DEVELOPMENT STRATEGY OF ANTI-POVERTY PROGRAMS IN INDONESIA [email protected] Senior Advisor of Minister of National Development Planning/ Bappenas for Social Affairs and Poverty Reduction Canberra, 17 - 18 February 2020
DEVELOPMENT STRATEGY OF ANTI-POVERTY PROGRAMS IN [email protected] Advisor of Minister of National Development Planning/ Bappenas for Social Affairs and Poverty Reduction
Canberra, 17 - 18 February 2020
The Trend of Poverty Reduction in Indonesia
Susilo Bambang YudhoyonoBJ Habibie 21 Mei 1998–
20 Oktober 1999
Abdurrahman Wahid 20 Oktober 1999–
23 Juli 2001
Megawati S.23 Juli 2001–
20 Oktober 200420 Oktober 2009-20 Oktober 2014
Joko Widodo20 Oktober 2014-
sekarang
24.223.43
19.1418.41 18.2
17.42 16.6615.97
17.7516.58
15.4214.15
13.3312.36
11.66 11.47 10.96 11.13 10.7 10.12 9.66 9.22
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
1998
1999
2000
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010
Sept
201
1
Sept
201
2
Sept
201
3
Sept
201
4
Sept
201
5
Sept
201
6
Sept
201
7
Sept
201
8
Sept
201
9
Ting
kat K
emisk
inan
(%)
3F crises
Some natural disasters:• Lombok earthquake (Jul ‘18) • Palu earthquake (Sep ’18)• Mandailing Natal flood (Oct ’18)• Banten’ tsunami (Dec ‘18)
Aceh’s tsunami (Dec’04)
Jogja’s earthquake (May’06)
20 Oktober 2004-20 Oktober 2009
Gini Rasio and Comparison with Some Countries
Source: https://data.worldbank.orghttps://bps.go.idhttps://www.ceicdata.com
-0.48
-0.75
-0.15 -0.1
0,47
-1
-0.8
-0.6
-0.4
-0.2
0
0.2
0.4
0.6
Indonesia Brazil China Malaysia Argentina
Average Gini Ratio Reduction per year (poin Gini)
2013-2018 2013-2015 2013-2017 2014-2016
0.396
0.425 0.4240.433
0.4190.409
0.404
0.391 0.391
0.329 0.327 0.324
0.3360.329
0.316 0.32 0.319 0.315
0.388
0.4130.406
0.414
0.4020.394 0.391
0.384 0.380
0.3
0.32
0.34
0.36
0.38
0.4
0.42
0.44
2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019
Inde
ks
Gini Ratio, 2011 – 2019
Perkotaan Perdesaan Nasional
2013-2016
0.389 0.513 0.467 0.399 0.424
Urban Rural
Some Challenges Remain
39% head of HH only had elementary education
60% HH without sanitaton, 46,3% withoutdrinking water.
29,7% head of HHis elderly.
63,8% live in rural
Extreme poverty
-4
-2
0
2
4
2012a 2012b 2013a 2013b 2014a 2014b 2015a 2015b 2016a 2016b 2017a 2017b
The rate of poverty reduction in 5 poorest provinces was canceling out
Gorontalo Maluku Nusa Tenggara Timur Papua Barat Papua
16,511,310
80,171,987
103,869,333
54,239,640
< 0.8GK
0.8GK - GK
GK – 1.76GK
1.76GK-3.71GK
> 3.71GK
Number of Population by Welfare Status
Source: Susenas and Podes 2018
Flood: 19,675 villages
Landslide: 10,246 villages
Earthquake: 10,115 villages
2005 2007 2014/15 2017
• Fuel prices increased up to 185%
• Social Economic Census to determine 40% lowest income group.
• UCT was distributed to 19 million HH.
• UCT CCT.• CDD
Integration: PNPM/Nat’l Community Empowerment Program
• Significant cut of fuel subsidy
• Improved UDB• Integrated Social
Protection Card (KPS) Health Card, Smart Card, Welfare Card.
• National Social Security System: health and labor
• PNPM Village Fund.
Some Milestones
5
• Digital payment of CCT
• Rastra BPNT• CCT has
expanded to 6 K, then 10K families
2019
• Piloting Digital payment for energy subsidy
• More integration of social registry and civil registry.
52.7 61.9 69.282 90.1 98.4 99.6 99.6 99.6
121.8139.526.1
30.638.7
60.957.8
76.7 78.3 81.49 85.99
88.7
91.7911.30%10.50%
10.10%
12.60% 12.40%13.30%
13.60%13.50%
12.80%13.70%
14.54%
0.00%
2.00%
4.00%
6.00%
8.00%
10.00%
12.00%
14.00%
16.00%
0
50
100
150
200
250
2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020
Social Security
Social Assistance
% of Central Government Expenditures
59.7
132.297.9 107.6
240.0
75.2
2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020*
Health Social Asisstance Fuel Subsidy
Resource Mobilization For Social Protection
Significantly decline
Progress of Social Protection Program
Benefits:
1. Better targeting accuracy2. More options and controls by the recipient on
quantity & quality of rice3. Offer more nutrition4. Encourage micro and small business5. Provide access to financial services6. More effective use of the government budget
New-SchemeIn-kind food assistance is distributed by BULOG to the target households
Problems:1. Mis-targeted2. Mis-volumed3. Over price (due to logistic and delivery cost)4. Poor quality of rice (related with stock management)5. Late distribution (due to geographic, weather and
logistic issues)6. Poor administered (ample room for error, fraud and
corruption)
BULOG Food (Rice) Distribution
Target Household
Old-Scheme
Transformation From Rice Subsidy To Food VoucherElectronic Voucher
Target Family
Local Retailers act as Bank’s Agent Rice + source
of protein
Assistance is transferred as an electronic voucher to buy rice, eggs, meat, nuts at e-warong/Bank Agent.
