Colombia*
(Last updated September 2006)
|
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Introduction and OverviewColombia is located on the northwestern corner of the South American continent, having access to both the Atlantic and Pacific Oceans (to the north and west respectively). Its neighbor countries are Panama to the northwest, Venezuela to the northeast, Brazil to the southeast, Ecuador and Peru to the south. The total territory is 1.1 million square kilometers and its total population is 44.5 million inhabitants, the majority of whom live in urban areas (72.5% of the population). Historically, Colombia is characterized in Latin America for having a long tradition of democracy and institutional stability. Since 1880, along with Argentina, Colombia is the country that has changed its constitution the least (only twice) and during the 20th century was the country with the fewest number of military dictatorships (only one). However, at the same time the country has been criticized for having a closed political system. Until 1991, Colombia had a bipartisan system with the hegemony of the liberal and conservative parties and with no effective mechanisms for participation of third parties. In the late 1980s, in particular after the Constitution of 1991, the political system in Colombia opened significantly to the participation of other political parties and movements as well as to citizen participation in local affairs[1].Colombia is also characterized in Latin America for having a stable economy in comparison to other countries in the region. During the 1980, the “lost decade” for Latin America, Colombia was the only country in the region that did not experience negative growth. It was also the only country that did not stop paying its external debt. Colombia, as well as Chile, did not suffer from hyperinflation as other counties in the region did during the 1980s (such as Argentina and Brazil). Notwithstanding its stable economic growth (averaging 3.4% in the 1980s and 2.7% in 1990s) Colombia’s economy is small in terms of GDP per capita. In 2003, GDP per capita amounted to US$1,740, which is less than one third the GDP per capita in Mexico (US$6,060), 38% of GDP per capita in Chile (US$4,523) and about half the GDP per capita in Argentina (US$3,422), but closer to Brazil’s (US$2,771) (CEPAL, 2004). When compared using the purchasing power parity (PPP), Colombia differences look somewhat smaller, but Colombia is still low relative to these countries[2].
Also, notwithstanding its political stability and democratic
tradition, Colombia’s has suffered from a long period of
armed conflict, which is complex and which involves
guerrilla groups as well as paramilitary groups. Moreover,
the production of illicit drugs and all the illicit
activities that this entails adds another layer of
complexity to this conflict that represents a daily threat
to the economic and political stability.
Colombian social sector Historically, there has been an emphasis on social insurance (which covers mostly the formal sector) but not much on social assistance. As mentioned above, Colombia signed a new constitution in 1991. This new Constitution not only restructured the political system but it also broadened the scope of the state in terms of its responsibility of assuring social rights. Accordingly, it initiated a series of reforms that made significant progress towards expanding basic services such as health and education (explained below in the respective sections). However, social assistance was not included in the reforms following the new constitution, and therefore the problem of lack of a comprehensive system was exacerbated. This is clearly seen in the trends in expenditures: While public spending on health and education more than doubled between 1990 and 1996 (from about 4% of GDP to 8% of GDP), spending on social assistance remained unchanged during the 1990s (at about 1% of GDP) and actually decreased in 2000 (to 0.7% of GDP) (Fedesarrollo, 2002). After a severe economic recession in 1999 that increased unemployment and poverty rates significantly, it was evident that Colombia did not have an effective social protection system. Although different administrations had designed different programs for the poor, there was no consistent or comprehensive system, but instead fragmentation of the programs and lack of continuity. In recent years, and following other Latin American countries, there has been a growing interest and effort to build a safety net in the country. Although the task is not fully completed, important steps have been taken. In 2000 the “social support network” (Red de Apoyo Social) was created in order to implement a series of programs aimed to protect the most vulnerable populations. Also, in 2002 the “System of Social Protection” was created. This new system includes both social insurance and social assistance and tries to get under the same umbrella (or at least less umbrellas) the different programs that have been created in the past as well as the recent programs. |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Government AgenciesHistorically, there has been a lot of fragmentation of social programs and lack of coordination between institutions (for example, different agencies having similar programs and do not use their resources effectively). In particular, the Colombian safety-net protection system has been criticized for lacking a strategic approach and for being formed by “too many programs with too little resources” (World Bank, 2002a). One of the objectives of the most recent creation of the Presidential Agency for Social Action and International Cooperation (described below) is to provide this coordination and channel resources so that they are used more effectively and efficiently, which still remains to be seen (because it is very new). The System of Social Protection (created in 2002) has two main components: social insurance and social assistance. Each component is lead by different institutions. The Ministry of Social Protection[3] leads the programs that are related to social insurance (such as health insurance, pensions and “professional risks” (riesgos profesionales) and the Presidential Agency for Social Action and International Cooperation leads the programs related to social assistance (this is a very recent change (July 2005)). This agency was created in order to channel the resources needed to implement the social programs dependent on the national government and that are targeted to vulnerable populations affected by poverty, illicit drugs or violence. Its mission is “to coordinate, administer and implement the programs of “Social Action” and the development projects that are targeted toward poor and vulnerable populations”[4]. This new agency will also have the responsibility to coordinate the development of social policy established by the national government, coordinate the development of international cooperation policy determined by the Ministry of Foreign Relations, and to promote and manage international cooperation. Before this agency was created, there where two main institutions that ran different social assistance programs, which are now “subscribed” or attached to this new Presidential Agency. These are the Investment for Peace Fund (Fondo de Inversion para la Paz, FIP), which finances the social component of “Plan Colombia”[5] and the Social Solidarity Net (Red de Solidaridad Social, RSS), which is in charge of programs targeted to displaced population and victims of violence as well as the national nutrition program (Red de Seguridad Alimentaria). Also attached to this new presidential agency is the Colombian Agency for International Cooperation (Agencia Colombiana de Cooperación Internacional, ACCI).Another important institution is the National System of Welfare Service (Sistema Nacional de Bienestar Familiar, SNBF). This system was created in 1979 with the main objectives of promoting family integration and protecting children’s rights. Within this system, the most important institution is the Colombian Institute of Family Welfare (Instituto Colombiano de Bienestar Familiar, ICBF), which was assigned by law the responsibility of coordinating the system. In general, this system is in charge on one hand of child’s protection (like child welfare in the US) and on the other hand is in charge of early childhood care (particularly for low-income families), which includes the provision of child care, nutrition, and the promotion of access to health care (this latter in coordination with the Ministry of Social Protection), particularly among low-income families. One important feature of the ICBF is that all it is financed by a 3 percent payroll tax (the only other governmental agency that has tax-specific funding is the National Training Service (Sistema Nacional de Aprendizaje, SENA), which is financed by a 2 percent payroll tax) (Alm & López-Castaño, 2003). Finally, it is important to mention the Ministry of Education, which was created in 1886 and has the mission of “guaranteeing the right to education under the criteria of equity, quality and efficiency”[6]. The Ministry of Education sets the general educational policies, including those to increase coverage of basic education and oversees the educational system. At the local level, both the departamentos (states) and municipalities play an important role in developing and implementing the specific educational plans. |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Demographic ProfileAs many other Latin American countries, Colombia experienced important demographic transformations during the last half of the 20th century: population growth decreased (in part because of an important decrease in fertility rates), and the proportion of aged is increasing (in part because mortality rates have decreased). Population growth in Colombia almost halved from about 3% in the 1950s to 1.7% in the period 2000-2005. Although population growth in Colombia is close to the average for Latin America (1.5%), it is significantly higher than Argentina (.96%), Chile (1.1%) and somewhat higher than Brazil and Mexico (1.4%) (ECLAC, 2005). Fertility rates also decreased, particularly after the decade of 1960. In 1950 the average number of children per woman was close to 7 and remained constant until the 1960s, when birth control policies were established and then fertility rates started to decrease to an average of 3.69 children per women in 1980-1985 and 2.62 in 2000-2005[7]. This improvement in fertility rates is concurrent with all the region, which in 40 years went from having one of the highest fertility rates in the world, to having levels that are below the world’s median (ECLAC, 2005). As with population growth, the fertility rate in Colombia is close to the average for Latin America (2.57), but is higher than Chile (2.00), Argentina (2.05), Brazil (2.34) and Mexico (2.49). Compared to OECD countries, Colombia’s fertility rate is over one point higher than the average for European countries (1.47 children per women).Life expectancy has increased considerably in the last 50 years: while the age expectancy in 1950 was only 48 years, in 2004 it was 72.2 (Departamento Nacional de Planeación, 2005c), which is about the average expectancy rate for the region for 2000-2005 (72.0), although still over 5 years lower than the average for OECD countries (77.8) [8]. Colombia’s life expectancy is lower than Chile (77.7), Argentina (74.3), and Mexico (73.4), but higher than Brazil (71.0) (ECLAC, 2005).
