Your SlideShare is downloading. ×
0
Poverty, inequality and social policies in Brazil: 1995-2009
Poverty, inequality and social policies in Brazil: 1995-2009
Poverty, inequality and social policies in Brazil: 1995-2009
Poverty, inequality and social policies in Brazil: 1995-2009
Poverty, inequality and social policies in Brazil: 1995-2009
Poverty, inequality and social policies in Brazil: 1995-2009
Poverty, inequality and social policies in Brazil: 1995-2009
Poverty, inequality and social policies in Brazil: 1995-2009
Poverty, inequality and social policies in Brazil: 1995-2009
Poverty, inequality and social policies in Brazil: 1995-2009
Poverty, inequality and social policies in Brazil: 1995-2009
Poverty, inequality and social policies in Brazil: 1995-2009
Poverty, inequality and social policies in Brazil: 1995-2009
Poverty, inequality and social policies in Brazil: 1995-2009
Poverty, inequality and social policies in Brazil: 1995-2009
Poverty, inequality and social policies in Brazil: 1995-2009
Poverty, inequality and social policies in Brazil: 1995-2009
Poverty, inequality and social policies in Brazil: 1995-2009
Poverty, inequality and social policies in Brazil: 1995-2009
Poverty, inequality and social policies in Brazil: 1995-2009
Poverty, inequality and social policies in Brazil: 1995-2009
Poverty, inequality and social policies in Brazil: 1995-2009
Poverty, inequality and social policies in Brazil: 1995-2009
Poverty, inequality and social policies in Brazil: 1995-2009
Poverty, inequality and social policies in Brazil: 1995-2009
Poverty, inequality and social policies in Brazil: 1995-2009
Poverty, inequality and social policies in Brazil: 1995-2009
Poverty, inequality and social policies in Brazil: 1995-2009
Poverty, inequality and social policies in Brazil: 1995-2009
Poverty, inequality and social policies in Brazil: 1995-2009
Poverty, inequality and social policies in Brazil: 1995-2009
Poverty, inequality and social policies in Brazil: 1995-2009
Poverty, inequality and social policies in Brazil: 1995-2009
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in...5
×

Thanks for flagging this SlideShare!

Oops! An error has occurred.

×
Saving this for later? Get the SlideShare app to save on your phone or tablet. Read anywhere, anytime – even offline.
Text the download link to your phone
Standard text messaging rates apply

Poverty, inequality and social policies in Brazil: 1995-2009

1,230

Published on

Published in: Business, Technology
0 Comments
0 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Views
Total Views
1,230
On Slideshare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
0
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
29
Comments
0
Likes
0
Embeds 0
No embeds

Report content
Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

Cancel
No notes for slide

Transcript

  • 1. Poverty, inequality and social policies <br />in Brazil, 1995-2009<br />Mr. Pedro H. G. Ferreira de Souza, Institute of Applied Economic Research (IPEA)<br />IPC-IG Seminar 7 October 2011 Brasilia www.ipc-undp.org<br />
  • 2. Brazil in the late 2000s, an overview<br />Macroeconomicstabilization (1990s) + high commodity prices + creditexpansion + effective social policies = consumer-ledeconomic boom<br />2004-2008: averageper capita GDP growthof ~3.5% per year, thehighestsincethe late 1970s<br />Thriving labor market:<br />Formalizationandjobcreation:<br /><ul><li> 1999-2003: 2.4m
  • 3. 2003-2007: 5.1m
  • 4. 2007-2011: 8.7m </li></ul>Just low-hangingfruitorsustainablegrowth?<br />Whatweretheimpactsonpovertyandinequality?<br />
