Social Protection in Vietnam and Obstacles to Progressivity

Abstract

The present paper analyzes the incidence and progressivity of Vietnamese state income transfers using survey data from the Vietnamese Household Living Standards Survey 2004. Data quality and sample selection issues are highlighted, especially in the coverage of rural-urban migrants. Simple income-based profiles of incidence are matched to several influences that confound and complicate the measurement of progressivity. The issue of the informal economy is highlighted through analysis of both the extent of private inter-household transfers and remittances and their relationship with state transfers, and in the informal charges that accompany uptake of state services and other petty corruption. Second, the issue of user-charges for health and education services is considered, as a considerable portion of state transfers are related to the take up of schooling and health care. Third, the issue of behavioral effects is also considered, concentrating on private interhousehold transfers. The paper concludes by drawing together the evidence and the obstacles to measurement and progressivity to argue a range of data collection, methodological and policy recommendations.

False positives or hidden dimensions: What can monetary and multidimensional measurement tell us about child poverty in Vietnam?

“…A notable limitation of the VHLSS is its sampling method which causes a substantial group in the society to be omitted from the sample and the subsequent data (Evans & Harkness, 2008). The sample used for the surveys was constructed on the basis of the official lists of registered households in communes and urban wards in Vietnam that had lived in the enumeration area for at least 6 months (Pincus & Sender, 2006, 2008).…”

Social Welfare in Vietnam: A Curse or Blessing for Poor Children?

“…Furthermore, these changes resulted in a sharp decrease in poverty with monetary rates dropping from 29% in 2002 to 20% in 2004 (VASS, 2006). However, there is ample research suggesting that the economic success and the drop in poverty was not shared by all groups in society (Taylor, 2004) and that Vietnam struggles to ensure an ongoing reduction in the levels of poverty and promote equality (Evans & Harkness, 2008). Children in Vietnam are disproportionately affected by poverty.…”

“…Vietnam employs a wide range of social policy and protection programs, which are in part the result of the country’s post‐colonial war and post‐war social government (Evans & Harkness, 2008; Van de Walle, 2004a). Vietnam’s social protection scheme consists of social insurance and social welfare schemes, the latter including targeted benefit programs and special schemes for war veterans and invalids among others (Justino, 2005).…”

The Caring State? On Rural Welfare Governance in Post-reform Vietnam and China

“…While they have become more pluralistic, welfare arrangements in both countries generally divert resources to the higher-income sections of the populations and far more to urban than rural areas (Evans et al 2006;Evans and Harkness 2008;Besharov and Baehler 2013;Gao, Evans, and Garfinkel 2013;London 2013). There remains a large divide between rural and urban areas (Evans et al 2006;Frazier 2010).…”