Infant mortality rate in ASEAN Countries
•Download as PPTX, PDF•
3 likes•1,171 views
Infant mortality rate in ASEAN Countries
Recommended
More Related Content
Similar to Infant mortality rate in ASEAN Countries
Similar to Infant mortality rate in ASEAN Countries (20)
More from Abdul Hadi Ilman
More from Abdul Hadi Ilman (20)
Recently uploaded
Recently uploaded (20)
Infant mortality rate in ASEAN Countries
- 1. Will the ASEAN Countries Reach the MDGs Target for Infant Mortality Rate? by Saad Lebaz Abdul Hadi Ilman
- 2. Summary • Background • Methods • Findings - Only one country will meet the MDG target by 2015 - All countries will reach the target by 2050 • Conclusion
- 3. IMR over the World (2011) 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 Iceland Norway Andorra Denmark Italy Germany Netherlands Greece Cuba Lithuania Montenegro Qatar Malaysia Chile SriLanka Kuwait Bulgaria Grenada Mauritius Venezuela,RB ElSalvador Jamaica Samoa Iran,IslamicRep. Jordan Georgia Suriname WestBankandGaza St.VincentandtheGrenadines Philippines Indonesia Namibia Micronesia,Fed.Sts. Bangladesh Eritrea Madagascar India Yemen,Rep. PapuaNewGuinea Ghana Swaziland Zambia Togo Mozambique SouthSudan Lesotho Mali Somalia
- 4. IMR for ASEAN Countries (2011) 2.2 6.8 7.3 11.8 18.6 24.1 26.7 35.5 42.4 49.6 56 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 Singapore Brunei Darussalam Malaysia Thailand Vietnam Philippines Indonesia Cambodia Myanmar Timor-Leste Lao PDR
- 6. Period 1: 1960-1973 y = 1111.1x-0.212 R² = 0.8962 Period 2: 1974-2011 y = 6.67E+09x-1.224 R² = 0.9913 5.00 50.00 100,000 1,000,000 10,000,000 100,000,000 IMR Cummulative Birth Malaysia Period 1: 1960-1982 y = 4222x-0.209 R² = 0.8 Period 2: 1983-2011 y = 2.13E+13x-1.417 R² = 0.98 10.00 100.00 1,000.00 1,000,000 10,000,000 100,000,000 1,000,000,000 InfantMortalityRate Cummulative Birth Indonesia
- 7. Total Period y = 3619.8x-0.258 R² = 0.7095 Period 1: 1960-1983 y = 177.25x-0.07 R² = 0.9619 Period 2: 1984-2011 y = 4.65E+07x-0.787 R² = 0.9897 10.00 100.00 800,000 8,000,000 80,000,000 IMR Cummulative Birth Philippines Period 1: 1960-1972 y = 514.33x-0.234 R² = 0.8932 Period 2: 1973-2011 y = 2.75E+12x-1.891 R² = 0.9804 1.00 10.00 100.00 50,000 500,000 5,000,000 IMR Cummulative Birth Singapore
- 8. Period 1: 1960-1980 y = 4578.7x-0.257 R² = 0.8366 Period 2: 1981-2011 y = 6E+16x-2.017 R² = 0.972 10.00 100.00 1,000.00 1,000,000 10,000,000 100,000,000 IMR Cummulative Birth Thailand Period 1: 1960-1986 y = 1395.4x-0.196 R² = 0.9334 Period 2: 1987-2011 y = 5E+12x-1.444 R² = 0.9871 10.00 100.00 1,000.00 1,000,000 10,000,000 100,000,000 IMR Cummulative Birth Vietnam
- 9. The Equations and Slopes Country Classical Experience Equation Kinked year Kinked Experience Equation Model Selectionln a1 b2 b2 - b1 R2 PR2 (=2b2 )b R2 PR (=2b ) Indonesia -0.48** 0.76 0.72 1983 3.63 -1.42** -1.21** 0.990 0.37 Kinked (0.08) (0.05) (0.07) Malaysia -0.72** 0.86 0.61 1974 3.05 -1.22** -1.01** 0.995 0.43 Kinked (0.10) (0.02) (0.05) Philippines -0.26** 0.71 0.84 1984 2.25 -0.79** -0.72** 0.996 0.58 Kinked (0.04) (0.01) (0.02) Singapore -1.02** 0.81 0.49 1973 2.71 -1.89** -1.66** 0.991 0.27 Kinked (0.17) (0.05) (0.07) Thailand -0.64** 0.74 0.64 1981 3.66 -2.02** -1.76** 0.985 0.25 Kinked (0.11) (0.09) (0.11) Vietnam -0.40** 0.77 0.76 1987 3.14 -1.44** -1.25** 0.992 0.37 Kinked (0.06) (0.05) (0.06) For example: 72% slope means that 28% rate resulting in 28% reduction of IMR upon doubling of cumulative new births
- 10. Classical vs Kinked Experience Curve Slope 71.60% 60.78% 83.64% 49.48% 64.00% 75.95% 37.44% 42.81% 57.94% 26.95% 24.71% 36.75% 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% Indonesia Malaysia Philippines Singapore Thailand Vietnam Classical Kinked