*BULOG is state enterprise agency who responsible for rice reserve, distribution, and price control7
Bigger Context: Food Security and Value for Money
8
DEMAND SUPPLY INTERVENTION DATA
1. Reform Rice Subisidy to Food Assistance
2. Education on healthier eating behavior
1. Reform on fertilizer subsidy
2. Irrigation improvement3. Agribusiness
improvement
1. Rice market operation improvement
2. Food import policy improvement
1. Agriculture statistics improvement
2. Unified Database Improvement
How can the allocation of IDR 21 trillion could have a bigger impact?
1 in 3 children <5are stunted
1 in 8 children <5 are overweight
1 in 4 Indonesian are anemic
1 in 4 adults areoverweight
BPNT support financial inclusion
87% HH have access and opened a formal account for
the first timeMICROSAVE STUDY (2019)
The Effectiveness of CCT in Targeting and Impact on Spending
0.0
0.5
1.0
1.5
2.0
2.5
3.0
0.0
1.0
2.0
3.0
4.0
5.0
6.0
7.0
subsidies in-kind educ in-kind health Raskin PKH BSM
Effe
ctiv
enes
s, in
dex
Tota
l ben
efits
dis
trib
uted
, ind
ex effectiveness, index (RHS) total benefits distributed, index (LHS)
Effectiveness at Reducing Inequality Relative to Spending Levels (2012)
PIPRastra
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
Phillipines(2013)
Indonesia(2014)
Mexico(2012)
Jamaica(2010)
Colombia(2012)
Ecuador(2012)
Brazil(2012)
Share of beneficiaries from the poorest quintile (%) Total population coverage (%)
PKH has high targeting accuracy
7
8
22
0 5 10 15 20 25
Pre-Natal Visits
Completed immunization
Growth Monitoring check ups*
Percentage points
Health impacts
1.8
9.5
4.5 3.9
2
5
0
2
4
6
8
10
Gross primary enrollment Gross secondary enrollment
Perc
enta
ge p
oint
s
Positive education impacts compared
PKH Pantawid Pamilya (Phillipines) Familias en Accion (Colombia)
Impact of CCT on Health and Education
Indicators World BankMidline Study 2010
TNP2KEndline Study 2014 Microsave, 2019
Childbirth Delivery Improved probability of childbirth delivery assisted by medical staff/ at health facility.
Endline impact was bigger than midline.
No significant result
Ante and Post-Natal visit
• Health visit of CCT was bigger than non-CCT families.
• Antenatal increased 13%• Postnatal increased 7%
No significant differences between CCT and non CCT families in health visit
• Ante Natal: No significant result
• Post Natal: CCT families 7.4% higher than non CCT families
Baby Health Check Increased 15-22% No significant result CCT families 20.9% more often to check than non CCT families
Immunisation and Vaccination
<5 year old of CCT families had 3% higher to complete immunication and vaccination
<5 year old of CCT families had 5% higher to complete immunication and vaccination
n/a
Enrollment rate No significant result, but CCT children improved of learning time
• 7-15 year old: 4%• elementary: 1.8%• Junior high: 9%
n/a
Unified Data Base as a Basis of Targeting of Social Protection ProgramsUDB consists 40% of population who have the lowest income status, by name, by address, and by ID
9,22%
38%
40%
Poor
25%
Vuln
erab
le
20%
HEALTH CARD
FOOD ASSISTANCE
CCT
National Poverty Line (Sept 2019)24,78 million people
Number of HH27.110.241
Number of Families29.157.990
Number of People98.608.619
Number of people in the institutions (not in family)
615.646
SCHOLARSHIP
96.8 million people
15.6 million families
20,1 million students
10 million families
2020 2024 2030Universal Social Protection 2030
G2P/Digitalization as a tool of integration
More integration of social assistance & security
Reducing burden and protecting from the shock
Human Capital Development SUSTAINABLE
LIVELIHOOD Job
Toward Comprehensive Social Protection and Poverty Reduction
U
D
B
Improved access to basic services of the
40% poorest population
Reduction of disparities between
income groups & among regions
Achievement of Minimum Standards
for Basic Services
Social Security
Social Assistance
Training, Coaching, Mentoring
Value Added, Market Linkages, and Social Impact
Land Ownership
Local Institutional Capacity &
Collaboration
13
Stage of Development
Poverty Measurement
Social IssuePolicy
Intervention
Less Developed
Developing
Emerging
Developed
Advanced
Calorie Poverty
Expenditure (Basic Needs)
Poverty
Relative Poverty
SWB & Subjective
Poverty
Subjective Poverty
Hunger
Decent Living
Social Exclusion
Satisfaction and Political
Instability
Satisfaction and Political
Instability
Food Policies
Growth Policies
Redistribution Policies
Social Policies
Social Policies
Source: Dartanto and Otsubo (2013)
1. Indonesia has become an upper middle incomecountry. Focus of poverty reduction moves fromabsolut to relative poverty Productive economy/sustainable livelihood Inclusiveness (basic rights). Review poverty measurement.
2. Inclusive development has to be part of abroader strategy to address economic growth, longer term structural poverty, human capital development, and inequality Fundamental ingredients to expand access
to available labor market opportunities.
The Way Forward
Poverty and development stage
Thank You
Terima Kasih