2005年-世界发展银行全球_Burkina_Faso___Reducing_Poverty_Through_Sustained_Equitable_Growth_Poverty_Assessment_142页_9mb

Summary of Report No. 29743-BUR: Reducing Poverty Through Sustained Equitable Growth in Burkina Faso

Core Content

This report evaluates the relationship between economic growth and poverty reduction in Burkina Faso from 1998 to 2003, and projects future poverty trends under various growth scenarios. It emphasizes the importance of equitable growth and the role of social services in reducing poverty. The analysis is based on household surveys conducted in 1994, 1998, and 2003, and uses the Poverty Analysis Macroeconomic Simulator (PAMS) to assess the potential for poverty reduction.

Main Points

1. Measuring Poverty Over Time

• Survey Design Changes: The National Institute of Statistics and Demography (INSD) improved data collection but also made design changes that affected the comparability of surveys.
• Comparable Welfare Indicator: A consistent welfare indicator was constructed for 1998 and 2003 by adjusting for survey design differences and applying uniform price data.
• Poverty Decline: The poverty headcount declined by about 8 percentage points between 1998 and 2003. Using the 2003 baseline (46.4% headcount), the 1998 headcount was estimated at 54.6%.
• Rural vs. Urban: The decline was more pronounced in rural areas than in urban areas. National inequality remained largely unchanged.

2. Growth and Poverty Dynamics

• Growth Drivers: Growth from 1998 to 2003 was primarily driven by the expansion of the primary sector, especially agriculture and cotton production.
• Productivity and Informal Sector: Productivity in the primary sector increased slightly, while the secondary and tertiary sectors expanded at similar rates to GDP. The informal sector played a key role in manufacturing growth.
• Pro-Poor Growth: Growth was found to be pro-poor overall, but the effect was weaker in urban areas due to rising inequality.
• Growth-Inequality Trade-Off: A 1% increase in growth reduces the poverty gap by about 2%, while a 1% increase in inequality requires about 1.4–1.5% more growth to offset its impact. In rural areas, 0.8–1.1% more growth is sufficient, but in urban areas, 3.3–3.4% more growth is needed.

3. Poverty Reduction Strategies

• Baseline Scenario: A 5% long-term GDP growth, driven by secondary and tertiary sectors, could reduce poverty to 29% by 2015.
• Cotton Production: A 20% increase in cotton production would lead to a 4 percentage point decline in poverty headcount, but also increase inequality due to the concentration of benefits among a small group.
• Non-Tradable Agricultural Production: A 20% increase in non-tradable agricultural production would reduce poverty by about 9 percentage points and lower inequality.
• Public Sector Wages: Increasing public sector wages has a minimal impact on poverty due to the small proportion of civil servants in the population.
• External Shocks: A 10% decline in agricultural output would increase the poverty rate by 3 percentage points. A 20% increase in cotton prices could lower poverty by about 1.5 percentage points.

4. Social Services and Poverty

• Education:
  • Literacy rates remained low, with only 30% of male adults and 13% of female adults literate.
  • Primary school enrollment increased from 35% to 44%, and secondary from 13% to 16%, but completion rates are still low.
  • Education is closely linked to household income and access to services.
  • Public spending on education benefits higher-income households more, and private spending is concentrated in urban areas.
• Health:
  • Health infrastructure improved, but accessibility remains a challenge, especially in rural areas.
  • Infant mortality decreased from 104 to 83 per 1000 live births, now below the Sub-Saharan average.
  • Child malnutrition remains widespread, with 40% of children under 5 stunted and 33% underweight.
  • Use of health services increased, but still not sufficient. Traditional healers and private care are more commonly used than public facilities.
  • Public health spending is mainly directed toward primary care, which accounts for about 60% of total public spending.

5. Equity in Fiscal Operations

• Fiscal Choices: The report highlights the need for equitable fiscal policies to ensure that growth benefits are distributed fairly.
• Welfare Elasticity: Welfare elasticity and price reform indices indicate that growth is pro-poor, though the impact is less pronounced in urban areas.
• Social Protection: The social protection strategy aims to address vulnerability, particularly in the context of macroeconomic shocks.

Key Information

• Poverty Headcount: Declined by 8 percentage points between 1998 and 2003, from 54.6% to 46.4%.
• GDP Growth: The primary sector drove growth, with secondary and tertiary sectors also playing a role.
• Cotton Production: Played a critical role in poverty reduction but also increased inequality.
• Social Services: Education and health services are underfunded and unevenly distributed, with significant disparities between urban and rural areas.
• Fiscal Policy: Emphasis is placed on the need for more equitable fiscal operations and improved social service delivery.

Conclusion and Recommendations

• Pro-Poor Growth: Growth has been pro-poor, but equity considerations must be addressed to ensure long-term poverty reduction.
• Fiscal Reforms: Equitable fiscal policies are necessary to support pro-poor growth and reduce inequality.
• Social Services: Enhancing access and quality of education and health services is essential for reducing poverty.
• Data Quality: Continued improvements in data collection and survey design are crucial for accurate poverty measurement.
• Shocks and Vulnerability: Policies should address the vulnerability of households to macroeconomic shocks, particularly in rural areas.

Tables and Figures

• Tables: Cover survey design, poverty indicators, growth and poverty trends, education and health statistics, and fiscal data.
• Figures: Illustrate poverty trends, GDP growth, growth incidence curves, and the impact of shocks on poverty.

Acknowledgments

The report was prepared by a World Bank team led by Jan Walliser, with significant contributions from various government officials, consultants, and international partners. It benefits from close collaboration with the Ministry of Economy and Development (MEDEV), INSD, and GTZ. The study was supported by the World Bank's Poverty Reduction and Economic Management (PREM) department.