Progress of Vietnam’s Global Child Poverty

Study

Vietnam Country Study Team

Progress

• Oct – Nov ’07: Drafted TORs , identified potential partners (SEDEC, GSO);

• Dec ’07-Jan ’08: Set up a Country study team; Policy and Statistics team, reference group with TORs; Agreement with all parties (MOLISA, GSO, SEDEC) on coordination and working mechanism

• February ‘08: detail work plan of each team; detail policy analysis and statistical analysis Frameworks.

Progress

• March 14, 2008: Orientation Workshop with all govermental-line agencies and key stakeholders, which reached to:

• Common understanding the

concept of the study, approaches and methodologies.

• Consensus on the national policies and programs that most affect child well-being.

• Plan and coordination between teams.

UNICEF Vietnam(Country focal point/HQ

liaison)

SEDEC

(Policy templat

es)

Country team

(Country analysis report)

MOLISA(Coordination,

leadership)

Policy expert (Focal points)

MOF

Policy expert (Focal points)

MOET

Policy expert (Focal points)

MOH

Policy expert (Focal points)

MPI

Policy expert (Focal points)

MOJ

Policy expert (Focal points)

MOLISA

Policy expert (Focal points)

MARD

GSO(Statisti

cal templat

es)

IPI Data Compilation

Policy expert (Focal points)

MOCST

Policy expert (Focal points)

CEM

UNICEF HQ(Guidance,

Supervision)ORGANISATION

• April – May ‘08: Data (policy and statistics) gathering and processing, Regional workshop.

• June ’08: Report writing and Consultations with various stakeholders

• July ’08: Finalization

Progress

12 May ’08: Data gathering + Preparation of Statistic and Policy frameworks + Prelimilary draft

Chapter 1: Children and development

2 of 3 paragraphs draftted Chapter 2: Poverty and children

Data + 1 of 3 paragraphs draftted Chapter 3: The pillars of child well-

being Data + 2 of 5 paragraphs

drafttedChapter 4: A strategy for child well-being and equity 0 of 2 paragraphs draftted

Progress

Favourable circumstances:• Rich national data sets

– VLSS 1993, 1998, 2002, 2004, 2006 (some data)

– MICS II (2001), MICS III (2006);

– Population census 1999, pop. survey 2006

– National health survey 2003 & other surveys

• Some existing studies on children,

poverty.

• High goverment’s commitment,

cooperation of experts of ministries.

Pros vs. Con

Difficulties:• The guideline seems too ambitious

(data, correlation analysis) with a given limited time.

• Unsuitable timing: – UNICEF: MTR process, Child poverty index at

the same time

– Counterparts: over committed/overload with govt.’s agenda e.g. VHLSS’08

• Data:– Availability e.g. no data of many indicators

(budget data for children, disaggregated level)

– Quality / accuracy / compatibility

(diff. definition/calculation, unreliable adm. data)

– Accessibility (data from various sources)

– Data on children aged 16 (Vietnam) vs. aged

18 (CRC)

Pros vs. Con

Thank you