Urbanization and Multidimensional Child Poverty in Viet Nam
Nguyen Thi Van Anh, UNICEF’s Social Policy Specialist“Rethinking urbanization and equity in Asia: Harnessing the Potential
of Urban Living for All Children Brighton, 9-10 June, 2014
Session D1: Governance and Planning Presentation: 5
Contents1- Background
2- Overview of urbanization
2- Manifestation of child poverty
3- Policy implication and policy approach
Background- Low MICEconomy• GDP growth rate (2005-2010): 6.8% • GDP per capita : US$1375 (2011)
Demographics: Fast pop. growth rate: • Total population: 93,421,835 (July 2014
est.)• Annual population growth rate (2010): 1.04% • Urban population: 31% (2011)• Rural population : 68.3% (2011)• Rate of urbanization: 3.03% annual rate of change
(2010-15 est.)
Poverty• Poverty head count: 14.2% (2010)
Major urban area- population Ho Chi Minh City: 5.976 million; HANOI (capital): 2.668 million; Haiphong: 1.941 million; Da Nang: 807,000 (2009)
Overview of urbanization
Urbanization – Overview
Vietnam has the highest urbanization rate in Southeast Asia
Urbanization occurs in 3 ways Rural-urban migration Natural growth Reclassification of rural land as
urban
Rural – Urban migration: 9.2% (1999-2009)
Urbanization links to growth and development- is a key feature of eco. Development
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
7.57.9 8.7 9.210 11
16 17.220.721.5
19.219 19.720.724 25
26.927.529.6
The percentage of urban population during 1931-2009
Urbanization: rural – urban migration
0-4 5-9 10-14 15-19 20-24 25-29 30-34 35-39 40-44 45-49 50-54 55-59 60+0
5
10
15
20
25
Population of Ha Noi and HCM city by registration status, UPS 2010
Residents Migrants
Age group
%
Migrants - heavily concentrated in 15-34 age group25.57% of migrants in the 0-19 age group
High poverty density in urban settings
Poverty reduction have slowed down, especially in urban areas.
Income poverty measurement does not capture multi-dimensions of poverty
1993 1998 2002 2004 2006 2008 20100
10203040506070
25.1
9.5 6.6 3.6 3.9 3.3 6
66.6
44.935.6
25 20.4 18.727
Urban and Rural Poverty, 1993-2010
Urban Rural
Pove
rty
rate
s (%
)
It seems not a problem, from the data
IS THERE A PROBLEM OF MULTIDIMENSIONAL CHILD POVERTY IN URBAN SETTING ?
Manifestation of urban child poverty
Multidimensional child poverty, 2006-2010(Health, education, housing, water and sanitation, child labour, leisure
and social protection and inclusion)
Urban Multidimensional Child Poverty is increasing
2006 2008 20100
10
20
30
40
11.3 12.515.9
36.3 34.3 34.5
Multi-dimensional child poverty by Urban and Rural, VHLSS 2010
Urban Rural
Child
pov
erty
rate
(%)
Child poverty in social inclusion - higher in urban setting due to unregistered
MdCP
Education
Health
Shelte
r
Wate
r & sa
ni...
Child la
bour
Leisu
re
Socia
l inclu
s...
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
11.2 9.4
36.8
2.2
12.3
1.7
52.9
11.1
31.2
15.9
48.4
12.6
48.7
9.16
75.3
2.76
Urban Rural
MdC
P ra
tes (
%)
Social exclusion- policy issues ?
Migrants: 11.33% Hanoi pop. and 20.46% HCM city pop Children aged 0-14: 12.5% of migrants So poverty could be underestimated in urban areas Income poverty does not capture multidimensional aspects
Not everyone is counted the household surveys
* * *Social
Exclusion due to unregistered
migration?
Social exclusion – Policy issue?
The current “Ho Khau” system is based on household registration. It contributes to the formation of a management and service system of the localities.
Current system of social protection, financial investment and compulsory education have centered around “Ho khau”
Many procedures and policies made dependent on “household registration” (Ho Khau)
Child poverty in social inclusion in urban setting (11%) is 4 times higher than in rural setting due to unregistered, and over 20% in some big cities (HCM city and Binh Duong)
Lack of “Ho Khau”, migrant (unregistered) children are not able to enjoy the same rights as
local registered children
Social exclusion – Policy issue? Households without “ho khau” are most likely to be
“Invisible” and “in-calculated” in household survey and
Excluded from the “poor or social policy beneficiaries list”
Thus less benefited from support policiesMigrants
Face higher costs of living and to access to basic social and welfare services
Find hard to rely on formal institutions and access to social protection =>lack of information
Rely mainly on “informal” network Suffer prejudice against them (local children - not
to be friends to migrant children for fear of learning bad habits)
EDUCATION – Equal opportunity? Gaps in education between migrant vs. residents; Migrant children - enroll in private schools with
higher costs and poorer quality (Kindergarten); Benefit less from tuition and contribution fee
exemption
Migrants Residents899091929394959697
92.3
97Net enrollment rate, UPS 2010
%
Poor children - have to support parents, have little time to do homework and play, Little money to buy learning aids
Poor parents - difficulties in meeting children’s education costs and unable to invest in children’s higher education
Aged 5-9 Aged 10-14 Aged 15-190
102030405060708090
100 89
71
21
99 97
77
School Attendance by age groups, UPS 2010
Migrants Residents
%
Health care – Equitable?
