Kondisi Ketimpangan di Indonesia
Arief Anshory YusufCEDS, Universitas Padjadjaran
Seminar “ketimpangan pembangunan Indonesia dari berbagai aspek: Mengurai Tantangan Pembangunan di Era Pemerintahan Baru”
Jakarta, 21 Agustus 2014
www.ceds.fe.unpad.ac.id
Empowering Civil Society Networks in an Unequal Multi‐Polar World – Indonesia (ECSN–Indonesia)
OutlineOutline
1 Indonesian level and trend of inequality in1. Indonesian level and trend of inequality in a global perspective.
2 The trend of Indonesian various2. The trend of Indonesian various indicators inequality
3 Th d A l ti3. The causes and cures: An exploration
Indonesia can be categorized as a country of high inequality and low income, ..
Source: CIA, World Fact Book, 2013, World Bank WDI, and author’s calculation
.. and also of high inequality and high poverty.a d a so o g equa ty a d g po e ty
ZAF
60
HIGH POVERTY
LOW POVERTYHIGH INEQUALITY
CHLCRI
ECU
BRA
PER
PRYPAN
COL
SLV
BOL HND
SWZ
CAF
RWA
NGA
ZMB
50
HIGH POVERTYHIGH INEQUALITY
INDONESIA
LTU
URYARGMYS
THA
MEX
TUR
MKD
DOM
BTN
PER SLV
FJICHN
CMR
GEOIDN CIV
MRTTGO
SEN
UGAAGO
GIN BFA
MOZMWI MDG
LBR
40Gin
i Ind
ex
MEDIAN INEQUALITY
INDONESIA
HRV
BLR
BIH
POL
WBG
BGR
LTU
LVA
KAZ
JOR
ROM
AZEALBTUN
MDA
EGY ARMIRQ
KGZ
LKA
TJK
VNMSDN KHM
NPLETHIND NER
BGDMLI
SLE
BDI
30
HIGH POVERTY
OVE
RTY
UKRBLRSVK
20
0 20 40 60 80 100$
LOW INEQUALITYLOW POVERTY
LOW INEQUALITY
MED
IAN
PO
PPP$2 Poverty Incidence
Source: World Bank Poverty & Inequality DatabaseNote: Using the most recent data from the last 5 years (2007-2011) where available.
Among developing countries, the increase in Indonesian inequality over the last decade is q yamong the highest, while most others declined.
Source: World Bank Poverty & Inequality DatabaseNote: The inequality indicators are three-years average where data available.
Indonesian Gini coefficient has reached its record high, contributed by its large increase in the last g , y gdecade. For the last decade it rise by ~30%
Source: SUSENAS (Author’s calculation)
By other measure, the rise is ~60% (Palma Index or decile dispersion(Palma Index or decile dispersion
ratio)Palma Index Decile Dispersion Ratio
1.95
2.15
2.35Palma Index = share 10% richest/share 40%
11
12
13
14Mean income of 10% richest to 10% poorest
1.35
1.55
1.75 poorest
8
9
10
11
0 75
0.95
1.15
1.35
5
6
7
0.75
Palma Index (All) Palma Index (Urban)
419
93
1995
1997
1999
2001
2003
2005
2007
2009
2011
2013
All Indonesia Urban RuralPalma Index (Rural) Java Non-Java
As also indicated by the increasing share of the 20% richest and declining share of 40% poorest20% richest, and declining share of 40% poorest.
Source: SUSENAS (Author’s calculation)
The large increase in equality happens everywhere in Indonesiaeverywhere in Indonesia.
Source: SUSENAS (Author’s calculation)
The lower the initial inequality, the higher its change over time (Inequality convergence)change over time (Inequality convergence).
Source: SUSENAS (Author’s calculation)
In a large number of highly unequal cities, poverty incidence actually increased over the last decade. This is despite the cities’ high economic growthThis is despite the cities high economic growth and national decline in poverty over the same period.