- 11. Percentage Reduction (1990-2015) 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% Indonesia Malaysia Philippines Singapore Thailand Vietnam %reductionofIMR(1990-2015) US Census Our Projection MDG Goal
- 12. Percentage Reduction of IMR (1990-2015) Country 1990 2015 % reduction US Census Our Projection US Census Our Projection A B C 1 - (B/A) 1 - (C/A) Indonesia 61.70 24.30 25.69 60.62% 58.36% Malaysia 14.30 13.30 5.72 6.99% 59.97% Philippines 41.00 17.10 22.19 58.29% 45.88% Singapore 6.10 2.50 1.82 59.02% 70.18% Thailand 31.10 14.50 11.75 53.38% 62.22% Vietnam 36.40 18.40 16.43 49.45% 54.87%
- 13. Expected Year to Meet the MDG Target Country IMR 2015 Projection Expected Year to Meet the Target 1990 Target Ours US Census Ours US Census Year IMR Year IMR Indonesia 61.70 20.57 25.69 24.30 2026 20.41 2020 20.40 Malaysia 14.30 4.77 5.72 13.30 2022 4.75 > 2050 Philippines 41.00 13.67 22.19 17.10 2049 13.61 2023 13.50 Singapore 6.10 2.03 1.82 2.50 2012 2.00 2026 2.00 Thailand 31.10 10.37 11.75 14.50 2020 10.30 2027 10.20 Vietnam 36.40 12.13 16.43 18.40 2031 11.96 2028 12.10 *Actual IMR for Singapore in 2012 is 2.30, while the target should be 2.03
- 14. Malaysian’s Case y = 507980x-0.637 R² = 0.8737 3.00 30.00 300.00 100,000 1,000,000 10,000,000 100,000,000 IMR Cummulative Birth
- 15. Projection for 2050 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 Indonesia Malaysia Philippines Singapore Thailand Vietnam ProjectedIMR US Census Our Projection
- 16. -60% -40% -20% 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% 120% 140% Indonesia Malaysia Philippines Singapore Thailand Vietnam %differenceofUSCensusprojectionoverourprojection % difference
- 17. Conclusions 1. The kinked experience curve model is a more suitable methodology than the classical for the projection of IMR in ASEAN countries All countries are showing the declining trend in a specific of time The progress ratio are showing the steep slope (range from 25% to 58%) 2. From 6 ASEAN countries, only one is expected to meet the MDG target by 2015, and by 2050 all of them will reach the target. 3. We have mix conclusion about the relative differences of our projection and US Census’s projection
Editor's Notes
- These 2 slide are providing preview of how critical the IMR issue in ASEAN contries…
- The dependent variable is the rate of change of IMR The independent variable is the rate of change of cumulative births
- All kinked xp curve slopes are higher than the classical one, means that the rate of reduction has been getting faster over time All the kinked year was taking place before 1990, means that the improvement (if we say it) had been made before the MDG declaration in 1990. or in another view, we can say that after 1990 there is no specific improvement that made the rate of reduction was getting faster.
- The rate of reduction of IMR are different among countries -34.16% -17.97% -25.69% -22.52% -39.29% -39.20%
- We will take a look at more detail how much the percentage reduction for each country from 1990 to 2015
- Important note: The projection was taken based on the data from 1960 to 2011 for both variables: cumulative birth and IMR. But actually the World Bank has published the 2012 IMR data, but because we don’t have 2012 data for cumulative birth, we cannot use it. From the WB data, in 2012 Singapore’s IMR is 2.3. While our (late) projection is 2.0 it means the target are not reached in 2012
- In 2011, IMR in Malaysia was 7.30. But USCB’s projection for 2012 is so high: 14.60