WELLBEING IN FOUR COUNTRIESA comparison

Ian Gough

WeD

Wellbeing: a comparative sketch

Situate wellbeing research in the 4 countries in a broader national and global framework

Use here Bath framework of ‘welfare regimes’: a middle range theory

Consider in turn:1. Political economy since 19902. Wellbeing outcomes3. The ‘welfare mix’4. Agency and collective processes5. Distinct welfare regimes?6. Conclusions

1. BACKGROUND: CHANGING POLITICAL ECONOMY SINCE

1990 • End of Cold War

• Export of Western proto-democratic processes

• Neo-liberal reforms in economic policy

Isomorphism (Meyer): spread of such cognitive and institutional models

But wide divergences – and steps backward

And decoupling on the ground

BACK TO THE BACKGROUND: STRUCTURES:

Ethi Bang Peru Thai Development: Economic Income per head, PPP $US 756 1870 5678 8090 Human HDI .37 .53 .77 .78 Inequality: Vertical Income ratio of top to bottom quintile 10.0 3.3 11.6 5.3 Horizontal Ethnolinguistic and religious fractionalisation .69 .16 .38 .38 Gender Gender-related development index .35 .52 .76 .78 Sex ratio (male: female): total population .96 1.05 1.01 .98

Ethiopia and Bangladesh

Ethiopia: 1991 defeat of Derg; 1992 EPRDF election victory. Focus on state rebuilding with Federal constitution. Relatively weak economic reforms. Continuing elections but authoritarian tendencies.

Bangladesh: BNP election victory in 1990 marks end of military rule. Liberalisation, rapid economic growth and urbanisation. Growing cultural clashes with rise of millenarian Islam and entry of JMB into government. Elections now postponed.

Peru and Thailand

Peru: 1990 election of Fujimori, soon followed by authoritarian shift. Collapse of Sendero Luminoso. Neo-liberal reforms and economic growth, but persistent ultra-inequality and ‘sigma society’. Profound inequality and cultural divide.

Thailand: 1991 coup followed by Black May and 1992 elections. Continuing capitalist boom, only briefly interrupted by 1997 crisis (though significant social impact). Hegemony of money politics. Thaksin victories ended by another coup in 2006.

2. WELLBEING OUTCOMES: a) OBJECTIVE

4 very different patterns of development (see figure)

Many objective welfare outcomes map onto income per head, but many variations, eg:

• Bangladesh: worse poverty and malnutrition

• Peru: worse poverty

• Thailand: growing inequality

WELLBEING OUTCOMESb) Local, subjective measures: goal

satisfaction

WeDQoL goes beyond ‘happiness’:

• Goals of people in local contexts

• Necessity of goals to individuals

• Satisfaction of goals

Study satisfaction of top 15 necessary goals. Country means for all sites

Interpret findings with caution

Ethiopia Bangladesh Peru Thailand

Health 4.9 Food 4.5 Health 4.8 Health 4.5

Peace of mind 4.9 Water 5.0 Food 4.7 Food 5.0

Economic independence

3.6 Education 3.4 Education of children 3.9 Water 4.5

Food 4.3 Sanitation 3.9 Room/ house 4.0 Family relations 4.9

Behaving well 5.0 Good upbringing of children

2.8 Water/ electricity/ sanitation

4.0 Room/ house 4.2

Room/ house 3.6 Peace of mind 3.7 Salary work 2.8 Electricity 4.6

Faith 4.8 Family relations 4.5 Family relations 4.2 Well behaved children

3.7

Community peace 4.5 House/ home 3.8 Position of authority 3.8 Education of children 3.4

Family relations 4.5 Health 3.7 Community peace 3.4 Behaving well 4.4

Wealth 2.4 Children 2.9 Faith 4.0 Health care access 4.0

Personal progress 3.2 Personal progress 3.0 Behaving well 3.8 Wise spending 4.0

Living environment 3.8 Electricity 2.6 Professional 1.8 Provide for family 3.9

Land 2.7 Faith 3.8 Education of self 3.5 Faith 4.3

Neighbour relations 4.4 Roads 3.4 Living environment 2.8 Family occasions 4.3

Clothes 3.7 Living environment 3.4 Public transport 3.4 Household goods 4.1

Mean score 4.0 3.6 3.7 4.3

Ethiopia and Bangladesh• Ethiopia: lower mean satisfaction of basic

material goals and economic prospects, including wealth, land, housing, clothes and personal progress and economic independence. But relatively high mean satisfaction with health (?), peace of mind, faith.

• Bangladesh: Lowest mean goal satisfaction, across collective infrastructure (roads, electricity, environment), prospects for personal progress, health and education and children and their upbringing - despite economic growth. But high value of and satisfaction with family relations.

Peru and Thailand

• Peru: Low mean satisfaction levels echo other study findings of more negative feelings than any other Latin American country. Importance of a salaried, professional job (unique) yet very low satisfaction, reflects inequality and blocked opportunities.

• Thailand: highest mean satisfaction levels, especially re health and basic material needs. Less so with education and collective good goals. Lower satisfaction with goal of ‘well-behaved children’, suggesting strains of rapid growth and change.