One of the main factors that contributed to the increase in life
expectancy was the significant improvements in the infant
mortality rate, which was reduced by over 5 times in 50 years:
130 infant deaths per 1,000 live births (130‰) in 1950 to 24.4
infant deaths per 1,000 live births (24.4‰) in 2004
(Departamento Nacional de Planeación, 2005c),
which is below the average for the region for 2000-2005
(27.4‰). Infant morality in Colombia is more prevalent than in
Chile (which has a very low rate of 8‰) and Argentina (15‰), but
is less prevalent than in Mexico (28.2‰) or Brazil (27.3‰).
Compared to developed countries, Colombia’s infant mortality is
almost 5 times larger than the average for OECD countries (5.16
infant deaths per 1,000 live births)[9].
In terms of the age distribution the proportion of children (0-15) has decreased from 43% of the population in 1950 to 31% in 2005, while the proportion of adults (15-64) increased from 54% to 64% and the proportion of elderly adults (65 or older) increased from 3% to 5% in the same period (Departamento Nacional de Planeación, 2005c). Finally, it is important to note that Colombia experienced and accelerated the process of urbanization in the 20th century. While in 1918 21% of the population lived in urban areas and 79% in rural areas; in 2004 the distribution has almost reversed with 72.5% living in the urban areas and 27.5% living in rural areas (Departamento Nacional de Planeación, 2005c). Race/ethnicity Colombia is a mixed-race country comprising Afro-descendents, Amerindians, Europeans and combinations (such as mestizos). It is estimated that 21 percent of the population is Afro-Colombian and 2 percent are indigenous (World Bank, 2005). Traditionally, Afro-colombians have been concentrated in 5 departamentos of the country (Chocó, Cauca, Nariño, Bolivar, and Antioquia) and in the archipelago of San Andrés and Providencia. Afro-Colombians are disproportionately affected by poverty and by the armed conflict (30 percent of the internally displaced population is Afro-Colombian). Recent research has estimated that 40 percent of the Afro-Colombian population is currently concentrated in the three principal metropolitan areas of the country (Bogota, Medellin, Cali) (World Bank, 2005). |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Social ProtectionExpenditures on social welfare (levels and trends) During the 1990s Colombia’s expenditures on social welfare increased significantly: from 6.8% of GDP in 1990-1991 to 15.3% in 1996-1997. Because of the economic recession of the late 1990s, the level of social welfare expenditures decreased to 13.6% of GDP in 2000-2001 (Lasso, 2004), but it is still close to twice as much as the beginning of the 1990s. When we look at social expenditures as a proportion of total government spending, the trend is not as positive: while the share of social expenditures increased in the middle of the decade (from to 28.8% of total spending in 1990-1991 to 41.8% in 1996-1997), it went down to 33.5% in 2000-2001 (ECLAC, 2004). In terms of expenditures in specific sectors, for the period 2000-2001, social welfare expenditures in Colombia were distributed as follows: 3.9% of GDP for education, 4.3% of GDP for health, 4.4% of GDP for social security and labor, 1% of GDP for housing and other social welfare programs (Lasso, 2004). With the exception of health expenditures, all other expenditures are higher than in 1990-1991, but lower than in 1996-1997 (see Table 1 below).
The increase in social expenditures during the 1990s was not unique to Colombia, but was a common factor in most Latin America (particularly in the South American countries). Between 1990-1991 and 2000-2001 social expenditures per capita in the region increased by 60% in real terms (from 342 to 540 US dollars). As a percentage of GDP, social expenditures increased by close to four percentage points in this 10-year period (from 10.1% of GDP in 1990-1991 to 13.8% of GDP in 2000-2001) (ECLAC, 2004). One fact in which Colombia is an exception (along with Argentina, Costa Rica, Ecuador and Paraguay) is that social expenditures as a share of total spending decreased. For the rest of Latin American countries (for which data is available), the proportion of public spending geared towards the social sector increased (on average from 41.5% in 1990-1991 to 48.7% in 2000-2001) (ECLAC, 2004). Comparatively, Colombia’s social welfare expenditures are about the average for Latin America (for 2000-2001 the average social welfare expenditures for Latin America was 13.8 % of GDP. Colombian social expenditures are lower than Argentina, Brazil and Uruguay (which spend over 18% of their GDP on the social sector), but higher than Peru, Ecuador and Mexico (which spend less than 10% of GDP on the social sector). Also, Colombia is an exception in its reduction on expenditures on education and social security with respect to the mid 1990s. Only Colombia and Ecuador reduced education expenditures between 1996-1997 and 2000-2001 and only Colombia and Panama reduced expenditures on social security during this period (in 2000-2001 the average public expenditure on education for Latin America was 4.2% of GDP and for social security 5.1% of GDP, both higher than Colombia’s levels). In contrast, Colombia was the Latin American country with the largest increase in health expenditures over this period, situating the country average public expenditure for health, which was 3.1% of GDP in 2000-2001 (ECLAC, 2004). Compared to the OECD countries, Colombia’s social welfare expenditures are close to half the average for OECD (23.97% of GDP). If we look at specific sectors, Colombia’s public expenditures on education and health are relatively close to the OECD countries (4.84% of GDP and 5.85% of GDP respectively). However, public expenditures on pensions are significantly lower than the average for OECD countries (7.7% of GDP). Trends in poverty In Colombia two main indicators are used to measure poverty, the “Poverty Line Measure” and the “Basic Unmet Needs Index”. The “Poverty Line Measure” is an absolute income-based measure that estimates the proportion of people (and households) that live on incomes below the poverty line. This poverty line was calculated in 1988 by the National Department of Statistics (DANE, for its abbreviation in Spanish) and represents the minimum amount needed to buy a basic basket of goods. This threshold was updated in 1995 to reflect changes in consumption and is also updated every year to reflect changes in prices. In 2002, the poverty line was $173,232 Colombian pesos (62.2 US dollars) per month per person for the urban areas, and $125,339 Colombian pesos (50.1 US dollars) for the rural areas. The other indicator is the “Basic Unmet Needs Index” (NBI, for its abbreviation in Spanish), which considers poor any household that does not meet one of the basic needs and considers indigent any household that does not meet more than one of the basic needs (the basic needs are inadequate housing materials, inadequate utilities, extreme overcrowding, failure to attend school for school-aged children, and high economic dependency). When poverty is measured using the “Poverty Line” methodology, we can see substantial progress between 1975 and 1995, but a dramatic setback in the late 1990s: in 1999 poverty rate returned to the level in 1988 and extreme poverty reached even a higher level than the one in 1988 (see Table 2 below). If we look at trends by region we can see that the reversal in poverty has happened in the urban areas. However, it is important to note the extremely high poverty rates in the rural Colombian areas: in 1999 79% of the rural population was under the official poverty line compared to 55% in the urban areas.
