anatolii rojco population inequality and welfare measuring (based on households budgets survey)...

28
ANATOLII ROJCO Population Inequality and Welfare Measuring (based on Households Budgets Survey) ”One cannot achieve sustainable welfare if half of the country will prosper and half would live in misery” Franklin Delano ROOSVELT - USA President (1932-1945)

Upload: cecilia-britney-alexander

Post on 01-Jan-2016

220 views

Category:

Documents


0 download

TRANSCRIPT

Page 1: ANATOLII ROJCO Population Inequality and Welfare Measuring (based on Households Budgets Survey) ”One cannot achieve sustainable welfare if half of the

ANATOLII ROJCO

Population Inequality and Welfare Measuring

(based on Households Budgets Survey)

”One cannot achieve sustainable welfare if half of the country will prosper and half would live in misery”Franklin Delano ROOSVELT - USA President (1932-1945)

Page 2: ANATOLII ROJCO Population Inequality and Welfare Measuring (based on Households Budgets Survey) ”One cannot achieve sustainable welfare if half of the

The main goal of the investigation is to estimate inequality using modern scientific methods of inequality measuring and analysis.

The object for inequality measuring and inequality if the household. The data source are the data of Household Budget Survey carried out by the

National Bureau of Statistics of the Republic of Moldova.

The main indicator or population welfare are the consumption expenditure of households.

Page 3: ANATOLII ROJCO Population Inequality and Welfare Measuring (based on Households Budgets Survey) ”One cannot achieve sustainable welfare if half of the

Households’ distribution in correlation with consumption expenditures and disposable income (2005), %

Quintiles of consumption expenditures

Share of households whose consumption expenditures as related

to disposable incomes are:

Share of households whose consumption expenditures over pass

disposable income:

higher lower equalup to 1,2

timesfrom 1,2 to 1,5

timesover 1,5

times

I 81,9 17,9 0,2 17,9 16,0 48,0

II 54,4 45,4 0,2 22,4 15,5 16,5

III 33,4 66,4 0,1 17,1 8,6 7,7

IV 28,0 71,9 0,1 14,0 8,4 5,6

V 21,2 78,8 - 11,4 5,7 4,1

Total 40,4 59,5 0,1 16,2 10,5 13,7

Page 4: ANATOLII ROJCO Population Inequality and Welfare Measuring (based on Households Budgets Survey) ”One cannot achieve sustainable welfare if half of the

0.39220.3866

0.3766 0.37750.3637

0.35180.3571

0.3766

0.41050.4014

0.3871

0.42080.4279

0.4165

0.43420.4435

0.3

0.4

0.5

1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005

Consumption expenditures Disposable incomes

Dynamics of Gini coefficient during 1998-2005

Page 5: ANATOLII ROJCO Population Inequality and Welfare Measuring (based on Households Budgets Survey) ”One cannot achieve sustainable welfare if half of the

Dynamics of quintile and decile coefficients of funds

6.79

6.15.84

6.416.96.76

7.227.62

13.2612.19

11.46

11.67

10.15 11.1

9.87

9,22

5.5

6.5

7.5

8.5

9.5

10.5

11.5

12.5

13.5

1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005

quintile decile social security line

Page 6: ANATOLII ROJCO Population Inequality and Welfare Measuring (based on Households Budgets Survey) ”One cannot achieve sustainable welfare if half of the

Consumption expenditure distribution by quitiles

6

10.7

15.3

22.2

45.6

7.5

11.6

15.7

21.6

6.7

11.2

15.4

21.7

4543.6

0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50

I quintile

II quintile

III quintile

IV quintile

V quintile

1998 2003 2005

Page 7: ANATOLII ROJCO Population Inequality and Welfare Measuring (based on Households Budgets Survey) ”One cannot achieve sustainable welfare if half of the

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100

Uniform distribution line 1998 2003 2005

Lorenz Curves

Page 8: ANATOLII ROJCO Population Inequality and Welfare Measuring (based on Households Budgets Survey) ”One cannot achieve sustainable welfare if half of the

