Transcript Welfare mix

WELLBEING IN FOUR COUNTRIES
A comparison
Ian Gough
WeD
Wellbeing: a comparative sketch
Situate wellbeing research in the 4 countries in a
broader national and global framework
Use here Bath framework of ‘welfare regimes’: a
middle range theory
Consider in turn:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
Political economy since 1990
Wellbeing outcomes
The ‘welfare mix’
Agency and collective processes
Distinct welfare regimes?
Conclusions
1. BACKGROUND:
CHANGING POLITICAL ECONOMY SINCE 1990
• End of Cold War
• Export of Western proto-democratic
processes
• Neo-liberal reforms in economic policy
Isomorphism (Meyer): spread of such
cognitive and institutional models
But wide divergences – and steps backward
And decoupling on the ground
BACK TO THE BACKGROUND:
STRUCTURES:
Development:
Economic
Human
Inequality:
Vertical
Horizontal
Gender
Ethi
Bang
Peru
Thai
Income per head, PPP $US
HDI
756
.37
1870
.53
5678
.77
8090
.78
Income ratio of top to bottom quintile
Ethnolinguistic and religious fractionalisation
Gender-related development index
Sex ratio (male: female): total population
10.0
.69
.35
.96
3.3
.16
.52
1.05
11.6
.38
.76
1.01
5.3
.38
.78
.98
Ethiopia and Bangladesh
Ethiopia: 1991 defeat of Derg; 1992 EPRDF
election victory. Focus on state rebuilding with
Federal constitution. Relatively weak economic
reforms. Continuing elections but authoritarian
tendencies.
Bangladesh: BNP election victory in 1990 marks
end of military rule. Liberalisation, rapid
economic growth and urbanisation. Growing
cultural clashes with rise of millenarian Islam
and entry of JMB into government. Elections
now postponed.
Peru and Thailand
Peru: 1990 election of Fujimori, soon followed by
authoritarian shift. Collapse of Sendero
Luminoso. Neo-liberal reforms and economic
growth, but persistent ultra-inequality and ‘sigma
society’. Profound inequality and cultural divide.
Thailand: 1991 coup followed by Black May and
1992 elections. Continuing capitalist boom, only
briefly interrupted by 1997 crisis (though
significant social impact). Hegemony of money
politics. Thaksin victories ended by another coup
in 2006.
2. WELLBEING OUTCOMES:
a) OBJECTIVE
4 very different patterns of development (see
figure)
Many objective welfare outcomes map onto
income per head, but many variations, eg:
• Bangladesh: worse poverty and
malnutrition
• Peru: worse poverty
• Thailand: growing inequality
WELLBEING OUTCOMES
b) Local, subjective measures: goal
satisfaction
WeDQoL goes beyond ‘happiness’:
• Goals of people in local contexts
• Necessity of goals to individuals
• Satisfaction of goals
Study satisfaction of top 15 necessary goals.
Country means for all sites
Interpret findings with caution
Ethiopia
Bangladesh
Peru
Thailand
Health
4.9
Food
4.5
Health
4.8
Health
4.5
Peace of mind
4.9
Water
5.0
Food
4.7
Food
5.0
Economic independence
3.6
Education
3.4
Education of children
3.9
Water
4.5
Food
4.3
Sanitation
3.9
Room/ house
4.0
Family relations
4.9
Behaving well
5.0
Good upbringing of children
2.8
Water/ electricity/ sanitation
4.0
Room/ house
4.2
Room/ house
3.6
Peace of mind
3.7
Salary work
2.8
Electricity
4.6
Faith
4.8
Family relations
4.5
Family relations
4.2
Well behaved children
3.7
Community peace
4.5
House/ home
3.8
Position of authority
3.8
Education of children
3.4
Family relations
4.5
Health
3.7
Community peace
3.4
Behaving well
4.4
Wealth
2.4
Children
2.9
Faith
4.0
Health care access
4.0
Personal progress
3.2
Personal progress
3.0
Behaving well
3.8
Wise spending
4.0
Living environment
3.8
Electricity
2.6
Professional
1.8
Provide for family
3.9
Land
2.7
Faith
3.8
Education of self
3.5
Faith
4.3
Neighbour relations
4.4
Roads
3.4
Living environment
2.8
Family occasions
4.3
Clothes
3.7
Living environment
3.4
Public transport
3.4
Household goods
4.1
Mean score
4.0
3.6
3.7
4.3
Ethiopia and Bangladesh
• Ethiopia: lower mean satisfaction of basic
material goals and economic prospects,
including wealth, land, housing, clothes and
personal progress and economic independence.
But relatively high mean satisfaction with health
(?), peace of mind, faith.
• Bangladesh: Lowest mean goal satisfaction,
across collective infrastructure (roads, electricity,
environment), prospects for personal progress,
health and education and children and their
upbringing - despite economic growth. But high
value of and satisfaction with family relations.
Peru and Thailand
• Peru: Low mean satisfaction levels echo other
study findings of more negative feelings than
any other Latin American country. Importance of
a salaried, professional job (unique) yet very low
satisfaction, reflects inequality and blocked
opportunities.
• Thailand: highest mean satisfaction levels,
especially re health and basic material needs.
Less so with education and collective good
goals. Lower satisfaction with goal of ‘wellbehaved children’, suggesting strains of rapid
growth and change.