  • 5. Data<br />Themostwidelyused data set is thePesquisa Nacional por Amostra de Domicílios (PNAD), a nationalhouseholdsurveyconductedbyIBGE, the central statisticsofficeofthe country.<br />It is a multi-purposesurvey similar to the General HouseholdSurveyand it hasbeencarried out yearlysincethemid-1970s (exceptonCensusyears).<br />Although it coversseveralbroadareas (education, migration, fertility, income and earnings, housing, household access to services and facilities), a special emphasis is accorded to labor market participation. <br />Other data sets that are also used on poverty and inequality research include the Pesquisa de OrçamentosFamiliares(POF), which is similar to the Income and Expenditures Survey and fielded every 5 years; the Pesquisa Mensal do Emprego (PME), a monthly labor market-oriented survey that is restricted to metropolitan areas; and the NationalCensus, which is carried out every 10 years.<br />The use of administrative data to study poverty and inequality is still incipient yet promising. <br />
  • 6. PNAD<br />Advantages<br /><ul><li>Largesamplesizes (~100k households per year);
  • 7. Comparabilityissues are minimal, especiallysincetheearly 1980s;
  • 8. Generallyconsistentandhigh-quality data;
  • 9. Coversseveralbroadareas (lotsofvariables!);
  • 10. Permitsfine-grainedyear-by-yearanalyses;</li></ul>Major Limitations<br /><ul><li>Income - especiallyproperty-relatedandnon-monetary - is underreported. This is a commonproblemofsuchsurveysand does notseem to cause anyserious bias in incomeinequalitymeasures.
  • 11. Purely a cross-sectional data set: there is a conspicuouslackofpanel data in Brazil. This is probablythesinglebiggesthurdle for povertyandinequalityresearchers; weknowverylittleaboutlifetrajectories. Fortunately, thisseems to beabout to change in thenextfewyears as IBGE is updating its householdsurveys.
  • 12. Sampling design is slightlybiasedtowardslargermunicipalities.</li></li></ul><li>Mean real per capita income(US$ PPP)<br />∆ 1995-2003: <br />+1.3% per year<br />∆ 2003-2009: <br />+7.2% per year<br />Source: Pesquisa Nacional por Amostra de Domicílios, 1995-2009<br />The World Bank’s PPP indexoverstatestherecenttrendofgrowth in Brazil. <br />Still, therehasbeensubstantialgrowth in thelatterhalfofthepastdecade: per capita GDP rose a meager3%between 1995 and 2003 and17% between 2003 and 2009.<br />Note: no equivalencescalesused.<br />
  • 13. Incomeinequality(GiniIndex)<br />Stagnantinequality<br />∆ 2001-2009:<br />-9.2%<br />Source: Pesquisa Nacional por Amostra de Domicílios, 1995-2009<br />Afterdecadesofstagnantorrisinginequality, theGiniindexdeclinedswiftly in the 2000s. Nevertheless, Brazilianincomeinequality is still considerablylarge: evenifthecurrentpace is maintained, it wouldtakeanothercoupleofdecades to reachtheinequalitylevelspresentlyfound in developed countries. <br />
  • 14. Incomegrowthbycentiles(% 1995-2009)<br />Source: Pesquisa Nacional por Amostra de Domicílios, 1995-2009<br />Householdper capita incomegrowth: 127% for thebottom 20% and54% for the top 20%.<br />Theaverageincomeofthe top 20% was27 times higherthanthatofthebottom 20% in 1995. In 2009, thisratiodropped to 18 times – a whopping 32% decline, although it is still unnacceptablyhigh.<br />
  • 15. Extreme poverty(1.25 US$ PPP/day)<br />Brazilian MDG goal<br />reached<br />in 2007<br />Source: Pesquisa Nacional por Amostra de Domicílios, 1995-2009<br />Povertyreduction dates back to the late 1990s buthaspickedupspeedsincethemid-2000s as theeconomicrecoverywascombinedwiththefallofincomeinequality. <br />In 2011, povertyeradicationwasannounced as the top priorityofthenewlyinauguratedpresident Dilma Rousseff.<br />
