16.10.2020

EFFECTIVENESS OF MEASURES TO COMBAT POVERTY IN BULGARIA

The main factors at risk of poverty are education, economic activity and the populated place, according to a study by the Institute for Market Economics.

Moreover, the data show that deep poverty is concentrated in the working population (and not among pensioners, children or people with disabilities), which again refers to the problems of education and the labor market, write the economists of the Institute for Market Economics in their analysis.

The focus of public policies should inevitably be on poverty factors and not on fiscal measures to cover "missing" income. The data clearly show that the discussion of the topic of poverty cannot be limited to a discussion on the administrative increase of incomes, benefits and allowances. The more important conversation should be about education and new jobs.

The leading goal of policies must be to cross the path from low education to unemployment and ultimately poverty. The fiscal burden of poverty, based on people's own assessment of the lack of income in the household to "make ends meet", shows that spending policies cannot solve the problem of poverty. Education and labor market reforms, as well as adequate regional policy, have no alternative to raising incomes.

What does the administration do?

This week, the Bulgarian National Audit Office published an audit report on the implementation of "Effectiveness of anti-poverty measures" for the period 2015-2018 and the conclusions are, to put it mildly, worrying. The report focuses on the national poverty reduction target set in the Europe 2020 Strategy and set out in the National Reform Program and the National Development Program, and examines the actions of the Ministry of Labor and Social Policy and the Ministry of Education and Science, which have four ministers each for the period.

The implementation period is coming to an end and it is expected that there will be significant progress in achieving the national goal and its sub-goals. However, it turns out that this is not the case at all.

Purpose

The set goal envisages a reduction in the number of people living at risk of poverty or social exclusion by 260 thousand people (up to 1 372.1 thousand people) in 2020 compared to the base year 2008. The focus is on poverty reduction in four vulnerable groups - children under 17 (by 78 thousand), adults over 65 (by 52 thousand), unemployed (by 78 thousand) and working poor (by 52 thousand), and The measures are in a number of different sectors - employment, education, healthcare, social payments, policies for children and families, transport, housing, etc.

Execution

As we usually observe, the strength of the administration is in the quantitative writing of plans and strategies, but not in their quality and implementation. It is difficult to list all the gaps and criticisms identified in the audit report on the implementation of anti-poverty measures, but here are the main ones:

There is no system of indicators to monitor progress. In some of the measures there are no target values ​​or what resources are needed for their implementation;

There is no clear focus on the target groups, there is no analysis of the results in the regional aspect, nor on the impact of demographic and migration processes;

There are no clear functions of the responsible ministers and organization for monitoring, management, control and reporting, which does not allow adequate monitoring of the progress of the measures;

Huge delays and lack of interest - the initial implementation plans were adopted with a delay of 8 months and with serious weaknesses in the process of organizing the planning, limited guidelines for work, lack of analysis of activities. Subsequent plans for the implementation and reporting of previous periods were also adopted with delays and with very low attendance at the working group meetings (on average 31% of the members). Some of the documents for the work of the working group are missing;

There is no analysis and assessment of the degree of achievement of the performance indicators, as well as an analysis of the impact of the implemented measures in the adopted reports. No forecasts have been made for the implementation of the objectives. Curious is the case with the survey conducted among the members of the working group set up to develop the action plan for the period 2019-2020 and the report on the implementation of the plan for the previous period. The main weaknesses in the work of the group are: lack of targeted measures towards poverty, instead relying on general measures; lack of analytical work and seeking the impact of specific poverty reduction measures; delays; sending alternates to meetings who are not aware of the topic. One respondent shared that “All activities are taken from other strategies and development plans for which funding is provided. There is no single program to track the specific impact of poverty reduction.”

The result

The data for 2018 show that the goal has been met at 31% after ten years of work and only two remaining. Although the delay is known to the administration from both the data and the interim reports over the years, the National Poverty Reduction Strategy has not been updated for its entire 7-year implementation period. The Audit Office' report shows that if the trends continue, the goal of reducing the number of people living in poverty will not be achieved even by half by 2020, although the population is also purely mechanically contributing to its convergence. At the end of 2018, the poor are 1,550.8 thousand people and at this rate of decline will reach 1,526.4 thousand (with a target of 1,372.1 thousand). This means that the decrease compared to 2008 will be 105.7 thousand people, which is about 40% of the target.

The implementation of the specific sub-objectives is also deplorable. By the end of 2018, the planned poverty reduction for children is 4 %, for adults – 29 %, for the unemployed – 78 %, and for the number of working poor there is even an increase and the set goal will not only not be met, but and will move away from the goal twice.

Conclusion

Instead of a conclusion, we quote verbatim one of the report's conclusions: “Implementing such a long-term strategic document without reviewing the implementation of the measures provided for in it to reduce poverty and promote social inclusion and their adequacy in terms of socio-economic change and without assessing the effectiveness of the measures implemented, does not guarantee that the efforts and resources invested in their implementation will lead to the expected results. The level of achievement of the national and specific sub-goals for poverty reduction by the end of 2018 shows a serious lag."