Eligibility Thresholds for Minimum Living Guarantee Programs : International Practices and Implications for China

Using a simple framework, this paper discusses the underlying reason of the variation of threshold level in developed countries, from the least generous 20 percent to around 60 percent of median wage, with an average of 35 percent. The generosity of minimum guarantee social assistance programs is deeply rooted in social values and principles that further underpin the policy objectives. Many Organizations for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) countries set their policy targets for minimum living standard programs beyond basic needs and aim to guarantee a minimum socially acceptable level for a decent living. Thresholds are also refined to reflect the differences in family size and demographic structure, difference in regional cost of living and changes in prices and local wages. In some countries the thresholds show some regional variation due to local discretionary powers of sub-national authorities to set the threshold depending on the co-financing mechanisms. These lessons are valuable for China as the Chinese government has made efforts to standardize the implementation and management of its own minimum income guarantee (Di Bao) programs. The policy recommendations for China include accelerating the convergence of localized approaches, raising the administrative level for setting thresholds to higher level, defining the roles of central and local governments in financing and management, and establishing a transparent budgetary management system to transfer and allocate social assistance funds.

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Umapathi, Nithin, Wang, Dewen, O'Keefe, Philip
Format: Working Paper biblioteca
Language:English
en_US
Published: World Bank, Washington, DC 2013-11
Subjects:ABSOLUTE POVERTY, ACCESS TO INFORMATION, ACCESS TO JOBS, AGGREGATE POVERTY, ANTI-POVERTY, ANTI-POVERTY PROGRAM, ASSISTANCE PROGRAMS, AVERAGE INCOME, AVERAGE WAGES, BENEFICIARIES, BENEFICIARY, BENEFIT LEVEL, BENEFIT LEVELS, BENEFIT SYSTEMS, CASH BENEFIT, CASH BENEFITS, CASH TRANSFER, CASH TRANSFER PROGRAMS, CASH TRANSFERS, CHILD BENEFIT, COMPULSORY EDUCATION, CONDITIONAL CASH, CONSUMER PRICE INDEX, CONSUMPTION EXPENDITURE, COST OF FOOD, CPI, DISPOSABLE INCOME, ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA, ELIGIBILITY CRITERION, ELIGIBLE BENEFICIARIES, EMERGENCY ASSISTANCE, EMPLOYMENT GENERATION, EMPLOYMENT PROJECT, EXTREME POVERTY, FAMILIES WITH CHILDREN, FAMILY ASSISTANCE, FAMILY BENEFITS, FAMILY INCOME, FEDERAL ASSISTANCE, FINANCIAL PROTECTION, FISCAL CAPACITY, FOOD ASSISTANCE, FOOD CONSUMPTION, FOOD EXPENDITURE, FOOD EXPENDITURES, FOOD NEEDS, FOOD POVERTY, FOOD POVERTY LINE, FOOD PRICE, FOOD SHARE, FOOD STAMP, GUARANTEED MINIMUM INCOME, HEALTH SERVICES, HOUSEHOLD CONSUMPTION, HOUSEHOLD INCOME, HOUSEHOLD SIZE, HOUSEHOLD SURVEY, HOUSEHOLD SURVEY DATA, HOUSING, HOUSING SUBSIDIES, HUMAN DEVELOPMENT, IMPACTS ON POVERTY, INCOME DISTRIBUTION, INCOME GROWTH, INCOME POVERTY, INCOME SECURITY, INCOME SUPPORT, INCOME TRANSFER, INCOME TRANSFERS, INEQUALITY, INFORMAL EMPLOYMENT, INSURANCE, INSURANCE SYSTEMS, LABOR MARKETS, LIVING CONDITION, LIVING CONDITIONS, LIVING STANDARDS, MEANS TEST, MEANS TESTING, MEANS TESTS, MEDICAL EXPENSES, MIG, MINIMUM INCOME, MINIMUM INCOMES, MINIMUM WAGE, MINIMUM WAGES, NATIONAL POVERTY, NATIONAL POVERTY LINE, NATURAL DISASTERS, NEAR POOR, NEEDY FAMILIES, NET INCOME, NUMBER OF CHILDREN, NUTRITION, PENSION, PENSIONS, PER CAPITA INCOME, POLICY GOALS, POLITICAL CONSTRAINTS, POOR, POOR AREAS, POOR COUNTRIES, POOR FAMILIES, POOR HOUSEHOLDS, POOR PEOPLE, POORER AREAS, POORER HOUSEHOLDS, POVERTY LINE, POVERTY REDUCTION, PRIVATE PENSION, PROTECTION SYSTEMS, REGIONAL COST, REGIONAL COST OF LIVING, REGIONAL DIFFERENCES, REGIONAL INFLATION, REGIONAL PRICE, REGIONAL VARIATION, REGRESSION ANALYSIS, RURAL, RURAL AREAS, RURAL BENEFICIARIES, RURAL ECONOMY, RURAL GAP, RURAL INCOME, RURAL POOR, RURAL POOR HOUSEHOLDS, RURAL POPULATION, RURAL POVERTY, RURAL POVERTY LINE, RURAL POVERTY MONITORING, SAFETY NET, SAFETY NET PROGRAMS, SAFETY NETS, SAVINGS, SAVINGS ACCOUNTS, SCHOOL FEEDING, SEVERANCE PAY, SIMULATIONS, SINGLE PARENT, SINGLE PARENTS, SKILLED LABOR, SOCIAL ASSISTANCE, SOCIAL ASSISTANCE LAW, SOCIAL BENEFITS, SOCIAL CONTRACT, SOCIAL FUNDS, SOCIAL INSURANCE, SOCIAL POLICIES, SOCIAL POLICY, SOCIAL PROTECTION, SOCIAL SAFETY NETS, SOCIAL SECURITY, SOCIAL SECURITY PROGRAMS, SOCIAL SERVICE, SOCIAL SERVICES, SOCIAL WELFARE, STATISTICAL ANALYSIS, SUBSISTENCE, TARGETING, TAX CREDITS, TEMPORARY ASSISTANCE, TEMPORARY EMPLOYMENT, TRAINING PROGRAMS, UNEMPLOYMENT, UNEMPLOYMENT BENEFIT, WAGE GROWTH, WAR, WELFARE INDICATORS, WELFARE LEVEL, WELFARE PROGRAMS, WELFARE STATES, WELFARE SYSTEM, WELLBEING,
Online Access:http://documents.worldbank.org/curated/en/2013/11/18600397/eligibility-thresholds-minimum-living-guarantee-programs-international-practices-implications-china
http://hdl.handle.net/10986/17006
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:Using a simple framework, this paper discusses the underlying reason of the variation of threshold level in developed countries, from the least generous 20 percent to around 60 percent of median wage, with an average of 35 percent. The generosity of minimum guarantee social assistance programs is deeply rooted in social values and principles that further underpin the policy objectives. Many Organizations for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) countries set their policy targets for minimum living standard programs beyond basic needs and aim to guarantee a minimum socially acceptable level for a decent living. Thresholds are also refined to reflect the differences in family size and demographic structure, difference in regional cost of living and changes in prices and local wages. In some countries the thresholds show some regional variation due to local discretionary powers of sub-national authorities to set the threshold depending on the co-financing mechanisms. These lessons are valuable for China as the Chinese government has made efforts to standardize the implementation and management of its own minimum income guarantee (Di Bao) programs. The policy recommendations for China include accelerating the convergence of localized approaches, raising the administrative level for setting thresholds to higher level, defining the roles of central and local governments in financing and management, and establishing a transparent budgetary management system to transfer and allocate social assistance funds.