Successfully reported this slideshow.
Your SlideShare is downloading. ×

Promotin g Inclusive growth through the 4Ps

More Related Content

More from GDNet - Global Development Network, Cairo Office

Related Books

Free with a 30 day trial from Scribd

See all

Related Audiobooks

Free with a 30 day trial from Scribd

See all

Promotin g Inclusive growth through the 4Ps

  1. 1. Outline of the Presentation  Trends in growth, poverty and inequality  Economic participation of the poor  Assessment of 4Ps  Conclusions and Recommendations Based on PIDS DP 2013-09 and Chapter 4 of the EPM 2012 Promoting Inclusive Growth Through the 4Ps
  2. 2. Inclusive Growth  Allows participation and contribution by all members of society, with particular emphasis on the ability of the poor and disadvantaged to participate in growth (ADB)  The main instrument for a sustainable and inclusive growth is productive employment (WB)
  3. 3. Recent economic growth has been remarkable Source of basic data: NIA, NSCB 3.0 -0.6 0.3 2.1 4.4 4.7 5.8 5.2 -0.6 3.1 4.4 2.9 3.6 5.0 6.7 4.8 5.2 6.6 4.2 1.1 7.6 3.9 6.6 -1 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 GDP Growth rate GDP Growth rate
  4. 4. 33.1 24.9 26.4 26.5 28.8 28.6 27.9 0.0 5.0 10.0 15.0 20.0 25.0 30.0 35.0 40.0 1991 2003 2006 2009 2012 Poverty incidence among population (%), 1991-2012 Annual Estimates Semestral Estimates Source: NSCB Yet slow progress in poverty reduction
  5. 5. Inequality has declined slightly at the national level; inequality in the urban areas went down but it increased in the rural areas Source: Celia M. Reyes, Aubrey D. Tabuga, Ronina D. Asis and Maria Blessila G. Datu, 2012, Poverty and Agriculture in the Philippines: Trends in Income Poverty and Distribution (PIDS DP 2012-09) 0.4803 0.4735 0.5183 0.5045 0.4871 0.4837 0.4743 0.4736 0.4602 0.4850 0.4782 0.4513 0.4496 0.4462 0.3941 0.3942 0.4190 0.4255 0.4288 0.4296 0.4278 0.35 0.37 0.39 0.41 0.43 0.45 0.47 0.49 0.51 0.53 0.55 All Areas Urban Rural Gini
  6. 6. Majority of the poor workers are at most elementary undergraduate 13 8 6 3 44 33 22 13 1 2 6 26 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 Poorest Second Third Richest % No grade completed Some elementary Elementary graduate Some high school High school graduate Some college At least college graduate Source of basic data: Matched files of FIES 2009 and LFS January 2010, NSO
  7. 7. Where do workers with elementary education get employed? Agriculture, hunting & forestry, 49.8 Wholesale & retail trade, 13.4 Fishing, 7.2 Private household activities, 6.4 Manufacturing, 5.9 Construction, 5.6 Transport, storage & communications, 5.1 Other community, social & personal service activities, 1.9 Public administration & defense, 1.8 Hotels & restaurants, 1.2 Mining & quarrying, 0.8 Real estate, renting & business activities, 0.4 Electricity, gas & water supply, 0.1 Education, 0.1 Health & social work, 0.1Financial intermediation, 0 Source of Basic Data: LFS (July 2011), NSO
  8. 8. Average daily wage of high school graduate is 45% higher than an elementary undergraduate 141 169 186 202 246 335 598 1,137 0 200 400 600 800 1,000 1,200 No grade completedElementary undergraduateElementary graduateHigh school undergraduateHigh school graduateCollege undergraduateCollege graduatePostgraduate Php Source of basic data: LFS (July 2011), NSO
  9. 9. Proportion of children attending school, by income group and by age group, 2007 86.6 91.7 93.4 95.1 96.7 96.1 97.7 98.6 98.7 99.2 80.6 86.0 87.2 89.2 91.9 93.2 95.7 97.2 98.7 98.4 47.9 50.4 53.7 55.3 57.9 60.9 66.8 73.5 80.7 90.5 0.0 20.0 40.0 60.0 80.0 100.0 120.0 Poorest 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Richest 6 to 11 12 to 14 15 to 18 Source of basic data: APIS 2007, NSO