When poverty is measured using the NBI methodology, a different pattern is seen: poverty decreased in the late 1990s from 37.2% in 1993 to 23% in 2000 (Baldión & Esteban, 2001). Most of the improvement of the indicator has been due to improvements in housing materials and utilities, which is in part a result of governmental effort to increase the coverage of public infrastructure among the poor. Also, coverage rates of primary education and utilities increased substantially between 1992 and 1997, particularly among the bottom 2 quintiles of income (De Ferranti, Lafourcade, Giugale, Hicks, & Vélez, 2002). The fact that poverty measured by NBI is decreasing is an indication of a greater access to public services such as utilities and education, which eventually translate into an improvement of people’s well-being. However, the fact that poverty measured by the Poverty Line is increasing is an indication that there is a greater financial constraint within households and this is translated into more immediate material hardship. The economic crisis at the end of the 1990s was a major reason for the increase in poverty rates (and the loss of improvements reached in the early 1990s). This made evident the lack of an adequate safety-net protection system in the country able to protect individuals from an economic shock (Lasso, 2004; World Bank, 2002a). According to the most recent national household survey (2003), between 54% and 68% of people in Colombia are poor, depending on the type of poverty line that is used[10] (Nuñez & Espinosa, 2005) Moreover, 37% of children under the age of 18 are chronically poor (meaning that they are currently poor and are likely to remain poor in the future), 17% are indigent and over two thirds of children under the age of six are poor (Fedesarrollo, 2004b). A recent report published by the United Nations Economic Commission for Latin America and the Caribbean (ECLAC) shows that 25% of children in Colombia live in families with inadequate income to meet their nutritional needs.Trends in income inequality Income inequality decreased substantially during the 1960s and 1970s, did not change very much during the 1980s, but then it has been increasing since the late 1980s. The Gini coefficient increased from 0.54 in 1988 to 0.57 to 1999; the share of the top quintile of the distribution relative to the bottom quintile increased from 17.6 to 20.2 times in this period (De Ferranti, 2002). Not only inequality has been increasing, but also since the mid 1990s it has been increasing at a more rapid rate than before. The income ration of the top decile over the bottom decile increased from 50.3 times to 57.8 times between 1996 and 1999 (De Ferranti, 2003).[11] In the last decade, those at the bottom of the distribution have lost and those close to the top of the distribution have gained, leading to a widening of the income gap. This can be seen in Table 2. Individuals from the first five deciles have lost income, but the ones in the very bottom have lost at a much higher rate: people from the bottom decile had 0.92 of total income in 1991 and only 0.6 of total income in 2000 (a drop of 35%). In contrast, people from the 8th and 9th deciles have significantly increased their participation on total income.
Comparison with Latin America
Comparatively, Latin America is the most unequal region in the world, although it is not the poorest region (by 1998, the average poverty rate in Latin America was 10.5% whereas in Asia it was 15.6% and in Africa it was 63.6% (De Ferranti et al., 2003). Latin America has been diagnosed with “excess poverty” and “excess inequality” (Attanasio & Székely, 2001), meaning that given its level of development it is a region with much higher poverty and inequality than expected. Moreover, there is no indication that this “excess” is diminishing: poverty rates in Latin America are not improving in most of the countries of the region and inequality is increasing. According to a World Bank’s recent report on inequality in Latin America (De Ferranti et al., 2003), the recent trend in the region is one of growing inequality, even for those countries with “low” inequality in Latin-American standards (such as Argentina, Uruguay and Venezuela). Colombia is not an exception to this regional trend. Among South American countries, only Brazil and Paraguay had a decrease in inequality during the 1990s. However, contrary to Colombia, during the 1990s inequality in most Latin American countries increased at a slower rate than in the previous decades (as mentioned above, Colombian inequality is accelerating since the mid 1990s). In terms of the levels of inequality, however, Colombia ranks moderately high in Latin America and ranks high in South America. If we use the Gini coefficient as an indicator of inequality, Colombia ranks third among South American countries (for which data are available) after Brazil and Bolivia. The difference with Brazil, which is the most unequal country in Latin America, the difference is only 1 point[12]. Using the Theil index, which is more sensitive to changes in the lower end of the income distribution, Colombia ranks first, indicating the relatively large bias against the very poor. In sum, Colombia is one of the most unequal countries in Latin America, which at the same time is the most unequal region in the world.In terms of poverty, according to the latest data available across countries[13], in 1999 Colombia, with a poverty rate of 54.9% ranked 4th in the South American countries after Ecuador (with 63.5% of the population living under the poverty line), Bolivia and Paraguay (60.6%) (ECLAC, 2005). Although Colombia’s poverty rate is lower than most Central American countries, it is significantly higher than Brazil’s (37.5%), Chile’s (20.6%) and Argentina (which had a poverty rate of 19.7% in 1999 and 41.5% in 2002). With respect to trends in poverty, the general trend in Latin America during the 1990s was toward the reduction of poverty (De Ferranti, 2003), with a slight increase for the early 2000s There is a lot of heterogeneity in the region in terms of progress in reducing poverty. While some countries such as Mexico, Chile and Ecuador have made important progress in reducing poverty rates in others such as Argentina, Bolivia, Uruguay and Paraguay, poverty has increased. Colombia, along with Brazil, Panama and Venezuela is among the countries where poverty progress in reducing poverty has stagnated in the early 2000s (ECLAC, 2005).