  • 16. AncillaryStatistics<br />Source: Pesquisa Nacional por Amostra de Domicílios, 1995-2009<br />Thesametrends are reinforcedbydifferentstatistics. Economicgrowthandthe decline ofinequalityunquestionablyreducedpoverty. Resultsholdevenifwetakeintoaccountconfidenceintervals (ie: via bootstrapped standard errors). <br />
  • 17. Brazilianexceptionalism?<br />The 2000s were a gooddecade for developingeconomiesespecially in Latin America, whereseveral countries wentthrough a periodofpro-poorgrowth.<br />Sources: GDP Growth: United Nations. World Economic Situation and Prospects 2011. Inequality: Socio-Economic Database for Latin America and the Caribbean (CEDLAS and The World Bank). Note that in order to ensure comparability CEDLAS makes a wide range of adjustments to the original data sets. The years used to estimate the Gini coefficient are as follows: Argentina, 2003-2009; Brazil, 2001-2009; Chile, 2000-2009; Colombia, 2001-2004; Mexico, 2000-2008; Peru, 2003-2009; Venezuela, 2000-2006.<br />
  • 18. Poverty, inequalityandtheState(Major public policies)<br />Stateinterventions impinge directlyandindirectlyonpovertyandinequality in a myriadofways. Some are verypro-poorand help to reduceinequality (i.e.: Bolsa Família). Others are notoriouslyregressive: theBraziliantaxcode, for instance, reliesheavilyonindirectconsumption taxes which are known to take a greatertollonthepoor. Several are eitherambiguousorhard to measure (such as theexpendituresonthe Universal Health System).<br />Themostprominentones are related to typicalareasofinterventionofthe 20th centuryWelfare States :<br /><ul><li>Education
  • 19. Minimumwage
  • 20. Social Securityandretirementpensions
  • 21. Social assistanceandcashtransfers</li></li></ul><li>Poverty, inequalityandtheState(Major public policies)<br />SelectedGovernmentExpenditures in 2006 (% of GDP)<br />Source: Mostafa, J; Souza, PHGF; Vaz, FM. Efeitos econômicos do gasto social. In: Castro, JA; Ferreira, H; Campos, AG; Ribeiro, JAC (Org). Perspectivas da Política Social no Brasil. Brasília: Ipea, 2010. Total taxrevenuefrom Ribeiro, MB. Uma análise da carga tributária bruta e das transferências de assistência e previdência no Brasil no período 1995-2009: evolução, composição e suas relações com a regressividade e a distribuição de renda. In: Castro, JA; Santos, CHM; Ribeiro, JAC. Tributação e eqüidade no Brasil: um registro da reflexão do Ipea no biênio 2008-2009.Brasília: Ipea, 2010.<br />
  • 22. Education(i)<br />Historically, Brazilhasbeenplaguedby overall lowlevelsofeducationalattainmentand a veryunequaldistributionofeducationalopportunitiesbiasedtowardstheuppermiddle classes andtherich: verylimitedaccess to primaryeducation + substantial resources werespentonfreepublicpost-secondaryeducation. <br />It is no wonderthenthateducationhasbeensingled out for decades as oneofthemaindeterminantsofinequality in Brazil, thoughdifferentauthorshavedifferentinterpretations (ie: human capital theory, credentialismandsoon).<br />TheBrazilianeducational system hasgonethroughextensivereformssincethe 1988 Federal Constitution. A strongerfocusonprimaryandsecondaryeducationwasaccompaniedby more effectivefundingarrangements. Publicexpendituresoneducationrepresented2.7%ofthe GDP in 1980 andhashoveredaround4%/4.5% sincethemid-1990s. <br />In 2000, theratioofpublicexpendituresoneducation per capita betweenpost-secondaryandprimarystudentswas a staggering11.1. In 2009, thisratiofellby more thanhalfandreached5.2 (Inep/MinistryofEducation).<br />
  • 23. Education(ii)<br />Source: Pesquisa Nacional por Amostra de Domicílios, 1995-2009<br />
