Transcript Document

Why MES with HUMAN RIGHTS?
Integrating Macro Economic Strategies with Human
Rights
Project Aims and Objectives
To pilot a process of analysis, development of policy
recommendations, and capacity building that promotes the
realization of economic and social rights at the country level, with
particular attention to addressing the disadvantage associated with
gender, class, race and ethnicity.
To foster and develop synergies between human rights and
progressive political economy approaches.
To develop methodologies for evaluating macroeconomic policy from
a human rights perspective to progressively realize the economic
and social rights and to meet the minimum core obligations.
To develop the capacities of civil society and government
organizations to draw upon both human rights norms, standards,
obligations and procedures and the analytical and policy
development tools of progressive political economy and enhance
citizen’s capacities to evaluate and monitor governmental action.
The project examines six aspects
of macroeconomic policy:
(1) fiscal policy
(2) public expenditure
(3) taxation
(4) monetary policy
(5) international trade
(6) regulation: pension reform
Human Rights Instruments
Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR
Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of
Racial Discrimination (CERD)
International Covenant on Civil and Political
Rights (ICCPR)
International Covenant on Economic, Social and
Cultural Rights (ICESCR).
Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of
Discrimination Against Women (CEDAW)
Convention on the Rights of the Child (CRC)
Clarification of human rights
obligations





The obligation to respect requires states to refrain from
interfering with the enjoyment of economic, social and
cultural rights.
The obligation to protect requires States to prevent
violations of such rights by third parties.
The obligation to fulfil requires States to take appropriate
legislative, administrative, budgetary, judicial and other
measures towards the full realization of such rights.
The obligation of conduct requires action reasonably
calculated to realize the enjoyment of a particular right.
The obligation of result requires States to achieve
specific targets to satisfy a detailed substantive standard.
States must pay regard to the
following key points






requirement for progressive realization
use of maximum available resources
avoidance of retrogression
minimum core obligation for satisfaction of
minimum essential levels
non-discrimination and equality
participation, transparency and accountability
Evaluating Economic Policies In the
Light of Human Rights Obligations




Policies: public expenditure, taxation, fiscal and monetary
policy at the macroeconomic level, international trade, and
regulation of non-state actors, using the case of pension
reform
Key Question: How has policy been conducted- has it
consisted of action ‘reasonably calculated to realize the
enjoyment of a particular right’, selecting rights which
might reasonably be thought to have a strong relation to
the policy instrument?
Methods: Quantitative indicators plus qualitative
examination of relevant legislation and policy processes
Cross-check the analysis of conduct with a quantitative
and qualitative analysis of relevant ‘results’ for the
relevant rights
Public Expenditure and ES Rights
in the United States
Minimum Core Obligations –
Obligation of Conduct

Resource allocation and structure of
entitlements must be designed with the aim of
guaranteeing the population with the
enjoyment of minimum essential levels of ES
rights.

Applying an adequate standard of living
overall as well as to specific rights.
Is there an entitlement to the minimum
essential level of food?

Obligation of Conduct:
Food Assistance Programs
Food Stamp Program

School Lunch Program (Free and Reduced-Price Components)

Special Supplemental Nutrition Program for Women, Infants, and
Children (The WIC Program)

Child and Adult Care Food Program (Lower-Income Components)

School Breakfast Program (Free and Reduced-Price Components)

Nutrition Program for the Elderly

The Emergency Food Assistance Program (TEFAP)

Summer Food Service Program

Commodity Supplemental Food Program (CSFP)

Food Distribution Program on Indian Reservations (FDPIR)

Farmers’ Market Nutrition Programs

Special Milk Program (Free Segment)

Minimum Core Obligations –
Obligation of Result

There should be no section of the population
that is deprived of minimum essential levels of
enjoyment of ES rights.

Is basic nutrition of the most deprived people
improving?
Source: U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA), Economic Research Service, Household Food Security
in the United States, 2005
Food Insecurity & Hunger, 2005
Source: Food Research and Action Center ’s analysis of USDA Food Report.
Public Expenditure and ES
Rights in Mexico
ICESCR Principle: Progressive Realization
and Non Retrogression
Obligations of Conduct –
States should use public expenditure –social expenditure, in
particular– in the service of human rights.
How to form a judgment?



Ratio of public expenditure (especially social expenditure) to GDP
over time. Has it increased or decreased?
Ratio of public expenditure to GDP comparing with countries in
similar rank of development. Is Mexico spending less or more than
its peers?
What are the amounts allocated to specific rights, such as the right
to health and education? And, is the share increasing or decreasing
over time?
Evolution of public social spending in Mexico 1985-2003
Public Social Expenditure in Mexico as % GDP
Percentage
8
7
6
5
4
3
2
1
0
1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003
Year
Source: OECD, Country Statistical Profiles, 2007. On line, www.oecd.org
But…how does Mexico compare with other LAC
countries?
Public Social Expenditure as % GDP (2004)
40
30
20
10
Country
Source: ECLAC, Statistic and Social Indicators 2007.
LA
C
a
Pa
na
m
o
éx
ic
M
Cu
ba
Ri
ca
Co
st
a
l
Br
as
i
a
0
Ar
ge
nt
in
Percentage
50
Obligations of Result –
This obligation can be measured by the realization of specific human
rights related to each kind of expenditure.


