Measuring and Fostering Measuring and Fostering the Progress of the Progress of

Societies: Societies: Poverty and ExclusionPoverty and Exclusion

Judith Randel and Tony GermanJudith Randel and Tony Germandi@devinit.orgdi@devinit.org +44 (0) 1749 831141 +44 (0) 1749 831141

Progress, Poverty and ExclusionProgress, Poverty and Exclusion► What do we mean by progress on poverty What do we mean by progress on poverty

and exclusion and how can statistics help?and exclusion and how can statistics help? The post 2015 agenda for the eradication of The post 2015 agenda for the eradication of

povertypoverty Dis-aggregation and panel dataDis-aggregation and panel data Counting the uncountedCounting the uncounted Excluded or exploited?Excluded or exploited?

► Fostering and Measuring progress of the Fostering and Measuring progress of the global societyglobal society in the fight against poverty in the fight against poverty and exclusionand exclusion

Progress: MDGs PLUSProgress: MDGs PLUS

The MDGs have been a major force for progressThe MDGs have been a major force for progressBut…But…► Even if the MDGs are met in 2015 there will Even if the MDGs are met in 2015 there will

still be hundreds of millions of people living in still be hundreds of millions of people living in chronic povertychronic poverty

► Only one goal (education)l requires universal Only one goal (education)l requires universal access – but others are milestones access – but others are milestones

► Achieving the milestones means including the Achieving the milestones means including the ‘hard-to-reach’ poor‘hard-to-reach’ poor

Attention to universal rights and Attention to universal rights and post 2015 agenda for poverty post 2015 agenda for poverty

eradicationeradicationwhen we all signed up to the when we all signed up to the Millennium Declaration which Millennium Declaration which committed us to making the committed us to making the right to development a reality right to development a reality for everyone…we meant for everyone…we meant everyone”everyone” (Hilary Benn, UK SoS for International Development)(Hilary Benn, UK SoS for International Development)

We need to frame the way we We need to frame the way we gather and use data in the context gather and use data in the context

of the post-2015 agenda on of the post-2015 agenda on poverty eradicationpoverty eradication

►Data relevant to rights, means Data relevant to rights, means capturing multidimensionality, capturing multidimensionality, vulnerability and structural issuesvulnerability and structural issues

1.Disaggregating data on 1.Disaggregating data on poverty – need for panel data poverty – need for panel data

► We need to know who stays poor and who We need to know who stays poor and who moves into and out of poverty so we need to moves into and out of poverty so we need to measure what is happening to specific people measure what is happening to specific people over timeover time

► Between 1992 and 1999 the national poverty Between 1992 and 1999 the national poverty rate in Uganda fell from 56% to 34%rate in Uganda fell from 56% to 34%

► The panel data shows that in the same period, The panel data shows that in the same period, 30% of people moved out of poverty, but 20% 30% of people moved out of poverty, but 20% of people stayed poor and 10% fell into poverty. of people stayed poor and 10% fell into poverty.

► In other words there was a lot of mobility of In other words there was a lot of mobility of living conditions over time.living conditions over time.

Panel data and understanding impact on Panel data and understanding impact on povertypoverty

► The Rwandan government has been encouraging The Rwandan government has been encouraging farmers to make increased use of fertiliser. farmers to make increased use of fertiliser.

► Two cross section surveys show the % of farmers Two cross section surveys show the % of farmers using fertiliser increased between 2000 and 2005. using fertiliser increased between 2000 and 2005. They also show that the non-poor are more likely to They also show that the non-poor are more likely to use fertiliser than the poor. use fertiliser than the poor.

► But we don’t know whether the non-poor who used But we don’t know whether the non-poor who used fertiliser in 2005 were poor in 2000.fertiliser in 2005 were poor in 2000.

► It may be that many of them were poor in 2000 and It may be that many of them were poor in 2000 and use of fertiliser helped them become non-poor; use of fertiliser helped them become non-poor;

► OR it may be they were always non poor and the OR it may be they were always non poor and the non-poor are always more likely to use fertiliser. non-poor are always more likely to use fertiliser.

