asian approaches to social mobility: experience, lessons ... · research and policy area. while...

Asian Approaches to Social Mobility:

Experience, Lessons & Opportunities for Cooperation

August 21-22, 2014 Colombo, Sri Lanka

DRAFT—For internal review only. Please do not circulate.

of 17

INTRODUCTION

Organized jointly by the Korea Development Institute (KDI), The Asia Foundation (TAF) and the Centre for Poverty Analysis Sri Lanka, (CEPA), with funding support from KDI and TAF, the “Asian Approaches to Development Cooperation” (AADC) dialogue series brings together development experts and government officials from the Asia region and beyond to share perspectives and to facilitate mutual learning between and among “emerging” and “traditional” development actors. After a planning meeting in Seoul in December 2010, KDI and TAF convened three workshops over the course of 2011 in Kuala Lumpur (March), Colombo (June), and Seoul (September). The 2011 dialogues culminated with a side event at the Fourth High Level Forum on Aid Effectiveness (HLF-4) in November in Busan, Korea, the world’s largest and most important gathering for discussing issues of international development and foreign aid. The conference edition of “Emerging Asian Approaches to Development Cooperation,” authored by participants in the AADC series, was released at the HLF-4. In 2012, the AADC dialogues focused on the theme of development cooperation and pro-poor, inclusive growth. Over 40 participants convened in both New Delhi (March) and Beijing (June) for the fifth and sixth meetings in the dialogue series. An authors’ workshop and a public conference, both held in Seoul, followed in November. The authors’ workshop hosted by KDI enabled focused discussion on the forthcoming publication, Inclusive Growth and Development Cooperation: Experiences and Lessons from Asia. The 2013 AADC dialogues focused on providing an opportunity for knowledge exchange on the theme of climate change. The April meeting in Seoul highlighted climate change mitigation, low carbon development, and green growth strategies. In August, the complementary issues of climate change adaptation (CCA), disaster risk reduction (DRR), and disaster management (DM) were discussed in Vietnam and a final authors’ workshop was held in Bangkok in December. In 2014, the dialogues feature the issue of social mobility in Asia. This report covers the proceedings and outcomes of the meeting in Colombo which featured speakers and experience from across the region. An authors’ workshop will be held in Seoul in November.

OBJECTIVES OF DIALOGUE SERIES • To clarify and raise awareness of how Asian development actors operate: their objectives,

principles, motivation, and funding levels. • To contribute Asian views to the international dialogue on development cooperation

effectiveness and architecture, particularly in connection with follow-up to the HLF-4 and the shaping of the post-2015 global development agenda.

• To promote mutual interest, learning, understanding, and opportunities for collaboration

between and among development partners. • For 2014: To address how development cooperation from traditional and Asian providers

can contribute towards social mobility with poverty reduction and increased sustainable growth, and

• To make specific policy contributions and recommendations from Asian actors on how to address social mobility challenges.


of 17

OVERVIEW OF COLOMBO DIALOGUE The Colombo conference closely examined social and economic mobility across Asia, a growing research and policy area. While Asia has had remarkable success in fighting poverty, not enough of the region’s economic prosperity is reaching its poorest people. Jointly organized by The Asia Foundation and the Korea Development Institute (KDI) and the Centre for Poverty Analysis Sri Lanka (CEPA), the 2014 AADC meeting in Colombo focused on knowledge exchange on how historical, economic, political, and social factors have enabled social and economic mobility across Asia. The discussions in Colombo sought lessons from the historical experiences of social mobility in Korea and Australia, and examined how key ingredients of social mobility such as education and employment have impacted populations in Mongolia and India. The experts also discussed the impacts of migration migration on the lives of Filipinos, Bangladeshis, and Malaysians, and explored how mobility has intersected with ethnicity, gender, and religion in Sri Lanka and India. Discussions also considered at how political systems and institutions in China, Thailand, and Vietnam have shaped the mobility prospects for their citizens. The program also included a visit to the village of Seenigama, where sustained and targeted community based interventions by a local charity have bridged the urban rural divide and improved the lives and livelihoods of thousands. Countries participating at the dialogue included: Australia, China, India, Malaysia, Mongolia, South Korea, Sri Lanka, Thailand, United States, the Philippines, and Vietnam. Representatives from multilateral and bilateral agencies, academia, and international organizations also participated in discussions, including: the Australian Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade, United States Agency for International Development, and The World Bank. Participants’ presentations can be accessed via KDI’s website.

