Human_00FM.

qxd 25/10/05 6:14 PM Page i

Indigenous Peoples, Poverty and

Human Development in Latin America
Human_00FM.qxd 25/10/05 6:14 PM Page ii

Also by Harry Anthony Patrinos

INDIGENOUS PEOPLE AND POVERTY IN LATIN AMERICA: An Empirical Analysis

(co-editor with George Psacharopoulos)
THE POLICY ANALYSIS OF CHILD LABOR: A Comparative Study (co-editor with
Christiaan Grootaert)
DECENTRALIZATION OF EDUCATION: Demand-Side Financing
(with David Lakshmanan Ariasingam)
Human_00FM.qxd 25/10/05 6:14 PM Page iii

Indigenous Peoples, Poverty

and Human Development
in Latin America
1994–2004

Edited by

Gillette Hall
and

Harry Anthony Patrinos

Human_00FM.qxd 25/10/05 6:14 PM Page iv

Selection and editorial matter © Gillette Hall and Harry Anthony Patrinos 2006
Individual chapters © contributors 2006
All rights reserved. No reproduction, copy or transmission of this
publication may be made without written permission.
No paragraph of this publication may be reproduced, copied or transmitted
save with written permission or in accordance with the provisions of the
Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988, or under the terms of any licence
permitting limited copying issued by the Copyright Licensing Agency, 90
Tottenham Court Road, London W1T 4LP.
Any person who does any unauthorized act in relation to this publication
may be liable to criminal prosecution and civil claims for damages.
The authors have asserted their rights to be identified
as the authors of this work in accordance with the Copyright,
Designs and Patents Act 1988.
First published in 2006 by
PALGRAVE MACMILLAN
Houndmills, Basingstoke, Hampshire RG21 6XS and
175 Fifth Avenue, New York, N.Y. 10010
Companies and representatives throughout the world.
PALGRAVE MACMILLAN is the global academic imprint of the Palgrave
Macmillan division of St. Martin’s Press, LLC and of Palgrave Macmillan Ltd.
Macmillan® is a registered trademark in the United States, United Kingdom
and other countries. Palgrave is a registered trademark in the European
Union and other countries.
ISBN-13: 978–1–4039–9938–2
ISBN-10: 1–4039–9938–4
This book is printed on paper suitable for recycling and made from fully
managed and sustained forest sources.
A catalogue record for this book is available from the British Library.
Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data
Indigenous people, poverty, and human development in Latin America :
1994–2004 / edited by Gillette Hall and Harry Anthony Patrinos.
p. cm.
Includes bibliographical references and index.
ISBN 1–4039–9938–4 (cloth)
1. Indians – Economic conditions. 2. Indians – Social conditions. 3. Economic
development – Latin America. 4. Latin America – Economic policy. 5. Latin
America – Social policy. I. Hall, Gillete, 1962– II. Patrinos, Harry Anthony.
E59.E3I63 2005
362.5708998—dc22 2005049321
10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1
15 14 13 12 11 10 09 08 07 06
Printed and bound in Great Britain by
Antony Rowe Ltd, Chippenham and Eastbourne
Human_00FM.qxd 25/10/05 6:14 PM Page v

Contents

List of Figures vi

List of Boxes viii

List of Tables ix

Acknowledgements xvi

Notes on the Contributors xvii

1 Introduction: The Indigenous Peoples’ Decade in Latin America 1

Gillette Hall, Heather Marie Layton and Joseph Shapiro

2 Estimating the Number of Indigenous Peoples in Latin America 25

Heather Marie Layton and Harry Anthony Patrinos

3 Bolivia 40
Wilson Jiménez Pozo, Fernando Landa Casazola
and Ernesto Yañez Aguilar

4 Ecuador 67
Carlos Larrea and Fernando Montenegro Torres

5 Guatemala 106
Joseph Shapiro

6 Mexico 150
Alejandro Ramirez

7 Peru 199
Carolina Trivelli

8 Key Messages and an Agenda for Action 221

Gillette Hall and Harry Anthony Patrinos

Appendix: Methods and Data 241

Bibliography 258

Index 275

v
Human_00FM.qxd 25/10/05 6:14 PM Page vi

List of Figures

2.1 Percentage of indigenous peoples in the Bolivian population,

1976–2001 33
2.2 Indigenous population of Guatemala as a percentage of
the total population, 1778–2000 36
2.3 Percentage of Peruvian households that were
indigenous, 2001 38
4.1 Smoothed distribution of per capita consumption,
Ecuador, 1998 72
4.2 Per capita cumulative consumption, Ecuador, 1994 and 1998 73
4.3 Incidence of child labour, Ecuador, 2001 83
4.4 Percentage of children and young people who attended
school and were and not employed, Ecuador, 2001 83
4.5 Percentage of children and young people who both
attended school and were employed, Ecuador, 2001 84
4.6 Percentage of children and young people who worked
and did not attend school, Ecuador, 2001 84
4.7 Predicted earnings, by educational level, Ecuador, 1998 87
4.8 Educational returns, by years of schooling, Ecuador, 1998 88
4.9 Average years of schooling, by year of birth,
Ecuador, 1949–68 89
4.10 Average years of schooling, period of birth and
gender, Ecuador, 1998 90
5.1 Income distribution, Guatemala, 1989 and 2000 111
5.2 Child labour in Guatemala, by year of birth, 1940–80 126
5.3 Years of schooling, by year of birth, Guatemala, 2000 129
5.4 Percentage of people with no schooling, by year of birth,
Guatemala, 1940–80 130
5.5 Percentage of enrolled primary school children who
received a school materials pack by consumption quintile,
Guatemala, 2000 143
6.1 Income and educational attainment, Mexico, 2002 175
6.2 Average educational achievement, by age group,
Mexico, 2000 177
7.1 Poverty trends, Peru, 1994–2000 203
7.2 Extreme poverty trends, Peru, 1994–2000 203
7.3 Earnings differentials between indigenous and
non-indigenous peoples, Peru, 2001 213
7.4 Primary school enrolment, Peru, 1950–82 215
8.1 Average years of schooling, by age group, Mexico 225

vi
Human_00FM.qxd 25/10/05 6:14 PM Page vii

List of Figures vii

8.2 Educational returns, by years of schooling, Ecuador, 1998 226

8.3 Percentage of children who begun working at age 14 or
earlier, by year of birth, Guatemala, 1940–80 228
8.4 Stunting among children in Ecuador, Guatemala and
Mexico, 1998 229
8.5 Distribution of school breakfasts, by income quintile,
Peru, 2001 230
8.6 Distribution of school insurance, by income quintile,
Peru, 2001 230
8.7 Accountability relationships 237
A1 Decision-making process for child labour 253
Human_00FM.qxd 25/10/05 6:14 PM Page viii