With panel data we could distinguish these two cases, With panel data we could distinguish these two cases, but without panel data we do not know the answer but without panel data we do not know the answer so we don’t know whether fertiliser use has so we don’t know whether fertiliser use has contributed to poverty reduction.contributed to poverty reduction.

Issues on panel dataIssues on panel dataLimitations of panel dataLimitations of panel data► “ “age” over time - samples representative at the age” over time - samples representative at the

beginning become less so over timebeginning become less so over time► Attrition: People drop out - they may be the most Attrition: People drop out - they may be the most

revealing.revealing.

Very few panel data sets AND difficult to Very few panel data sets AND difficult to accessaccess

► Serious difficulties of researchers and others Serious difficulties of researchers and others (including sometimes government) getting access. (including sometimes government) getting access. Panel data seen as a valuable private resource for Panel data seen as a valuable private resource for individual researchers or groups of researchers individual researchers or groups of researchers (often international). This is an issue with (often international). This is an issue with privately funded and statistics offices’ data.privately funded and statistics offices’ data.

Do we need a code of good practice (or Do we need a code of good practice (or something stronger) on access to data, something stronger) on access to data, particularly panel data? particularly panel data?

2. Counting the Uncounted2. Counting the Uncounted

Statistics often exclude those who are most Statistics often exclude those who are most vulnerablevulnerable

► Household surveys and censuses don’t Household surveys and censuses don’t cover the homelesscover the homeless

► Disabled people and unwanted relatives are Disabled people and unwanted relatives are often missedoften missed

► Difficult to count people in war zones, or Difficult to count people in war zones, or remote areasremote areas

► Children are often undercountedChildren are often undercounted► ““We also miss the rich – they don’t want to We also miss the rich – they don’t want to

participate in income and expenditure participate in income and expenditure surveys”surveys”

Death and Invisibility biasDeath and Invisibility bias

►And the most extreme form of And the most extreme form of invisibility is death – deaths due from invisibility is death – deaths due from poverty make the statistics look poverty make the statistics look better. “Holding everything else better. “Holding everything else constant, if a poor person dies, the constant, if a poor person dies, the first MDG is closer to being attained” first MDG is closer to being attained” (Ravi Kanbur)(Ravi Kanbur)

3. Respecting the perspective of 3. Respecting the perspective of poor peoplepoor people

Extremely poor people experience Extremely poor people experience multidimensional disadvantage, vulnerable multidimensional disadvantage, vulnerable to major impacts from tiny shocks. to major impacts from tiny shocks. Consequently…Consequently…

– – looking through development ‘sectors’ looking through development ‘sectors’ makes little sensemakes little sense

- Classifying response according to donors’ - Classifying response according to donors’ management categories of ‘humanitarian’ management categories of ‘humanitarian’ and ‘development’ makes even less sense.and ‘development’ makes even less sense.

Dependent or productive? Dependent or productive?

►““Njuma is 70, a widow, she depends on Njuma is 70, a widow, she depends on gifts from neighbours and earns about gifts from neighbours and earns about US$0.03 an hour gleaning corn. US$0.03 an hour gleaning corn. Economic surveys and the census Economic surveys and the census would, if they recognised her at all, would, if they recognised her at all, class her as poor and not working. The class her as poor and not working. The reality is that she is employed in some reality is that she is employed in some of the lowest paid work in the world” of the lowest paid work in the world” (David Hulme, Chronic Poverty Report)(David Hulme, Chronic Poverty Report)

Excluded or Exploited?Excluded or Exploited?

► Will very poor people be able to escape Will very poor people be able to escape poverty is they are fully included in the poverty is they are fully included in the process of development and growth – or are process of development and growth – or are they already included – just on profoundly they already included – just on profoundly disadvantageous terms?disadvantageous terms?

► What we measure will be very different What we measure will be very different according to the hypothesis we choose. If according to the hypothesis we choose. If we consider exploitation, then the statistics we consider exploitation, then the statistics need to reveal the systemic conditions that need to reveal the systemic conditions that entrench poverty.entrench poverty.

