Upload
lynette-hicks
View
215
Download
1
Tags:
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
2
Poverty and Inequality in SA• Poverty and Inequality part of the apartheid legacy.• Embedded in the skewed allocation of social and human
capital.• Income and Expenditure survey of 2006 :
– 7 percent of household income goes to poorest 40% of the population.
– Poorest 20% received less than 1.5% of income.– Richest 10% earned more than 50% of household
income.• RSA ranks as a middle-income country in terms of average
income, many of its social indicators are comparable to the worlds poorest countries – due to both poverty and inequality.
History of Social Security in SA
• SA’s formal Social Security System extends to the Children’s Act of 1913 and Workmen’s Compensation Act of 1914.
– Workers compensated for illness and injury and care-givers accessed child maintenance grants.
• Older Age Pensions Act of 1928 and Disability Grants in 1937.
• Black people excluded both by law and bureaucratic based discrimination.
3
4
Current approach to Social Security
• Primary focus on implementing Taylor Report: establishment of a Comprehensive Social Security System comprising of 3 pillars: – Social Assistance, – Social Insurance and– Discretionary benefits
Types Of Social Assistance Grants
• Old Age Grants
• Disability Grants
• War Veterans Grants
• Foster Care Grant
• Care Dependency Grant
5
Social Assistance
• Since advent of democracy target groups have not changed but has been deracialised and eligibility criteria changed.
• All qualifying children access to CSG:
– 1994 ages 0 to 7 years of age.
– Current children up to 18 years are eligible.
• Old Age Pensions: Men and Women from the Age of 60 receive State Old Age Pensions.
6
Social Assistance
• September 2010 there are 14 548 beneficiaries– The CSG is at 10 003 991 and with other grants
total numbers of children receiving cash transfers are 10 667 960
– State Old Age Pensions: 2 620 939– Disabilities: 1 203 567
7
Impacts
• It is South Africa’s most effective programme for reducing poverty, and it impacts on inequality.
• Expenditure Survey of 2004/2006 social assistance transfers reduced the Gini-Coefficient for income from work from 0.80 to 0.73. Meaningful transfer of income from higher income groups to the poor.
• Grants also well targeted:– Richest 2 provinces have the lowest take up rate
– Poorest 3 provinces have the highest take up rates.
8
Impacts
• Households, included women receiving State Old Age Pension, reported better weight for height indicators for girls.
• Kwazulu Natal Income Dynamic Study indicated significant improvement in the weight to height scores for children. Significant reduction in experience of hunger.
• Households that receive cash transfers have higher expenditure shares on food and education then those poor households who don’t.
9
Impacts
• Unemployed in households who receive cash transfers are more likely to seek work.
• Overall the cash transfers have significant developmental impacts.
10
Goal 1: Eradicate Extreme Poverty
Poverty line Percent below poverty line
Poverty Gap
2000 2006 2000 2006
Food Poverty line R148 28.5
R20924.8
10.4 7.9
$1.00 (ppp) 11.3 5.0 3.2 1.1
$1.25 (ppp) 17.0 9.7 5.4 2.3
$2.00 (ppp) 33.5 25.3 13.0 8.1
$2.50 (ppp) 42.2
34.8 18.0 12.5
Percent living below poverty lines and poverty gap: 2000 and 2006
Concluding Remarks
• Solidarity Based measure – state and society has to play a role in protecting the vulnerable.
• Barriers – means tests. Need to weigh up issues of affordability to benefits of universal coverage.
• New issue is conditionalities – particularly for children.
12