Launch of The Report of the 2008-09 Household Income and Expenditure Survey A few key findings Professor Wadan Narsey School of Economics (FBE) The University of the South Pacific 1 (currently on leave at Kagoshima University)
A presentation from Kagoshima University Research Center for Pacific Islands Kagoshima University Japan with thanks to the Director KURCPI (Professor Shinichi Noda), Professor Kuwahara and support staff (Ms Kusumoto) for the use of the KURCPI facilities for this recording. 2
To launch . 3
Welcome Chief guests Mr Timoci Bainimarama (Government Statistician) Ms Judith Robinson, Ms Sarah Goulding, Margaret Logavatu (AusAID) University colleagues, students, ladies and gentlemen Thank you for attending this launch of the 2008-09 HIES. 4
Presentation: a few key results and policy implications Acknowledgements Value of the 2008-09 HIES: first time comparisons possible (with 2002-03) Average Household Incomes in Fiji (area, region, ethnicity) Food security (home consumption, main dietary items, junk food, narcotics) Expenditure components: interesting items with policy implications. health education Report has others bits and pieces 5
Acknowledgements FIBoS Household Survey Unit processed and edited the data. - Mr Epeli Waqavonovono (Chief Statistician) - Mr Toga Raikoti (Principal Statistician) - Mr Serevi Baledrokadroka (Principal Statistician) - all the support staff at HQ and in regional offices. AusAID for funding the data analysis and writing of report Kagoshima University Research Center for Pacific Islands for providing a peaceful environment to complete the writing of the Report. USP for the sabbatical leave, part of which I have used to complete the report. FBE (Professor Biman Prasad) and School of Economics (Dr Sunil Kumar and Ms Bhavna Ram) for organizing the launch of this Report. 6
Importance of this 2008-09 HIES 1. From Bureau’s point of view: two main objectives - to rebase CPI weights and assist with national accounts - to assist policy makers with key stats on incomes and expenditures at the national level, throughout Fiji 2. These HIES are genuine representative national sample, well administered survey; with data generally superior to that derived from any academic study. 3. Changes in household incomes and expenditures: - important base indicators of standards of living (MDGs) - changing patterns of food consumption: food security crucial - “new expenditures” like mobile phones 7
First: macro picture: Fiji’s GDP (constant prices) (Index Numbers) GDP (Constant Prices) (Index Numbers) (2002=100) 110 105 100 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 GDP: Total Income produced domestically increased to 2006; followed by decrease thereafter (collapse of the sugar industry, collapse of loans to agriculture) But 2008-09 level still better off in aggregate than 2002-03. 8
Gross Domestic Product per capita (constant prices) (Index Numbers) GDP per capita (Constant Prices) (Index Numbers) 110 105 100 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 With growing population, decline in GDP per capita more severe after 2006. By 2008-09, still slightly above the levels of 2002-03. 9
GDP does not include Foreign Remittances Remittances ($million) (2002 prices) 400 300 $ million 200 100 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 Remittances have been very large: $300 million in 2006, more than sugar earnings. Remittances rose in real terms to 2006; declined to 2007 and 2008, before rising again in 2009. i.e. strongly counter-balanced the impact of declining GDP per capita. 10 Gross National Income includes remittances: look at GNP per capita.
