrición”). Mexico Public Health (Salud Pública México) 2003;45
supl 4:S565-S575
– Rivera J A, Sotrés-Alvarez D, Habicht JP, Shamah T, Villalpando S. Impact of
the Mexican Program for Education, Health and Nutrition (Progresa) on rates of
growth and anemia in infants and young children. A randomized effectiveness
study. JAMA 2004;291:2563-2570 pp.
– Scott, John. “Public Expenditure and Human Development” in 2008-2009 Report
on Human Development in Mexico (“Gasto Público y Desarrollo Humano” en
Informe sobre Desarrollo Humano México 2008-2009). First work seminar, June
26, 2008
– Székely Pardo Miguel and López Calva Luis Felipe et. al. Carried out the first
poverty map exercise with 2000 information. “Putting income poverty and inequality
on the Mexico Map” in Mexican Economy (“Poniendo a la pobreza de ingresos y la
desigualdad en el mapa de México” en Economía Mexicana), Nueva Época, CIDE,
vol. XVI, no, 2, second semester, Mexico, 2007, 239-303 pp.
– Scott John. Redistributive efficiency of programs against poverty in Mexico.
(Eficiencia redistributiva de los programas contra la pobreza en México). Work
Document No.307. Mexico, D.F. Economy Division, Center for Economic Research
and Education (Centro de Investigación y Docencia Económica, CIDE), 2004.
– Schultz, P. “The impact of Progresa on school enrollment” in More Opportunities
for poor families. Results Evaluation of the Education, Health and Food Program.
(“El impacto del Progresa sobre la inscripción escolar”, en Más Oportunidades
para las familias pobres. Evaluación de Resultados del Programa de Educación,
Salud y Alimentación.) Washington, D.C., International Food Policy Institute
(IFRPI), 2000.
117
– Velázquez. Fiscal Federalism and Decentralization (Federalismo Fiscal y
Descentralización). Economy Department. Universidad Iberoamericana. 2006
– Villalpando S, Shamah T, Rivera J, Lara Y, Monterrubio E. “Fortifying milk with
ferrous gluconate and zinc oxide in a public nutrition program reduced the
prevalence of anemia in toddlers” in J Nutr 2006;136: 2633-2637 pp.
118
Appendixes
Table A1 Percentage of people in poverty conditions
and statistical significance of changes, 1992 - 2006 1 Food poverty: refers to people whose income is below the required to cover the food needs corresponding to the requirements established by the INEGI – CEPAL food basket. 2 Capabilities poverty: refers to people whose income is below the required to cover the basic consumption pattern in food, health and education. 3 Patrimony poverty: refers to people whose income is below the required to cover the basic consumption pattern in food, clothing and footwear, housing, health, public transportation and education. 4 Hypothesis testing is two-tailed and with a 0.05 significance level. Source: CONEVAL estimations based on the 1992, 2000, 2004 and 2006 ENIGHs
119
Table A 2 1992 – 2006 evolution of poverty with standard errors *
Households * The figures correspond to the new databases that incorporate modifications made after the demographic conciliation performed by the INEGI and the CONAPO. 1 Food poverty: refers to households whose income per capita is below the required to cover the food needs corresponding to the requirements established by the INEGI – CEPAL food basket. 2 Capabilities poverty: refers to households whose income per capita is below the required to cover the basic consumption pattern in food, health and education. 3 Patrimony poverty: refers to households whose income per capita is below the required to cover the basic consumption pattern in food, clothing and footwear, housing, health, public transportation and education. 4 Standard errors are reported in percentages Source: CONEVAL estimations based on the 1992 to 2006 ENIGHs
120
Table A 3
1992 – 2006 poverty lines 1 Monthly net income per capita in pesos in august of each year. 2 Food poverty line: Minimum amount of monthly total net income a person should have to cover their basic food needs. 3 Capabilities poverty line: Minimum amount of monthly total net income a person should have to cover their basic food, health and education needs. 4 Patrimony poverty line: Minimum amount of monthly total net income a person should have to cover their basic food, health, education, clothing and footwear, public transportation and housing needs. 5 For years prior to 1993, the adjustment was made given the change to new pesos (nuevos pesos). 6 Engel coefficients of the year 2000 are used in order to make the estimations comparable. SOURCE: CONEVAL estimations based on information by Banco de México http://www.banxico.org.mx
121
Table A 4 Distribution in percentages at state level of people in poverty conditions and
absolute figures, using the imputation methodology, 2005 Source: CONEVAL estimations based on the 2005 2nd Population and Housing Count and the 2005 ENIGH.
1
Table A 5 Total population, social gap indicators, index and degree, marginalization index and level, by federal state, 2005
2
1 For the construction of the social gap index, the average occupants per room natural logarithm was used. Source: the social gap indicators, index and degree are CONEVAL estimations based on the 2005 2nd Population and Housing Count The marginalization index and level of marginalization are estimations by the CONAPO based on the 2005 2nd Population and Housing Count 1 For the construction of the social gap index, the average occupants per room natural logarithm was used. Source: the social gap indicators, index and degree are CONEVAL estimations based on the 2005 2nd Population and Housing Count The marginalization index and level of marginalization are estimations by the CONAPO based on the 2005 2nd Population and Housing Count