KEY TERMS AADC Asian Approaches to Development Cooperation CCA Climate change adaptation CEPA Centre for Poverty Analysis, Sri Lanka DM Disaster management DRR Disaster risk reduction GDP Gross domestic product HECS Australia’s Higher Education Scheme HLF-4 Fourth High Level Forum on Aid Effectiveness KDI Korea Development Institute OECD Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development PCI Provincial Competitive Index PISA Programme for International Student Assessment SMEs Small and medium-sized enterprises TAF The Asia Foundation USAID United States Agency for International Development


of 17

SOCIAL MOBILITY: A HISTORICAL PERSPECTIVE In this session panelists discussed historical trends and analysis of factors which have shaped social mobility in upper income countries. Moderated by Dr Véronique Salze–Lozac’h (Senior Director, Economic Development, The Asia Foundation) the session featured:

Kim Taejong Managing Director, KDI School of Public Policy & Management, Korea Development Institute

Edward Archibald

Counsellor, Development Cooperation, Sri Lanka and Maldives Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade, Australia

Kim Taejong highlighted the importance of intergenerational economic mobility as a crucial determinant to the level of social dynamism and social cohesion in Korea. He noted the particular critical role played investments in human capital, through education. Korean students score well above PISA and OECD averages in core subjects and he attributed this largely to the quality and salaries of Korean teachers, who on average are compensated much higher than counterparts in the OECD. Teachers are also rotated around different districts which has an equalizing effect on the quality of education across the country. Korea has also tried to provide equal access to education, regardless of economic background. He cited the following factors as contributing to Korea’s intergenerational social mobility: Enhanced educational equity, labor market expansion from a rapid economic growth, and high educational attainment of students from poor family background. Dr Kim warned however that Korea is now suffering from jobless growth and that if the job market does not expand, Korea could experience downward mobility. Edward Archibald provided a contrast to Dr Kim’s presentation by reflecting on how in relative terms there is little evidence of intergenerational mobility in Australian education indicatorsAustralia since the 1970’s. While Australia’s Higher Education Scheme (HECS) and similar policies significantly increased the percentage of 18 – 25 years olds accessing secondary and tertiary education, research indicates Mr. Archibald noted that people from low socio-economic backgrounds remain substantially under-represented in higher education, relative to their population share. The literature points to a Factors such as mother’s educational level and schools with students from lower socioeconomic groups as important factorslow status schools are key inhibiting factors. Mr Archibald noted that the academic literature suggests a range of factors He pointed to several factors which may dampen social mobility in Australia: Iincreased choice in education, income differential greater inequality between suburbs, increased demand by employers for educational credentials, a trend towards assortative mating, and substantial levels of skilled migrationan increasingly skilled migrant intake.


of 17

Discussion topics included: the link between reforms to address poverty reduction and those aimed at education, the important of politics and political decision to Korea’s social mobility, the role of social capital and networks, and the differentiation between university standards and quality in Australia.

KEY INGREDIENTS OF SOCIAL MOBILITY

In this session, panelists discussed the critical factors that influence mobility opportunities and strategies that have targeted these factors. Moderated by Anthea Mulakala (Director, International Development Cooperation, The Asia Foundation), the session featured:

Véronique Salze-Lozac'h Senior Director, Economic Development The Asia Foundation

Ashwini Deshpande

Economist Delhi School of Economics

Tsetsenbileg Tseveen Head of Department of Sociology Institute of Philosophy, Sociology and Law Mongolian Academy of Sciences