Statistics and global progress: Statistics and global progress: Following the moneyFollowing the money

►Urgent need for improved resource Urgent need for improved resource tracking- poor people and their tracking- poor people and their representatives and civil society do representatives and civil society do not have access, in a timely fashion, to not have access, in a timely fashion, to data on whether rhetoric is being data on whether rhetoric is being translated into resource flows. Major translated into resource flows. Major deficit in fostering progressdeficit in fostering progress

►

Statistics and global progress: Statistics and global progress: Social ProtectionSocial Protection

►Global access to social protection major Global access to social protection major indicator of progressindicator of progress

o The fact that we don’t have good The fact that we don’t have good statistics on chronic poverty means that statistics on chronic poverty means that it more difficult to identify appropriate it more difficult to identify appropriate policy responses.policy responses.

o role of social protection and decent role of social protection and decent workwork

o Measuring the benefits as well as the Measuring the benefits as well as the costs of social protection schemescosts of social protection schemes

Statistics and global Statistics and global progress:how much is enough?progress:how much is enough?

►Being more selective about what we Being more selective about what we need data for:need data for:

o More access, less interpretationMore access, less interpretationo How much is enoughHow much is enough

DATA AND EMPOWERMENTDATA AND EMPOWERMENT

►To FOSTER progress you need to To FOSTER progress you need to convey SCALE truthfullyconvey SCALE truthfully

►But to MEASURE progress you need But to MEASURE progress you need accuracy.accuracy.

►Problems with conflating the two – Problems with conflating the two – leading to too much unnecessary dataleading to too much unnecessary data

DATA AND EMPOWERMENTDATA AND EMPOWERMENT

Latte £1.89Latte £1.89

Ethiopian Farmer: 3pEthiopian Farmer: 3p

An outdated equation of poverty and An outdated equation of poverty and exploitationexploitation

(Get Cape, Wear Cape, Fly)(Get Cape, Wear Cape, Fly)

Following the moneyFollowing the money

►Current systems do not allow aid Current systems do not allow aid money to be tracked adequately – money to be tracked adequately – governments can’t plan, citizens can’t governments can’t plan, citizens can’t monitor and hold to accountmonitor and hold to account

►TimelinessTimeliness►Actual transactions and transfersActual transactions and transfers

Who is empowered by the Who is empowered by the data?data?

►Who holds and has access to the dataWho holds and has access to the data

Ensuring assumptions don’t Ensuring assumptions don’t create bias against extreme create bias against extreme

povertypoverty► Income is the most difficult things to Income is the most difficult things to

measure for the poorest who may measure for the poorest who may survive on combinations of gifts, survive on combinations of gifts, begging, scavengingbegging, scavenging

►ENDSENDS

G8 are G8 are largest largest

donors – donors – keeping to keeping to

their their resource resource

commitmentcommitments is vital for s is vital for achieving achieving

MDGsMDGs

ODA in 2006 $ millions: G8 countries provide most aid

0 5000 10000 15000 20000 25000

United States

United Kingdom

Japan

France

Germany

Netherlands

Sweden

Spain

Canada

Italy

Norway

Denmark

Australia

Belgium

Switzerland

Austria

Ireland

Finland

Portugal

Greece

Luxembourg

New Zealand

But aid has been virtually static since 2004. But aid has been virtually static since 2004. In 2006 G8 aid declinedIn 2006 G8 aid declined

Percentage change in total ODA 2005 to 2006 - the first full year since Gleneagles G8

Italy, -30.0

USA, -20.0

Japan, -9.6

Canada, -9.2

Germany, 0.9

France, 1.4

Non-G7 countries, 6.1

UK, 13.1

G7 countries, -8.7

-40.0 -20.0 0.0 20.0

Headline increases are not delivering Headline increases are not delivering on real resources for the pooreston real resources for the poorest

Allocation of G8 bilateral ODA in 2006

Other bilateral ODA49%

ODA to SSA less Nigeria debt

22%

ODA to Iraq11%

Nigeria debt relief18%

Non-G8 donors Non-G8 donors have led the have led the way on aid as way on aid as a % of GNI. a % of GNI.

