2001年-世界发展银行全球_Kosovo___Poverty_Assessment_Volume_1_Main_Report_93页_5mb

Kosovo Poverty Assessment Summary

Core Content

This report, Kosovo Poverty Assessment, provides a comprehensive analysis of poverty in Kosovo in 2000, focusing on income, consumption, education, and health dimensions. It aims to inform policy debates on poverty alleviation and social service delivery, particularly for the Joint Interim Administrative Structure (JIAS), the World Bank, and other donors.

Main Report Structure

• Executive Summary: Highlights the widespread nature of poverty and the need for targeted strategies to address it.
• Data and Poverty Indicators: Based on the 2000 Living Standard Measurement Survey (LSMS), which covers 2,880 households and is representative of Albanian and Serb populations.
• Poverty as Lack of Opportunities: Defines poverty as multidimensional and discusses its extent, correlates, and policy implications.
• Income Sources and Social Assistance: Analyzes income generation, transfer mechanisms, and the role of international aid in poverty reduction.
• Poverty and Inequality in Education Attainments: Examines educational disparities across income, ethnicity, and gender.
• Health Status and Access to Health Care: Reviews health conditions, access barriers, and the role of affordability.
• Towards a Strategy for Poverty Alleviation: Proposes a two-pronged approach for reducing poverty, focusing on both the poor and the extremely poor.

Key Findings

Poverty Incidence

• Overall Poverty: 50.5% of the population lived in poverty in 2000.
• Extreme Poverty: 12% of the population lived in extreme poverty, defined as consumption below the Food Poverty Line (FPL).
• Regional Differences:
  • Rural Areas: 52% of households were poor, with 11.6% in extreme poverty.
  • Urban Areas: 47.5% of households were poor, with 12.5% in extreme poverty.
• Poverty Gaps:
  • Extreme Poverty Gap: 2.5% of the FPL.
  • Overall Poverty Gap: 15.7% of the PL.

Characteristics of the Extremely Poor

• Demographics:
  • Mostly Albanian households.
  • Typically have 7 members, a high dependency ratio, and no or small land holdings.
  • Rural residence, displacement history, and no machinery.
• Serb Households:
  • Generally smaller, headed by elderly individuals, with no children.
• Correlates of Extreme Poverty:
  • High dependency ratios (≥0.5).
  • No or small land holdings in rural areas.
  • Unemployment or disability in urban areas.
  • Poor housing conditions, lack of sewage, and no piped water.

Income Sources

• Main Income Sources:
  • Wages and earnings from business activities.
  • Household transfers from relatives (especially for Albanian households).
  • International aid (food aid, winter fuel, and clothes).
• Income Inequalities:
  • Albanian households receive significantly more transfers than Serb households.
  • Private expenditure for education is high across all income levels.
  • Household transfers reduce income inequality (Gini coefficient drops from 0.76 to 0.63).
  • International aid is concentrated in the poorest groups.

Education Inequality

• Primary School Enrolment:
  • Albanians: 97% enrolment rate.
  • Other ethnic groups: Only 76% of children under 14 enrolled, with 15% in urban areas for the poorest.
• Secondary School Enrolment:
  • Albanian girls: 52% enrolled.
  • Albanian boys: 76% enrolled.
  • Serbs: 80% enrolment, slightly higher for girls.
  • Other ethnic groups: 55% enrolment on average, with 40% for girls.
• Barriers to Education:
  • High private costs (37% of non-enrolment due to cost).
  • Distance to schools (5.4% of sampled population cited this).
  • Safety concerns (notably in rural areas).
  • Conditional family assistance is suggested to improve targeting and break the poverty-education cycle.

Health Inequality

• Health Status:
  • Serbs report systematically worse health indicators than Albanians.
  • Gender bias is observed, with women more likely to report poor health outcomes.
• Health Access:
  • Affordability is the main barrier to accessing health care.
  • 95% of Albanians pay for health services, with pharmaceuticals being the most expensive item.
  • Serbs have easier access to free health care and lower costs.
• Health Care Financing:
  • Out-of-pocket payments are the primary method of health financing.
  • Public transfers are more significant for Serb households.

Policy Recommendations

For the Poor

• Broad-based Economic Growth: Focus on labor-intensive growth and structural reforms.
• Rural Development: Improve agricultural productivity and create job opportunities in related sectors.
• Support for SMEs: Encourage small and medium enterprises to promote job creation.
• Legal and Institutional Frameworks: Develop and implement rules and market mechanisms to support the private sector.

For the Extremely Poor

• Targeted Social Assistance: Implement a sustainable system to boost consumption levels.
• Income-Related Family Allowances: Develop a system to support the most vulnerable.
• Community-Based Public Works: Create employment opportunities for the extremely poor.
• Land Access: Improve access to land for agricultural households.
• Education Access: Ensure affordability and promote secondary education for girls and minority groups.
• Health Access: Legally contain under-the-table payments, establish realistic health service output, and collect more reliable data on health utilization.

Conclusion

The report emphasizes that poverty in Kosovo is widespread but not deep, with a focus on improving the living conditions of the extremely poor through targeted interventions. It also highlights the need for long-term monitoring to distinguish between transient and structural poverty issues.