0.3823

0.3227

0.3443

0.349

0.3572

0.3844

0.399

0.3588

0.3568

0.3565

0.33140.3297

0.3166

0.3252

0.3656

0.3426

0.3481 0.3468

0.3776

0.3462

0.3282 0.3288

0.3476

0.3411

0.3

0.325

0.35

0.375

0.4

1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005

Big cities Other cities Villages

Gini coefficient dynamics in territorial aspect

Page 9: ANATOLII ROJCO Population Inequality and Welfare Measuring (based on Households Budgets Survey) ”One cannot achieve sustainable welfare if half of the

107.1

100

96.6

102.1

106.1

107.8106.6

107.4

105.5

101.5

96.796.3

100.2

98.6

97.4

95

100

105

1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005

GDP (comparable prices)Gini coefficient (consumption expenditures)

GDP evolution and Gini coefficient as against previous year, %

Page 10: ANATOLII ROJCO Population Inequality and Welfare Measuring (based on Households Budgets Survey) ”One cannot achieve sustainable welfare if half of the

Level of population inequality in different countries

a – consumption expenditures b – disposable income c – author’s calculations

Country YearGini coefficient Fund coefficient

decile quintile

Countries with reduced Gini coefficient(G ≤ 0,3)

Dania Sweden Norway Finland Ukraine Germany

1997b

2000b

2000b

2000b

2003a

2000b

0,2470,2500,2580,2690,2810,283

8,1926,1676,0005,6505,8976,906

4,3134,0223,8753,8234,0764,341

Countries with average Gini coefficient (0,3 < G ≤ 0,4)

Romania France EstoniaItaly Moldovac

Russia

2003a

1995b

2003a

2000b

2005a

2002a

0,3100,3270,3580,3600,3780,399

7,3948,96411,04011,65211,11712,750

4,8405,5836,3886,4626,7927,639

Countries with high Gini coefficient (G > 0,4)

GeorgiaTurkmenistanEl SalvadorBrazil BotswanaNamibia

2003a

1998a

2002b

2003b

1993a

1993b

0,4040,4080,5240,5800,6300,743

15,15012,19255,43957,2580,857129,000

8,2867,78720,70423,88531,95556,214

Page 11: ANATOLII ROJCO Population Inequality and Welfare Measuring (based on Households Budgets Survey) ”One cannot achieve sustainable welfare if half of the

Sex and age structure of households depending on their welfare level, %

Big cities Other cities Villages

I V I V I V

Sex of household head:

man 43,7 40,9 59,7 52,8 69,1 56,3

woman 50,3 59,1 40,3 47,2 30,9 43,7

Age of household head:

up to 25 years old – 17,8 1,0 5,5 1,0 2,2

25-34 years 19,1 22,6 14,0 5,3 11,5 6,1

35-44 years 23,6 15,7 25,0 16,8 23,4 16,0

45-54 years 24,2 17,2 30,1 28,5 25,8 29,8

55-64 years 17,4 13,9 17,4 28,5 15,3 20,4

65 and over 15,7 12,8 12,4 15,4 23,0 25,6

Total 100,0 100,0 100,0 100,0 100,0 100,0

Page 12: ANATOLII ROJCO Population Inequality and Welfare Measuring (based on Households Budgets Survey) ”One cannot achieve sustainable welfare if half of the

Distribution of households with different welfare levels by number and composition, %

Number of household members:Big cities Other cities Villages

I V I V I V

1 member 4,3 35,9 6,6 40,9 12,3 40,3

2 members 17,6 32,0 19,9 32,7 22,5 30,3

3 members 22,5 19,4 27,7 18,1 21,2 15,4

4 members 43,6 9,4 35,8 7,6 22,4 9,7

5 members 7,7 2,9 5,4 0,7 12,9 2,8

6 and more members 4,2 0,4 4,6 – 8,7 1,7

Total 100,0 100,0 100,0 100,0 100,0 100,0

Household composition:

With one child 41,4 21,1 33,2 13,5 21,6 13,9

With two children 5,2 5,0 15,6 3,1 20,9 6,5

With three children 7,7 0,6 2,5 0,3 7,2 1,2

With four and more children 4,2 – 1,8 – 3,1 0,3

Without children 41,4 73,3 46,8 83,1 47,2 78,2

Total 100,0 100,0 100,0 100,0 100,0 100,0

Page 13: ANATOLII ROJCO Population Inequality and Welfare Measuring (based on Households Budgets Survey) ”One cannot achieve sustainable welfare if half of the