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Child, Youth and Family Policy RegimesMaternity BenefitsWomen who contribute to the social security system or who contribute as self-employed are eligible for maternity leave. The maternity leave is paid and covers 12 weeks after delivery. The woman has the right to cede one week of leave to her spouse or partner (and then her leave will be reduced to 11 weeks). In order to be eligible for this maternity leave the woman has to be affiliated with the social security system and have proof that she had contributed without interruptions during all her pregnancy. Also, individuals who adopt a child are also eligible for a 12-week paid leave. In order to be eligible, the adoptive parent must have contributed to the social security system for at least 33 weeks. It is important to note that about 51% of women aged 18 to 55 are employed[14] and among those who are employed, 63% are in the informal sector (Fedesarrollo, 2004a). This means that about 6 million working-age women (most of whom are also in their childbearing age) are potentially unprotected for maternity. |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Early Childhood Education and Care (ECEC)The Constitution of 1991 declared the education as a right for children aged 5 to 15 (including at least one year of pre-primary education and nine of basic education). In 1993, the Social Security Law gave special attention to young children and established special programs targeted towards pregnant women, infants and women head of households. Also, in 1994, the General Education Law established at least one obligatory year of preschool education called Grade Zero (Grado Cero or Transición) and in 1997 the law stipulated this year of preschool as universal for public institutions (Ministerio de Educación Nacional & UNESCO, 1999). These legal reforms have translated into an important expansion of education and services for children 0-5. However, the coverage of services for this age group is still limited (as shown below). It is important to note that until the mid 70s pre-primary education was not important within educational policy in Colombia. In 1975 enrollment was very low and it was mainly offered by private institutions to high SES children in the main cities (Ministerio de Educación Nacional & UNESCO, 1999). Although by 1985 enrollment more than doubled, and public participation also increased, it was not until the early 1990s that important pieces of legislation lead to significant expansion of services. Colombia does not have a comprehensive early childhood education and care policy. Both the legal framework and the institutions that provide services to this group of children are fragmented. For example, the new mandate of Grade Zero for children age 5 represents an important step towards improving education for this age group, however, the fact that these children are going to be in formal schools does not make clear if they are going to benefit from other programs that are provided by the ICBF and that are important for their health and nutrition (i.e. there is a lack of coordination between the Ministry of Education and ICBF – see page 4). However, it is important to recognize that the ICBF has played a major role in protecting children in Colombia. Although a national comprehensive policy is still in need, and many of the programs need to be improved, this institution has developed important programs towards young children, as described below. Broad policy and specific ProgramsColombia has two main strategies directed to early childhood: preventive care (care, health and nutrition) and pre-primary education. These are mainly designed to “compensate” for unequal initial conditions among disadvantaged children when they enter the formal education system (Ministerio de Educación Nacional & UNESCO, 1999). The main program that carries out the preventive care strategy is the Community Welfare Homes (Hogares Comunitarios de Bienestar) and the main programs that carry out the pre-primary education strategy are the Child Homes (Hogares Infantiles) and the obligatory pre-school year before entering to first grade (Grado Cero), which are all explained below. It is important to note from the outset that these programs overlap in terms of the age group they serve and it is not very clear what criteria are used for who is served in which program or who can use more than one program. The following is a description of the programs that are aimed towards children 0-6 years old (most of them targeted to children who come from poor and vulnerable families): - Hogares FAMI – Familia, Mujer e Infancia (Family, Infants and Women Homes). These are centers for pregnant women and mothers of children under the age of 2 who are in a vulnerable situation (either psychological or socioeconomic). It offers workshops on nutrition and health, monitors the nutritional situation of children, promotes hygiene and immunization, and provides a nutritional supplement called Bienestarina[15], which is a kind of flour that has milk, vitamins and minerals and is of high nutritional value. - Materno Infantil (Infants and moms). This program is targeted towards pregnant women, mothers who are breastfeeding and children under the age of 7 who live in rural areas and who are not enrolled in a FAMI (program explained above). This program provides a monthly provision of Bienestarina (nutritional supplement) and it also offers health and nutrition workshops to families, and promotes insurance of children and mothers to the social security system (health insurance). - Hogares Comunitarios de Bienestar (Community Welfare Homes). These are family-day care centers that are run by “Community Mothers” (women from the community who are paid 2/3 of the minimum wage and who provide care to up to 15 children in their own home). The program is targeted to children under the age of 6 who come from poor or vulnerable families. In addition to the provision of day care, these centers offer a nutritional supplement, monitoring of the children’s nutrition, the promotion of immunization and the promotion for registering in the health system (for the children and their families). In addition, parents also receive workshops to promote better family relationships. This program is one of the largest coverage in the country but at the same time it has many problems in terms of targeting because not all the children covered come from the poorest families. The program has also been criticized for its poor quality: many of the “Community Mothers” do not have the minimum educational requirements and many of the homes do not have adequate materials (Nuñez & Espinosa, 2005). - Hogares Infantiles (Child Homes). These are more formal day care centers, which in addition to providing care, nutrition and preventive health care (monitoring of growth, promotion of immunization) they also provide a more structured program that aims to stimulate children’s cognitive and social skills. Also, these centers are run by professional staff and in facilities owned (or paid for) by the government. These centers are targeted on children from 6 months old up to 5 years old who have at least one working parent and it also (in theory) aims to serve low-income families. The quality of this program is much higher than the quality of the Community Welfare Homes, however the coverage is much lower (both because it is more costly and because it benefits more middle-class families and not poor families, which is the main interest of the ICBF) (Perotti, 2000). Overall, as of September of 2005 there were 1,279,076 children covered by the different types of “homes” described above. Of these, 59% correspond to the Community Welfare Homes, 29% to the Family, Infants and Women Homes, and 10% to the Child Homes (to my knowledge not data is available by type of home)[16].- Grado Cero (Grade Zero). This is the first obligatory year of formal education and corresponds to one year of pre-primary school. It is aimed to prepare children for first grade (mostly in reading and math). One important note here is that when a child goes from a Child Home to Grade Zero, he/she may loose the nutrition and preventive care benefits received in the Child Homes. Although the food programs in schools (School Restaurants - Restaurantes Escolares) may serve the nutrition component, it is not clear that all needy children are covered (because the food program is school-based and the child may not be enrolled in a beneficiary school). Unlike the other programs mentioned above (which are run by the Colombian Institute of Social Welfare (ICBF), the Grade Zero (formal pre-primary education) is coordinated by the Ministry of Education and implemented by the Departamentos (“states”) and municipalities. In terms of coverage, the net coverage for this grade in 2003 was only 42.6% (Departamento Nacional de Planeación, 2005c) - Familias en Acción. Very recently (in 2001) the program Families in Action (Familias en Acción) was created following the successful experience of Progresa/Oportunidades in Mexico. Families in Action is a conditional cash transfer program aimed at poor families with children. It has two main components: a nutritional and health component targeted on children under the age of seven and an educational component targeted on children between the ages of 7 and 17 (this later component will be explained in the school-aged children section). The nutritional and health component is a cash subsidy per family with children under 7 and it is conditioned on regular check-up visits to the health center to control nutrition and growth progress of children. This program is run by a centralized agency, the RAS or Safety Net (Red de Apoyo Social), which is part of the Presidential Agency for Social Action and International Cooperation. This program is perhaps the only social program in Colombia that is under a rigorous evaluation (as part of a recent effort of starting an “evaluation culture” of public policies). Preliminary results of the evaluation of Families in Action have shown strong effects on nutrition and health for children under 7 (Atanassio, Battistin, Fitzsimons, Mesnard, & Vera-Hernández, 2005; Departamento Nacional de Planeación, 2004). As of December of 2005, Familias en Acción benefited 897,896 children (Departamento Nacional de Planeación, 2005b) which represents 90% of the government goal of 1 million children covered by 2006 (including both the nutritional and education components).- Children’s breakfast. This nutrition program was created in 2003 and is targeted on very poor children[17] aged 6 months to 5 years old living in municipalities that are not covered by the program Familias en Acción (described above). The program provides a daily nutritional breakfast during the working days (weekends or holidays are not included) as well as actions of health promotion and prevention (such as growth and development monitoring). As of December of 2005, this program covered 1,006,074 children, surpassing the goal of 1 million children that the government originally (Departamento Nacional de Planeación, 2005b).