List of Boxes

1.1 Thoughts of the indigenous poor in Ecuador on

governance and government policies 7
4.1 Bilingual education in Ecuador 95
5.1 Indigenous concepts of well-being 107
5.2 Comments by Guatemalan Mayas on child labour 126

viii
Human_00FM.qxd 25/10/05 6:14 PM Page ix

List of Tables

1.1 Elected indigenous political representatives, Guatemala,

1985–2000 4
1.2 Percentage change in real per capita social expenditure,
Latin America, 1990–99 12
1.3 Expansion of bilingual education, Mexico, 1952–2003 14
1.4 Enrolment in bilingual schools, Guatemala, 1980–2000 15
2.1 Indigenous peoples in South America, Mexico and
Central America 26
2.2 The language question in Latin American survey work 29
2.3 Definitions of ethnicity used in Latin America over time 31
2.4 Indigenous population, Bolivia, 2001 32
2.5 Estimates of the indigenous share of the total population
in Ecuador 34
2.6 Indigenous population of Mexico, 1930–2000 37
2.7 Population of Peru, by ethnicity and domicile, 1972–2000 38
3.1 Poverty among indigenous peoples, Bolivia, 1989 42
3.2 Poverty headcount, Bolivia, 1989–2002 43
3.3 Extreme poverty headcount, Bolivia, 1997–2002 43
3.4 Poverty indicators, Bolivia, 1999–2002 44
3.5 Incidence of poverty, by educational level, Bolivia, 2002 44
3.6 Determinants of poverty, Bolivia, 2002 46
3.7 Calculated probability of an individual being poor, Bolivia 47
3.8 Indigenous population, by consumption decile, Bolivia, 2002 47
3.9 Labour force participation, Bolivia, 2002 48
3.10 Informal sector employment, Bolivia, 2002 49
3.11 Earnings and employment type, Bolivia, 2002 49
3.12 Mean monthly earnings, Bolivia, 2002 50
3.13 Determinants of labour earnings, Bolivia, 1989–2002 51
3.14 Contribution of variables to indigenous/non-indigenous
earnings differential, Bolivia, 2000 52
3.15 Wage discrimination, Bolivia, 2000 53
3.16 Incidence of child labour, Bolivia, 2002 54
3.17 Characteristics of working children, Bolivia, 2002 55
3.18 Sequential decision model of child labour, Bolivia, 2002 55
3.19 Simultaneous decision model of child labour, Bolivia, 2002 56
3.20 Percentage of children who work, Bolivia, 2002 57
3.21 Mean years of schooling, major cities, Bolivia, 1989 58
3.22 Gender and educational achievement, Bolivia, 2002 58
3.23 Years of education, by period of birth, Bolivia, 2002 59

ix
Human_00FM.qxd 25/10/05 6:14 PM Page x

x List of Tables

3.24 Age–grade distortion, Bolivia, 2002 59

3.25 Mean years of schooling, Bolivia, 2002 60
3.26 Illiteracy rate, Bolivia, 2002 60
3.27 Determinants of school enrolment, youth sub-sample,
Bolivia, 2002 61
3.28 Probability of being enrolled in school, Bolivia, 2002 61
3.29 Location of most recent birth, Bolivia, 2002 63
3.30 General health conditions, Bolivia, 2002 63
3.31 Place where illness was treated, Bolivia, 2002 64
3.32 Expenditure on health care in the two weeks prior to the
survey, per individual, Bolivia, 2002 64
3.33 Medical insurance coverage, Bolivia, 2002 64
4.1 Internal migration rates, Ecuador, 1996–2001 69
4.2 Poverty incidence by region, Ecuador, 1998 71
4.3 Poverty gap and severity, Ecuador, 1998 73
4.4 Poverty, by area and region, Ecuador, 1995–2003 74
4.5 Poverty, by ethnicity, Ecuador, 1994–2003 75
4.6 Average per capita consumption and income, Ecuador,
1994–2003 75
4.7 Education, nutrition and child labour, by income quintile
Ecuador, 1998 76
4.8 Determinants of poverty, Ecuador, 1998 77
4.9 Estimated probabilities of being poor, Ecuador, 1998 78
4.10 Determinants of labour earnings, Ecuador, 1998 79
4.11 Decomposition of earnings differences, indigenous pay
structure, Ecuador, 1998 80
4.12 Decompositions of earnings advantage, Ecuador, 1998 81
4.13 Child schooling and labour conditions, Ecuador, 2001 82
4.14 Child labour, sequential probit regressions, Ecuador, 1998 85
4.15 Child and youth employment and earnings,
Ecuador, 1998 86
4.16 Educational attainment, Ecuador, 1998 90
4.17 Determinants of years of schooling, Ecuador, 1998 91
4.18 School enrolment rate, children aged 6–14, Ecuador, 1998 92
4.19 Determinants of school enrolment, children aged 6–14,
Ecuador, 1998 92
4.20 Reasons for not enrolling in school, children aged 6–14,
Ecuador, 1998 93
4.21 Age–grade distortion, primary school, Ecuador, 1998 93
4.22 Determinants of age–grade distortion, children aged 6–14,
Ecuador, 1998 94
4.23 Percentage of people who were ill or injured and sought
medical care during the month prior to the survey,
Ecuador, 1998 95
Human_00FM.qxd 25/10/05 6:14 PM Page xi