Gross National Income pc (current international $) (recent WB data) Gross National Income pc (current international dollars) Index Numbers: 2002 = 100 125 120 115 110 105 100 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 Remittance money kept pushing GNI pc up till 2008 Then clear decline thereafter till 2010. Will see below: remittances (foreign and local) have saved Fiji households./ 11
Total Household Incomes: 20% real increase in aggregate, But... Estimated Total Household Income ($m) Area 2002-03 2008-09 % Ch. Real % Ch. Rural 884 1004 14 -10 Urban 1115 2044 83 44 All 1998 3048 53 20 % Rural 44 33 -25 Driven by real increase of 44% in urban households total income. -10% decline in total rural HH incomes Rural share (bottom row) declined by 25% from 44% to only 33%.: 12
Average Household Incomes? small rise of 7% for Fiji (in real terms: i.e. adjusting for CPI inflation of 27%) Average Household Income ($) 2002 2008 % ChangeReal % Ch. Rural 10559 11608 10 -13 Urban 15267 23036 51 19 All 12753 17394 36 7 Rural Gap -31 -50 While urban households average income improved (by +19%) There was a real decline of -13% in Rural areas (purple shading) The Rural: Urban gap (green) in Av.HH incomes widened further from -31% to -50%: i.e. must expect rural:urban drift to continue and worsening of service provision in urban areas for water, sewerage, education, health and environment. Policy implication: MUST prioritize rural development 13
Average Household Incomes (ethnicity): political issue for decades Average Household Income (ethnicity) Ethnicity 2002 2008 % Ch. R % Ch Fijian 12972 16994 31 3 Indo-F 11902 15537 31 3 Other 19105 34197 79 41 FIJI 12753 17394 36 7 %(F-I)/I 9 9 Fijian and Indo-Fijian Av.HH Income changed by same 3% in real terms Others increased by 41%. Fijian:Indo-Fijian margin remained the same at +9%. But for majority of households in Fiji: no ethnic divide between the two major races. 14
Ethnic shares of Total HH Income: political implications? Ethnic Shares of Total HH Income Ethnicity 2002 2008 % Ch. Fijian 51 53 4 Indo-F 43 36 -16 Other 7 11 72 FIJI 100 100 0 Usual focus is on relativities between Fijians and Indo-Fijians: Indo-Fijian share has declined by -16% to just 36% But only small 4% increase in Fijian share to 53% (still majority of total Inc.) Largest increase of 72% has been to Others, who have received the bulk of the share lost by Indo-Fijians, rising to 11% of Total HH Income. Overall shares of income similar to shares of population. 15
Ethnic Poverty Result (from Preliminary Report) Both major ethnic groups are equally poor. According to both the 2002-03 HIES and the 2008-09 HIES Policy implication of these four slides: eliminate ethnic biases for national sharing of resources and poverty alleviation 16
But note: Indo-Fijian households are smaller than Fijian Because Fijian households larger than Indo-Fijian (Fijian couples have more children) by more than 20% Indo-Fijian households are still decreasing in size (-9%) faster than Fijians (- 5%) The size gap has increased from 21% to 27% (green) Which means that Income per Adult Equivalent for Indo-Fijians is higher. Av. Household Size Ethnicity 2002 2008 % Ch. Fijian 5.4 5.1 -5 Indo-F 4.4 4.0 -9 FIJI 4.9 4.7 -5 %(F-I)/I 21 27 17
Hence living standards of Indo-Fijian households better than Fijian HH Income per Adult Equivalent Ethnicity 2002 2008 % Ch. R % Ch Fijian 2958 3995 35 6 Indo-F 3108 4341 40 10 Other 4628 8747 89 49 FIJI 3094 4389 42 12 %(F-I)/I -5 -8 HH Income per Adult Equivalent is good indicator of standard of living, because it adjusts total household income for household size Fijian households have lower HH Income per Adult Equivalent than Indo-Fijian households and the gap is growing from -5% to -8%. This also affects expenditure on education, health, durable goods, mobiles etc 18 Policy: Put “family planning” back on the agenda for indigenous Fijians .
Worrying Changes in Income Sources (2002-03 to 2008-09) Incomes from Income Sources ($m) Data 2002 2008 % Ch. R % Ch. Wages Permanent 851 1344 58 24 Wages Casual 228 294 29 2 Agricultural Business 197 216 10 -14 Commercial Business 145 126 -14 -32 Home Consumption 151 158 4 -18 All Remittances/Gifts 84 259 206 141 Other Income 342 652 91 50 Total Income 1998 3048 53 20 Households saved by Remittances, Gifts and Other Incomes. 19
Simplifying previous slide: Decline in “productive” sectors Broad shares of Total HH Income Data 2002 2008 % Ch. Wages and Salaries 54 54 0 Ag/Commerce/Subsistence 25 16 -34 All other receipts 21 30 40 FIJI 100 100 “Productive” parts of the economy (Agriculture, Commerce, Subsistence) saw a large 34% decline in share of Total HH Income to a mere 16%. While Other Incomes increased by 40% from 21% to 30%. Policy issue: Must refocus national development efforts on productive sectors. Contentious policy issue: restraint of formal (public) sector incomes (not the low casual wages) during national downturn. 20
Good news for indigenous Fijian households: real 20% increase Indigenous Fijians: Income sources 2002 2008 % Ch. R % Ch Wages Permanent 437 700 60 26 Wages Casual 92 116 27 0 Agricultural Business 108 159 47 16 Commercial Business 43 66 55 22 Home Consumption 124 135 9 -14 Others 214 435 103 60 FIJI 1018 1611 58 25 Plus also: Increase in Agricultural Business incomes: 16% Increase in Commercial Business incomes: 22% Increase in Permanent Wages: 26% But worrying: significant decrease in Home Consumption (-14%). 21
Recommend
More recommend
