Rural poverty in Mexico: prevalence and challenges Expert Group Meeting on Eradicating Rural Poverty to implement the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development 27 February – 1 March 2019 Addis Ababa, Ethiopia Lo que se mide se puede mejorar www.coneval.org.mx
Around 80% percent of the population of Mexico (120 million) lives in urban areas. Urban: 2,500+ habs. Rural: < 2,500 habs. • 74 metropolitan areas concentrate over 60% of the national population. • Slightly more than 97% of the 192,000 localities are inhabited by fewer than 2,500 people. • More than nine out of ten are inhabited with a population of fewer than 500 people. 2
General Law for Social Development Article 36 Degree Access Access Degree of Educatio Access Access Housing Income of social to to basic accesibility nal lag to social to food and cohesion health housing to paved security quality services services roads space Economic Territorial Social Rights wellbeing context • Mexico was the first country to introduce an official multidimensional poverty measure in 2009. • Poverty is measured at national and state level every two years and every five years M ULTIDIMENSIONAL the municipal level , with information generated by the National Institute of Statistics and Geography (INEGI, Instituto Nacional de Estadística y Geografía). POVERTY MEASUREMENT • The methodology identifies people living in poverty as well as other vulnerable groups . • Multidimensional poverty measurement and its features are relevant indicators for social policy evaluation .
What are the main features of the methodology? Current per capita income Mexican Educational lag Population Access to health services Wellbeing Income Access to social security Territorial Access to food • Degree of social cohesion • Degree of accessibility to paved Housing and quality space roads 4 6 5 3 2 1 0 Access to basic housing services Social Deprivation Index (SDI) Social Rights
Main features Without D Vulnerable Not poor and e people by not vulnerable p Population with social r Income poverty line i social deprivations deprivations v Income a poverty line t POOR Vulnerable i people by o n income s 3 6 5 4 2 1 0 Deprivations Social Rights
Properties of the multidimensional poverty measurement 3 2 1 Dimensional Comparability across Population decomposability time decomposability Identification of disadvantaged groups • • Gender National • Children and adolescents • Rural / urban • Ethnic minorities • State • Elderly population • • Municipality Young adults • People with disabilities Regions Population 6
H ALF OF THE M EXICAN POPULATION LACKS ECONOMIC RESOURCES FOR SATISFYING BASIC NEEDS . o 2016 F OUR OUT OF TEN PEOPLE LIVE IN POVERTY AND ONE OUT OF 13 LIVE IN EXTREME POVERTY . o o O NLY ONE OUT OF FIVE DOES NOT PRESENT ECONOMIC OR SOCIAL DEPRIVATIONS . No poverty nor vulnerability Economic wellbeing Urban: 161.3 Vulnerability by social deprivations Rural: 104.9 [22.6%, [26.8%, 32.9M] (USD) 27.8M] Income poverty line Moderate poverty [50.6%, 62M] P OVERTY Vulnera- [35.9%, 44.0M] [43.6%, bility by 53.4 M ] Extreme income poverty income line Urban: 81.5 [17.5%, 21.4M] Extreme poverty [7.0%, Rural: 58.2 8.6M] (USD) [7.6%, 9.4M] 6 5 4 3 2 1 0 Social Rights / Social deprivations 7
Graph 1. Percentage of population by condition of poverty or vulnerability, according to size of locality, 2010-2016 100% 3.8 5.2 5.3 6.0 7.0 0.7 1.3 1.0 1.2 1.5 90% 23.2 24.4 24.2 24.9 27.3 80% 28.9 33.0 31.9 31.7 33.3 5.9 7.4 7.6 8.8 70% 8.7 60% 62.5 64.9 61.1 58.2 32.0 61.6 27.6 27.8 24.6 26.5 24.8 21.5 20.6 50% 17.4 27.1 41.7 40.6 39.2 40.4 40% 38.9 6.2 6.3 6.7 4.7 6.2 30% 40.8 20% 40.1 40.5 38.5 35.4 35.4 34.3 34.4 33.7 32.7 10% 0% Rural Urban Rural Urban Rural Urban Rural Urban Rural Urban 2008 2010 2012 2014 2016 Population in moderate poverty Population in extreme poverty Population vulnerable by social deprivations Population vulnerable by income Population not poor nor vulnerable Source: CONEVAL based on MCS-ENIGH 2010-2014 and MEC-MCS-ENIGH, 2016.
