Whither Poverty in Sri Lanka?

By K Romeshun (Centre for Poverty Analysis)


Sri Lanka’s President Mahinda Rajapakse stated in his budget speech for 2011 that the number of poor in the country measured in monetary terms have reduced substantially from 15.2% in 2006/7 to 8.9% in 2009/10. Poverty in the estate areas, which have always been poorer than urban and rural areas, has also reduced drastically from 32% to 11.4% between 2006 and 2009. During the same period inequality is also seen to have reduced from 0.4 to 0.36.

Poverty in Sri Lanka is measured by the Department of Census and Statistics using the Household Income and Expenditure Survey. This allows for an identification of the proportion of the poor, as a proportion of the population that falls below a pre-determined monthly expenditure of Rs 3,241 per person (for August 2011). However the debate on poverty has long since moved beyond income/expenditure indicators and should be complemented with multi-dimensional poverty indexes as in the 2010 United Nations Human Development Report. We have to remember that poverty is not only influenced by income and expenditure but also by measures such as capabilities (adequate health, education and nutrition), private and social assets, free time, empowerment or attainment of minimal social participation and security. This confirms that how poverty should be counted needs to move beyond the use of a monetary approach. These aspects are also coming into public scrutiny in Sri Lanka as noted with housing (private assets) for the urban poor being the number one issue in the tussle for Colombo’s mayoral race.

The Department of Census and Statistics (DCS) poverty statistics indicate that poverty is lowest in the Western Province, and Central Bank statistics indicate that the Western Province generates a major portion of the Gross Domestic Product (GDP) of the country. In order to increase greater inclusiveness of development throughout the country, the Sri Lankan government has embarked on an ambitious plan of upgrading and improving the economic infrastructure of the country, especially roads under the Mahinda Chinthana programme. However, the focus on economic infrastructure and the limitations of funds available, is seen to reduce contribution to the social sector from the budget, as a percentage of GDP, and this is likely to have a negative impact on investments which have had long standing support from successive governments enabling the high levels of educational and health achievements that Sri Lanka is rightly proud of.

DCS statistics indicate education is indeed a means of coming out of poverty but DCS’s Household and Income and Expenditure Surveys indicate higher education that would bring higher levels of income still remains within the reach of higher income groups. The lower quality of education, focus on literacy as opposed to attainment rates and lack of focus on dropouts especially at secondary and tertiary levels, result in a vicious cycle of poverty where a majority of poor children have low levels of education. This in turn results in low-level temporary and insecure employment, which is reflected in over 60% of Sri Lanka’s labour force remaining outside the formal employment market.

Another surprise in a country that professes to have high levels of educational attainment and good hygienic practices is the high level of malnutrition rates amongst children as observed in the DCS ‘s Demographic and Health Surveys. Malnutrition contributes to increased risks of infant and child deaths; cognitive disabilities in children, decreased school performance; lower productivity of people and an impaired ability to earn sufficient earnings. Malnourishment also increases vulnerabilities to various diseases in later life. Therefore, Sri Lanka needs to address the issue of malnutrition for the sake of the future economic and social welfare of individuals and the country.

These few issues indicate that whilst we can celebrate the reduction of income or consumption poverty there are a number of groups who are struggling to come out of poverty. Eradicating poverty, ultimately means having the ability to have choices and the ability to afford such choices. Sri Lanka in its clamour for growth needs to take this into consideration. If not, the national statistics are likely to hide vulnerabilities that will result in the same social tensions that led to the unrest that erupted in the North and East as well as in the South. It is also important to support macro-level studies with micro-level qualitative studies that would provide the human perspective so that appropriate policy, programme and project responses can be made to ensure that poverty is tackled meaningfully in Sri Lanka, in a manner that results in changes to the overall wellbeing of people.

(The Centre for Poverty Analysis (CEPA) is an independent, Sri Lankan think-tank promoting a better understanding of poverty related development issues. CEPA believes that poverty is an injustice that should be overcome and that overcoming poverty involves changing policies and practices nationally and internationally, as well as working with people in poverty. CEPA’s mission is to be the leading organisation providing independent analysis of poverty, shaping policy in Sri Lanka and the region. Ultimately, CEPA strives to contribute to influencing poverty related development policy, at national, regional, sectoral, programme and project levels.)

http://www.island.lk/index.php?page_cat=article-details&page=article-details&code_title=36986