Infrastructure development in Uva:
Benefits will trickle down to the poor
By Gamini Warushamana
The high level of poverty in the Uva province was the clarion call of
the Opposition's political campaign in the recently-held Uva Provincial
Council election.
Many opinions were expressed as to why Uva became the poorest
province in the country.
There will be one province at the bottom when all provinces are
ranked according to the level of poverty. If the disparity is not high
and the trend of declining poverty is the same, being the lowest in rank
is no issue.
However, the situation here is not as simple as that because Uva has
turned out to be the poorest district surpassing the terrorist-affected
Northern and the Eastern provinces. Poverty levels were much higher
compared to the national level.
There are many economic, social and climatic reasons for this
situation, said Department of Census and Statistics (DCS) sources. They
had an explanation about what the figures mean.
Poverty
According to the Director General of the Department, D.C.A.
Gunawardena, the Department had to answer various concerned groups on
how these statistics reflect poverty in Uva because statistics are
published only once in three years and no politician is bothered,
condemning statistics and relegating it to the back-burner, thus it had
a huge impact in the election campaign in Uva.
People having low income and not having many possessions are
considered poor. It is a judgment of living standards of members of a
society and therefore, the term 'poor' is relative.
Poverty is defined for a person or group of persons as the inability
to meet the minimum level of well-being such as access to certain
consumption standards or income levels. All those who live in poverty
are poor but not all the poor people live in poverty.
There are indicators to measure poverty. Sri Lanka uses the Official
Poverty Line (OPL), which was compiled by DCS using poverty statistics
gathered through household income and expenditure survey conducted every
three years (every five years in the past).
OPL is an absolute poverty line, which is fixed at a specific welfare
level a person needs to meet minimum nutrition level (2030 kilo calories
per capita per day).
This compares household food and non-food expenditure data over time.
In general, poverty is declining in Sri Lanka and worldwide except some
pockets that have specific political, economical, climatic or
geographical constraints are still critical.
According to the 2012-13 survey (the latest), the poverty headcount
ratio has been declining compared to the 1990-91 survey. The poverty
headcount in Sri Lanka declined from 26.1 in 1990-91 to 6.7 in 2012-13.
This is a significant achievement. (Chart 1)
Africa
Globally the poverty headcount index, ($1.25 a day (ppp) percentage
of population), has declined from 43.1 in 1990 to 20.6 in 2010. During
the past two decades, the number of people living on less than $1.25 a
day declined by 693 million from 1,908 million to 1,215 million.
The highest poverty level 48.5 has been reported in Sub Sahara Africa
and the second highest is 31.0 in South Asia.
In Uva, there is a declining trend in poverty but the poverty
headcounts are high in the two districts, Moneragala and Badulla.
According to 2012-13 statistics the poverty headcount index in
Moneragala was 20.8 percent and in Badulla it was 12.3 percent, much
higher compared to the national figure 6.7.
Contrary to the general trend, the poverty headcount in the
Moneragala district increased from 14.5 to 20.8 during the survey period
1990-91 to 2012-13.(Charts 2 and 3).
Improvement
Gunawardena said that there is a notable development especially in
infrastructure in all parts of the country including the Uva province.
Construction of roads, improvement in water and sanitary facilities and
houses is taking place in the Uva province as well without exception.
The improvements are reflected in the statistics.
For instance, the number of households with electricity increased
from 68.5 percent in 2009-10 to 77.6 percent in 2012-13. The number of
households with safe drinking water facilities has increased from 89.6
percent to 94.0 percent.
The improvements in infrastructure development should be translated
to economic benefits and we can expect improvement in the living
standards of the people.
However, poverty statistics do not reflect this because the economic
benefits of these developments have not trickled-down to the poor yet
and it will take time, he said.
The Uva province has been ranked as the poorest province in the
country in all previous poverty statistical reports. Moneragala is
identified as the poorest district and in the 2004 report Siyambalanduwa
Divisional Secretariat (DS) division was ranked as the poorest division
in the country.
Although Moneragala continuously held the position as the poorest
district, the percentage of poor people continuously declined up to
2009-10.
According to 2012-13 survey statistics, the poorest DS division of
the Moneragala district is Wellawaya with an HCI of 55.8 percent and
Thanamalwila follows with 39.1 percent.
When compared to the figures of 2009-10, the living standard of half
of the low income population in the Moneragala district had deteriorated
by 2012-13.
Income distribution
According to statistics, the monthly household income has declined
while inequality in income distribution has also widened.
Household income of the lowest 10 percent of the household has
declined by 15 percent, while the income of the highest 10 percent of
households has increased by140 percent.
Household income of the middle income households has slightly
increased but compared to increase in household expenditure during the
two survey periods, it is insignificant.
Inequality in income distribution has widened significantly.
According to 2012-13 survey data, 42 percent of the household income
has been distributed among the households in the richest 10 percent and
the balance 58 percent shared among the 90 percent of the households.
In the 2009-10 survey, 28 percent of household income has been shared
by the richest 10 percent and the balance 72 percent has been shared by
the rest of the 90 percent.
Another feature is the number of income earners in a household in the
poorest 10 percent of households has declined.
The number of employed persons engaged in agriculture has declined to
57 percent from 62 percent.
The reasons for declining household income too have been identified.
The drought is the main reason and 4,900 families in Medagama,
Siyambalanduwa, Thanamalwila, and Sevenagala DS divisions had been
severely affected by the 2012 drought.
Economic activities were affected as a result and milk production
declined by 18% and livestock production declined by 39%. Agricultural
crop production suffered. For instance green gram production declined to
1,788 tons in 2012 from 2,428 tons in 2009.
Expenditure
This situation also reflects the expenditure side.
The household expenditure of 60% of the households in the Moneragala
district has declined between the two survey periods 2009-10 and
2012-13. This is the main reason for the increase of poverty levels.
The share of the monthly income spent on food has declined in 70
percent of the households. There is no significant change in the
consumption pattern of households.
According to the demographic survey report of 2006-07, the highest
number of malnourished children below five years of age was reported
from the Moneragala and Badulla districts.
The main factor that the responsible authorities, especially the
newly elected Provincial Council, should take into account is that the
most vulnerable groups, the population with monthly income is at the
edge of the poverty line.
They have the highest risk of falling below the poverty line at any
small economic crisis or natural catastrophe.
In 2012, 6.2 percent of the population in the Moneragala district was
10 percent above the poverty line.
If the official poverty line increased by 10 percent, poverty in the
district would have increased to 27.0. |