Top Message
Top Message
Back to Home Page  |  Recommend a Site  |  Settings   |  Sign In
Education Web
Target Your Results By: Clear All Selected iViews Customize Your Search
Viewing 1-1 of 1 total results
 Conditional Cash Transfers in Brazil, Chile and Mexico: Impacts upon Inequality
8 8
9 9
10 10
11 11
18 18
including som e unconditional cash transfers. CCT incom e is the com ponent under scrutiny, and is the incom e received by the fam ilies registered in the program m es. This com ponent exists, how ever, only for 2003-2004. The category of ‘other incom e’ includes every form...
1 0
including som e unconditional cash transfers. CCT incom e is the com ponent under scrutiny, and is the incom e received by the fam ilies registered in the program m es. This com ponent exists, how ever, only for 2003-2004. The category of ‘other incom e’ includes every form of incom e registered by the survey that w as not classified in any of the other three categories. This last com ponent is com prised m ainly of rents, investm ent earnings and private transfers (donations and dom estic or international
8 0 http://www.undp-povertycentre.org/pub/IPCWorkingPaper35.pdf#page=8 www.undp-povertycentre.org/pub/IPCWorkingPaper35.pdf#page=8
6 International Poverty Centre W orking Paper n&ordm; 35 The transfer has three basic <span class="highlight">com</span> ponents, tw o of w hich are conditional and one non- conditional. H ouseholds benefiting from O portunidades receive an unconditional transfer in the am ount of 250 pesos ($ 32 PPP) per elderly adult in the household. Additionally, households receive a food support transfer of 189 pesos ($ 24 PPP) conditional on attending training sessions on nutrition and health. The m ore substantive transfer, though, is the
9 0 http://www.undp-povertycentre.org/pub/IPCWorkingPaper35.pdf#page=9 www.undp-povertycentre.org/pub/IPCWorkingPaper35.pdf#page=9
including som e unconditional cash transfers. CCT incom e is the <span class="highlight">com</span> ponent under scrutiny, and is the incom e received by the fam ilies registered in the program m es. This <span class="highlight">com</span> ponent exists, how ever, only for 2003-2004. The category of &lsquo;other incom e&rsquo; includes every form of incom e registered by the survey that w as not classified in any of the other three categories. This last <span class="highlight">com</span> ponent is <span class="highlight">com</span> prised m ainly of rents, investm ent earnings and private transfers (donations and dom estic or international
10 0 http://www.undp-povertycentre.org/pub/IPCWorkingPaper35.pdf#page=10 www.undp-povertycentre.org/pub/IPCWorkingPaper35.pdf#page=10
8 International Poverty Centre W orking Paper n&ordm; 35 of recipient (e.g., w age em ployee or self-account w orker). The inform ation available in Chilean datasets m akes it very difficult, how ever, to reverse this adjustm ent. Also, this adjustm ent cannot be reproduced for the other countries. The third challenge w as related to the construction of total incom e.6 This involved questions about w hat should be <span class="highlight">com</span> puted, and w hat should not. In Chile and Mexico, it is custom ary to im pute the
11 0 http://www.undp-povertycentre.org/pub/IPCWorkingPaper35.pdf#page=11 www.undp-povertycentre.org/pub/IPCWorkingPaper35.pdf#page=11
Sergei Soares; Rafael G uerreiro O s&oacute;rio; F&aacute;bio Veras Soares; Marcelo Medeiros and Eduardo Zepeda 9 W here G is the G ini index, ck represents the coefficient of concentration of factor <span class="highlight">com</span> ponent k relative to total incom e and &phi;k is the w eight of factor k in total incom e. D ifferencing [1] w e have: ( )k k k k k G c c&#981; &#981;&#8710; = &#8710; + &#8710; &#65533; [2] The first term in the sum m ation represents the <span class="highlight">com</span> position effect and the second the effect of the change in the coefficient of concentration. If w e
18 0 http://www.undp-povertycentre.org/pub/IPCWorkingPaper35.pdf#page=18 www.undp-povertycentre.org/pub/IPCWorkingPaper35.pdf#page=18
rounded. Source: Pnad 1995, 2004; Casen 1996, 2003; Enigh 1996, 2004. Incom e from social security also had an im portant contribution to the dynam ics of inequality. It raised inequality in Brazil and Mexico but not in Chile. In Brazil and Mexico, a <span class="highlight">com</span> bination of greater concentration and a larger share of this m ore concentrated incom e <span class="highlight">com</span> ponent in the total overturned one sixth of the equalizing effect of the im proved distribution of labour incom es in Mexico and over-turned one quarter in Brazil