  10. 10. Features of the Philippine CCT  Objectives: ◦ Social Assistance – provide cash assistance to alleviate immediate needs (short-term poverty alleviation); and ◦ Social Development – to break the intergenerational poverty cycle through investments in human capital
  11. 11. Features of the Philippine CCT  Target families: Extremely poor families with children aged 0 to 14  Components: Health and Education  Health: P6,000 annually (P500 per month)/family  Education: P3,000/child/school year (P300/child/month for 10 months); up to a max. of 3 children in each family
  12. 12. Features of the Philippine CCT  Criteria for selection of beneficiaries: ◦ Residents of poorest municipalities; ◦ Households whose economic condition is equal to or below the provincial poverty threshold; ◦ Households that have children 0-14 years old and/or have a pregnant woman at the time of assessment; and ◦ Households that agree to meet conditions specified in the program.
  13. 13. Features of the Philippine CCT  The poorest households in the selected municipalities are identified through a Proxy-Means Test.  The DSWD selects the beneficiaries through the National Household Targeting System for Poverty Reduction (NHTS-PR).
  14. 14. 4Ps Targeting  NHTS-PR identified 5.2 million poor families, way above the estimated 3.9 million poor families in 2009. Including all these families will lead to even higher leakage rate.  On-demand system (families who claim eligibility but are not selected have to go through the on- demand system); they are entered into the database of eligible beneficiaries in the NHTS- PR; there is a lag before they can be accommodated into the 4Ps database of beneficiaries
  15. 15. Features of the Philippine CCT  Conditionalities: 1. Pregnant women must avail of pre- and post-natal care and be attended during childbirth by a trained health professional; 2. Parents must attend family development sessions; 3. 0-5 year old children must receive regular preventive health check-ups and vaccines; 4. 3-5 year old children must attend day care or preschool classes at least 85% of the time; 5. 6-14 year old children must enrol in elementary or high school and must attend at least 85% of the time. 6. 6-14 years old children must receive de-worming pills twice a year
  16. 16. 4Ps has been scaled up too rapidly 0.006 0.34 0.63 1.0 2.3 3.1 3.8 5.2 0.000 1.000 2.000 3.000 4.000 5.000 6.000 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 Source of basic data: DSWD
  17. 17. 4Ps is the biggest social protection program - 10,000 20,000 30,000 40,000 50,000 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 50 299 5,000 10,000 21,194 39,450 44,250 Source of data: DSWD
  18. 18. 4Ps Targeting  Based on the APIS 2011, 4Ps beneficiaries comprise 6.4% of the total families. Over 82% of all 4Ps beneficiaries are rural families.  Only 70.81% of the 4Ps beneficiaries in 2011 are income poor (after taking out the cash grant). ◦ Leakage rate is 29% (Fernandez and Olfindo finds that 72% of the beneficiaries belong to the bottom 20 % of the population)  Among the 4Ps beneficiaries who are poor, only 7.2% became non-poor when given cash transfers.  So far, the 4Ps has already reached 20.32% of the country’s total poor families (exclusion rate is 79.7%)
  19. 19. 4Ps beneficiaries include non- poor Source of basic data: APIS 2011, NSO 32.83 24.96 17.08 11.92 6.83 3.5 1.43 0.84 0.41 0.21 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 Percent(%)