In her presentation on “Economic Mobility Growth and equality of opportunities: The Asia Foundation’s contribution”, Véronique Salze-Lozac'h approached economic mobility from the income, inequality, and poverty perspectives, indicating how measure and causality vary. She also explored pathways for improving economic mobility, noting that equality of opportunity plays an important role. She identified financial capital, social capital, and human capital as key elements or economic mobility which can be bolstered by education and training, a supportive business environment and trade, social safety nets, and fiscal policies. She finally discussed Asia Foundation programs which have sought to address barriers to social mobility within these pillars. Ashwini Deshpande in her presentation on “Mapping Trajectories of Difference: Education and Socio-Economic Mobility,” looked at the links between social origin and educational attainment and social origin and occupational destination in India. Dr Deshpande presented findings from ongoing survey research which examines the specific barriers in the path to higher education for individuals from different social groups. In particular the survey tracked male, urban, Class XII graduates. Findings reveal that caste and religion have a significant effect on outcomes such as the highest level of education attained and current occupation. Furthermore,


of 17

social identities (caste, religion) continue to matter in shaping trajectories of socio-economic outcomes, even in a modern metropolis. Tsetsenbileg Tseveen in her presentation on “Social Mobility as an Impact of Economic Development in Mongolia” indicated that rapid urbanization and the expansion of the mining industry have been two critical factors contributing to social and economic mobility. Population density in the capital city of Ulaanbaatar increased to 246 persons per square kilometer in 2010 compared to 162 in 2000. This compares to the national average of 1.7 persons per square kilometer. Reasons for migration are economic and for education. Migrants, mostly from China, are flocking to centers such as Omnogobi, for employment opportunities in mining and manufacturing. These trends have altered the traditional nomadic lifestyle, and increased the social mobility of domestic and foreign migrants, most of whom are young (15 -29 years). Despite this, 43.6% of the population is still economically inactive. Discussion focused on affirmative action strategies to address the mobility gaps experienced by caste and religious inequalities; how social unrest in Sri Lanka is often driven, not by those experiencing low social mobility, but by those who have achieved high mobility but stagnate; whether programmatic interventions to address mobility challenges have revealed positive outcomes, how social stigmatization around caste continues to influence job choices in India, and how Mongolian rural-urban migration and the traditional nomadic lifestyle have impacted on educational opportunities for youth.

LABOR MOBILITY This session discussed labor market dynamics, quality employment, and the impacts of migration and remittances on social mobility. Moderated by economist, Ramani Gunatilleke the session featured:

Jorge V. Tigno

Associate Professor and Chair, Department of Political Science University of the Philippines

Samiha Huda

National Program Officer International Office of Migration, Dhaka

Athi Sivan Mariappan Research Fellow, Institute of the Malay World and Civilizations, National University of Malaysia

Nisha Arunatilake Fellow, Institute of Policy Studies, India


of 17

Jorge V. Tigno focused on “Home improvement? Migration, Social Mobility & Development in the Philippines.” Dr Tigno discussed the “culture of migration” in the Philippines which stems from the absence of local opportunities and has resulted in half of adult Filipinos willing to go and live in another country. Migration is now a key feature of Philippine society, politics, and economics and migrants have been branded as “modern day heroes.” After presenting evidence, he concluded that nuanced migration leads to nuanced social mobility. While migration had led to some level of upward mobility due to increased incomes which can afford higher education and better jobs, it has also led to some degree of downward social mobility as migrants with professional qualifications accept jobs in lower employment categories. Samiha Huda reported that 8.3 million Bangladeshis live abroad as migrants and earned the country USD 15 billion in remittances by the end of 2014. Her presentation focused on the situation facing women migrants. The government of Bangladesh has introduced a program to prepare migrant women including, training, visa facilitation, and pre-departure orientation. While remittances have impacted household well-being in Bangladesh, there are other positive and negative social impacts of migration for women. Positively, many gain self-esteem, independence, and freedom. Negatively, they are sometimes abused or tortured overseas, they may not welcomed back into their communities, and their children may suffer from neglect from their mother’s absence. Ms. Huda recommended better plans for recruitment, tracking of agents, and reintegration of women upon return. Athi Sivan Mariappan presented on “Spatial and Occupational Mobility: The Malaysian Experience.” He explored two questions: To what extent have poverty eradication programs helped to create social mobility and second, why have certain segments of the same social and economic group remained vulnerable despite the aggressive efforts? Malaysia’s poverty eradication programs and efforts to eliminate vulnerability, even within the same social and economic group, have had different outcomes when viewed over the long term. While intra-generational mobility can be an outcome of income mobility through aggressive state intervention, the same outcome was not sustainable among the intergenerational category, especially in the context of rapidly expanding modern labor market. Movement from agricultural occupations and into the modern economy paved the way for income and social mobility but the structures of inequality in an urban context retained many in the vulnerable category. The biggest beneficiary among the poverty groups is often the relatively privileged who form the new middle class. Nisha Arunatilake in her presentation on the “Impact of Migration and Remittances on Social Mobility” raised the question as to whether external migration has reduced poverty and increased social and economic mobility for Sri Lanka’s migrants and their families. She presented a few case studies and statistics which supported her conclusion that while overseas migration has positively influenced social mobility in terms of reduced poverty, diversified income, more expenditure on food, non-food, health and education, the majority of returnees do not perceive themselves to be better off socially and economically. In fact, the majority of returned migrants have found social and economic reintegration into Sri Lankan society challenging. Since evidence suggests that education, skills, and better financial literacy can improve economic reintegration she suggested that policy reform is needed to try to improve reintegration programs and enhance programs for improving financial literacy of returnees. Discussion addressed the lack of data on returnee migrants which leads to poor identification of reintegration strategies and training needs; the ethnic dimensions of migration; state apparatus


