Who benefits from public services? Decomposing inequalities in - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Who benefits from public services? Decomposing inequalities in Mozambique Sam Jones University of Copenhagen July 2017 1 / 25

Title 1 Background Methodology 2 Results 3 4 Conclusion 2 / 25

(1) Background 3 / 25

Expansion of public services in LDCs Millennium Development Goals crystallised a focus on service delivery in developing countries. Notable successes: 20pp increase in primary net enrolment in sub-Saharan Africa from 2000-2015 Global under-five mortality rate declined by more than 50% (1990-2015) Maternal mortality rate declined by 45% worldwide (1990-2015) Population averages hide distributional differences. How equitable has this expansion been ? In Mozambique? 4 / 25

Expansion of public services in LDCs Millennium Development Goals crystallised a focus on service delivery in developing countries. Notable successes: 20pp increase in primary net enrolment in sub-Saharan Africa from 2000-2015 Global under-five mortality rate declined by more than 50% (1990-2015) Maternal mortality rate declined by 45% worldwide (1990-2015) Population averages hide distributional differences. How equitable has this expansion been ? In Mozambique? 4 / 25

Expansion of public services in LDCs Millennium Development Goals crystallised a focus on service delivery in developing countries. Notable successes: 20pp increase in primary net enrolment in sub-Saharan Africa from 2000-2015 Global under-five mortality rate declined by more than 50% (1990-2015) Maternal mortality rate declined by 45% worldwide (1990-2015) Population averages hide distributional differences. How equitable has this expansion been ? In Mozambique? 4 / 25

Expansion of public services in LDCs Millennium Development Goals crystallised a focus on service delivery in developing countries. Notable successes: 20pp increase in primary net enrolment in sub-Saharan Africa from 2000-2015 Global under-five mortality rate declined by more than 50% (1990-2015) Maternal mortality rate declined by 45% worldwide (1990-2015) Population averages hide distributional differences. How equitable has this expansion been ? In Mozambique? 4 / 25

Expansion of public services in LDCs Millennium Development Goals crystallised a focus on service delivery in developing countries. Notable successes: 20pp increase in primary net enrolment in sub-Saharan Africa from 2000-2015 Global under-five mortality rate declined by more than 50% (1990-2015) Maternal mortality rate declined by 45% worldwide (1990-2015) Population averages hide distributional differences. How equitable has this expansion been ? In Mozambique? 4 / 25

Expansion of public services in LDCs Millennium Development Goals crystallised a focus on service delivery in developing countries. Notable successes: 20pp increase in primary net enrolment in sub-Saharan Africa from 2000-2015 Global under-five mortality rate declined by more than 50% (1990-2015) Maternal mortality rate declined by 45% worldwide (1990-2015) Population averages hide distributional differences. How equitable has this expansion been ? In Mozambique? 4 / 25

Expansion of public services in LDCs Millennium Development Goals crystallised a focus on service delivery in developing countries. Notable successes: 20pp increase in primary net enrolment in sub-Saharan Africa from 2000-2015 Global under-five mortality rate declined by more than 50% (1990-2015) Maternal mortality rate declined by 45% worldwide (1990-2015) Population averages hide distributional differences. How equitable has this expansion been ? In Mozambique? 4 / 25

Mozambique: public sector expansion 205 200 174 173 148 150 144 143 140 134 127 US$ pc (real) 123 112 111 103 100 94 92 92 80 80 77 75 67 64 63 64 55 54 53 48 47 50 44 43 39 34 33 28 27 25 23 22 21 0 1997 1999 2001 2003 2005 2007 2009 2011 2013 2015 1998 2000 2002 2004 2006 2008 2010 2012 2014 2016 Receitas do Estado Total 5 / 25

Mozambique: priority sector spending 125 100 US$ pc (real) 75 50 25 0 1997 1999 2001 2003 2005 2007 2009 2011 2013 2015 1998 2000 2002 2004 2006 2008 2010 2012 2014 2016 Ano Sectores prioritários Outras 6 / 25