3. The welfare mix
State
Expenditure on education. %
GNI 1994-97a.
Health expenditure. Public %
of GDP. 2000
Health expenditure. Total per
capita $. 1997-2001
Ethiopia
4.0
Bangladesh
2.2
Thailand
4.8
1.4
Peru
2.9
(3.3)
2.8
1.8
5.0
14.0
100.0
71.0
2.1
Market
Health expenditure. Private %
of GDP. 2000
2.8
2.4
2.0
1.6
International
household
Remittances %GDP 2000
0.7
4.3
1.4
1.4
1.4*
8.8
18.7
6.3*
2.6
2.5
1.8
0.8
0.7
0.7
0.6
0.0
IGO
2005
Total aid %gdp 2000
2004
Welfare mix: Ethiopia
• Critical importance of aid (huge increase to 19%
GDP by 2004); thus of donors, IGOs and INGOs
• Role in famine relief and emergency aid, now
shift to ‘productive’ services
• Growing government role in aid harmonisation
• Community institutions include burial societies
(iddirs), religious organisations and clans
• Heavy reliance on household strategies,
including distress migration
• 4 different systems within one regime
Welfare mix: Bangladesh
• Past role of aid and donors, but reducing
• Huge role of domestic NGOs – 1200+, some
very large: BRAC, Proshika, Grameen Bank
• Government subordinate in past to both; now
seeking to formalise the relationship
• Hugely complex public works and relief
programmes
• But access to programmes ‘informal’ (see below)
• Past and present migration yielding very large
remittances
Welfare mix: Peru
• Growing government programmes (including
food and social assistance)
• New drive to decentralise plus rights discourse
(legacy of SL and Truth Commission)
• Dual systems: 1. state plus new commercial
provision
• 2. Vibrant community associations, fiestas,
faenas, church charity
• Migration to secure mix and maintain Andean
links
Welfare mix: Thailand
• Growing state rights to education and now
health care (30 Baht programme), but limited
social protection
• Poverty discourse shifting to discourses around
inequality and wellbeing
• Growing commercial provision
• New acceptance of NGOs
• Traditional Baan role
• Central role of Thai family model: diversification
and internal migration + remittances to villages
4.AGENCY/ COLLECTIVE PROCESSES
Three case studies of assistance progs
Ethiopia: Food Aid
• Huge scale
• Distribution down to kebele level: either
direct or food-for-work
• Pros and cons: relief, unfairness,
destabilization
• Strong cadres lessen corruption but
reinforce state presence and dependency?
Bangladesh: rice distribution and
SKSP
• Distribution of subsidised rice
• Obligatory UP level SKSP committees.
• In practice allocation via mastaans and/or
doliokoron: local representatives of
political parties
• These act as gatekeepers – and thus to
many other programmes and benefits.
• Trade benefits for loyalty. Thus relations
with key men crucial.
Peru: milk and food programmes
• Vaso de leche (VL): substantial
programme to procure and distribute milk
and foodstuffs. Followed earlier popular
demonstrations.
• Precise legal guidelines. Each municipal
government required to set up a
committee CVL, comprising women reps.
• Tiny material benefits, but valued socialcultural links. A legitimated programme.
Food assistance:
rules and relationships
Everywhere tension between formal rules and
informal relations: allocative efficiency and
solidarity. Tendency to latter.
But different wellbeing outcomes:
• Ethiopia: cadre allocation; dependent insecurity
• Bangladesh: ‘Faustian bargain’ reproduced.
• Peru: more participatory and legitimate.
‘Successful state cooption’.
4. DISTINCT REGIMES? Ethiopia
Externally-dependent informal-insecurity
regime
• Failure of development: very low and stagnant
real social resources
• Continuing dependence on aid and external
actors.
• Path dependence due to ‘poverty traps, cycles
and ratchets’ reproducing subsistence
orientation.
• Thus continuing reliance on local informal
mechanisms and self-help
DISTINCT REGIMES? Bangladesh
Poorly functioning informal in/security regime
• Domestic NGOs and remittances
• Some rise in public productive expenditure, but
inequality and poor quality
• Complex intermeshing of actors generates
‘contamination’ of values, collusion, patronage
and illegality
• Growth and democracy but political settlement
blocked
DISTINCT REGIMES? Peru
Dual liberal-informal security regime
• Established state role but unequal access
• Racialised class heirarchy reproduces
segmentation, inequality and poverty
• Insecure livelihoods mitigated by
community and family mechanisms widely
governed by personal relations
• Growing rights discourse but no sustained
political settlement
DISTINCT REGIMES? Thailand
Productive – informal welfare regime
• Directive developmental state pursuing
growth and Thai cultural values
• Growing rights-based productive social
expenditure
• Generally successful family role in
operating mixed livelihood portfolio – large
rural base
• Strains of modernisation, value clashes
and now postponement of democracy
Conclusions: WeD wellbeing approach
WeD perspective helps understand contradictory
impact of development and social change:
• WeDQoL: Local goals and individual
satisfactions inform agency
• Different role of relationships in determining
access to welfare mix
• Welfare outcomes shaped by operation of
agency and relationships - within context of
welfare regimes
• These shaped by common global shifts, but
normally develop in path-dependent way