  • 24. Education(iii)<br />Meanyearsofschoolingamongtheeconomicallyactivepopulationincreasedfrom5.8 in 1995 to 8.3 in 2009 (+42%).<br />However, educationalattainment is still quite low, as 8 yearsofschooling is justenough to complete themandatoryprimaryeducation.<br />TheGiniindexoftheyearsofschoolingamongtheeconomicallyactivepopulationplummetedfrom0.413 in 1995 to 0.288 in 2009 (-30%). <br />Thiswasonethekeydriving forces behindtherapidfallof labor marketinequality.<br />Source: Pesquisa Nacional por Amostra de Domicílios, 1995-2009<br />
  • 25. Minimumwage(i)<br />The Federal MinimumWagelawwasfirstenacted in Brazil in thelate 1930sandestablished more than a dozen regional minimumwages in order to takeintoaccountdifferences in costof living. Thiswaschanged in 1984, when a newunifiednationalminimumwagewascreated. <br />TheMinimumWage is adjustedannuallybutuntilrecentlytherewere no lawsregulatingsuchadjustments. As such, its real valuehasfluctuatedwildly over time. Thischanged in themid-2000s, as thegovernmentandemployers’ andworkers’ associationscame to anagreement: eachannualadjustmentwouldrecoupthepreviousyear’sinflationcompoundedwiththe real GDP growthoftheyearbeforethelast. Thiswasfinallysignedintolawearlierthisyear.<br />Afterthe Federal Constitutionof 1988 theimportanceoftheminimumwagewasgreatlyincreased as it alsobecametied to social securitybenefitsandothergovernmentprograms.<br />Brazilian states andmunicipalitiescan set higherminimumwages. Nevertheless, thishasbeenseldomthe case.<br />
  • 26. Minimumwage(ii)<br />Monthlyminimumwage (US$ PPP) – 1985.01/2011.01<br />∆ 2005-2011:<br />+10% per year<br />∆ 1995-2005:<br />+7% per year<br />Source: Ipeadata.<br />
  • 27. Minimumwage(iii)<br />According to the PNAD, in 2009 9 millionworkers (mostly in the formal sector) receivedtheminimumwage as remuneration, whichcorresponds to roughly11%ofthelabour force. <br />Ontheotherhand, almost60%ofpensionershadbenefitsequal to theminimumwage – more than13 millionpeople. Thesebenefits are heavilysubsidizedbythe federal governmentandprofoundlyredistributive, thoughexpensive. <br />Additionally, the social assistancebenefit to poorpeople over 65 orwith a disability (BPC) alsopaid a minimumwage to 1.5 million* people. <br />
  • 28. Social Security(i)<br />Social Security dates back to the late 19th Century industry-specific Funds for Retirement and Pensions which were progressively unified under a framework inspired by the Bismarckian German model. It became fully state-run in the 1960s and only after the 1988 Constitution it became entirely separate from the health care system.<br />To this day it has at least two main branches – one for private sector workers and one for civil servants. As a mandatory and contributory system that benefits mostly formal workers, it has traditionally left out a considerable proportion of the Brazilian population. <br />Since the 1988 Constitution, however, it has been expanded considerably – for instance, the so-called “Rural Social Security”, which is almost non-contributory as it encompasses mostly small farmers and poor rural workers, went from 4 million monthly benefits in 1991 to 7 million in 2003, a 75% increase in just 12 years. This development helped in reducing income inequality and poverty in rural areas. More recently, the rapid creation of formal jobs has been another key factor in enlarging the reach of the Social Security. <br />
