8-Social Protection Index Technical Workshop - Role of National Statistics Offices_Sri Lanka (Dilhanie Deepawansa)

Country Presentation Improving and Updating the Social Protection Index ADB RCDTA 7601

D.D.Deepawansa (Statistician)

Department of Census and Statistics Ministry of Finance and Planning Sri Lanka

Outline of the presentation Overview of the Household Income and Expenditure SurveyHIES Research findings of SP using HIES -2012/13 SP Data limitations - HIES - 2012/13 The issues encountered with the SP questionnaire Recommendation to solve problems Sustainability of the SP Data generation Impact on policy implications

Household Income and Expenditure Survey-HIES •HIES has been conducted since 1990/91 as a separate survey under the National Household Survey Program. •Survey frequency : once in five years up to 2006/07 and thereafter once in three years. • Sample survey conducts for an year in 12 consecutive monthly rounds and island -wide representative sample of equal size are enumerated in each monthly round. •General sample size is 25,000 housing units which provides adequate and reliable information down to district level. •Data are collected through interviews and Diary Methods.

Survey Design Coverage : Island-wide ( people living in housing units excluding the institutional population) Sample design of the survey is two stage stratified First stage

- Selection of primary sampling units (CBs) Using PPS/Systematic sampling method

Second stage - Selection of secondary sampling units (housing units) using systematic sampling (Urban, Rural, Estate are domains in residential sectors in each district, District is the main domain used for the stratification.)

Primary sampling Units (PSU’s) are allocated to each district by using the Neyman allocation method considering the variance of household expenditure and no. of housing units

SP variables in HIES 2012/13 HIES 2012/13 questionnaire was expanded to identify the main the social protection schemes given below were launched by the government. Social Insurance programs

Social Assistan ce Programs

1. 2. 3.

1.

Pension Payment Disability / relief payments  Health medical aids and  Compensation

2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9.

Samurdhi program (Poverty  alleviation ) Elderly payment Educational & Scholarships School food program Triposha food program Compensation  Insurance etc Disaster relief  Assistant  Food and other commendations Fertilizer  & Other subsidies

Social Protection Data Analysis  and Findings 2012/13  (Three month data)

Social Protection Coverage‐2012/13

the portion of population in each group that receives the transfers

coverage is: (Number of individuals in the population  who live in a household where at least one member  receives the transfer)/(Number of individuals in the  population)

coverage is: (Number of individuals in the  population who live in a household where at least  one member receives the transfer)/(Number of  individuals in the population)

Indirect Beneficiaries Number of individuals in the group who live in a household where at least  one member receives the transfer

Impact of programs on poverty measures simulating the absence of the program Indicator 

Indicator without listed  transfer    All social protection All social insurance Pension Disability and Relief Medical aid Compensation   All social assistance Samurdhi Elderly Payment Scholarship School  food   program Thriposha Other Food Disaster Fertilizer subsidies  

Poverty  PG Index  HCI  6.5

1.1 

7.5 6.9 6.5 6.5 6.5

  2.3  2  2  1.1  1.1  1.1    1.5  1.3  1.1  1.1  1.2 

6.5 6.6 6.5 6.8

1.1  1.1  1.1  1.2 

9.2 8.2 8.2 6.5 6.5 6.5

Poverty  Severity  Index(SPI)  0.3 1.1 0.9 0.9 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.5 0.4 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.4

Concentration Curves, Main group of Social Protection Sri Lanka - 2012/13

Overlap of social protection programs

0.00% 0.00%

7.02% 0.00% 1.69%

0.00%

All social insurance 33.57%

All labor market programs All social assistance

57.72%

The issues encountered Questionnaire design Covered the main Social Protection Transfers. However, due to time restrictions  adequate coordinating meetings were not held with other relevant agencies.

Conducting of the Survey

• The survey took longer period to complete.(three visits per  household and took approximately 20‐ 30 minutes  each time ) • Enumerators encountered  extra  efforts  to explain   the  importance of collecting survey data   as the respondents  did  not receive any direct benefits from the survey • Respondents struggled  to provide accurate answers to some  questions such as value of assistance received by  the way of  services or in kind • The link between individual welfare and income was not always  clear  • Non responses 

Recommendation to solve the issues • Develop the Social protection Module in collaboration  with relevant agencies by arranging formal meetings and  discussions. • Develop appropriate  training programmes for field  officers • Increase the frequencies of field supervisions • Provide supporting documents for easy handling of the    questionnaire (addition to the guide book)  eg: Check lists

Sustainability of SP data generation / future directions SPI Module to be continued along with  HIES  once in three years

Awareness programs to be organized for  relevant officers and agencies to  disseminate impact  of Social Protection  Transfers. 

Impact on policy implications • Policy makers and donor agencies to arrive at informed  decisions in formulating standard framework for social  protection.  This will provide; • clear guidance to the policy makers to understand and identify  target segments of  the   population assistance to quantify the  scale of social protection schemes.  Monitoring and analysis • Having such details will enable proper pre and post analysis and  monitoring of social protection programs.

Thank you