Disposable income in households with different welfare level(in average per one member per month)

Big cities Other cities Villages

I V I V I V

Disposable income, lei 384,80 1191,67 297,45 963,09 209,88 904,10

including:

Employment related income 254,80 772,42 213,32 482,72 48,70 217,04

Income from agriculture 0,00 3,20 15,56 57,55 87,34 306,11

Income from non-agriculture production

0,00 50,87 6,69 50,05 – 0,42 37,73

Income from property 0,00 5,89 0,00 0,00 0,00 1,36

Social payments 85,76 90,33 50,21 121,44 61,70 115,81

Other current transfers 44,24 268,44 11,67 251,51 12,51 225,84

Out of which:

Money from abroad 17,98 75,99 2,85 155,37 4,17 180,44

Page 14: ANATOLII ROJCO Population Inequality and Welfare Measuring (based on Households Budgets Survey) ”One cannot achieve sustainable welfare if half of the

Distribution of households and volume of money from abroad, %

Big cities Other

cities Villages

Households receiving money from abroad

Quintiles: I 1,6 3,3 6,7

II 1,3 6,9 12,9

III 11,6 20,1 18,6

IV 16,0 26,3 21,1

V 69,5 43,4 40,8

Total 100,0 100,0 100,0

Volume of money received from abroad

Quintiles: I 1,4 1,7 3,4

II 1,1 3,6 8,1

III 7,6 13,0 12,9

IV 7,2 25,8 18,9

V 82,7 55,9 56,7

Total 100,0 100,0 100,0

Page 15: ANATOLII ROJCO Population Inequality and Welfare Measuring (based on Households Budgets Survey) ”One cannot achieve sustainable welfare if half of the

Consumption expenditures in households with different welfare levels(in average per one member per month)

Big cities Other cities Villages

I V I V I V

Total consumption ditures, lei

176,88

1200,56

177,80

1005,51

163,43

1058,54

Including in %:

– food and non-alcoholic drinks 61,40 37,30 70,93 47,07 78,49 42,55

– alcoholic drinks and tobacco 3,46 1,90 1,65 1,19 4,58 2,50

– clothes and shoes 2,58 12,93 1,52 10,82 1,93 8,20

– dwelling maintenance 15,31 13,57 15,15 16,19 7,33 23,95

– dwelling equipping 0,84 3,63 1,96 2,08 1,78 3,98

– health 3,60 3,70 2,24 5,28 1,19 5,87

– transport 3,43 7,42 0,28 2,94 0,76 3,80

– communication services 2,29 3,98 3,01 4,41 2,02 3,51

– culture and entertainment 1,91 4,22 0,86 1,90 0,43 3,23

– education 0,59 2,17 0,16 4,08 0,09 0,39

– hotel, cafeteria, restaurant 0,69 3,78 0,00 0,40 0,01 0,14

– other goods and services 3,91 5,30 2,25 3,64 1,38 1,87

Page 16: ANATOLII ROJCO Population Inequality and Welfare Measuring (based on Households Budgets Survey) ”One cannot achieve sustainable welfare if half of the

Housing depending on household’s welfare level and residence of its members

Big cities Other cities Villages

I V I V I V

By one household member, m2

total area 13,1 22,9 20,4 38,2 23,3 45,6

habitable area 8,2 14,2 14,0 26,0 16,7 32,8

Distribution of household members by assurance with habitable area, %

up to 9,0 m2 65,2 31,8 33,0 6,5 23,2 3,0

9,01 – 20,0 m2 30,5 50,1 48,7 39,1 49,2 24,3

more than 20,0 m2 4,3 18,1 18,3 54,4 27,6 72,7

Total 100,0 100,0 100,0 100,0 100,0 100,0

Page 17: ANATOLII ROJCO Population Inequality and Welfare Measuring (based on Households Budgets Survey) ”One cannot achieve sustainable welfare if half of the

Presence of utility commodities in the dwelling depending on household welfare level ( in % of total of households )