The Private Sector
The private sector plays an important role in the provision of preventive and childcare services in Colombia. In recent years, the government (through the ICBF) is paying some foundations and NGOs for the provision of services (the payment is per child served). There is no information on the exact number of private institutions or number of children covered, but according to the latest report given to UNESCO, there were 145 institutions in the country providing services to young children, but it is not clear from the information obtained how many of these provide formal pre-primary education and how many provide preventive care (Ministerio de Educación Nacional & UNESCO, 1999). It is known that 45% of children enrolled in pre-primary education are enrolled in private institutions, but it is not clear how many of these are slots paid by the government. Coverage Colombia made significant progress in expanding coverage of formal education to children aged 5 and 6, increasing from 54% in 1992 to 84% in 2003 (Departamento Nacional de Planeación, 2005c). However, the net coverage for pre-primary education (including 3 and 4 year olds in addition to 5 year olds[18]) is still low at 37% (UNESCO, 2005). When we look at the 5-year old group alone, which is the official age of obligatory pre-primary education, Colombia also made important progress since the early 1990s (as many other Latin American countries did), however the coverage as of 1998 was relatively low at 53% (compared to 100% in Argentina, 77% in Peru, 58% in Brazil, and 55% in Chile) (UNESCO, 2001).
With respect to preventive care, as of 1997 24% of
children between the ages of 0 and 6 (and 60% of the
targeted population in terms of both age and income)
were served by the child care and preventive care
services offered by the ICBF (Ministerio
de Educación Nacional &
UNESCO, 1999). In 2003,
the situation was not better: according to a recent
national representative survey, only 26% of children
under the age of 5 were covered by public services
and 11% by private institutions, while 63% of
children under the age of 5 are being taking care by
a family member (Fedesarrollo,
2004b).
Despite the legal reforms carried out in the 90s, young children in Colombia are still very vulnerable and unprotected. Over two thirds of children under the age of six are poor and almost one-half (45%) do not have health insurance (Fedesarrollo, 2004b) and as mentioned above, more than half of preschool-age children are outside the formal educational pre-primary education system. Unfortunately, not all the programs described above have the desired coverage and most importantly, they do not always cover the target population for which they were created. For example, recent estimates reveal that public day care centers cover only 27% of children in the lowest income quintile (while they cover 17% of children in the top quintile) (Fedesarrollo, 2004b). Family child care is disproportionably used by low-income families as opposed to center care. While 70% of families from the bottom two quintile use family-care for their children under 5, only 49% of families in the top quintile do. Conversely, 29% of families from the bottom quintiles use center care compared to 51% for the top quintile. This means that resources are not being use effectively and that many of the most needy are being excluded from the services. |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Child SupportCajas de Compensation Familiar (Family Compensation Funds) Colombia does not have a universal child allowance. However, low-income individuals attached to the workforce are benefited from the Family Compensation Funds (Cajas de Compensation Familiar). These funds are financed by a 4 percent payroll tax and provide subsidies to workers with children or dependent adults who have earnings lower than four times the minimum wage (or lower than six times the minimum wage when the spouse’s earnings are counted). The subsidies are both in the form of cash and in-kind. The amount of cash subsidy is per dependent and it is on average $13,968 per month (approximately US$6) (Nuñez & Espinosa, 2005), which is less than 5% of the minimum wage. The in-kind subsidies usually include help with housing, education, food and recreation, and vary according to the Fund. One of the main limitations of this subsidy is that it only benefits those who are employed and therefore excludes all individuals who work in the informal sector and who are more likely to have lower incomes. This is very serious if we take into account that 63% of workers are in the informal sector (Fedesarrollo, 2004a). Not surprisingly, only 1.2% of beneficiaries from Family Compensation Funds are from the lowest income quintile; while 66% of beneficiaries are in the 4th and 5th quintiles (Lasso, 2004). Work and training programs Empleo en Acción (Employment in Action) and Jóvenes en Acción (Youth in Action) are two programs that are part of the “social support network” (Red de Apoyo Social) that was created in 2000 (as well as the conditional cash transfers program Familias en Acción explained in the early childhood and education sections). Employment in Action is a workfare program that provides temporary employment to poor, unemployed, low skilled workers by employing them in public works such as school expansions and road repairs (the works are located in poor communities so that there is a double benefit to the program). Between 2001 and 2004 this program implemented 2,788 projects and generated 211,307 temporary jobs (Castro, 2004). However, the program was finished and replaced with the Program of Direct Employment Support (PADE for its abbreviation in Spanish[19]), which is a program that subsidizes part of the minimum wage over a period of 6 months to new employees hired.
Youth in Action is a program based on the Chilean program
Chile Jóven. It provides practical training and financial
support to unemployed, low-income youth[20].
The first phase of the program is a three to five month long
training course provided by private sector firms, and the second
phase is a three month internship. Participants receive a
scholarship during both the training and internship periods. The
scholarship is equivalent to approximately US$63 per month for
women with children under 7 and US$44 per month for others
(World
Bank, 2002a).
Since 2002, a total of 99,483 youth graduated from this program
and in 2005 there were 26,585 enrolled (Departamento
Nacional de Planeación, 2005b).