of 17

for supporting and monitoring migration and how migration alters the labor market in sending countries.


of 17

SOCIAL COHESION OR SOCIAL DIVIDE: GENDER, RACE, ETHNICITY, CASTE,

RELIGION This session discussed how gender, race, ethnicity, caste, and religion have impacted social mobility in Asia. Speakers also presented strategies to address these factors. Moderated by Priyanthi Fernando, (Executive Director Centre for Poverty Analysis, Sri Lanka), the session featured:

Tudor Silva Department of Sociology, University of Peradeniya

Nidhi Sabharwal

Associate Professor, National University of Educational Planning and Administration, India

Adrian Ngasi International Economist, Bureau for Policy, Planning, and Learning (PPL), Office of Donor Engagement, USAID

Prof Tudor Silva in his presentation on “Ethnicity and Religion as Drivers of Charity and Philanthropy in Colombo” discussed how charity and philanthropy grounded in religion and ethnicity has contributed to social mobility and social harmony in Sri Lanka. He presented two examples of an Indian Tamil social service organization among jewellery traders in Pettah which has supported Tamil workers economically and educationally, and the Gangaramaya temple in Colombo which runs a number of social and community services. Dr Silva noted that these charitable efforts can be seen as bonding social capital rather than bridging social capital and that the initiative demonstrated how the upwardly socially mobile have a sense of responsibility and obligation towards the poor within their own community. Nidhi Sabharwal presented on “Affirmative Action Policies for Social, Ethnic and Religious Minorities: The Indian Approach to Economic & Educational Development and Mobility of the Excluded Groups.” She examined how constitutional provisions and affirmative action policies on education, employment and political participation have impacted on the social mobility of scheduled castes, scheduled tribes, other backward groups, religious minorities and women in India. She also discussed the implementation and monitoring of these initiatives. Evidence suggests positive improvement for scheduled castes in employment, education and literacy, and poverty reduction. Similarly, a comprehensive gender policy has yielded visible improvements in schools, higher education enrolment and space in local governance. Despite these gains, she noted that social gaps persist because of unequal and discriminatory access to opportunities of social mobility. She recommended that the needs of the marginalized groups must be at the heart of the policy guidance in defining the approach to social mobility, and more efforts are needed to reduce the gap by strengthening and expanding the present policy of empowerment and equal opportunity.


of 17

Adrian Ngasi, in his presentation on “USAID’s Contribution in Addressing Social Mobility,” examined the relationship between inequality, growth, and social mobility. He listed some major drivers and constraints to social mobility including poverty/inequality, education, geographic barriers, tax-benefit systems, labor market, and insecurity and crime. He highlighted how USAID’s program target increased access to and improved quality in education. Programs also strengthen the workforce and address the constraints women face in business and political participation. Mr. Ngasi then gave some examples of USAID programs in Asia that address these constraints and drivers. Discussion focused on different approaches to social mobility pursued by charitable organizations, community development initiatives, government, the private sector and international aid. Participants discussed the merits and impacts of various approaches and actors.