Big cities Other cities Villages 

I V I V I V 

Electricity 100,0 100,0 96,8 100,0 96,8 100,0 

Water

water pipe line 100,0 100,0 48,1 60,4 1,3 12,7 

from water pump – – 13,3 15,9 0,4 1,4 

from well – – 36,1 23,6 96,6 82,8 

other – – 2,5 – 1,7 3,1 

Sewerage 100,0 100,0 48,1 60,4 1,3 12,7 

Hot water (centralized supply) 82,6 73,6 38,6 32,4 – – 

Gas  

network (centralized supply) 65,2 69,4 74,7 78,6 6,3 22,8

bottled 17,4 2,4 22,8 21,4 83,8 76,0

Heating:  

centralized 100,0 98,6 13,3 16,5 – – autonomous – – 30,4 44,0 1,4 13,6 stove – centralized on gas – 1,4 17,7 18,7 1,3 7,2 stove with wood and coal – – 38,0 20,9 97,3 79,1Bath or shower 95,7 99,0 39,2 54,4 0,1 2,7Telephone 78,3 85,6 66,5 89,0 33,2 68,4

Page 18: ANATOLII ROJCO Population Inequality and Welfare Measuring (based on Households Budgets Survey) ”One cannot achieve sustainable welfare if half of the

Households’ equipping with durables(pieces by 100 households)

Durables Big cities Other cities Villages

I V I V I V

Radio 14 10 7 13 19 25

TV set: - colour 84 94 67 89 34 71

- white-black 4 3 21 9 40 24

Tape recorder 30 37 13 26 20 23

Video receiver 14 17 2 10 3 13

Musical set 3 15 1 6 1 7

Camera 32 36 4 12 4 11

PC 5 15 ─ 3 ─ 3

Fridge 91 84 82 93 41 77

Washing machine 46 58 46 64 28 56

Sewing machine 28 29 16 27 9 26

Vacuum cleaner 51 66 30 52 7 26

Microwave 5 6 1 3 ─ 3

Bicycle for adults 5 5 1 8 11 17

Motor bicycle ─ ─ 1 2 4 7

Car 11 15 4 23 4 20

Page 19: ANATOLII ROJCO Population Inequality and Welfare Measuring (based on Households Budgets Survey) ”One cannot achieve sustainable welfare if half of the

Durables’ operation period in households

Durables

Operation term, %

TotalUp to 5 y 6-10 y 11-15 y 16-20 y 20 and over

Color TV set

Big cities I 26,9 45,3 17,5 10,3 – 100,0

V 43,1 28,9 19,5 6,3 2,3 100,0

Other cities I 36,0 25,0 22,0 7,0 10,0 100,0

V 38,9 27,0 14,5 14,4 5,3 100,0

Villages I 53,9 22,0 16,7 6,1 1,3 100,0

V 49,5 27,4 14,8 6,3 2,0 100,0

Fridge

Big cities I 16,1 14,2 3,8 17,2 48,7 100,0

V 21,8 15,9 15,1 15,4 31,9 100,0

Other cities

I 5,5 10,0 18,9 22,7 42,8 100,0

V 15,0 14,1 15,6 19,8 35,5 100,0

Villages I 6,7 7,3 14,6 15,5 56,0 100,0

V 14,9 10,2 15,2 16,5 43,2 100,0

Washing machine

Big cities I 37,6 7,5 11,4 32,1 11,4 100,0

V 41,6 20,8 10,9 9,8 16,9 100,0

Other cities I 11,2 15,4 22,2 18,9 32,3 100,0

V 24,7 16,0 17,0 15,9 26,5 100,0

Villages I 14,2 15,9 17,5 14,2 38,2 100,0

V 23,9 13,2 19,3 13,7 30,0 100,0

Car

Big cities I – – 48,7 – 51,3 100,0

V 5,2 17,5 48,8 17,0 11,5 100,0

Other cities I – – 22,8 13,7 63,5 100,0

V – 23,8 28,1 28,3 19,9 100,0

Villages I – 12,1 12,7 23,9 51,3 100,0

V 3,3 16,9 35,1 22,0 22,7 100,0

Page 20: ANATOLII ROJCO Population Inequality and Welfare Measuring (based on Households Budgets Survey) ”One cannot achieve sustainable welfare if half of the

