2003年-世界发展银行全球_Safety_Nets_in_Transition_Economies_2页_261kb

Safety Nets in Transition Economies Summary

Core Content

Transition economies refer to countries that have shifted or are shifting from a centrally planned economy to a market-based system with private ownership and market institutions. These countries include those from the former Soviet Union, Eastern and Central Europe, and some in Asia and Africa that have undergone market transformations. The transition process has had significant economic and social impacts, particularly on poverty and inequality.

Main Views and Key Information

Economic Performance and Poverty

• Transition Impact: The dismantling of state-owned enterprises, combined with the collapse of trading relationships and fiscal shocks, led to increased poverty, unemployment, and inequality.
• Poverty Rates: By 1998, 5.1% of the population lived on less than $1 a day, compared to 1.5% in 1990. In conflict-ridden and low-income countries, the rates were even higher.
• Vulnerable Groups: Many vulnerable groups could not rely on state-subsidized support services, and increasing urbanization weakened traditional family and community coping mechanisms.
• Regional Differences: Countries in Asia and Africa faced unique challenges, such as conflict and severe terms-of-trade deterioration, which complicated the transition process.

The Role and Effectiveness of Safety Net Programs

• Three Policy Groups:

  1. Middle-income, faster-reforming countries:
     • High social spending (15-20% of GDP).
     • Mainly cash transfers and pensions.
     • Social spending was an important source of income for households.
     • Means-tested assistance was minimal.
     • Pensions helped maintain social cohesion but discouraged labor supply.
  2. Middle-income, slower-reforming countries:
     • Similar spending on health and education (around 10% of GDP).
     • More subsidies for private goods (housing, utilities).
     • Non-targeted benefits for specific groups (e.g., war veterans) cost 3-5% of GDP.
     • Low spending on child allowances and means-tested programs.
     • Benefits were often not progressive and favored urban, state-owned sectors.
  3. Low-income, slow-reforming countries:
     • Lowest social expenditures (mostly below 3% of GDP).
     • Education and health spending was minimal.
     • Legal obligations for social assistance were not honored due to low funding.
     • Utility subsidies were concentrated in urban areas.
     • Poor households relied on informal coping mechanisms such as selling assets and labor migration.

• Effectiveness:

  • High social insurance spending and child allowances helped prevent poverty.
  • Targeting was often difficult and politically unpopular.
  • Successful targeting systems were rare, with only a few countries (e.g., Armenia, Kosovo, Albania) managing to effectively use foreign aid for this purpose.

Lessons and Recommendations

• Poverty Transience: In slower-growing middle-income countries, poverty is often temporary, and public resources should be redirected toward growth-supporting investments.

• Institutional Adaptation: It is better to build on existing institutions and laws, even if they are not ideal, and adapt them over time.

• Reforms for Efficiency:

  • Eligibility: Tighten eligibility criteria and use targeted subsidies for social services and school feeding.
  • Means Testing: Use means testing more effectively, despite administrative challenges in low-income countries.
  • Financing: Ensure adequate national financing for safety net programs to avoid favoring richer areas.
  • Monitoring and Evaluation: Continuously monitor program outcomes and evaluate their impacts on families, especially children at risk.

• Success Stories: Some countries in Central and Eastern Europe and Central Asia improved program coverage and targeting, demonstrating that poverty alleviation can be achieved at a relatively low cost.

Conclusion

The transition from centrally planned to market-based economies has led to significant economic and social challenges, particularly in terms of poverty and inequality. The effectiveness of safety net programs varied across countries, with middle-income, faster-reforming countries showing better results. However, there is a clear need for better targeting, more efficient use of resources, and adequate financing to ensure that safety nets truly serve the most vulnerable populations. The World Bank’s Social Safety Nets Primer series provides guidance on designing and implementing effective safety net programs globally.