List of Tables xi

4.24 Likelihood of seeking professional medical care in the

event of illness or accident, Ecuador, 1998 96
4.25 Average travelling time to and waiting time at place of
health care-service, Ecuador, 1998 97
4.26 Place where health-care service received, Ecuador, 1998 97
4.27 Reason why medical care was not sought in the event of
illness or injury, Ecuador, 1998 97
4.28 Place of delivery of most recent child, Ecuador, 1998 98
4.29 Prenatal care provider, time of initiation and number
of visits, Ecuador, 1998 98
4.30 Likelihood of knowing at least one contraceptive method,
Ecuador, 1998 99
4.31 Likelihood of using a contraceptive method, Ecuador, 1998 100
4.32 Infant mortality rates, Ecuador, 2001 100
4.33 Child mortality rates, Ecuador, 2001 100
4.34 Percentage of children who had diarrhoea and received oral
rehydration therapy, Ecuador, 1998 101
4.35 Malnutrition in children under five, Ecuador, 1998 101
4.36 Vaccination rates, Ecuador, 1998 102
4.37 Health insurance coverage, Ecuador, 1998 102
5.1 Basic demographics, Guatemala, 1989–2000 108
5.2 Percentage change in poverty headcount, Guatemala,
1989–2000 110
5.3 Poverty headcount, Guatemala, 2000 110
5.4 Poverty gap and severity, Guatemala, 1989–2000 111
5.5 Determinants of poverty, Guatemala, 1989–2000 112
5.6 Calculated probabilities of individuals being poor,
Guatemala, 1989–2000 113
5.7 Labour indicators, Guatemala, 1989–2000 115
5.8 Employment by sector, Guatemala, 1989–2000 115
5.9 Informal sector employment, Guatemala, 1989–2000 116
5.10 Remittances to and within Guatemala, 2000 117
5.11 Extended earnings functions, Guatemala, 2000 118
5.12 Earnings differentials, Guatemala, 1989–2000 119
5.13 Contribution of independent variables to
indigenous/non-indigenous earnings differential,
Guatemala, 2000 120
5.14 Mincerian earnings functions, Guatemala, 2000 122
5.15 Returns from schooling, mincerian earnings functions,
Guatemala, 1989–2000 122
5.16 Characteristics of working children, Guatemala, 1989–2000 123
5.17 Schooling and child labour, Guatemala, 2000 124
5.18 Probability of a child working, sequential probit,
Guatemala, 2000 124
Human_00FM.qxd 25/10/05 6:14 PM Page xii

xii List of Tables

5.19 Probability of a child working, multinomial logit,

Guatemala, 2000 125
5.20 Years of schooling, by gender, Guatemala, 1989–2000 128
5.21 Determinants of years of schooling, Guatemala, 1989–2000 130
5.22 Literacy rates, Guatemala, 2000 131
5.23 Reasons why children do not enrol in school,
Guatemala, 2000 131
5.24 Age–grade distortion, Guatemala, 2000 132
5.25 Languages used in schools with indigenous children,
Guatemala, 2000 133
5.26 Grade repetition and drop-out rates, Guatemala, 2000 133
5.27 Third grade mathematics and Spanish test scores,
2000–1 134
5.28 Place where medical treatment was sought, Guatemala, 2000 136
5.29 Possession of medical insurance, Guatemala, 2000 136
5.30 Determinants of outpatient medical facility visits,
Guatemala, 2000 137
5.31 Prenatal care, Guatemala, 2000 137
5.32 Location of last birth, Guatemala, 2000 138
5.33 Vaccination received during the most recent pregnancy,
Guatemala, 2000 138
5.34 Contraception, Guatemala, 2000 139
5.35 Likelihood of knowing about contraceptives,
Guatemala, 2000 139
5.36 Likelihood of using contraceptives if contraceptives
known about, Guatemala, 2000 140
5.37 Child malnutrition, Guatemala, 2000 141
5.38 Receipt of school nutrition and materials programmes,
by consumption quintile, Guatemala, 2000 142
5.39 Households access to services, Guatemala, 2000 144
5.40 Participation in organizations and communal activities,
Guatemala, 2000 144
5.41 Changes in the circumstances of indigenous peoples,
Guatemala, 1989–2000 148
6.1 Sample demographics, Mexico, 2000 151
6.2 Household data, Mexico, 2000 152
6.3 Average per capita monthly income in Mexican
municipalities, August 1989 and 2002 154
6.4 Trends in poverty, head count index (P0), Mexico,
1992–2002 155
6.5 Incidence of poverty, by purchasing power parity
(PPP), Mexico, 1989–2002 157
6.6 Mean per capita monthly income in a population living
in poverty, Mexico, 2002 157
Human_00FM.qxd 25/10/05 6:14 PM Page xiii

List of Tables xiii

6.7 Depth of poverty, aggregate poverty gap (FGT P1 index)

Mexico, 1992–2002 158
6.8 Severity of poverty, FGT P2 index, Mexico, 1992–2002 159
6.9 Poverty incidence, by educational level, Mexico, 2002 159
6.10 Determinants of poverty for individuals aged 18 and over,
Mexico, 2002 160
6.11 Calculated probabilities of an individual being extremely
poor or moderately poor, Mexico, 2002 163
6.12 Average monthly wages for selected sectors by municipal
category, Mexico, 2002 163
6.13 Sample statistics on male workers, Mexico, 2002 164
6.14 Determinants of earnings in Mexico 166
6.15 Decomposition of ethnic earnings differentials,
Mexico, 2002 167
6.16 Decomposition of male ethnic earnings differentials
using different methods, Mexico 169
6.17 Contribution of each variable to the earnings differential,
according to the indigenous pay structure,
Mexico, 2002 169
6.18 Percentage of working children, Mexico, 1997 171
6.19 Logit estimates of the probability that a child will work 172
6.20 Multinomial logit results 173
6.21 Sequential probit results (children aged 6–17) 174
6.22 Illiteracy rates in Mexico, 2000 176
6.23 Educational achievement, people aged 15 and over,
Mexico, 2000 176
6.24 Mean years of schooling, Mexico, 2000 178
6.25 Mean years of schooling, people aged 15 and over,
Mexico, 2002 178
6.26 Determinants of educational achievement, adult
subsample, Mexico, 2002 179
6.27 Age–grade distortion, Mexico, 2003 180
6.28 School dropout rates by gender and indigenous
concentration, Mexico, 1989–2002 180
6.29 Reasons for dropping out of school, Mexico, 2000 181
6.30 Determinants of primary school drop-out,
Mexico, 2002 181
6.31 Estimated probability of primary school drop-out,
Mexico, 2002 182
6.32 Determinants of school participation, entire youth
subsample, Mexico, 2002 183
6.33 Estimated probability of school participation,
Mexico, 2002 183
6.34 Reading scores by type of school, Mexico, 1998–2002 184
Human_00FM.qxd 25/10/05 6:14 PM Page xiv

xiv List of Tables

6.35 Test scores in mathematics, by school type, Mexico,

1998–2002 185
6.36 Life expectancy and mortality, Mexico, 1990–96 186
6.37 Illness, treatment and mortality rates, Mexico, 1998–99 187
6.38 Insurance status by ethnicity, Mexico, 2000 188
6.39 Health services utilized, by ethnicity, Mexico, 2000 189
6.40 Prevalence of anaemia and undernutrition in children
under five years of age, Mexico, 1998–99 190
6.41 Adjusted and unadjusted probability ratios for anaemia
and malnutrition among indigenous and non-indigenous
children under five years of age, Mexico, 1998–99 191
6.42 Determinants of fertility for married women
aged 12–50, Mexico, 2000 192
6.43 Coverage of the Oportunidades and Procampo
programmes, by type of municipality and income
quintile, Mexico, 2002 193
6.44 Access to utilities and household assets, Mexico, 2000 194
7.1 Percentage of indigenous peoples according to mother
tongue, Peru, 1994–2000 200
7.2 Percentage of households living in poverty, Peru, 1994–2000 201
7.3 Percentage of households living in extreme poverty,
Peru, 1994–2000 201
7.4 Poverty gap and FGT index, Peru, 2001 204
7.5 Poverty headcount by geographic domain, Peru, 2001 204
7.6 Mean per capita income, Peru, 2001 204
7.7 Responses to the question of whether, given the income
of their household, the respondents felt that they lived
well, fairly well or poorly, Peru, 2001 205
7.8 Distribution of indigenous peoples, by consumption
decile, Peru, 2001 206
7.9 Decomposition of total inequality according to total
income distribution, Peru, 2001 (index of generalized
entropy, GE(2)) 206
7.10 Determinants of household poverty, Peru, 2001 207
7.11 Marginal effect of indigenous identity on the probability
of a household being poor, by definition and
geographic domain, Peru, 2001 208
7.12 Labour force characteristics, Peru, 2001 209
7.13 Mean incomes, Peru, 2001 210
7.14 Determinants of earnings, all employed individuals,
Peru, 2001 211
7.15 Contribution of each variable to the earnings differential,
by endowments and indigenous pay structure, Peru, 2001 211
7.16 Wage inequality, all employed individuals, Peru, 2001 212
Human_00FM.qxd 25/10/05 6:14 PM Page xv

List of Tables xv

7.17 Returns from schooling, Peru, 2001 214

7.18 Returns from schooling, by geographic domain, Peru, 2001 214
7.19 Mean years of schooling, Peru, 2001 215
7.20 Possession of health insurance, Peru, 2001 217
7.21 Access to public and private services, Peru, 2001 217
7.22 Social provisions, by consumption quintile, Peru, 2001 217
8.1 Poverty rate changes in Latin America percentage change in
the poverty rate between the earliest and latest survey years 222
8.2 Percentage change in indigenous poverty rates during
periods of crisis and recovery, Ecuador and Mexico 222
8.3 Percentage change in the poverty gap, Bolivia, Guatemala
and Mexico 223
8.4 Percentage increase in the probability of being poor if
indigenous, Latin America 223
8.5 Percentage of the labour earnings gap among males
that cannot be explained by productive characteristics,
Latin America 224
8.6 Average years of schooling, individuals aged 15 and over,
Latin America 225
8.7 Average increase in earnings for each additional year of
schooling, Latin America 225
8.8 Ratio of indigenous and non-indigenous average
monthly income, by population category, Mexico,
1989 and 2002 226
8.9 National mathematics test scores at the fifth
(or nearest) grade, Latin America 227
8.10 Percentage of the population with health insurance
coverage, Latin America 228
8.11 Agenda for action 232
A1 Household surveys and definitions of ethnicity 243
A2 Comparison of census and ENIGH socioeconomic
indicators in municipalities with an indigenous population
of 70 per cent or more 246
A3 Poverty lines and extreme poverty lines, Bolivia, 1999–2002 248
A4 Poverty lines, Ecuador, 1994–2003 249
A5 ECLAC’s estimates of urban poverty, Ecuador, 1990–99 250
A6 Poverty lines, Peru, 1994–2000 252
Human_00FM.qxd 25/10/05 6:14 PM Page xvi

Acknowledgements

We have benefited greatly from comments and encouragement by people

who read earlier versions of this study and/or participated in review meetings
and seminars at the World Bank, the Universidad de las Americas in Puebla,
Mexico, and Georgetown University. We are deeply indebted to the World
Bank’s former Vice-President for the Latin America and Caribbean region,
David de Ferranti, who put the full weight of his department behind the pro-
ject and helped to make it truly regional. We are particularly grateful to
our managers, Ana-Maria Arriagada, Ariel Fiszbein, Evangeline Javier and
Eduardo Velez, for their support and helpful comments. Shelton Davis, one
of the premier authorities on indigenous peoples throughout the world, was
as always very supportive, as well as instrumental in finding additional fund-
ing for the country studies. Several people contributed background papers
for the study, including Zafiris Tzannatos, Chris Sakellariou, Luis Felipe
Lopez-Calva and Rosangela Bando. Navin Rai, the indigenous peoples coor-
dinator for the World Bank, mobilized additional resources to support our
time on the project.
The project also benefited from the oversight of and thoughtful comments
by Guillermo Perry (Chief Economist for the Latin America and Caribbean
Region at the World Bank) and a world-class group of reviewers, including
George Psacharopoulos (principal author of the 1994 report), Barry Chiswick
(University of Illinois-Chicago), Ronald Oaxaca (University of Arizona),
Emmanuel Jiménez (Sector Director, East Asia Human Development, World
Bank), Quentin Wodon (Lead Poverty Specialist, Africa Region, World Bank)
and Navin Rai.
The country chapters are authored by Wilson Jiménez, Fernando Landa
and Ernesto Yañez (Bolivia), Carlos Larrea and Fernando Montenegro Torres
(Ecuador), Joseph Shapiro (Guatemala), Alejandro Ramírez (Mexico) and
Carolina Trivelli (Peru). The dedication of each one of them has been
remarkable, and we are grateful for the numerous times when they went well
beyond the call of duty to ensure the scope and quality of this study.
Our greatest thanks go to Heather Marie Layton and Joseph Shapiro, who
worked side by side with us on every aspect of the project from start to
finish. They care deeply about the issues reported in this volume and their
sense of resolution shines through.
GILLETTE HALL
HARRY ANTHONY PATRINOS

All royalties generated from the sale of this book will be donated to indigenous
peoples’ organization in Latin America.

xvi
Human_00FM.qxd 25/10/05 6:14 PM Page xvii

Notes on the Contributors

The editors
Gillette Hall is an economist at the World Bank. Raised in Latin America,
she developed an early interest in issues of poverty, and later faced these
challenges firsthand as a volunteer in the small rural village of Nepena, Peru.
Her work at the Bank focuses on helping partner governments develop suc-
cessful policies for poverty reduction. She holds an undergraduate degree
from the Georgetown University School of Foreign Service, and a PhD in
economics from the University of Cambridge, United Kingdom. She has
taught at the University of Oregon, in her hometown of Eugene, Oregon,
and at the Johns Hopkins School for Advanced International Studies in
Washington, DC. She has published journal articles and papers on poverty
and development in Latin America. This is her first book.

Harry Anthony Patrinos is Senior Education Economist at the World Bank.

He manages several projects in the Latin America region and specializes in
the economics of education. He is one of the main authors of the report
‘Lifelong Learning in the Global Knowledge Economy’ (2003). Dr Patrinos
has many publications in the academic and policy literature. He is
co-author of the books: The Policy Analysis of Child Labor: A Comparative
Study (St. Martin’s Press, 1999), Decentralization of Education: Demand-Side
Financing (World Bank, 1997) and Indigenous People and Poverty in Latin
America: An Empirical Analysis (with George Psacharopoulos), (publ. 1994).
He has also worked in Africa, Asia, Europe, the Middle East and North
America. He previously worked as an economist at the Economic Council of
Canada. Dr Patrinos received a doctorate from the University of Sussex,
England.

The contributors
Fernando Landa Casazola is an economist at the Social and Economic
Policy Analysis Unit (UDAPE) in Bolivia. He carries out research on the main
indicators of poverty, inequality and labour markets. He has publications
related to public social expenditures, poverty and inequality, and impact
evaluation of a workfare programme in Bolivia. He received an MA in
economics from ILADES-Georgetown University.

Carlos Larrea is Professor at FLACSO-Ecuador, and consultant to various

international institutions. He works on poverty, employment, nutrition and
social development in Ecuador and the Andean region. He is author of the
book Dolarización, Crisis y Pobreza en el Ecuador (Abyayala, 2004), and is

xvii
Human_00FM.qxd 25/10/05 6:14 PM Page xviii

xviii Notes on the Contributors

co-author, with Jeannette Sánchez, of Pobreza, Empleo y Equidad en el Ecuador:

Perspectivas para el Desarrollo Humano (UNDP, 2002). He has published several
articles in international refereed journals. He received his doctorate from
York University, Toronto.
Heather Marie Layton is a consultant to the World Bank. She has worked on
several studies, including the Southern States Development Strategy, a multi-
sectoral study of Mexico’s poorest region, and an analysis of quality of edu-
cation in Mexico. She holds a BA in International Studies and Spanish from
the University of Oregon, and earned an MA in International Development
Policy from the School of International Service at American University, with
a focus on Latin American Development Policy. Her thesis, ‘A Meta-Analysis
of Conditional Cash Transfer Programs’, examined the adoption and success
of conditional cash transfer programmes in Latin America. She has lived and
worked in Guanajuato, Mexico and Mexico City.
Wilson Jiménez Pozo is Deputy Director of Social Policies at the Social and
Economic Policy Analysis Unit (UDAPE) in Bolivia. He coordinates activities
related to the design and evaluation of social policies. He has produced sev-
eral reports related to poverty, inequality, labour markets and education, and
he has publications in international journals. He received his economics
degree from the University Mayor de San Andrés of La Paz, and he studied
Public Policy at Bolivia’s Catholic University.

Fernando Montenegro Torres is an economist at the World Bank. He spe-

cializes in social protection issues, health financing and development, and
currently works on projects in Latin America and the Caribbean. Previously
he worked as a consultant for the Inter-American Development Bank (IDB),
Pan American Health Organization (PAHO) and International Labor
Organization (ILO). He has published several academic journal articles and
co-authored book chapters on topics related to public policy and the econom-
ics of human development. He received an MA in international economics
from the School of Advanced International Studies of the Johns Hopkins
University and a doctorate in health economics from the Bloomberg School
of Public Health at Johns Hopkins University.
Alejandro Ramírez is the Chief Executive Officer of Cinepolis, the largest
movie theatre company in Latin America. He has served as Mexico’s Deputy
Permanent Representative to the OECD, and as Technical Secretary of the
Social Cabinet of the Government of Mexico. He has worked for the Human
Development Report Office of the UNDP and for the World Bank in the areas
of poverty and human development. He has published numerous papers on
economic and policy issues. He is a member of the Editorial Board of the
Journal of Human Development. He holds a BA in economics and an MBA
from Harvard University, an MSc in development economics from Oxford
University and is a doctoral candidate in economics at Cambridge University.
Human_00FM.qxd 25/10/05 6:14 PM Page xix

Notes on the Contributors xix

Joseph Shapiro is a Marshall Scholar studying at St. Antony’s College,

University of Oxford. He has written extensively on education and health pol-
icy in developing countries and advises several Latin American governments
on impact evaluation of large public education and health programmes. He
has served as Junior Professional Associate in Latin America and the
Caribbean division of the World Bank, Consultant for the World Bank’s
Mexico and Colombia office, and Editor-in-Chief of the Stanford Journal of
International Relations. He graduated Phi Beta Kappa from Stanford
University with Interdisciplinary Honors in the Ethics in Society Program
and has a University Distinction in Economics.
Carolina Trivelli is Senior Researcher at the Instituto de Estudios Peruanos
(IEP) in Lima, Peru, and is an independent consultant in poverty, rural finan-
cial markets and rural development issues. She is a Board Member of the Red
para el Desarrollo de las Ciencias Sociales en el Perú and of the Consorcio
para el Desarrollo de la Ecorregión Andina, and Member of the International
Advisory Board of CLASPO (Texas University). She was General Director of
IEP, President of the Directive Council of the Seminario Permanente de
Investigación Agraria and has taught at the Universidad del Pacífico. She has
published several articles and books on poverty, labour and microcredit. She
received her economics degree from the Pontificia Universidad Católica del
Perú and has an MA in agricultural economics from Pennsylvania State
University.
Ernesto Yañez Aguilar is an economist specializing in research on poverty,
inequality, education and labour markets. He has publications related to
poverty, inequality, labour markets and social capital. He has a PhD in
economics from the Universidad Autónoma de Barcelona in Spain.
Human_00FM.qxd 25/10/05 6:14 PM Page xx

We dedicate this book to Shelton Davis whose

tireless work for indigenous peoples is an
inspiration to us all
Human_01.qxd 25/10/05 6:15 PM Page 1

1
Introduction: The Indigenous
Peoples’ Decade in Latin
America
Gillette Hall, Heather Marie Layton and Joseph Shapiro

In 1993, on the recommendation of the World Conference on Human

Rights, the United Nations Assembly proclaimed the International Decade of
the World’s Indigenous Peoples, to begin on 10 December 1994.1 At the same
time a report entitled Indigenous People and Poverty in Latin America
(Psacharopoulos and Patrinos, 1994) provided the first regional assessment
of living standards among indigenous peoples. It found systematic evidence
that indigenous peoples suffered far worse socioeconomic conditions than
the population as a whole. In addition to high poverty rates it documented
social exclusion via labour market discrimination and limited access to pub-
lic education and health services. This report set a baseline from which
future progress could be measured.
The year 1994 heralded a major uprising of indigenous people in the
Mexican state of Chiapas, known as the Zapatista rebellion. Deploring the
world’s lack of attention to their plight and fearful of the effects of rapid glob-
alization on their local economies and culture, the actions of these people sig-
naled the beginning of a new era in which indigenous peoples would begin to
play an increasingly vocal part in national politics. In the subsequent years
indigenous groups throughout Latin America exercised their political muscle
in new and increasingly visible ways. Indigenous movements took to the
streets in Ecuador on five separate occasions during the 1990s, leading to nego-
tiations with the government and ultimately to constitutional change. But
this newfound political muscle was not truly felt until 2003, when indigenous
groups led a coalition that toppled President Sánchez de Lozada of Bolivia.
These actions are considered to have brought about some of the most far-
reaching reforms in favour of indigenous peoples world-wide (UNICEF, 2003).
Latin American governments have responded in two ways. First, many con-
tries have enacted or attempted to pass legislation supporting the rights of
indigenous peoples. Second, countries have directed a greater share of national
resources towards education, health and poverty-reduction programmes, and

1
Human_01.qxd 25/10/05 6:15 PM Page 2

2 Introduction

transferred a greater share of public expenditure to state and local control.

Multilateral organizations have also changed their approach. In 1991 the
International Labour Organization (ILO) passed Convention 169, the only
legally binding instrument of international law to deal exclusively with the
rights of indigenous peoples. Major development organizations such as the
World Bank and the Inter-American Development Bank have added the pro-
tection of indigenous peoples’ rights to their operational guidelines and
stepped up their effort to incorporate the needs of indigenous communities
into the design and implementation of their projects.
The purpose of this volume is to investigate whether these developments
on national and international fronts have been accompanied by real
improvements in the material conditions of indigenous peoples. It does so
by addressing four main questions:

● Have poverty rates increased or decreased among indigenous peoples

since 1994, and what are the main determinants of the observed trends?
How does this compare with changes in the poverty rate among the rest
of the population?
● Have the main human capital indicators (education and health)
improved for indigenous and non-indigenous groups alike? What factors
explain these trends?
● As income (and therefore income poverty) is to a large extent determined
by human capital, have the income returns from human capital changed
for indigenous and non-indigenous people? What explains differences in
labour market earnings?
● Does access to major social and poverty reduction programmes differ
between indigenous and non-indigenous people?

The study covers the five countries in Latin America with the largest
indigenous populations – Bolivia, Ecuador, Guatemala, Mexico and Peru2 –,
(The subsequent implementation of household surveys has allowed the
inclusion of Ecuador in this volume. which was not included in the previous
report (Psacharopoulos and Patrinos, 1994) due to lack of data.) The focus of
each country chapter is similar to that in 1994, with particular emphasis on
human development indicators (poverty, education, health, income deter-
minants and access to basic services). While this emphasis gives the study a
high degree of comparability with the 1994 report, it limits its scope to a sub-
set of factors that can lead to improved poverty outcomes, omitting for
example consideration of assets, access to credit and so on, which will be
explored in future work.
Using additional information which has become available since publica-
tion of the 1994 report, this book provides a more complete picture of
human development issues that are expected to play a fundamental role in
poverty reduction over the medium to long term. In particular each country
Human_01.qxd 25/10/05 6:15 PM Page 3