Rich poor Residents Migrants0
5
10
15
20
25
12.3
18.817
21
Total medical costs in non-food expen-diture (%), UPS 2010%
Migrants- less likely than residents to get health insurance and health care in a public facility/seek professional treatment due to lack of registration and money 45% migrants “Only buy medicine” when sick; 15% migrants vs. 2% residents get professional
attention Do not get services for SI beneficiaries due to
insufficient supplies (e.g. drugs) from district SI funds; Some migrant children have to return home for vaccinations or pay for vaccinations services
Still 39% of urban children (0-4) are poor in healthcare
Migrant children have no full access to local health care services
Burden on medical costs on poor and migrants
Nutrition – City’s issues ?
HCM city 2010 malnutrition Underweight (<5): 6,8%, Stunting: 7,8% Obesity: 10,9%
Many migrant children have poor intake, not enough nutritious food and other daily essentials due to high costs of living
Living conditions –housing disparities ?
Housing with concrete roof: 22% poor vs.42% of non poor
housing with concrete floor: 71% poor vs. 90% non-poor
The very urban poor tend to be migrants and live in a dormitory or houses of poor and unsafe living conditions
Rental housing: 64% migrant vs. 2% residents
Living conditions - Water and sanitation disparities?
Still 12.3% urban children lack of access to clean water and hygiene sanitation
Access to water from
private tap 40% migrants vs. 65%
residents Using tap water 30% poor vs. 57% non-poor Using flush toilet 48% poor vs. 89% non-poor
Child protection – Child labour
Migrant children are five times likely to work than resident children
0- <5 6- <24 25- <42 >420.0
10.0
20.0
30.0
40.0
50.0
3
29.918.5
48.6
4.5
42.2
23.729.5
Child labour by working hours
Urban Rural
Residents Migrants0
1020304050607080
1.07
14.6720.03
75.71
Children with a principal job in Ha noi and HCM city
Aged 10-14 Aged 15-19
Child labour (aged 15-17) – higher in urban settings;
Urban child clabourers work longer hours. 95% of them are not attending school
Policy implication
& Policy approach
Policy issues ? Gap in statistics: Official data, used for
planning and for budgeting, might also underestimate the population
Urban Poverty could be underestimated
Leading to The exclusion of some
population groups in planning and budgeting
Right to policy choices not made
What difference does the undercounting make?
If plans and budgets are not based on actual populations, resources may not be adequate to deliver services.
And if resources are inadequate to deliver services, who misses out?
New challenges – New approaches Include migration in the development
Count themso they can be planned for,
budgeted for, their poverty and access to services tracked
Deliver services to themdo not make household registration status a barrier to accessing basic services
What legal and policy changes are needed to achieve this?
Urban planning and budget allocation Based on actual population, including migrantsOutputs-based social budgeting – prioritized budget
allocation to where the poor are
Adopt multidimensional approach to poverty monitoring and targeting – identify new emerging form of poverty and vulnerability, particular of migrants
Reform the current social protection system to make it more comprehensive and accessible - Help the urban poor to cope with risks and vulnerability e.g. replace “Ho Khau” with IDs
Design an integrated family package f social assistance for urban poor, migrants and their children - Priorities given to early childhood development
Stronger regulate/control over-commercialization (privatization) in health care and education
Create more effective policies to support small enterprises in promoting their social responsibility (e.g. Kindergarten) and promote the formalization of informal economic activities
New challenges – New approaches
Reference Urbanization review in Vietnam, World Bank Vietnam household living standard survey 2010, GSO Multidimensional child poverty 2013, GSO-UNICEF Urban poverty assessment 2010, GSO-UNDP Child Labour survey 2010, MOLISA/ILSSA-ILO Participatory urban poverty monitoring, Oxfam and
Action Aids Impact assessment of poverty reduction policies for 2009-
2013 in HCM city, MDRI Migration study 2010, UNICEF-DOLISA HCM city
Thank you
for your attention
Top Related