2004年-世界发展银行全球_Albania___Social_Safety_Net_Review_105页_670kb

Albania Social Safety Net Review Summary

Context

Albania underwent significant socioeconomic and political transformation in 1989, leading to the collapse of its rigid system and resulting in widespread economic instability. The state-run economy disintegrated, with collectivized farming replaced by privatized agriculture, and industrial complexes shutting down. This caused massive job losses, increased underemployment, and a surge in informal and self-employment. GDP fell by 40 percent, and family incomes were severely impacted. Migration patterns shifted, both internally and externally, altering family structures and the distribution of labor and infrastructure. In response, Albania transitioned from a system of guaranteed employment and subsidized prices to a new income-tested aid program (ndihma ekonomike) and a social insurance system introduced in 1993. Despite a decade of economic growth, formal employment did not increase as expected, and the economy remained reliant on informal and self-employment.

Social Safety Net (SSN) Overview

Albania's social safety net consists of:

• Three cash social assistance programs managed by the Ministry of Labor and Social Affairs (MoLSA):

  • Income-tested cash assistance (ndihma ekonomike)
  • Monthly cash allowance for people with disabilities who are children or students
  • Price compensation for pensioners and their families

• Social insurance programs administered by the Social Insurance Institute (SII)

• Social care services for orphans, disabled, and elderly people, managed by the State Social Services (SSS)

Additional support comes from public programs and private assistance by NGOs. Many households also receive private financial flows, primarily remittances from family members working abroad.

Two Perspectives on Remittances

Remittances are viewed in two ways:

1. As private income transfers – they are analyzed alongside other public and private income transfers.
2. As earnings – they are considered as income generated by the recipient household due to migration-based employment strategies.

The first perspective treats remittances as a crucial safety net, especially for low-income households. The second perspective suggests that remittances are not transfers but rather a form of income, which may imply less impact on poverty and a smaller role for the social safety net.

Key Findings

Overall Impact of Social Transfers

• Public and private transfers significantly reduced poverty and extreme poverty in 2002:
  • Total transfers lifted 18 out of every 100 individuals out of poverty, reducing the pre-transfer poverty rate from 43.9% to 25.4%.
  • Total transfers lifted 14 out of every 100 individuals out of extreme poverty, reducing the pre-transfer extreme poverty rate from 19% to 4.7%.

Sub-National Impact

• Public transfers had a greater impact on poverty in urban areas (14.7% reduction) than in rural areas (9%).
• Private transfers had a greater impact in rural areas (7.3% reduction) than in urban areas (5.9%).
• The central region saw the most benefit from social transfers in terms of poverty alleviation.
• Households with children benefited less from transfers than the average household.
• Households where all members are of pensionable age benefited more than the average.

Impact of Individual Programs

• Pensions:

  • Had the broadest coverage, reaching 65% of extremely poor households and 59% of poor households.
  • Reduced the poverty headcount by 22% and the poverty gap by 29%.
  • Less targeted than remittances, with only 56% of pensioners being poor before transfers and 27% in extreme poverty.

• Remittances from abroad:

  • Played a key role in Albania's transfer system, contributing 12.8% of household income.
  • Were more effective in reducing poverty and extreme poverty, with 47% of average monthly household income coming from remittances.
  • When treated as transfers, they lifted 80% of recipients out of poverty and 66% out of extreme poverty.
  • Were the most effective component of the social safety net, reducing the extreme poverty gap by 94%.

• Ndihma ekonomike:

  • Had poor targeting efficiency, with 55.5% of beneficiaries being poor.
  • Assisted only 19% of poor families, leading to a modest reduction in poverty (2.3%).
  • 36% of program funds went to non-poor households, more than the 28% allocated to extremely poor households.
  • Underreporting in the LSMS survey suggests the program's true impact may be higher.

Efficiency and Effectiveness of Transfers

• Public transfers had a greater impact on poverty headcount (26% reduction) compared to private transfers (15%).
• Private transfers (especially remittances) had a relatively greater impact on income distribution, reducing the poverty gap by 45% and poverty severity by 78%.
• Targeting efficiency:
  • Public transfers reached 73.8% of poor individuals.
  • Private transfers reached 35.8% of poor individuals.
  • Ndihma ekonomike reached 18.6% of poor individuals, with 63.6% of its transfers going to poor households.
  • Pensions reached 58.7% of poor individuals, with 56.0% of transfers going to poor households.

Policy Implications

• The budget for the social safety net is insufficient to meet the needs of the population.
• There is a need to improve targeting and coverage of the social safety net.
• Monitoring and evaluation of recent changes in program design and administration are essential.
• Complementary assistance may be required for extremely poor households, especially through alternative program designs.

Conclusion

Albania's social safety net has had a significant impact on poverty and income distribution, particularly through remittances and pensions. However, the ndihma ekonomike program is inefficient and underfunded, with limited coverage and impact. The overall effectiveness of the social safety net is constrained by insufficient resources and poor targeting. A comprehensive approach to policy reform, including budget increases, improved targeting, and enhanced program coordination, is necessary to strengthen the social safety net and better address poverty in Albania.