3. The welfare mix

Ethiopia Bangladesh Peru Thailand State Expenditure on education. %

GNI 1994-97a. 4.0 2.2 2.9

(3.3) 4.8

Health expenditure. Public % of GDP. 2000

1.8 1.4 2.8 2.1

Health expenditure. Total per capita $. 1997-2001

5.0 14.0 100.0 71.0

Market Health expenditure. Private %

of GDP. 2000 2.8 2.4 2.0 1.6

International household

Remittances %GDP 2000 0.7 4.3 1.4 1.4

2005 1.4* 6.3* 1.8 0.7 IGO Total aid %gdp 2000 8.8 2.6 0.8 0.6 2004 18.7 2.5 0.7 0.0

Welfare mix: Ethiopia

• Critical importance of aid (huge increase to 19% GDP by 2004); thus of donors, IGOs and INGOs

• Role in famine relief and emergency aid, now shift to ‘productive’ services

• Growing government role in aid harmonisation• Community institutions include burial societies

(iddirs), religious organisations and clans• Heavy reliance on household strategies,

including distress migration• 4 different systems within one regime

Welfare mix: Bangladesh

• Past role of aid and donors, but reducing• Huge role of domestic NGOs – 1200+, some

very large: BRAC, Proshika, Grameen Bank• Government subordinate in past to both; now

seeking to formalise the relationship• Hugely complex public works and relief

programmes• But access to programmes ‘informal’ (see below)• Past and present migration yielding very large

remittances

Welfare mix: Peru

• Growing government programmes (including food and social assistance)

• New drive to decentralise plus rights discourse (legacy of SL and Truth Commission)

• Dual systems: 1. state plus new commercial provision

• 2. Vibrant community associations, fiestas, faenas, church charity

• Migration to secure mix and maintain Andean links

Welfare mix: Thailand

• Growing state rights to education and now health care (30 Baht programme), but limited social protection

• Poverty discourse shifting to discourses around inequality and wellbeing

• Growing commercial provision• New acceptance of NGOs • Traditional Baan role• Central role of Thai family model: diversification

and internal migration + remittances to villages

4.AGENCY/ COLLECTIVE PROCESSESThree case studies of assistance progs

Ethiopia: Food Aid

• Huge scale

• Distribution down to kebele level: either direct or food-for-work

• Pros and cons: relief, unfairness, destabilization

• Strong cadres lessen corruption but reinforce state presence and dependency?

Bangladesh: rice distribution and SKSP

• Distribution of subsidised rice• Obligatory UP level SKSP committees. • In practice allocation via mastaans and/or

doliokoron: local representatives of political parties

• These act as gatekeepers – and thus to many other programmes and benefits.

• Trade benefits for loyalty. Thus relations with key men crucial.

Peru: milk and food programmes

• Vaso de leche (VL): substantial programme to procure and distribute milk and foodstuffs. Followed earlier popular demonstrations.

• Precise legal guidelines. Each municipal government required to set up a committee CVL, comprising women reps.

• Tiny material benefits, but valued social-cultural links. A legitimated programme.

Food assistance: rules and relationships

Everywhere tension between formal rules and informal relations: allocative efficiency and solidarity. Tendency to latter.

But different wellbeing outcomes: • Ethiopia: cadre allocation; dependent insecurity• Bangladesh: ‘Faustian bargain’ reproduced.• Peru: more participatory and legitimate.

‘Successful state cooption’.

4. DISTINCT REGIMES? Ethiopia

Externally-dependent informal-insecurity regime

• Failure of development: very low and stagnant real social resources

• Continuing dependence on aid and external actors.

• Path dependence due to ‘poverty traps, cycles and ratchets’ reproducing subsistence orientation.

• Thus continuing reliance on local informal mechanisms and self-help

DISTINCT REGIMES? Bangladesh

Poorly functioning informal in/security regime• Domestic NGOs and remittances• Some rise in public productive expenditure, but

inequality and poor quality• Complex intermeshing of actors generates

‘contamination’ of values, collusion, patronage and illegality

• Growth and democracy but political settlement blocked

DISTINCT REGIMES? Peru

Dual liberal-informal security regime • Established state role but unequal access• Racialised class heirarchy reproduces

segmentation, inequality and poverty • Insecure livelihoods mitigated by

community and family mechanisms widely governed by personal relations

• Growing rights discourse but no sustained political settlement

DISTINCT REGIMES? Thailand

Productive – informal welfare regime • Directive developmental state pursuing

growth and Thai cultural values• Growing rights-based productive social

expenditure• Generally successful family role in operating

mixed livelihood portfolio – large rural base• Strains of modernisation, value clashes and

now postponement of democracy

Conclusions: WeD wellbeing approach

WeD perspective helps understand contradictory impact of development and social change:

• WeDQoL: Local goals and individual satisfactions inform agency

• Different role of relationships in determining access to welfare mix

• Welfare outcomes shaped by operation of agency and relationships - within context of welfare regimes

• These shaped by common global shifts, but normally develop in path-dependent way