  • 29. Social Security(ii)<br />The widening coverage coupled with the minimum benefits being tied to the minimum wage have turned the Brazilian Social Security into an useful tool to combat poverty among the elderly. <br />In 2009, about 90% of the population over 65 received a Social Security benefit and poverty levels were below 1% for this group (vs~8% among children 15 or younger).<br />The flipside of this system is that it runs significant deficits annually – about 1.3% of GDP for the Private Sector and 2% for the Civil Servants’ Social Security. This and the general ageing of the population has put the Social Security under scrutiny, with recent reforms trying to limit expenses by tightening the retirement conditions. <br />The deficits are not a particularly worrisome issue for the Private Sector Social Security, as those can be partially swayed if the recent trend of formalization continues. Also, the benefits paid are generally progressive and very important when it comes to alleviating poverty among the elderly. <br />On the other hand, the Civil Servants’ Social Security covers just a tiny fraction of the population and its large paychecks actually contribute to increase income inequality. Therefore, those deficits are far more troublesome. It is still too early to assess the impact of the 2003 reform, but preliminary evaluations suggest it may have far-reaching consequences.<br />
  • 30. Social Assistance(i)<br />Historically, social assistance programs in Brazil have been highly fragmented and spearheaded by non-profit charitable foundations. This has started to change since the 1988 Constitution. Since the mid-1990s, in particular, the widespread popularity of targeted cash transfer programs has been the most visible and effective side of social assistance in Brazil. <br />There are two major programs: <br /> The earliest one was the Benefício de PrestaçãoContinuada (BPC), a monthly unconditional cash transfer equal to the minimum wage targeted to individuals of any age with severe disabilities and to the elderly over 65, with family per capita income below ¼ of the<br />minimum wage. It is a constitutional right enshrined by the 1988 Constitution and was effectively implemented in the mid-1990s. <br /> The most renowned is the ProgramaBolsaFamília (PBF), a conditional cash transfer created in 2003 as a result of the unification of several similar pre-existing programs. It is targeted at poor families, especially those with children, and has educational and health conditionalities (school attendance, children’s immunizations and pre- and post-natal care). Unlike the BPC, it is not an entitlement: the number of beneficiaries depends largely on budget constraints.<br />
  • 31. Social Assistance(ii)<br />Benefício de Prestação Continuada - 2010<br />Programa Bolsa Família - 2010<br />Source: Ministryof Social Development.<br />Source: Ministryof Social Development.<br />
  • 32. Social Assistance(iii)<br />Individualswhobenefitdirectlyorindirectlyfromtransfers - 2009<br />Source: Pesquisa Nacional por Amostra de Domicílios, 2009<br />
  • 33. Ginidecomposition(i)<br />Shorrocksdecompositionbyfactorcomponents<br />TheGiniindexcanbewritten as a weightedsumofthekConcentrationCoefficients<br />Householdincome per capita is disaggregated in kfactorcomponents<br />Incomeshareofeachcomponent<br />TheConcentrationCoefficient is a measureof<br />howunequallydistributed is eachcomponent<br />Source: Shorrocks, AF. Inequality decomposition by factor components. Econometrica, v. 50, n. 1, pp. 193-211, 1982.<br />
  • 34. Ginidecomposition(ii)<br />Source: Pesquisa Nacional por Amostra de Domicílios, 2001 & 2009<br />
  • 35. Ginidecomposition(iii)<br />Dynamicdecomposition: <br />= Composition + Concentration<br />46.8% ofthe ∆Gini<br />Source: Pesquisa Nacional por Amostra de Domicílios, 2001 & 2009<br />