Mozambique: educational output Children of primary school age / no. schools 15,000 13,300 12,900 11,100 10,000 9,500 7,300 6,500 5,600 5,000 4,700 3,900 3,400 2,900 2,500 2,200 1,800 1,600 1,400 1,200 1,200 1,000 1,000 800 700 700 700 600 600 600 600 600 500 500 500 500 500 500 500 500 500 500 500 0 1997 1999 2001 2003 2005 2007 2009 2011 2013 2015 1998 2000 2002 2004 2006 2008 2010 2012 2014 2016 2o ciclo 1o ciclo 7 / 25

(2) Methodology 8 / 25

Framework 9 / 25

Evaluating equity in public services Complex. Public services are generally not pure public goods. Most are club goods – they are excludable and somewhat rivalrous, BUT they generate positive externalities & their provision has high fixed costs = ⇒ some kind of natural public monopoly, but effective access typically invokes individual opportunity costs Services − → Access − → Usage − → End benefits Benefits are mediated by individual choice and circumstance (e.g., income) Inequalities in benefits/usage do not only reflect public policies. 10 / 25

Evaluating equity in public services Complex. Public services are generally not pure public goods. Most are club goods – they are excludable and somewhat rivalrous, BUT they generate positive externalities & their provision has high fixed costs = ⇒ some kind of natural public monopoly, but effective access typically invokes individual opportunity costs Services − → Access − → Usage − → End benefits Benefits are mediated by individual choice and circumstance (e.g., income) Inequalities in benefits/usage do not only reflect public policies. 10 / 25

Evaluating equity in public services Complex. Public services are generally not pure public goods. Most are club goods – they are excludable and somewhat rivalrous, BUT they generate positive externalities & their provision has high fixed costs = ⇒ some kind of natural public monopoly, but effective access typically invokes individual opportunity costs Services − → Access − → Usage − → End benefits Benefits are mediated by individual choice and circumstance (e.g., income) Inequalities in benefits/usage do not only reflect public policies. 10 / 25

Evaluating equity in public services Complex. Public services are generally not pure public goods. Most are club goods – they are excludable and somewhat rivalrous, BUT they generate positive externalities & their provision has high fixed costs = ⇒ some kind of natural public monopoly, but effective access typically invokes individual opportunity costs Services − → Access − → Usage − → End benefits Benefits are mediated by individual choice and circumstance (e.g., income) Inequalities in benefits/usage do not only reflect public policies. 10 / 25

Evaluating equity in public services Complex. Public services are generally not pure public goods. Most are club goods – they are excludable and somewhat rivalrous, BUT they generate positive externalities & their provision has high fixed costs = ⇒ some kind of natural public monopoly, but effective access typically invokes individual opportunity costs Services − → Access − → Usage − → End benefits Benefits are mediated by individual choice and circumstance (e.g., income) Inequalities in benefits/usage do not only reflect public policies. 10 / 25

Evaluating equity in public services Complex. Public services are generally not pure public goods. Most are club goods – they are excludable and somewhat rivalrous, BUT they generate positive externalities & their provision has high fixed costs = ⇒ some kind of natural public monopoly, but effective access typically invokes individual opportunity costs Services − → Access − → Usage − → End benefits Benefits are mediated by individual choice and circumstance (e.g., income) Inequalities in benefits/usage do not only reflect public policies. 10 / 25

Evaluating equity in public services Complex. Public services are generally not pure public goods. Most are club goods – they are excludable and somewhat rivalrous, BUT they generate positive externalities & their provision has high fixed costs = ⇒ some kind of natural public monopoly, but effective access typically invokes individual opportunity costs Services − → Access − → Usage − → End benefits Benefits are mediated by individual choice and circumstance (e.g., income) Inequalities in benefits/usage do not only reflect public policies. 10 / 25

Metrics of inequality Follow literature on measurement of health inequalities . Absolute measures of inequality : invariant to an equal increment in the outcome (e.g., health) but not to an equi-proportionate change = ⇒ ‘leftist’ Relative measures of inequality : invariant to an equi-proportionate change in the outcome (e.g., health) but not to an equal increment = ⇒ ‘rightist’ Approach applies naturally to other domains – e.g., access/usage of public services. 11 / 25