  20. 20. Administrative cost of the program is substantial Budget category 2011 2012 Total 21,194 39,450 Cash transfer/grant to beneficiaries 17,138 35,453 Implementation support* 4,056 3,997 Trainings 1,625 703 Salaries and allowances for 1,800 new personnel 716 1,877 Bank service fee 171 346 Information, education and advocacy materials; printing of manuals and booklets 649 252 Capital outlay 218 133 Monitoring, evaluation and administration support 677 686 Share of cash transfer to total budget 80.9% 89.9% Source: DSWD, available online http://pantawid.dswd.gov.ph/index.php/pantawid-pamilya-financials Share of Cash Transfer to Total Budget
  21. 21. IMPACTS OF 4PS
  22. 22. School attendance falls below 90% after age 13 Source of basic data: APIS 2011, NSO 92.6 98.0 98.4 98.9 98.8 98.3 96.4 93.6 89.7 77.5 60.0 43.6 33.8 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 Percent(%) Age
  23. 23. Comparison of school attendance rates of children in matched 4Ps and non-4Ps families, by age group, 2011 Age group 4Ps Non-4Ps Difference Significance (α=0.05) Aged 6-14 96.3 92.8 3.5 significant Aged 6-11 97.8 95.0 2.8 significant Aged 12-14 93.1 89.0 4.1 significant Aged 15-18 57.1 54.3 2.8 not significant Note: Figures are estimates from the Nearest Neighbor (1), or One-to-one, matching with replacement. Source of basic data: Matched files of APIS 2011 and LFS July 2011, NSO
  24. 24. Lack of personal interest is the most common reason for not attending school 0.5 0.2 0.2 0.7 0.5 0.4 1.9 1.4 1.3 3.0 4.5 4.5 15.4 30.9 34.5 0.2 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.8 1.9 2.0 2.2 2.7 2.9 3.9 15.7 24.8 41.4 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 Finished schooling No school within the barangay Too young to go to school Problem with birth certificate Problem with school record No regular transportation Others School are very far Cannot cope with school work Housekeeping Marriage Illness/Disability Employment/looking for work High cost of education Lack of personal interest Reasons for not attending school among children in 4Ps families (aged 6-18) 4Ps Non-4Ps Source of basic data: APIS 2011, NSO
  25. 25. Older children drop out of school to work to augment family income 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.10 0.54 0.91 2.52 5.39 14.88 26.15 38.29 46.10 92.1 96.9 96.5 95.7 94.4 92.6 88.7 84.8 75.2 63.1 48.4 33.6 24.3 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 % Age out-of-school, working studying, not working Source of basic data: Matched files of APIS 2011 and LFS July 2011, NSO
  26. 26. Proportion of children in 4Ps families who are attending school or working, by sex and by single year of age, 2011 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.8 1.5 4.2 8.5 22.1 36.4 50.2 59.2 92.5 96.7 95.6 95.4 92.4 90.3 84.5 80.9 68.1 55.3 38.3 29.8 16.6 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 % Age out-of-school, working studying, not working Boys, 4Ps 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.2 0.2 0.3 0.8 2.2 8.3 14.2 24.2 29.8 91.7 97.1 97.5 96.0 96.5 95.2 93.1 88.7 82.4 70.2 60.1 38.1 33.9 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 % Age out-of-school, working studying, not working Girls, 4Ps