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Child EducationEducation in Colombia is compulsory for the ages 5 to 15, including one year of preschool and nine years of basic education (five of primary school and four years of basic secondary school). Formal education also includes two years of high school (educacion media) which are not compulsory but are required in order to receive a high school degree and enter into post secondary education (i.e. college, technical school, etc). According to the 1991 Constitution (Article 67), education should be free in all public institutions. In practice, however, only primary basic education is totally free in public schools. Secondary and higher education in public schools charge some minimum fees, usually based on the family’s income. As it was mentioned above, Colombia made important progress during the 1990s in increasing social welfare expenditures, including education (although the trend decreased in the early 2000s). During the decade, increased coverage was one of the main goals of the government, in part followed by the mandate of the new Constitution that stated that education as a right for children 5 to 15. From 1992 to 2003, enrollment rates for children aged 7 to 11 increased from 90.2% to 96.3%, and from 69.2% to 79.6% for children age 12 to 17. Although these are significant improvements, it is important to note that net coverage for primary education (i.e. the proportion of children 7 to 11 that are in primary school) only increased from 83.8% in 1992 to 85.6% in 2003. The net coverage for secondary education (i.e. the proportion of children 12 to 17 that are enrolled in secondary school) was larger, increasing from 47.9% in 1992 to 62.5% in 2003 (Departamento Nacional de Planeación, 2005c). Compared to other Latin American countries, Colombia’s net coverage of primary education is close to that of Chile’s (88.8%) but lower that that of Brazil (96.5%), Argentina (99.8%) and Mexico (99.4%). Net coverage of secondary education is lower compared to Brazil (71.6%), Chile (74.5%) and Argentina (80.8%) (UNESCO, 2005). According to the most recent national household survey, 78% of children 5 to 11 years old are enrolled in public schools, 16% in private schools and 6% are not enrolled at all. Among children 12-18 years old, 58% are enrolled in public schools, 15% in private schools and 27% are not enrolled in school. It is important to note that 61% of children 5 to 11 years old who are not enrolled in school are poor, and 79% of children 12 to 17 years old who are not enrolled in school are poor (Nuñez & Espinosa, 2005), highlighting the need to address poverty in order to increase school enrollment and the potential positive effects of Familias en Acción (explained next). Familias en Acción Familias en Acción was created in 2001 trying to emulate the Mexican program Oportunidades as an effort to increase school enrollment among poor children. The program provides a subsidy to poor families with school-aged children and in exchange families are required to keep their children enrolled in school and maintain an attendance rate of not less than 80 percent and not repeating more than one grade (the program also has a nutrition component for children 0 to 6 – see ECEC section above). The amount of the subsidy is per child enrolled and it is twice as large for students in secondary school as for those in primary school[21].
The program is having an important effect on school enrollment.
In urban areas the program increased school attendance for
children 12-17 years old by 3.5 percentage points (and no
significant effect on children 8-11 years old). In the rural
areas the program increased school enrollment by 2.9 percentage
points for children 8-11 and by 4.6 percentage points for
children 12-17 years old (Departamento
Nacional de Planeación (DNP), 2004).
As of December of 2005, Familias en Acción benefited
897,896 children (Departamento
Nacional de Planeación, 2005b) which
represents 90% of the government goal of 1 million children
covered by 2006. It is important to
note that although there has been an important progress in
expanding the coverage of this program, the total number of
children covered represents 21% of the potential eligible
children[22].
School Nutrition Program This program provides a nutritional supplement to children 5 to 18. The supplement is provided through schools and is targeted to poor children (SISBEN 1 and 2). Breakfast is targeted to children aged 5 to 12 and should provide a minimum of 20% of the minimum calories and nutrients needed according to age. Lunch and snack are targeted to all children and should provide 30% and 7.5% of calories needed respectively. In addition to improving the nutritional status of children, this program also serves as an incentive to enroll poor children in school and avoid dropping out. As of December of 2005 the school nutrition program covered a total of 2,543,163 children (Departamento Nacional de Planeación, 2005b), which is about 89% of the targeted population[23]. It is important to note that the targeted population is very poor children (SISBEN 1 and 2). If we take into account the total number of chronically poor children (who eventually would need to benefit from this program) the beneficiaries of the program represent 62%. Children and Youth Clubs
These are clubs for children aged 7 to 12 (Children
clubs) and 13 to 18 (Youth clubs) that are targeted to
children who live in high-risk areas in terms of poverty
and vulnerability. Priority is given to children who
are very poor, children who come from single-mother
homes, working children, children who are not in the
school system or children who are displaced. These
clubs offer several activities such as arts, sports and
some educational sessions in order to improve the
relationships of children.
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Child HealthIn the early 1990s Colombia undertook a comprehensive reform of its health care system. The Law 100 of 1993 created the General System of Social Security in Health (SGSSS for its abbreviation in Spanish). This new system has two regimes: 1) The contributory system in which workers contribute via payroll tax (12% of earnings) and choose health insurance services from different providers (public or private). Each person pays a premium that covers a basic plan and may elect to buy additional private health insurance (this option is common for middle and upper income individuals). 2) The subsidized system in which eligible[24] people who cannot afford the contributory system can get subsidized health insurance that covers a basic plan (less comprehensive than the basic plan offered in the contributory system). The subsidized system is funded mainly through a “solidarity fund” that comes from transfers from the contributory system.One of the main goals of health care reform was to universalize health care coverage. Although universal coverage has not been reached yet, important improvements in health care coverage have been reached, particularly those at the bottom of the income distribution (Vélez & Foster, 1999). Health care coverage increased from 23.7% of the population in 1993 to 57.2% in 1997 and 61.8% in 2003 (Lasso, 2004).
There is an important group of people who fall between the
subsidized and the contributory system and therefore are not
covered by any health insurance. These are independent workers
are not poor enough to be covered by the subsidized system, but
earn less than twice the minimum salary which is the lower limit
to participate to the contributory system on an independent base
(World Bank, 2002b).