4.5 HIGH INEQUALITY
DECLINING POVERTYHIGH INEQUALITYINCREASING POVERTY
.3.4
ffici
ent i
n 20
12
MEDIAN INEQUALITY
.2G
ini c
oef
ERTY
CH
AN
GE
.1
-20 -10 0 10
LOW INEQUALITYDECLINING POVERTY
LOW INEQUALITYINCREASING POVERTY
ZER
O P
OVE
Change in poverty incidence (2003-2013)
Non-city (kabupaten) City (kota)
Source: SUSENAS (Author’s calculation, for Gini coefficient) and BPS (for poverty incidence)
Is the story mainly about the very rich leaving everyone else behind? It may seem soeveryone else behind? It may seem so.
Source: SUSENAS (Author’s calculation)
Causes: An explorationCauses: An exploration• Less and less pro-poor growthLess and less pro poor growth• Commodity boom of the 2000s• Policy failures – political economy bottleneckPolicy failures political economy bottleneck
– Mis-targetted subsidy– Rice policyp y– Labor market regulation
• Institutions, governance, corruption• Failed functioning of state-budget• Inequality of opportunity
less pro-poor growthless pro poor growth8
75
6ed
ian
splin
e
2002-2012
34
Me
1990-1996
2
0 20 40 60 80 100Percentiles
Inequality of opportunity?Inequality of opportunity?6.00 Schooling years (year) 40.00 H.Education (%) 40.00 Clean water (%)
4.00
5.00
25 00
30.00
35.00
25 00
30.00
35.00
2.00
3.00
15.00
20.00
25.00
15.00
20.00
25.00
1.00
2.00
5.00
10.00
5.00
10.00
0.000.00
1992
1995
1998
2001
2004
2007
2010
0.00
1994
1997
2000
2003
2006
2009
2012
Gap between 20% richest and 20% poorest
KESENJANGAN AKSES TERHADAP PENDIDIKAN MASIH SANGAT TINGGI TALENT POOL RENDAHMASIH SANGAT TINGGI – TALENT POOL RENDAH
Lama sekolah (tahun)Angka partisipasi murniSMALama sekolah (tahun) SMA
9 19.710
12
61% 62%
69%0.7
0.8
5.4
7.9
9.1
6
8
0.4
0.5
0.6
3.4
4.65.4
2
419%
28%
0.2
0.3
0
2
1992 2002 2012
6%
0
0.1
1992 2002 2010
20% termiskin (Q1) 20% terkaya (Q5) 20% termiskin (Q1) 20% terkaya (Q5)
Sumber: www.keberpihakan.org
PERGURUAN TINGGI MASIH EKSKLUSIFPT ADALAH PENGHASIL INOVATOR DAN WIRAUSAHAWAN
36.7%40%Angka partisipasi murni PT
25.6% 26.3%
36.7%
30%
35%
15%
20%
25%
1 3%5%
10%
15%
0.1% 0.6% 1.3%0%
1992 2002 2010
20% t i ki (Q1) Q2 Q3 Q4 20% t k (Q2)20% termiskin (Q1) Q2 Q3 Q4 20% terkaya (Q2)
Sumber: www.keberpihakan.org
In Heckman (2001)
KUALITAS KESEHATAN ANAK BALITA INDONESIA RENDAHBALITA INDONESIA RENDAH
Pct of 5 years of age who are Stunted
Percentage of Children under 5 years of age Affected by WastingStunted years of age Affected by Wasting
47.9
40 9
50
6012.3
10.89.710
12
14
40.9 39.235.1
32.3 30.530
40
9.7
7.9 7.3 6.9
4.73 6
6
8
10
17.2 15.7
4.4
0
10
20 3.6
0
2
4
0
Sumber: FAO Food Insecurity Database
Cure: Equity for GrowthKeadilan untuk Pertumbuhan
PERTUMBUHAN PRODUKTIVITAS/ NEGARA
EKONOMI TINGGIDAYA SAINGLINGKUNGAN PENDUKUNG
PENDIDIKAN
INOVASI
KEADILAN/
PRAKONDISI
PEMERATAAN
PENDIDIKAN
MODAL PEMBANGUNAN PEMERATAANKESEMPATAN
KESEHATAN
INSANI MANUSIA
KESEHATAN
Terima KasihTerima Kasih