  27. 27.  The 4Ps program leads to an increase in the school participation rate by 3.5 percentage points among children aged 6-14 years old.  The 4Ps program does not influence the participation of children beyond the age coverage of the program. There is no significant difference between the school participation rate of children aged 15-18 in 4Ps families and non-4Ps children (using matched samples).  The current coverage of 4Ps to 6- to 14-year-old children is intended to enable the child to finish elementary.  School attendance rate is lower for older children than for younger ones.  The gap between the richest households and the poorest ones is much wider for the older children than for the younger ones.  The average daily wage of someone who has finished high school is 45 percent higher than the wage of someone who has reached some years in elementary.  Education builds up human capital gradually. Therefore, sustained investment is required to realize significant results. Conclusions
  28. 28. Recommendations  To increase employability of the poor in higher productivity and faster growing sectors, extend the Pantawid Pamilya program or harmonize with other government programs to ensure that the children finish at least high school. ◦ Will lead to more inclusive growth and increase potential earnings of 4Ps
  29. 29. Recommendations  Given the fiscal burden of extending the program, it becomes more important to improve targeting scheme ◦ Reduce leakage rate by updating the PMT model ◦ Reduce exclusion rate by moving away from strategy of focusing on “pockets of poverty” ◦ Focus on the chronic poor; transient poor
  30. 30. Recommendations  Improve program implementation ◦ Lessen lag in including beneficiaries identified through on-demand system ◦ Monthly disbursement of cash transfer ◦ Use of regular savings account for 4Ps  Reduce administrative cost by adopting unified data collection system for NHTS-PR; will also reduce potential response bias
  31. 31. Recommendations  Pilot test changes in the program before scaling up ◦ Bigger grants to children in high school? ◦ Grants when children graduate from high school? ◦ Maximum number of years in the program?
  32. 32. Thank you! www.pids.gov.ph
  33. 33. Distribution of 4Ps and poor families, by region, share to total (%) 10.8 10.0 9.0 7.4 7.1 6.4 6.3 6.3 5.9 5.8 5.7 4.9 4.6 4.2 2.4 1.7 1.4 6.8 9.9 8.2 7.1 7.7 5.5 3.1 7.6 5.7 6.1 10.6 4.7 4.0 5.2 2.7 3.4 1.8 0.0 2.0 4.0 6.0 8.0 10.0 12.0 Share to total poor families, FIES 2009 Distribution of 4Ps families, DSWD (Dec 2012) Sources of basic data: DSWD and FIES 2009, NSO
  34. 34. Various Implementation Issues  Delays in transferring the cash grants (currently every 2 months)  Cash card system (Cash card system - used for merely transferring; does not work like a regular ATM savings account; grantees do not have the option to keep money in the bank)  Grants are still distributed in cash (ex. Naujan, Oriental Mindoro) Venue: Municipal hall next to a tiangge
  35. 35. Comparison of school attendance rates of children in 4Ps and Non–4Ps families, by single year of age Age 4Ps Non-4Ps 6 92.6 92.0 7 98.0 97.2 8 98.4 98.4 9 98.9 98.2 10 98.8 98.1 11 98.3 97.8 12 96.4 97.0 13 93.6 93.9 14 89.7 90.7 15 77.5 86.2 16 60.0 71.3 17 43.6 58.7 18 33.8 48.2 Source of basic data: APIS 2011, NSO
  36. 36. Age 4Ps Non-4Ps 6 92.9 87.4 7 97.6 95.7 8 98.9 97.2 9 98.8 97.1 10 99.0 97.1 11 97.9 96.6 12 96.6 95.1 13 94.1 89.2 14 88.2 84.1 15 76.5 78.2 16 59.1 59.5 17 42.6 41.5 18 31.0 30.5 Comparison of school attendance rates of children in 4Ps and Non-4Ps families belonging to bottom 40%, by single year of age Source of basic data: APIS 2011, NSO
  37. 37. Comparison of school attendance rates of children in matched 4Ps and non-4Ps families, by single year of age, 2011 Sample 4Ps Non-4Ps Difference Significance (α=0.05) Aged 6 91.2 83.5 7.7 significant Aged 7 98.2 95.5 2.7 significant Aged 8 98.4 96.9 1.6 significant Aged 9 98.7 96.0 2.7 significant Aged 10 98.6 96.3 2.3 significant Aged 11 98.1 95.8 2.3 significant Aged 12 96.6 94.1 2.5 significant Aged 13 93.3 89.3 4.0 significant Aged 14 89.5 81.6 7.9 significant Aged 15 76.9 76.7 0.3 not significant Aged 16 59.7 56.5 3.2 not significant Aged 17 44.2 43.8 0.4 not significant Aged 18 34.0 32.0 2.0 not significant Notes: Figures are estimates from the Nearest Neighbor (3) matching with replacement Source of basic data: Matched files of APIS 2011 and LFS July 2011, NSO
  38. 38. Proportion of poor, 4Ps and non-4Ps families who experienced hunger, 2011 Group Percent Poor 15.9 4Ps 14.4 Matched 4Ps 14.7 Matched Non-4Ps 12.8 Note: 4Ps and non-4Ps families with children aged 6-18 who are attending school were matched using Propensity Score Matching (One-to-one matching with replacement). Source of basic data: Matched files of APIS 2011 and LFS July 2011, NSO
  39. 39. Frequency of experiencing hunger among poor, 4Ps and non-4Ps families, 2011 Frequency Poor 4Ps Matched 4Ps Matched Non-4Ps At least once in each week 31.7 28.1 30.6 35.3 At least once in each month 40.4 39.8 38.6 37.8 At least once in three months 27.9 32.1 30.8 26.9 Note: 4Ps and non-4Ps families with children aged 6-18 who are attending school were matched using Propensity Score Matching (One-to-one matching with replacement). Source of basic data: Matched files of APIS 2011 and LFS July 2011, NSO
  40. 40. Proportion of children in 4Ps families who are attending school, by type of family, 2011 Age Proportion of children aged 6-18 in 4Ps families 3 or less 4 or more 6 92.2 93.1 7 98.6 97.0 8 99.4 97.1 9 98.9 98.8 10 99.1 98.5 11 98.2 98.3 12 96.6 96.1 13 93.7 93.5 14 91.2 87.9 15 77.8 77.2 16 62.5 58.2 17 43.9 43.4 18 32.0 35.0 Source of basic data: APIS 2011, NSO
  41. 41. Distribution of children aged 6-14 not attending school in 4Ps families by family size, % to total Share of Children Age Smaller families (at most 3 eligible children) Larger families (4 or more eligible children) All 6 19.4 18.5 19.1 7 6.8 3.9 5.8 8 3.1 6.9 4.4 9 3.0 3.2 3.1 10 3.5 3.8 3.6 11 5.6 5.0 5.4 12 10.9 8.9 10.2 13 21.2 17.8 20.1 14 26.6 32.1 28.5 All 100 100 100 Source of basic data: APIS 2011, NSO
  42. 42. Proportion of children in matched 4Ps and non- 4Ps families who are attending school and/or working, by sex and by single year of age, 2011 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.8 1.5 4.2 8.5 22.1 36.4 50.2 59.2 92.5 96.7 95.6 95.492.4 90.3 84.5 80.9 68.1 55.3 38.3 29.8 16.6 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 % Age out-of-school, working studying, not working Boys, 4Ps 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.2 0.2 0.3 0.8 2.2 8.3 14.2 24.2 29.8 91.7 97.1 97.5 96.0 96.5 95.2 93.1 88.7 82.4 70.2 60.1 38.1 33.9 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 % Age out-of-school, working studying, not working Girls, 4Ps 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.2 1.0 2.4 4.7 9.5 18.6 26.7 37.7 90.8 96.4 97.1 96.4 96.295.2 93.0 87.6 83.6 75.5 61.1 49.4 38.8 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 % Age out-of-school, working studying, not working Boys, Non-4Ps 0.0 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.3 0.8 1.3 2.8 8.9 14.3 20.3 92.897.1 97.8 97.5 96.9 96.7 95.8 93.3 90.6 85.1 68.7 57.2 48.5 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 % Age out-of-school, working studying, not working Girls, Non-4Ps

Editor's Notes

  • Based on the paper that we did assessing the CCT in the Philippines, covering the design, implementation and impacts of the program.For this morning, I will focus my presentation on the role of the 4Ps in promoting inclusive growth. In particular I will show what it would take to make the program more effective in promoting inclusive growth.
  • Increasing both employment and productivityEmployment growth generates new jobs and income for theindividual - from wages in all types of firms, or from self employment, usually in microfirms - while productivity growth has the potential to lift the wages of those employedand the returns to the self-employed. After all, in many low-income countries theproblem is not unemployment, but rather underemployment. Hence, inclusive growth isnot only about employment growth, but also about productivity growth.20 Moreover, it isnot only about wage-employment but also about self-employment which means thatreturns to capital, land and other assets matter to the income potential of the focus groupas shown in the identity above. (WB)
  • First quarter growth 7.8%Industry sector grew by 10.9%, services sector by 7% and agri sector by 3.3%. Industry sector – construction 32.5%; manufacturing by 9.7%, while mining contracted by 17%Services – financial intermediation 13.9%Agri – agri and forestry -2.9%; fishing- 5.5%
  • Poverty incidence increased further in 2009 due to the lingering effects of the food and fuel price hikes, global financial crisis and natural calamities such as typhoons Ondoy and Pepeng in the latter half of 2009 and El Nino
  • About 57% of the poorest quartile are at most elementary undergraduate, compared with 16% for the richest quartile
  • 45 % higher than elem undergrad32 % higher than elem graduate
  • ON-DEMAND SYSTEMFamilies who can prove their eligibility to the program can seek to be included among the beneficiaries. However, based on an interview with program implementers, these families are not directly entered into the database of 4Ps beneficiaries but on the database of eligible families under the NHTS-PR. This procedure may cause delay in the inclusion of deserving families to the program, if they get included at all.
  • About 90 percent of PantawidPamilya beneficiaries belong to the bottom 40 percent of the population. There is a high concentration of PantawidPamilya beneficiary households in the lowest income decile. About 33 percent of beneficiaries belong tothe first bottom decile and about 25 percent of PantawidPamilya beneficiaries belong to the second bottom decile. In total about 72percent of PantawidPamilya beneficiaries belong to the poorest 20 percent of the population in the Philippines, as obtained fromincidence analysis conducted with the most recent Family Income and Expenditure Survey (FIES, 2009) – Fernandez & Olfindo, 2011
  • Need to find ways to reduce administrative costs – one way is the unified data collection system
  • DELAY IN TRANFERRING THE FUNDSFor an extremely poor family who heavily relies on the government transfer to meet the different needs of not only the children but the household in general, a delay in the transfer of funds will have adverse effects. They can opt to borrow from loan sharks which will diminish the value of the grants upon receiving due to interest burden just to meet their needs. They will not be able to budget this money properly since they need to pay off debt first. It would be very helpful if the program can set up a system that can provide the money in a more prompt way. CASH CARD SYSTEMThe program is said to disburse cash grants to beneficiaries through a cash card that acts like an ATM card. This cash card system however is simply used for transferring the grant and does not work like a regular ATM savings account. There is a certain period designated where the grantees are allowed to withdraw the money. Upon expiration of this period, the grantee can no longer access the funds. The downside of such system is that it does not give the option for beneficiaries to keep the money in the account. Had it been designed to act in such a manner, it can encourage grantees to keep the money there until the time comes when they need it. Because this option is not present, it is very easy on their part to spend the money right away.DISTRIBUTION OF GRANT IN CASHIn some areas, or at least in Naujan, Oriental Mindoro, the distribution of the 4Ps grants is made by handing over the cash to the beneficiaries in some predetermined date at the Municipal Hall. One disadvantage of this procedure is that once the grantees get a hold of the cash, they can spend it right away especially if the venue where the money is being distributed is right next to a flea market. It is very easy for business establishments to take advantage of this situation since the grantees are gathered in one area at the same time.
  • Add data on matched non-4PsAPIS question on hunger:“During the past 3 months, did you or any member of your family experience hunger because you did not have food to eat?”
  • Add data on matched non-4Ps

×