GOVERNANCE AND POLITICAL INSTITUTIONS

This session addressed how different political systems and policies have influenced equality and social mobility in Asia. Moderated by Kim McQuay, (Country Representative Thailand,), the session featured:

Guan Xinping

Professor of Social Policy and Social Work, Dean, Department of Social Policy and Social Work, Nankai University, China

Somchai Jitsuchon Research Director - Inclusive Development, Thailand Development Research Institute

Dau Anh Tuan Legal Head, Vietnam Chamber of Commerce & Industry

Guan Xinping examined the socio-economic changes that have transpired in China over the last three decades, including economic transformation, an aging population, rapid, urbanization, globalization, and increasing democratization and social equity. All these factors have impacted on social mobility in China. He discussed anti-poverty schemes in rural and urban areas, and the challenges China faces including large income inequality, localized social services and the unequal distribution of public financial resources, the fragmentation of the social insurance system and the unequal benefits/contribution obligations among different people. He highlighted problems faced by migrants who work outside of their ‘registered’ districts and as a result face social exclusion to a range of services because of the household registration system. A comprehensive reform is underway however, toward full inclusion for this critical group of people.


of 17

Somchai Jitsuchon provided an overview of “Social Mobility and Its Implications for Welfare System: A Case of Thailand.” He noted that while Thailand was one of the World Bank’s 13 economic miracles, it has still experienced low and volatile growth over the last 20 years which has heightened economic risk and caused symptoms of the middle income trap and rising inequality. Domestic migration (both rural-urban and return to rural) has been a significant feature in Thailand’s social mobility. Interestingly, many migrants return to the rural areas because of better living conditions. At the same time there are high levels of mobility between economic sectors and types of work status (formal/informal). This has resulted in high levels of informal employment. Thailand's social mobility has always been high, especially between economic sectors and work status, but less so in terms of migration between rural-urban which was a major activity in the past. The high levels of social mobility is somewhat related to large informal employment. Dr. Somchai finally discussed Thailand’s welfare system noting that targeting is a major challenge, particularly to reach the poorest who suffer most from economic shocks. The Thai political system continues to fail in addressing this problem effectively. Dau Anh Tuan presented on “Advancing Economic Mobility for Vietnam’s SMEs: Benefits of The Provincial Competitive Index (PCI).” He explained the importance of the SME sector in Vietnam contributing 50% of the labor force and 40% of GDP. The Provincial Competitive Index was developed to address the low quality policy and public services that hinder SME success: entry costs, land access, business support services, transparency etc. IN 2013 the PCI collected views from over 8000 firms in Vietnam to rank the 63 provinces according to their performance in a range of areas. The PCI has become a benchmark for provinces to improve their service and performance and has resulted in concrete reforms across Vietnam. Furthermore it has benefitted Vietnam’s SMEs and provided a public private platform for dialogue on the business environment. The discussion raised questions around how diverse ethnicity intersects with migration and regional disparity in China, how big cities are more problematic than small cities in China for access to social services, and the concern that the growth paradigm in Thailand has eroded the benefits of the welfare system.


of 17

WELCOME DINNER, SITE VISITS & CLOSING RECEPTION

Sri Lankan Senior Minister of International Monetary Cooperation, Dr. Sarath Amunugama, provided the keynote address on August 21. He noted that Sri Lanka’s future success in achieving its 2020 vision required widespread, inclusive growth and a strategic partnership between the state and private sector to advance soft and hard infrastructure.


of 17

A site visit to Seenigama, where sustained and targeted community based interventions by a local charity, Foundation of Goodness, have bridged the urban rural divide and improved the lives and livelihoods of thousands. After a briefing from Kushil Gunasekera, Founder/Chief Trustee, participants visited and learned more about FOG’s programs such as Sustainable Income Generation through the IT Training Centre and the Business Process Outsourcing unit, the women’s training and empowerment program and the health services unit.


of 17

FUTURE DIRECTIONS In late 2014, an authors’ workshop will follow in Seoul, where participants will discuss key lessons presented at Colombo meeting and work toward curating them as a book publication.