Land usage by households, %

Big cities Other cities Villages

I V I V I V

Land:

– have – 11,3 59,9 66,8 100,0 100,0

– don’t have 100,0 88,7 40,1 33,2 – –

Total 100,0 100,0 100,0 100,0 100,0 100,0

Type of land:

– near house plot – 1,0 51,4 52,2 99,5 99,8

– auxiliary household – 1,4 5,2 13,2 84,8 86,1

– villa land – 91,7 20,4 25,3 – –

Page 21: ANATOLII ROJCO Population Inequality and Welfare Measuring (based on Households Budgets Survey) ”One cannot achieve sustainable welfare if half of the

Health status of household members depending on welfare level, %

Big cities Other cities Villages

I V I V I V

Chronic disease:

– don’t have 68,0 57,3 77,1 56,0 72,5 54,7

– hypertonic disease 4,6 9,1 5,5 10,1 3,6 8,3

– hear diseases 5,0 3,9 1,4 4,5 1,9 4,3

– chronic bronchitis 1,2 2,8 1,9 1,6 1,1 1,7

– Bronchitis asthma – 0,8 0,4 0,3 0,5 0,5

– digestive system diseases 6,3 10,1 4,9 9,9 4,7 9,7

– kidney diseases 2,5 3,6 1,1 3,0 2,3 3,4

– diabetes – 1,1 0,5 2,3 0,5 1,0

– tuberculosis – 0,1 – 0,4 0,3 0,1

– other diseases 12,4 11,2 7,2 11,8 12,6 16,3

Total 100,0 100,0 100,0 100,0 100,0 100,0

Beneficiaries of medical insurance:

– are 77,0 87,2 73,5 84,1 66,2 75,3

– are not 23,0 12,8 26,5 15,9 33,8 24,7

Total 100,0 100,0 100,0 100,0 100,0 100,0

Page 22: ANATOLII ROJCO Population Inequality and Welfare Measuring (based on Households Budgets Survey) ”One cannot achieve sustainable welfare if half of the

Household expenditures for health

Big cities Other cities Villages

I V I V I V

Lei per month

Total expenditures: 6,56 45,32 4,26 53,17 2,00 64,51

including:

– doctor consultation, laboratory tests, diagnosis, physic - therapeutic treatment

0,00 6,67 0,40 7,74 0,13 4,66

– payment for hospital treatment 2,38 1,73 0,10 1,03 0,04 5,52

– dentist services 0,00 7,25 0,00 4,55 0,10 11,29

– drugs procurement 4,18 29,67 3,76 39,85 1,73 43,04

In percentage

Total expenditures : 100,0 100,0 100,0 100,0 100,0 100,0

including:

– doctor consultation, laboratory tests, diagnosis, physic - therapeutic treatment

0,0 14,7 9,4 14,6 6,5 7,2

– payment for hospital treatment 36,3 3,8 2,3 1,9 2,0 8,6

– dentist services 0,0 16,0 0,0 8,6 5,0 17,5

– drugs procurement 63,7 65,5 88,3 74,9 86,5 66,7

Page 23: ANATOLII ROJCO Population Inequality and Welfare Measuring (based on Households Budgets Survey) ”One cannot achieve sustainable welfare if half of the

Education level of household members (of 15 years and over), %

Education

Big cities Other cities Villages

I V I V I V

University 12,1 37,2 3,8 27,0 1,3 12,8

Secondary vocational (college) 10,3 16,9 11,5 27,6, 4,8 13,9

Secondary general (lyceum) 44,8 36,9 52,9 28,3 32,7 34,6

Incomplete gymnasium 25,9 8,1 24,2 14,6 45,1 27,6

Primary 5,2 0,6 4,1 1,9 10,7 7,4

With no education 1,7 0,3 3,5 0,6 5,4 3,7

Total 100,0 100,0 100,0 100,0 100,0 100,0

Page 24: ANATOLII ROJCO Population Inequality and Welfare Measuring (based on Households Budgets Survey) ”One cannot achieve sustainable welfare if half of the

Households with children studying on contract basis, %

Big cities Other cities Villages

I V I V I V

Share of households with children studying on contract basis out of the total number of households