Graph 2. Population (percentage and millions) with social deprivation and insufficient income, according to size of locality, 2016 90.0 50.0 46.5 45.1 45.0 80.0 77.1 40.0 70.0 35.0 59.7 60.0 53.1 30.0 49.4 47.8 50.0 25.0 40.0 21.9 Percentage 20.0 29.2 29.1 17.6 Millions 16.9 30.0 15.3 24.7 15.1 15.0 21.4 13.1 13.1 18.7 20.0 16.2 10.0 13.9 13.9 13.2 8.7 8.6 8.3 8.3 7.0 9.2 9.1 6.1 10.0 5.0 3.8 0.0 0.0 Educational lag Lack of access to Lack of access to Lack of housing Lack of access to Lack of access to Population with Poulation with health services social security quality and space basic housing food income below income below services income poverty income extreme line poverty line Rural Percentage Urban Percentage Rural Millions Urban Millions Source: CONEVAL based on MEC-MCS-ENIGH, 2016.
Graph 3. Inequality of opportunities and outcomes for different population groups: Poverty gap amongst selected populations, México, 2016 100 90 85.1 80.5 78.5 80 70 31.3 45.0 31.1 56.5 60 Percentage 47.8 50 16.4 40.6 37.3 37.8 6.4 40 4.6 4.0 3.9 30 49.2 47.3 41.5 20 40.1 40.1 36.0 33.9 33.2 10 0 Rural Non elderly Urban non Indigenous Non Young Elderly Young Mujeres indígenas en Hombres no indígenas Menores indígenas Menores no indígenas Adultos mayores Menores de 65 años Jóvenes (12-29) en Jóvenes (12-29) en indigenous non indigenous indigenous women rural zonas rurales en zonas urbanas indigenous indigenous rural indígenas en zonas no indígenas en zonas zonas rurales zonas urbanas urban rurales urbanas women urban population population men women population population Moderate poverty Extreme poverty Población en situación de pobreza moderada Población en situación de pobreza extrema Source: CONEVAL based on MEC-MCS-ENIGH 2016.
Graph 4. Indigenous population (percentage and millions) living in poverty, with social deprivations or income insufficiency, 2016 90.0 70.0 79.9 78.8 77.6 80.0 60.0 59.3 70.0 53.1 64.6 50.0 60.0 45.1 54.0 49.3 Percentage 48.3 40.0 50.0 43.2 41.0 Million 40.0 30.0 34.8 33.0 31.5 30.0 21.2 20.0 18.3 17.9 19.3 17.0 16.7 20.0 16.3 16.7 15.5 15.2 13.3 11.4 10.0 10.4 10.0 6.4 5.8 5.6 5.4 5.5 4.5 3.4 3.0 2.4 2.3 2.2 0.9 0.0 0.0 Population Population Educational Lack of access Lack of access Lack of Lack of access Lack of access Income below Income below living in living in lag to health to social housing to basic to food extreme poverty poverty extreme services security quality and housing poverty income line poverty space services income line POVERTY SOCIAL DEPRIVATIONS ECONOMIC WELL-BEING HLI % NHLI % HLI Million NHLI Million Source: CONEVAL based on MEC-ENIGH 2016. 11
The dual nature of poverty 5 urban municipalities concentrate the same amount of people living in poverty (3.2 million) than 450 smaller, rural municipalities To improve Population conditions of To generate concentration Population growth and conditions for equality in the dispersion development most developed where territories infrastructure and opportunities need to be distributed 12
Poverty programs: Social and economical Durable OPORTUNIDADES (1997-2018) inequalities Ethnic/gender/age - Investment in human capital: in rural education, health, food. spaces - Conditional cash transfers. Territorial - Focus on families and individuals (much less on context). Given the lack of economic growth, the possibility to movilize these new resources has been limited. 13
Challenges for poverty measurement at local level: sources of information Income and Population census or Small area-estimation Qualitative research Expenditure inter-censal surveys methods for indirectly agenda : CONEVAL National Survey (every 5 years) calculating the rest of and local governments (every 2 years) the indicators It is representative Representative at CONEVAL is Qualitative at the state and the municipal level. currently developing methodologies national level, but Information to build a conceptual and assess for social not municipal. four indicatord. methodological processes, changes It is not possible to and factors invoved agenda for Complete directly estimate estimating poverty in poverty evolution. information for income, access to at smaller areas , identifying if a food and access to rural and urban. person is in a social security situation of poverty.
Thank you! Paloma Villagómez Ornelas Deputy General Manager of Guidelines for Poverty and Social Development Measurement CONEVAL pvillagomez@coneval.org.mx www.coneval.org.mx
Recommend
More recommend