  • 36. GE(0) Decomposition(i)<br />Incomeinequalitydecompositionsbypopulationsubgroupshavealwaysbeenofinterest, especially in Brazil, where regional, racial andeducationalinequalitieshavesuchprominence.<br />TheGeneralizedEnthropy (GE) familyofinequalitymeasures is wellsuited to suchdecompositions. The GE(0) index – alsoknown as theTheil-L indexorthemeanlogdeviation – is particularlyuseful as it allows a counterfactualinterpretationoftheBetween-Groupinequality(ie: iftheinequalitybetweengroups A and B is responsible for X% of total inequality, thismeansthatthe total inequalitywouldbe X% loweriftheaverageincomeofbothgroupswerethesame).<br />“Income” effect<br />“Pureinequality” effect<br />“Allocation” effect<br />Populationshareofgroup j<br />Incomeshareofgroup j<br />Relativemeanincomeofgroup j<br />
  • 37. GE(0) Decomposition(ii)<br />Source: Pesquisa Nacional por Amostra de Domicílios, 2002 & 2009<br />
  • 38. GE(0) Decomposition(iii)<br />Source: Pesquisa Nacional por Amostra de Domicílios, 2002 & 2009<br />Educationalimprovemententailed a negativeallocationeffect, but a more homogeneouslyeducated labor force sustained a dominantincomeeffect as decliningreturns to educationnarrowedtheincomegapsamongthedifferentlevelsofeducationalattainment. Within-groupinequalityalsocontributedtremendously to the overall dropofthe GE(0) index.<br />
  • 39. Conclusions<br />Poverty and inequality reduction was made possible by more effective social policies and a consumer-led economic boom. As Brazil is still a middle-income country with an unacceptably high level of income inequality, the recent trajectory of pro-poor growth must be preserved at all costs.<br />There has been a renewed commitment to social programs since the 1988 Constitution and they now comprise a hefty 16% of the GDP and represent extremely valuable tools to reduce poverty and inequality. Educational policies and minimum wage hikes have had a great impact on the labour market while Social Security and Social Assistance expenditures have greatly diminished poverty among the elderly and, to a lesser extent, children.<br />There is still plenty of room for improvement:<br />BolsaFamília is formidable, but the benefits are still too low and there are eligible families that are not in the program.<br /> Civil servants' social security is inordinately expensive and runs huge annual deficits.<br /> Educational attainment is still too low and the overall quality of public schools is substandard.<br /> Some policies that could do a lot to reduce poverty and inequality have been pretty much set aside (ie: land reform).<br />
  • 40. RecentBibliography(English)<br />Ferreira, FHG; Leite, PG; Litchfield, JA. The rise and fall of Brazilian inequality: 1981-2004. Washington, DC: World Bank, 2006. (World Bank Policy Research Working Paper #3867)<br />Foguel , M. N.; Barros . R. P. TheEffectsofConditionalCashTransferProgrammesonAdultLabourSupply: AnEmpiricalAnalysisUsing a Time-Series-Cross-SectionSampleofBrazilianMunicipalities. Estudos Econômicos, São Paulo, v. 40, n. 2, p. 259-293, 2010.<br />Jaccoud, L; Hadjab, PDE; Chaibub, JR. The consolidation of social assistance in Brazil and its challenges, 1988-2009. Brasília: International Poverty Centre for Inclusive Growth, 2010. (IPC-IG Working Paper #76)<br />Medeiros, M; Diniz, D; Squinca, F. Cash benefits to disabled persons in Brazil: an analysis of the BPC Continuous Cash Benefit programme. Brasília: International Poverty Centre for Inclusive Growth, 2006. (IPC-IG Working Paper #16)<br />Medeiros, M; Britto, T; Soares, FV. Targeted cash transfer programmes in Brazil: BPC and the BolsaFamilia. Brasília: International Poverty Centre for Inclusive Growth, 2008. (IPC-IG Working Paper #46)<br />Soares, FV. Brazil's BolsaFamília: a review. Economic & Political Weekly, v. XLVI, n. 21, May 21, 2011.