PARTICIPANTS BANGLADESH

Samiha Huda National Programme Officer International Organization for Migration – Dhaka CHINA

Guan Xinping Professor of Social Policy and Social Work Dean, Department of Social Policy and Social Work Nankai University, China

INDIA

Ashwini Deshpande Economist Delhi School of Economics University of Delhi

Nidhi Sadana Sabharwal Associate Professor Centre for Policy Research in Higher Education National University of Educational Planning & Administration, New Delhi

MALAYSIA

Athi Sivan Mariappan Research Fellow Institute of the Malay World and Civilization (ATMA) National University of Malaysia MONGOLIA Tsetsenbileg Tseveen Head – Department of Sociology Institute of Philosophy, Sociology & Law Mongolian Academy of Sciences

PHILIPPINES

Jorge Villamor Tigno Associate Professor – Political Science Department University of the Philippines


of 17

SRI LANKA

Edward Archibald Counsellor, Development Cooperation – Sri Lanka & Maldives Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade, Australia

Nisha Arunatilleke Research Fellow Institute of Policy Studies

Kalinga Tudor Silva Senior Professor Department of Sociology University of Peradeniya

Ramani Gunatilleke Economist & Freelance Consultant Centre for Poverty Analysis

Thilani Kaushalya Junior Research Professional Centre for Poverty Analaysis

Eranga Amunugama Programme Development Specialist Centre for Poverty Analaysis

Patrick Vandenbruaene Consultant World Bank

Chandani Ramasinghe Assistant Director Ministry of Economic Development

Sugeeshwara Gunaratna 1st Secretary of the Mission Ministry of Foreign Affairs

Justin Mohan First Secretary - Development Cooperation Indian High Commission

Kim Keung Il Deputy Resident Representative KOICA

Noh Ahreum Program Assistant KOICA

Ji Eun Pyo Counsellor Korean Embassy

Pradeep Peiris Executive Director Social Scientists Association

Subhashini Abeysinghe Senior Analysy & Head of Economics Verite Research

THAILAND

Somchai Jitsuchon Research Director - Inclusive Development Thailand Development Research Institute

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA Adrian Ngasi International Economist Bureau for Policy, Planning, & Learning - Office of Donor Engagement USAID VIETNAM Dau Anh Tuan Researcher and General Director, Legal Department Vietnam Chamber of Commerce & Industry


of 17

RESOURCE PERSONS

Priyanthi Fernando Executive Director Centre for Poverty Analysis (CEPA), Sri Lanka

Vagisha Gunasekara Senior Research Professional Centre for Poverty Analysis (CEPA), Sri Lanka

KOREA DEVELOPMENT INSTITUTE

Kim Taejong Managing Director KDI School of Public Policy & Management Korea Development Institute

Jung Young-Joo Research Associate & Program Officer KDI School of Public Policy and Management Korea Development Institute

THE ASIA FOUNDATION

Gordon Hein Vice President The Asia Foundation

Anthea Mulakala Director, International Development Cooperation The Asia Foundation

Kim McQuay Country Representative - Thailand The Asia Foundation

Veronique Salze-Lozac'h Senior Director, Economic Development & Chief Economist The Asia Foundation

Dinesha deSilva Wikramanayake Country Representative - Sri Lanka The Asia Foundation

Johann Rebert Deputy Country Representative – Sri Lanka The Asia Foundation

COORDINATORS

Lee Kyung-Sook Senior Program Officer The Asia Foundation, Korea

Anton Nallathamby Director, Books for Asia & Administration The Asia Foundation, Sri Lanka

Chandrika Jayawardane Office and Communications Manager The Asia Foundation, Sri Lanka

Sunita Anandarajah Program Officer The Asia Foundation, Malaysia

SUPPORT STAFF

Hyacinth Razack Deputy Office Manager The Asia Foundation, Sri Lanka

Priyantha Ranmuni Network Administrator / Administrative Officer The Asia Foundation, Sri Lanka

Ashani Perera Receptionist The Asia Foundation, Sri Lanka

Kim Yu-jin Intern The Asia Foundation, Sri Lanka


of 17

asian approaches to social mobility: experience, lessons ... · research and policy area. while...

Documents