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
HousingIn Colombia there are no housing subsidies for rent but there are housing subsidies for buying a home, home improvements and for legalization of property rights (“legalización de títulos”). Before 1991, the central government was involved in housing construction and loan subsidies for low-income families. However, after 1991, the focus has been changed to mainly direct subsidies to families for purchase or home improvement. The main program is the Family Housing Subsidy (Subsidio Familiar de Vivienda), which provides a lump-sum subsidy in order to facilitate the purchase or improvement[25] of a home to low-income families (with a monthly family income below 4 monthly minimum wages). In case of purchase, these subsidies should be spent in the down payment for certain types of housing called Social Housing (Vivienda de Interés Social) which are usually constructed by the private sector with incentives from the government and which are sold at affordable prices (up to 135 monthly minimum wages). This subsidy is distributed through the National Housing Fund (Fondo Nacional de Vivienda), the Family Compensation Funds (described above) and the Agrarian Bank (Banco Agrario) in the rural areas.The current administration had provided housing subsidies to 273,400 families since 2002 and has the goal to reach 400,00 families (Departamento Nacional de Planeación, 2005a). However, the estimate is that 1.2 million families do not have housing. Moreover, if poor families that are renting are taken into account, the housing deficit is 2.6 million[26]. It is not clear how the poorest households are going to be able to acquire adequate housing given the current system because it requires a minimum income and amount of savings that many at the lowest income quintile do not have. Although the housing subsidy is aimed at increasing equity, recent research showed that this subsidy is regressive, and benefits higher income quintiles more than those at the bottom (Lasso, 2004). |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Special Groups of ChildrenDisplaced ChildrenColombia suffers from a long history of internal violent conflict, which involves both guerrilla and paramilitary groups and which gets exacerbated by the presence of illicit crops. One of the main policies of the current administration of President Alvaro Uribe Vélez is the Policy of Defense Democratic Security (Política de Defensa y Seguridad Democrática) which aims at increasing the State presence in all the territory (particularly in those areas where the government has been absent for many years and where illegal groups have consolidated). Since President Uribe took office, there has been a significant improvement in most of indicators: kidnaps dropped by more than 50% (from 2,986 cases in 2002 to 1,441 in 2004), the number of victims from massacres decreased by 49%[27] and the homicide rate per 100,000 inhabitants dropped by almost one third (from 65.8 in 2002 to 44.2 in 2004), reaching the lowest homicide rate in 17 years (DNP, 2005).Despite these improvements, many Colombians are still victims of the internal conflict. According to the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) there are currently 2 million internally displaced people in Colombia (from which 41% are children) (UNHCR, 2004)[28] . Although there is an official policy towards the internally displaced population since 1997, the Colombian Constitutional Court ruled that the measures included in this policy were insufficient to meet the needs of this vulnerable group of the population. As a response, in February of 2005, the government created a national plan for the provision of comprehensive care to the displaced population (Plan Nacional para la Atención a la Población Desplazada). This plan designed a series of programs directed to both displaced populations and to those living in areas of risk of being displaced by violence (in order to prevent displacement). For families that are already displaced, the main programs are emergency assistance (food, health care, temporary shelter), loans for housing, loans and training to start productive projects, training and support to find employment. The current administration’s goal is to provide emergency assistance to 200,000 internally displaced families by the end of its administration (August 2006). So far, 131.689 families have been provided emergency assistance.
Finally, it is also important to note that another way through
which children are affected by this conflict is by being
recruited as combatants by both guerrilla and paramilitary
groups. According to Human Rights Watch, one out of four
illegal combatants in Colombia is a child under 18
(Human Rights Watch, 2003).
Although Colombian legislation prohibits the recruitment
of children under 18 for military purposes, there is no active
policy designed to avoid that children join these illegal
groups.
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Illicit Crop ProducersAnother objective of the current Policy of Defense and Democratic Security is to eliminate illicit crops. The two main strategies used to reach this objective are to the spraying of herbicides and the substitution of crops. Within the substitution of crops strategy the two main programs are the “Gamekeeper families” (Familias Guardabosques) and the “Productive Projects” programs. The idea of these programs is to provide an alternative to these families so that they make a legal use of the land from they can derive an adequate amount of income. The “Gamekeeper families” provides a cash transfer and technical support to families that live in areas of high risk of illicit crops. This support is temporary and is supposedly to help the family reach a level of economic sustainability from the new activity. As of December of 2005 there were 33,137 beneficiary families of this program (Departamento Nacional de Planeación, 2005b). The “Productive Projects” program, as it name indicates, are productive projects in the agricultural sector that are co-financed by the government, the private sector and the beneficiary families. The objective for 2003-2006 is to enroll 27,000 peasant families in these projects. As of November of 2005, this program benefited a total of 6,860 families (Departamento Nacional de Planeación, 2005b). |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Street ChildrenRecent estimates show that there are 5,200 children and 1,700 families who live in the street. Many of the street children have the street as their main social environment and had lost contact with their own families. Although there is no comprehensive policy towards this social problem, there is a program for street children and youth that offers educational and health support to these children and well as preventive services. The program gives priority to children who had completely lost their links with their families and to children that are at high risk (e.g. children who are not enrolled in school and who are working in the informal sector in very precarious conditions). The program is offered in cities with high prevalence of street children, such as Bogota, Cali, Medellin and Cartagena. In 2005, there were 3,058 children who received services from this program (ICBF, 2005). |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Notes* Research and Reported by Sandra Garcia [1] In 1986 the election of mayors by popular vote was approved, and in 1991 the election of governors by popular vote was approved (before, governors where appointed by the President, and mayors where appointed by the governors) [2] In 2004, GDP per capita using PPP was $6,544 for Colombia, $12,229 for Argentina; $10,581 for Chile, $9,473 for Mexico and $8,017 for Brazil The World Factbook (CIA, 2005). [3] The Ministry of Social Protection was recently created (2002) and is a product of merging the former Ministry of Health and Ministry of Labor [4] Agencia Presidencial para la Acción Social y Cooperación Internacional http://www.acci.gov.co/La_Entidad/index_Entidad.htm [5] With programs such as Familias en Accion, Familias Guardabosques, Proyectos Productivos, Infraestrucura Social and Reconversion Sociolaboral [6] http://www.mineducacion.gov.co/1621/article-89266.html [7] Another important factor explaining the decrease in fertility rates is the increased coverage of education for women and their increased participation in the labor force (Departamento Nacional de Planeación, 2005c). [8] http://www.oecd.org/dataoecd/7/42/35530071.xls [9] http://www.oecd.org/dataoecd/7/41/35530083.xls
[10]
If the “old” poverty line is used, then 54% of individuals
and 49% of households are poor; if the “new” poverty line is
used, then 68% of individuals and 62% of households are
poor. The main difference between the old and new poverty
lines is that they are calculated based on a different year
of the Survey of Income and Expenses (1985 vs 1995).