But EU G8 But EU G8 donors have donors have

set timetables set timetables for 0.7% targetfor 0.7% target

ODA as a percentage GNI 2006:G8 countries are not as generous - other countries give a greater share of income

0.00 0.20 0.40 0.60 0.80 1.00 1.20

Sweden

Luxembourg

Norway

Netherlands

Denmark

Ireland

United Kingdom

Belgium

Austria

France

Finland

Switzerland

Germany

Spain

Australia

Canada

New Zealand

Japan

Portugal

Italy

United States

Greece

Aid was more than 0.3% of GNI from 1975 to Aid was more than 0.3% of GNI from 1975 to 1994 and has just returned to this level 1994 and has just returned to this level

– mainly thanks to debt relief– mainly thanks to debt relief

The long term trend in aid as a % GNI for the DAC. G8 donors provide about 80% of ODA, so their performance is crucial

0.2

0.3

0.4

0.5

0.6

0.7

1975

1976

1977

1978

1979

1980

1981

1982

1983

1984

1985

1986

1987

1988

1989

1990

1991

1992

1993

1994

1995

1996

1997

1998

1999

2000

2001

2002

2003

2004

2005

2006

Without debt relief (which doesn’t produce Without debt relief (which doesn’t produce much in the way of new resources), much in the way of new resources),

aid to SSA has stagnatedaid to SSA has stagnated

G8 bilateral ODA to sub Saharan Africa since 1989

$0

$5,000

$10,000

$15,000

$20,000

$25,000

1989-1990

1994-1995

2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006

US

$m

co

ns

tan

t p

ric

es

ODA for Nigeria debt from G8

G8 bilateral aid without Nigeriadebt relief

Priority to Africa has increased Priority to Africa has increased amongst G8 donors.amongst G8 donors.

Share of bilateral ODA allocated to Africa in 2006

0

7000

14000

21000

Canad

a

Franc

e

Germ

any

Italy

Japa

n UKUSA

Other bilateral

ODA to SSA

ODA to Iraq

Increased aid to reduce poverty is Increased aid to reduce poverty is affordable in the light of other G8 affordable in the light of other G8

spending prioritiesspending prioritiesShare of GNI to ODA and Military

Spending G8 donors 2006

0.0%

1.0%

2.0%

3.0%

4.0%

Canada France Germany Italy Japan UK USA

ODA

Military spending

Some grounds for optimism Some grounds for optimism and need for real leadershipand need for real leadership

► Some G8 donors making major efforts to meet pledgesSome G8 donors making major efforts to meet pledges► Paris Declaration is resulting in (modest) progress on Paris Declaration is resulting in (modest) progress on

aid quality and efforts to shift ownership to southaid quality and efforts to shift ownership to south► Public commitment is robust and sustainedPublic commitment is robust and sustained► Real progress is being made – for instance on Real progress is being made – for instance on

education (number of children in school, long term education (number of children in school, long term funding commitments) and HIV (access to ART up funding commitments) and HIV (access to ART up tenfold) tenfold)

► Evidence of affordability (eg. on social protection) Evidence of affordability (eg. on social protection) removes one excuse for donors not doing moreremoves one excuse for donors not doing more

► With renewed action at Heiligendamm, the G8 can live With renewed action at Heiligendamm, the G8 can live up to their moral responsibility and political up to their moral responsibility and political commitments to help meet MDG pledges to halve commitments to help meet MDG pledges to halve poverty – a key step to the longer term goal (agreed at poverty – a key step to the longer term goal (agreed at the 1995 Social Summit) of poverty the 1995 Social Summit) of poverty eliminationelimination

4% of the 4% of the increaseincrease in G8 countries’ income in G8 countries’ income would pay for the $25 billion promised to would pay for the $25 billion promised to

AfricaAfricaIncrease in income for G8 countries

compared to $25 billion in extra ODA to Africa

Additional aid promised for Africa, $25

billion or 4% of one years

increase in G8 income

Increase in G8 GNI over

2004 to 2005, $660 billion