Publication:
Safety Nets and Safety Ropes : Who Benefited from Two Indonesian Crisis Programs—The "Poor" or the "Shocked"?

dc.contributor.authorSumarto, Sudarno
dc.contributor.authorSuryahadi, Asep
dc.contributor.authorPritchett, Lant
dc.date.accessioned2015-01-28T16:12:55Z
dc.date.available2015-01-28T16:12:55Z
dc.date.issued2000-09
dc.description.abstractImagine several mountain climbers, scaling a cliff face, who want protection from falling. One way to protect them would be to place a net at the bottom of the cliff to catch any climber just before he hits the ground. Another would be to provide a rope, and a set of movable devices that can be attached to the cliff; as the climbers scale the cliff, they attach the rope at higher levels, so that if a climber falls, he falls only by the length of the rope. In this paper, the :safety net" guarantees against a fall past an absolute level; the "safety rope" guarantees against a fall of more than a given distance. The safety net is concerned with an increase in poverty; the safety rope mitigates risk through social insurance, or social protection. Calculations of the benefit incidence, and targeting effectiveness of safety net programs, typically examine only the relationship between a household's current expenditures, and program participation. But in programs that respond to an economic shock, or intend to mitigate household risk, it is not only the current level of expenditures that matters, but also changes in expenditures. Safety net programs may intend to benefit only the currently poor; programs to mitigate shocks ("safety rope" programs) may intend to provide transfers to those whose incomes have fallen, even if they have not fallen below an absolute poverty threshold. The authors examine the targeting performance of tow programs, created to respond to the social impacts of Indonesia's crisis. They find strong evidence that one program, subsidized sales of rice targeted to the permanently poor, was only weakly related to the shock in consumption spending. A job creation program was much more responsive to changes in spending. A Household that started in the third quintile in expenditures in 1997, and fell to the lowest quintile between 1997, and 1998, was four times as likely to have participated in the job creation program as a household starting in the third quintile in 1997, but experiencing a positive shock. But the household experiencing a negative shock, was only fifty percent more likely to have received subsidized rice, than a household experiencing a positive shock.en
dc.identifier.doi10.1596/1813-9450-2436
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/10986/21354
dc.language.isoen_US
dc.publisherWorld Bank, Washington, DC
dc.relation.ispartofseriesPolicy Research Working Paper;No. 2436
dc.rightsCC BY 3.0 IGO
dc.rights.urihttp://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/igo
dc.subjectadverse selection
dc.subjectbeneficiaries
dc.subjectcities
dc.subjectcommunities
dc.subjectconsumption expenditures
dc.subjectCPI
dc.subjectdistricts
dc.subjecteconomic activity
dc.subjecteconomics
dc.subjecteconomists
dc.subjectemployment
dc.subjectexpenditures
dc.subjectforestry
dc.subjectgeographic targeting
dc.subjecthealth care
dc.subjecthealth care services
dc.subjecthouseholds
dc.subjectincome
dc.subjectinfrastructure projects
dc.subjectliving standards
dc.subjectmoral hazard
dc.subjectparticipation rates
dc.subjectpolicy research
dc.subjectpolitical economy
dc.subjectpoverty rates
dc.subjectPRA
dc.subjectprograms
dc.subjectpurchasing power
dc.subjectrisk aversion
dc.subjectrural areas
dc.subjectrural economy
dc.subjectsafety
dc.subjectsafety nets
dc.subjectsavings
dc.subjectself-help
dc.subjectsocial development
dc.subjectsocial insurance
dc.subjectsocial monitoring
dc.subjectsocial services
dc.subjectsocial welfare
dc.subjecttargeting
dc.subjectunemployment
dc.subjecturban areas
dc.subjectutility functions
dc.subjectvillages
dc.subjectwages
dc.subjectwelfare function
dc.subjectsafety net policies
dc.subjectguarantees
dc.subjectpoverty incidence
dc.subjectpoverty line
dc.subjectrisk management
dc.subjectsocial protection systems
dc.subjectsocial insurance programs
dc.subjecthousehold expenditure surveys
dc.subjecteconomic shocks
dc.subjectexpenditure patterns
dc.subjectfinancial crises
dc.subjectperformance indicators
dc.subjectsocial impact
dc.subjectsubsidies
dc.subjectconsumption statistics
dc.subjectjob creation
dc.titleSafety Nets and Safety Ropes : Who Benefited from Two Indonesian Crisis Programs—The "Poor" or the "Shocked"?en
dspace.entity.typePublication
okr.crossref.titleSafety Nets and Safety Ropes: Who Benefited from Two Indonesian Crisis Programs the Poor or the Shocked?
okr.date.disclosure2000-09-30
okr.date.doiregistration2025-04-10T09:42:53.906056Z
okr.doctypePublications & Research
okr.doctypePublications & Research::Policy Research Working Paper
okr.globalpracticePoverty
okr.guid345301468771675298
okr.identifier.doi10.1596/1813-9450-2436
okr.identifier.reportWPS2436
okr.language.supporteden
okr.region.administrativeEast Asia and Pacific
okr.region.countryIndonesia
okr.region.geographicalAsia
okr.region.geographicalSoutheast Asia
okr.region.geographicalWorld
okr.topicCommunities and Human Settlements::Housing & Human Habitats
okr.topicEnvironment::Environmental Economics & Policies
okr.topicHealth, Nutrition and Population::Health Economics & Finance
okr.topicInformation and Communication Technologies::ICT Policy and Strategies
okr.topicPoverty Reduction
okr.topicPoverty Reduction::Poverty Monitoring & Analysis
okr.topicPublic Sector Development::Decentralization
okr.unitEnvironment and Social Development Sector Unit, East Asia and Pacific Region
relation.isSeriesOfPublication26e071dc-b0bf-409c-b982-df2970295c87
relation.isSeriesOfPublication.latestForDiscovery26e071dc-b0bf-409c-b982-df2970295c87
Files
Original bundle
Now showing 1 - 1 of 1
Loading...
Thumbnail Image
Name:
wps2436.pdf
Size:
1.28 MB
Format:
Adobe Portable Document Format
License bundle
Now showing 1 - 1 of 1
No Thumbnail Available
Name:
license.txt
Size:
1.71 KB
Format:
Item-specific license agreed upon to submission
Description: