CHILD POVERTY AND INEQUALITY: THE WAY FORWARD

Program (reference year)

Cost

(GDP)

N.

Beneficiaries

Monthly

subsidy ($)

Chile Solidario (Chile 2005) 0.08%

256.000

families

8 - 21 $

depending on

poverty

intensity

Oportunidades (México,

2006)

0.40%

5 million

families

(18% of pop)

12 - 74 $

depends on

educ. level

17$ family

health

Bono desarrollo umano

(Ecuador 2005)

0.60%

5 million

people

(40% of pop)

15 $

Familias en accion

(Colombia 2007)

0.20%

1.7 million

families

8 - 33 US$ (educ
subsidy/child)
30 US$ (health
subsidy/ family)
Source: Authors’ compilation on Fiszbein and Schady (2009) and Bouillon and Tejerina (2007).

3. Regression Analysis

3.A. Dataset and matrix of correlation coefficients

To test the relative importance of the sources of inequality declines

discussed in Part 3, and to verify the hypothesis that such declines

were stronger in LOC countries (in addition to the effect of the

specific policies introduced) it was necessary to compile a dataset on

Income Distribution in Latin America (IDLA). IDLA includes

annual observations for 18 Latin American countries^54 , the years

1990-2007 and large number of variables, including those used in

regression analysis (Table 11). The database includes 324 (18x18)

cells for each variable, though missing data reduce the number of

non-zero cells by almost a third. The dependent variable is the Gini

(^54) The countries included in the dataset represent the near totality of the
population and GDP of the region. They are: Argentina, Bolivia, Brazil, Chile,
Colombia, Costa Rica, Dominican Republic, El Salvador, Ecuador, Guatemala,
Honduras, Mexico, Nicaragua, Panama, Paraguay, Peru, Uruguay, and Venezuela.