13,8 16,4 3,6 13,9 2,5 9,0

Distribution of households with children studying on contract basis (all households - 100,0%)

1,8 59,9 7,8 31,1 10,8 28,8

Page 25: ANATOLII ROJCO Population Inequality and Welfare Measuring (based on Households Budgets Survey) ”One cannot achieve sustainable welfare if half of the

Distribution of households with different welfare levels by number of visits to service providers for population, %

QuintileTotal

I II III IV V

District health center

Big cities 2,3 3,3 11,5 23,4 59,5 100,0

Other cities 9,6 16,2 18,3 22,8 33,1 100,0

villages 5,7 16,0 15,5 21,9 40,9 100,0

Post Office

Big cities 3,2 6,0 15,3 32,7 42,8 100,0

Other cities 12,8 23,5 23,5 21,8 18,4 100,0

villages 17,9 21,5 22,4 23,0 15,2 100,0

Local administration body

Big cities 0,0 0,0 0,0 71,3 28,7 100,0

Other cities 20,3 10,2 28,3 23,0 18,2 100,0

villages 11,3 23,4 22,6 28,0 14,7 100,0

Library or club

Big cities 2,9 6,4 15,7 21,6 53,4 100,0

Other cities 11,5 16,2 5,4 21,7 45,2 100,0

Villages 10,2 21,3 11,3 16,6 40,6 100,0

Concert hall, theatre, cinema

Big cities 0,0 0,0 6,0 6,8 87,2 100,0

Other cities 0,0 0,0 15,0 15,0 70,0 100,0

Villages 0,0 0,0 0,0 0,0 100,0 100,0

Page 26: ANATOLII ROJCO Population Inequality and Welfare Measuring (based on Households Budgets Survey) ”One cannot achieve sustainable welfare if half of the

Self-assessment of household’s living standards, %

Big cities Other cities Villages

I V I V I V

Very good – 0,3 – – – –

Good 4,3 9,4 0,6 7,1 0,9 8,0

Satisfactory 56,5 69,7 57,0 68,7 73,0 79,3

Bad 26,1 18,8 34,2 23,1 22,0 10,9

Very bad 13,1 1,8 8,2 1,1 4,1 1,8

Total 100,0 100,0 100,0 100,0 100,0 100,0

Page 27: ANATOLII ROJCO Population Inequality and Welfare Measuring (based on Households Budgets Survey) ”One cannot achieve sustainable welfare if half of the

Level of difficulty when paying for utility services depending on household’s welfare level, %

Big cities Other cities Villages

I V I V I VCentralized heating:

– never 4,3 35,8 – 16,7 – –

– sometimes 43,5 33,4 100,0 83,3 – –

– frequently 52,2 30,8 – – – –

Natural gas centralized supply :

– never 66,7 74,6 14,7 38,2 55,1 8,5

– sometimes 13,3 21,6 69,8 32,8 40,8 65,8

– frequently 20,0 3,8 15,5 29,0 4,1 25,6

Electricity:

– never 52,2 73,0 40,5 53,8 45,5 31,6

– sometimes 34,8 22,8 47,7 27,5 51,2 67,0

– frequently 13,0 4,2 11,8 18,7 3,3 1,4

Access to centralized hot water supply:

– yes 39,1 41,2 – – – –

– no 60,9 58,8 100,0 100,0 100,0 100,0

– frequently 13,0 4,2 11,8 18,7 3,3 1,4

Page 28: ANATOLII ROJCO Population Inequality and Welfare Measuring (based on Households Budgets Survey) ”One cannot achieve sustainable welfare if half of the

Size of monthly disposable incomes sufficient for settling household's problems (per one household member, lei)

Big cities Other cities Villages

I V I V I V

Disposable income 384,80 1191,67 297,45 963,09 209,88 904,10

Sufficient amount to ensure:

- minimal needs 359,47 563,40 306,90 495,72 321,29 423,95

- normal needs 1235,40 1863,90 876,42 1375,43 875,38 1345,54

Difference between the disposable income and the amount sufficient for ensuring :

– minimal needs 25,33 628,27 9,45 467,37 -111,91 480,15

– normal needs -850,60 -672,23 -578,97 -412,34 -665,50 -441,44