[11] Different authors have different figures, but consistent: for example, Baldión and Nina report an increase of the Q5/Q1 ratio from 23.8 in 1996 to 26.3 in 2000 (Baldión and Nina 2001) [12] There are discrepancies in calculations of the Colombian Gini coefficient among different authors (by 1-3 points in the Gini). For example Baldión et al (2001) report a Gini of 56.6 for 2000, but the other years do not correspond to the calculations reported in the World Bank study (even though they are using the same data). [13] This comparison is based on poverty rates estimated by ECLAC for each country. Although data is available for 2002 for most of the countries, for Colombia the most recent figure at the national level was 1999. [14] Calculations based on population and employment figures from Colombian National Department of Statistics (DANE, http://www.dane.gov.co/inf_est/empleo.htm (Retrieved 11/8/05) and http://www.dane.gov.co/inf_est/series_proyecciones.htm (Retrieved 12/8/05) [15] This type of supplement also exists in other Latin American counties: Guatemala (Incaparina), Mexico (Nutrisano), Peru (Alli Alimentu), Ecuador (Papilla y bebida and PAN). According to the ICBF, the Colombian product (Bienestarina) is the best compared to the other supplements because it provides an important amount of high quality protein. [16] Figures received directly by ICBF (Ejecución de Metas Sociales y Financieras, Septiembre 2005) [17] SISBEN 1 [18] Technically in Colombia the pre-primary education age-group is 3-5 year olds, which includes one year of compulsory preschool education, this is when children are 5 years old. [19] Programa de Apoyo Directo al Empleo [20] To be eligible for Youth in Action, a person must be between 18-25 years old and have a score of 1 or 2 in the SISBEN (System of Selection of Beneficiaries of Social Spending). The SIISBEN is an index used to target social spending to those most in need. It is based on assessment of living conditions including income, employment, educational attainment and assets. [21] In 2002, the subsidy was $14,000 pesos (aprox US$6) per child enrolled in primary school and $28,000 (aprox US$12) per child enrolled in secondary school, which is about half the size of the Mexican program’s subsidies. [22] According to calculations from Nuñez & Espinosa based on the most recent household survey, there are 4,276,388 children in SISEN 1 or SISBEN 2 (the indicator used to measure permanent income and determine eligibility to these programs). Although Familias en Accion is not currently aimed at children from all the country but only to those living in cities below 100,000 inhabitants, the government is planning to expand its coverage to other areas. [23] Calculation based on figures published by (Nuñez & Espinosa, 2005). [24] Eligibility is determined though an index called the SISBEN (System of Selection of Beneficiaries of Social Spending) and is based on assessment of living conditions including income, employment, educational attainment and assets. [25] DNP http://www.dnp.gov.co/paginas_detalle.aspx?idp=121 , retrieved 11/9/05 [26] Improvement to the basic structure or to obtain basic needs for the home. [27] From 1,349 cases in the period from February 2001 to July 2002; to 690 cases in the period from August 2002 to January 2004 |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
ReferencesADDIN EN.REFLIST Alm, J., & López-Castaño, H. (2003). Payroll Taxes in Colombia. Bogotá: Fedesarrollo. Atanassio, O., Battistin, E., Fitzsimons, E., Mesnard, A., & Vera-Hernández, M. (2005). How Effective are Conditional Cash Transfers? Evidence from Colombia: The Institute for Fiscal Studies. Briefing Note No. 54. Attanasio, O., & Székely, M. (2001). Going Beyond Income: Redefining Poverty in Latin America. In O. Atanassio & M. Székely (Eds.), Portrait of the Poor: An Assets-Based Approach. Washington, D.C.: Inter-American Development Bank. Baldión, E., & Esteban, N. (2001). Coyuntura Económica e Indicadores Sociales. Bogotá: Departamento Nacional de Planeación. Castro, M. F. (2004). Impact Evaluacion of Empleo en Acción: Lessons and Relevance for Colombia. Paper presented at the Third Meeting of the Social Policy Network, Buenos Aires. CEPAL. (2004). Statistical Yearbook for Latin America and the Caribbean: United Nations. CIA. (2005). The World Factbook. De Ferranti, D., Lafourcade, O., Giugale, M., Hicks, N., & Vélez, C. E. (2002). Colombia Poverty Report. Washington D.C.: World Bank. De Ferranti, D., Perry, G., Ferreira, F., Walton, M., Coady, D., Cunningham, W., et al. (2003). Inequality in Latin America and the Caribbean: Breaking with History? Washington D.C.: World Bank Latin American and Caribbean Studies. Departamento Nacional de Planeación. (2004). Evaluación del Impacto del Programa Familias en Acción - Subsidios Condicionados de la Red de Apoyo Social: Informe del Primer Seguimiento. Bogotá. Departamento Nacional de Planeación. (2005a). Sistema de Metas Presidenciales. Retrieved November 9th, 2005, from http://www.sigob.gov.co/ Departamento Nacional de Planeación. (2005b). Sistema de Metas Presidenciales (SIGOB). Retrieved December 8, 2005, from http://sigob.presidencia.gov.co/ Departamento Nacional de Planeación. (2005c). Visión Colombia II Centenario: Propuesta para Discusión. Bogotá: Planeta. Departamento Nacional de Planeación (DNP). (2004). Evaluación del Impacto del Programa Familias en Acción - Subsidios Condicionados de la Red de Apoyo Social: Informe del Primer Seguimiento. Bogotá. DNP. (2005). Cifras de Violencia 2004: Departamento Nacional de Planeación, Dirección de Justicia y Seguridad. ECLAC. (2004). Panorama Social de América Latina 2003. Santiago de Chile: United Nations Economic Commission for Latin America and the Caribbean (ECLAC). ECLAC. (2005). Panorama Social de América Latina 2004. Santiago de Chile: United Nations Economic Commission for Latin America and the Caribbean (ECLAC). Fedesarrollo. (2002). Informe de pobreza y evaluación de la red de asistencia social. Conyuntura Social(May). Fedesarrollo. (2004a). Análisis conyuntural. Coyuntura Social(31). Fedesarrollo. (2004b). Vulnerabilidad de la infancia y juventud, Colombia 2003. Coyuntura Social, 30(2), 11-19. Human Rights Watch. (2003). Aprenderás a no llorar: niños combatientes en Colombia. New York: Human Rights Watch. ICBF. (2005). Informe ICBF presentado al Ministerio de Protección Social. Bogotá: Instituto Colombiano de Bienestar Familiar. Lasso, F. (2004). Incidencia del Gasto Público Social sobre la Distribución del Ingreso y la Reducción de la Pobreza. Bogotá: Misión para el Diseño de una Estrategia para la Reducción de la Pobreza y la Desigualdad. Ministerio de Educación Nacional, & UNESCO. (1999). Programa 'Educación para Todos': evaluación del año 2000 (Background paper for EFA 2000 Assessment). Nuñez, J., & Espinosa, S. (2005). Asistencia Social en Colombia: Diagnóstico y Propuestas (No. Documento CEDE 2005-42). Bogotá: CEDE. Perotti, R. (2000). Public Spending on Social Protection in Colombia: Analysis and Proposals. Fedesarrollo - Working Papers Series(No. 18). UNESCO. (2001). Latin America and the Caribbean regional report: UNESCO Institute for Statistics. UNESCO. (2005). Education for All Global Monitoring Report 2005: The Quality Imperative. UNHCR. (2004). UNHCR Global Report 2004: United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees. Vélez, C. E., & Foster, V. (1999). Public Social Expenditure in Colombia: Incidence and Sector Priorities in the 1990's. Washington D.C.: World Bank. World Bank. (2002a). Colombia Social Safety Net Assessment. World Bank. (2002b). Colombia: Social Safety Net Assessment. Washington D.C.: The World Bank. World Bank. (2005). The Gap Matters: Poverty and Well-Being of Afro-Colombians and Indigenous Peoples: Environmentally and Socially Sustainable Development Unit - Latin America and The Caribbean Region.
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