<br />Soares, FV; Soares, S; Medeiros, M; Osorio, RG. Cash transfer programmes in Brazil: impacts on inequality and poverty. Brasília: International Poverty Centre for Inclusive Growth, 2006. (IPC-IG Working Paper #21)<br />Soares, S; Osorio, RG; Soares, FV; Medeiros, M; Zepeda, E. Conditional cash transfers in Brazil, Chile and Mexico: impacts upon inequality. EstudiosEconómicos, númeroextraordinario, p. 207-224, 2009.<br />Soares, S; Ribas, RP; Soares, FV. Targeting and coverage of the BolsaFamíliaprogramme: why knowing what you measure is important in choosing the numbers. Brasília: International Poverty Centre for Inclusive Growth, 2010. (IPC-IG Working Paper #71)<br />Teixeira, CG. A heterogeneity analysis of the BolsaFamíliaprogramme effect on men and women's work supply. Brasília: International Poverty Centre for Inclusive Growth, 2010. (IPC-IG Working Paper #61)<br />
  • 41. RecentBibliography(Portuguese, I)<br />Barros, RP; Carvalho, M; Franco, S; Mendonça, R. Conseqüências e causas imediatas da queda recente da desigualdade de renda brasileira. Rio de Janeiro: Ipea, 2006. (Texto para Discussão #1201)<br />Barros, RP; Franco, S; Mendonça, R. A recente queda na desigualdade de renda e o acelerado progresso educacional brasileiro da última década. In: Barros, RP; Foguel, MN; Ulyssea, G (Orgs). Desigualdade de renda no Brasil: uma análise da queda recente, v. 2. Brasília: Ipea, 2007.<br />Castro, JA; Santos, CHM; Ribeiro, JAC (Orgs). Tributação e equidade no Brasil: um registro da reflexão do Ipea no biênio 2008-2009. Brasília: Ipea, 2010.<br />Cotta, TC; Paiva, LH. O Programa Bolsa Família e a proteção social no Brasil. In: Castro, J.A. e Modesto, L (Org.). Bolsa Família 2003-2010: avanços e desafios, v. 1. Brasília: Ipea, 2010.<br />Hoffmann, R. Transferências de renda e redução da desigualdade no Brasil e em cinco regiões entre 1997 e 2005. In: Barros, RP; Foguel, MN; Ulyssea, G (Orgs). Desigualdade de renda no Brasil: uma análise da queda recente, v. 2. Brasília: Ipea, 2007.<br />Ipea. Boletim de Políticas Sociais #13. Brasília: Ipea, 2007. <br />Ipea. Boletim de Políticas Sociais #17. Brasília: Ipea, 2009.<br />Osorio, RG; Souza, PHGF; Soares, S. Desenvolvimento, modernização e condições de vida. In: Ipea. Perspectivas da Política Social no Brasil. Brasília: Ipea, 2010.<br />Osorio, RG; Soares, S; Souza, PHGF. Erradicar a pobreza extrema: um objetivo ao alcance do Brasil. Brasília: Ipea, 2011. (Texto para Discussão n. 1619).<br />
  • 42. RecentBibliography(Portuguese, II)<br />Rocha, R. Programas condicionais de transferência de renda e fecundidade: evidências do Bolsa Família. Paperpresentedatthe 31st Encontro Brasileiro de Econometria, 2009.<br />Silveira, FG. Tributação, Previdência e Assistência Sociais: impactos distributivos. PH.D. dissertation, Economics, Universidade Estadual de Campinas, 2008.<br />Soares, S. Distribuição de renda no Brasil de 1976 a 2004 com ênfase no período entre 2001 e 2004. Brasília: Ipea, 2006. (Texto para Discussão #1166).<br />Soares, S. Volatilidade de renda e a cobertura do Programa Bolsa Família. Rio de Janeiro: Ipea, 2009 (Texto para Discussão #1459).<br />Soares, S; Souza, PHGF; Osorio, RG; Silveira, FG. Os impactos do benefício do Programa Bolsa Família sobre a desigualdade e a pobreza. In: Castro, J.A. e Modesto, L (Org.) Bolsa Família 2003-2010: avanços e desafios, v. 2. Brasília: Ipea, 2010. <br />Soares, S.; Sátyro, N. O Programa Bolsa Família: desenho institucional, impactos e possibilidades futuras. Brasília: Ipea, 2009 (Texto para Discussão #1424).<br />

×