Gillette Hall, Heather Marie Layton and Joseph Shapiro 3

chapter has an expanded section on health issues, a new section on access to

social assistance programmes and an extended discussion of issues pertain-
ing to the quality of education. Each chapter differs slightly from the others
as it draws on the unique mix of statistical information available in each
country. However the chapters have been made as comparable as possible in
terms of the topics covered.
The remainder of this chapter describes the setting against which the
study takes place by summarizing the major policy changes that occurred
during the indigenous peoples’ decade. Further introductory material is
provided in Chapter 2, which discusses the complexity of identifying indige-
nous peoples and addresses the question of how many indigenous people
reside in Latin America. Chapters 3–7 are the individual country studies.
Chapter 8, identifies regional patterns and proposes an agenda for future
action based on the major conclusions of the study.3
Before proceeding it is important to point out an important reality regard-
ing indigenous peoples about whom this book is written while indigenous
peoples do describe the material conditions in which many of them live –
poor education, unemployment, and so on – as ‘poverty’, they also consider
themselves rich in terms of cultural and spiritual traditions that may be
absent in larger societies.4 These factors tend not to be captured in this book
as it assesses poverty only in quantitative terms. This book is both strength-
ened and handicapped by that approach. The strength of our approach is
that it speaks in terms that are familiar to national and international policy
makers, and as such its goal is to have a direct impact on policy decisions
that will strongly affect the lives of indigenous peoples. Yet at the same time,
this quantitative approach does not reflect on all the needs and values of
Latin America’s indigenous peoples. While indigenous peoples consider that
poor education, malnutrition, bad health, unemployment, discrimination
and so on are causing them to live in poverty, they consider themselves.

The policy setting

Indigenous peoples’ visibility in Latin American society and politics grew dur-
ing the 1990s,5 Their presence is being felt, first and foremost, via increased
political participation. Across the region indigenous political representation
has historically been minimal, but substantial advances have occurred
recently, most notably since 1990. As one politician commented, we are
finally electing leaders who look like the people they represent (Forero, 2003).
Changes in representation vary by country. In Peru, in 2001 Alejandro
Toledo Manrique, a descendant of the Quechua people, was elected as the
country’s first indigenous president. In 1993 Bolivians elected Ayamaran
Victor Hugo Cárdenas as vice-president. This is the first time that an indige-
nous person has held a position of such prominence. In Bolivia in particular,
where a majority of the population is indigenous, rapid increases in local
Human_01.qxd 25/10/05 6:15 PM Page 4

4 Introduction

Table 1.1 Elected indigenous political representatives, Guatemala, 1985–2000

Total number of Number of indigenous Indigenous representatives

representatives representatives as a percentage of the total

1985 110 8 8.0

1990 116 6 5.2
1995 80 8 10.0
2000 113 14 12.4

Source: Lux de Cotí, 1991; MINUGUA, 2001.

political participation has followed. In 1995 about 20 indigenous represen-

tatives were elected to local councils (IWGIA, 1996). In 1997, partly due to
disagreements between indigenous groups about electoral strategy, an
indigenous alliance received only 3 per cent of the votes and only one
indigenous member of parliament was elected (IWGIA, 1998). However in
2002 the Movement for Socialism (MAS), a party established by indigenous
cocoa growers in the late 1990s, won 20 per cent of the votes and a new
indigenous party, the Pachakuti Indigenous Movement (MIP), won an addi-
tional 7 per cent (Madrid, 2003), thereby tripling the proportion of indige-
nous congressional law makers in Bolivia (Forero, 2003).
Guatemala has experienced similar changes. In 1995 Robert Qume Chay
became the first K’iche person to win a major mayoral election. He duly
became mayor of Quetzaltenango, the second most important city in
Guatemala (IWGIA, 1996). In the country as a whole the percentage of
indigenous national representatives rose from 8 per cent in 1985 to 12 per
cent in 2000 (Table 1.1). However indigenous representation is still far from
proportional as about 40 per cent of Guatemalan citizens are indigenous.
Moreover there is evidence of apathy: in 1999, when Guatemala held a ref-
erendum to ratify constitutional reforms, including the 1995 agreement on
indigenous rights, only 12 per cent of Guatemalans voted, 57 per cent of
whom rejected the reforms (IWGIA, 2000; Stavenhagen, 2002).
In Ecuador the Confederation of Indigenous Nationalities of Ecuador
(CONAIE) entered into partnership with several unions and non-governmental
organizations (NGOs) to form the Movement for Pachakutik–New Country
(MUPP–NP). This party only received a small proportion of the votes in the
1996 and 1998 general elections, but in 2000 it joined forces with the Patriotic
Society Party (PSP) and won 20 per cent of the votes (Madrid, 2003). Prior to
that, in 1996 an indigenous confederation had won 10 per cent of deputies’
seats (Beck and Mijeski, 2001). In 2002 a number of indigenous organizations,
including the MUPP–NP, backed Lucio Gutierrez’s successful presidential cam-
paign and subsequently several cabinet positions were awarded to indigenous
leaders. For example Nina Pacari, an indigenous lawyer who had been involved
with the indigenous movement since its inception, was appointed minister of
foreign relations. However President Gutierrez soon began to distance himself
Human_01.qxd 25/10/05 6:15 PM Page 5

Gillette Hall, Heather Marie Layton and Joseph Shapiro 5

from his populist platform, firing several indigenous government officials in

the process. Nine months after Gutierrez took office the MUPP–NP withdrew
its support for his administration (Fraser and Jeffrey, 2004).