An array of indicators of well being outcomes for specific rights, such as
education, health, food, access to water, etc. is required. In general, are
average levels of well being improving or deteriorating?
It is important to disaggregate by sex, age, class, and ethnicity as much
as existing data allows, and to urge national governments to collect and
distribute disaggregated economic data.
MM rate (per 100,000 born
alive)
Maternal mortality rates LAC (2000)
300
250
200
150
100
50
0
Brasil
Costa
Rica
Cuba
Chile
Country
Source: ECLAC Statistic and Social Indicators 2007.
Mexico Panama
LAC
Taxation and ES Rights in
Mexico
Integrating Macroeconomic Strategies and
Human Rights – A Case Study: US and
Mexico
Taxation in Mexico: an
overview







Low tax to GDP ratio – 10% in 2004
Tax base is narrow
Tax collection is too low
Numerous tax exemptions and special regimes
High level of informality ın the economy
Systems for generating public information are weak
Low reliance on corporate and income taxes and
social security contributions, high reliance on good
and services taxes (55% of total revenue, highest in
the OECD)
Tax revenue in OECD countries, America and Mexico, 2004 (% of GDP)
30.00%
25.00%
1.0%
Tax revenue % of GDP
3.8%
20.00%
6.7%
1.8%
15.00%
0.7%
2.0%
1.8%
2.3%
2.4%
10.00%
6.7%
0.4%
2.9%
5.7%
12.7%
5.00%
0.5%
4.1%
0.2%
3.9%
2.1%
1.8%
1.4%
3.8%
4.8%
3.1%
1.9%
0.00%
OCDE
Income tax
South America
Other direct taxes
Central America
VAT
Source: Ministry of Finance, Mexico (2007)
IEPS
Latin America
Other indirect taxes
M exico 2006/p
Taxation and ES Rights in
Mexico




Case study: Mexico. Using the following
principles inherent to economic and
social rights:
Maximum available resources
Non-discrimination equality
Transparency, and accountability and
participation
Non-discrimination and equality
Obligation of conduct : to ensure that tax laws
and collection measures do not discriminate.
Do the income tax rules discriminate on the basis of
gender, sexual orientation, types of household,
citizenship, or civil status? Are there tax loopholes that
benefit the rich and enable them to move their resources
overseas? Are taxpayers of all social groups treated
equally in the implementation of tax laws?
Non-discrimination and equality – what the
data say – Obligations of Conduct (VAT)

Lowest income population – 45.8% of their income in
food and medicines, highest income population - 11.7%

Special treatments on VAT represent a high subsidy for
the highest income population


People in the highest income decile pay only 6.4% of
VAT collection and people in the lowest income decile
pay 11.4%
VAT ıs regressive– rules on VAT exemption seem to be
manipulated by business and producers to avoid
payment
VAT INCIDENCE
Decil
Percentage
of
Total Collection
Net Payment wrt
Including Exempted
personal
Products as part of
income
(%)
Income (%)
I
1.451
11.4
5.221
II
2.367
10.7
4.890
III
3.339
10.4
5.053
IV
4.256
10.0
5.069
V
5.563
9.3
5.30
VI
6.969
9.0
5.371
VII
8.955
8.6
5.527
VIII
10.923
8.8
5.310
IX
15.291
8.1
5.181
X
40.887
6.5
5.774
Source: ENIGH, 2002
Taxatıon and ES rıghts
TAX REFORM 2007
What are the implications in terms of equality and
human rights?
“…the best tax is that levied on a foreign
national living outside the country…”
Taxation and Human Rights
in the United States
Maximum Available Resources
There is widespread agreement that maximum available
resources does not just depend on the size and structure of
the economy and its rate of growth. It also depends on how the
state mobilizes resources to fund its obligations. Thus it is
important to consider the level and structure of tax rates;
effectiveness of tax administration; structure of any fees
charged for use of public services; effectiveness of
administration of user fees; availability of other sources of
revenue inflow of foreign aid; government borrowing; and
interest payments to domestic and foreign creditors.
Obligation of conduct

The obligation is to introduce and implement tax
laws and tax administration that are capable of
generating sufficient revenue for ES rights in
ways that comply with human rights obligations.
Total Tax Revenue as Percentage of GDP,
1975-2003: Country Comparison
Percentage of GDP
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
1975 1985 1990 1995 2000 2001 2002 2003
Year
Source: Revenue Statistics 1965-2003, OECD 2004, p. 18
Norway
Canada
Sweden
Switzerland
United States
Denmark
United Kingdom
France
Germany
Total Tax Revenue as Percentage of GDP: United States
Percentage of GDP
31
30
29
28
United States
27
26
25
24
23
1975
1985
1990
1995
2000
2001
2002
Year
Source: Revenue Statistics 1965-2003, OECD 2004, p. 18
2003