Informal movements

As indigenous participation in formal political elections has grown there has

been a parallel proliferation of indigenous movements. These movements
include NGOs and less structured groups such as the Zapatista movement in
the Mexican state of Chiapas. NGOs that represent excluded groups such as
indigenous peoples have increased in importance worldwide: Boulding
(1997) estimates that the number of international NGOs with an ethnic basis
increased fivefold between 1970 and 1994 to about 550 organizations. These
NGOs have played an increasingly prominent part in world events.
The spread of indigenous NGOs and movements in Latin America has
been comparable. Yashar (1998, p. 23), in a review of political movements in
the five countries considered in this book, concludes that, with the exception
of Peru, indigenous organizations have made obsolete the common assump-
tion that ‘ethnicity in Latin America has had comparatively little explicit
impact on political organizing, party platforms, debates, and conflict, in
sharp contrast to other regions in the world’. Yet even in Peru, some politi-
cal momentum among indigenous peoples has taken place (Remy, 1994).6
The Emiliana Zapatista Liberation Front (EZLN) has been one of Latin
America’s best known indigenous movements. In 1994 it began an uprising
in the state of Chiapas to protest against economic liberalization and other
policies of the Mexican federal government. In 1994, 100,000 people rose in
Mexico City in support of the Zapatistas. The movement did not seek to
control the government, but rather to influence national policy and increase
the voice of Mexican indigenous peoples. The movement continues to exist,
although its influence has diminished since 1994 (Bruhn, 1999).
Indigenous movements in Guatemala have had a more direct influence on
national policy, and particularly on the 1996 peace accords that followed the
civil war. Guatemala’s Civil Society Assembly (ASC) and groups such as
Majawil Q’ij, the National Coordinating Committee of Indigenous People
and Campesinos (CONIC) and the Council of Guatemalan Mayan
Organizations (COMG) fought for indigenous rights in the peace accords,
and their efforts were partly responsible for the creation of the Accord on
Identity and Rights of Indigenous Peoples after the 1996 elections. Another
indigenous organization is Nukuj Ajpop, an electoral coalition that success-
fully fielded several municipal and legislative candidates in 1995 (IWGIA,
1995, 1996). Much earlier, from the 1970s a Mayan movement began to
strive for the involvement of Guatemala’s Mayan people in political debates
(Jiménez Sanchez, 1998).
Ecuador’s Confederation of Indigenous Nationalities (CONAIE) spear-
headed indigenous mobilization in that country and became one of the
Human_01.qxd 25/10/05 6:15 PM Page 6

6 Introduction

most influential indigenous NGOs in Latin America. Indigenous organizing

in Ecuador began as two separate movements in the Amazon and the Sierra,
but merged in 1980 under the CONAIE banner (Selverston, 1994). In the mid
1990s CONAIE began discussions with the national government about the
reform of a national agrarian law that CONAIE condemned and Ecuador’s
Tribunal of Constitutional Guarantees had declared to be unconstitutional.
The reformulated law contained far more provisions on the rights of indige-
nous peoples (IWGIA, 1996). In 1997 the indigenous movement participated
in popular uprisings that brought about the overthrow of the Abdalá
Bucaram government (IWGIA, 1998). CONAIE also played a significant part
in organizing protests against the government of Jamil Mahuad, who was
eventually deposed as president in 2000. After Mahuad stepped down a
three-man junta briefly took power. This comprised a military general, a for-
mer Supreme Court judge and Antonio Vargas, who at that time was the
president of CONAIE (Beck and Mijeski, 2001).
Despite such changes, in Latin America and elsewhere indigenous peoples
continue to complain that lack of governmental participation is responsible
for a substantial part of their poverty. On behalf of the World Bank, Narayan
et al. (2000) interviewed 60,000 poor women and men in 50 countries, includ-
ing Argentina, Bolivia, Brazil and Ecuador. The respondents included in their
definition of poverty the absence of participation in and positive interaction
with the government in terms of voice, effective programmes and trans-
parency, plus the existence of discrimination and lack of concern about
discrimination. So for indigenous peoples, misguided or non-existent policies
not only cause poverty but also perpetuate powerlessness (Box 1.1). Thus
while major changes in political participation have taken place, there is still
much progress to be made.

Policy changes

The increased political participation by indigenous peoples in Latin America

has been accompanied by policy changes in two major areas with a potential
impact on poverty and human development. First, significant changes in
legislation on indigenous peoples’ rights have occurred since 1990, particu-
larly regarding claims to land and resources. Second, many countries have
implemented programmes to reduce poverty, and in some cases these are
specifically targeted at indigenous peoples, such as the provision of bilingual
education. We shall review related developments below.

Legislation
A primary goal of indigenous political involvement, through both formal
elections and non-governmental movements, is to generate legislation that
Human_01.qxd 25/10/05 6:15 PM Page 7

Gillette Hall, Heather Marie Layton and Joseph Shapiro 7

Box 1.1 Thoughts of the indigenous poor in Ecuador on governance and

government policies

The World Bank’s Voices of the Poor report included participatory poverty
assessments in 50 countries. The Ecuador assessment identified indigenous
respondents. Though many responses focused on lack of income, inferior health
and education services, and other traditional indicators of poverty, a number of
replies commented on lack of effort from government, or lack of voice in govern-
ment affairs.

We suffer in the countryside because we haven’t received any help from the different
governments. We don’t receive anything. They don’t want to help us.
– Indigenous woman from indigenous Amazonian community, Ecuador
Money does not reach the needy … because the government does not define any policy;
every time there is a new government, the policy changes. … Each government has a
different work plan that cheats people.
– Indigenous person from Ecuadorian highlands
The government does not really govern; the rich are the ones that govern. … The farm-
ers words are not heard and his product is not valued. … The press does not inform on
our collective rights. … We are never told of communities that make plans. … There are
a lot of us who don’t know our public rights, above all.
– Indigenous Ecuadorian
There used to be institutions that would help us with projects, but they were embez-
zled. If we protest what they have done, they say that they will create another organi-
zation. We are also learning the bad practices of the State. They are learning from
Dahik, Verduga [state secretaries charged for embezzlement].
– Indigenous woman from Ecuadorian highlands

Source: Flores (1999).

better reflects the needs of indigenous peoples. Such legislation is in reality

both a cause and an effect of indigenous political power. On the one hand,
international conventions and constitutional amendments encourage the
creation of programmes for indigenous peoples and may facilitate legal
recourse against discrimination. Internal policies in organizations such as
the World Bank and Inter-American Development Bank can change the ways
in which those institutions operate. On the other hand such legislation
arises because indigenous peoples and others working on their behalf, such
as NGOs and politicians, lobby international organizations to introduce it.
Both international legislation and national constitutional amendments to
improve the situation of indigenous peoples have expanded significantly
over the last century. However this is only the first step, and much
remains to be done in terms of strengthening the implementation and
enforcement of legislation. Impediments to this include lack of money and
Human_01.qxd 25/10/05 6:15 PM Page 8

8 Introduction

weak institutional structures at the national and regional levels (Inter-

American Development Bank, 2003).

International legislation
In 1989 the International Labour Organization (ILO) produced Convention
169 on Indigenous and Tribal Peoples in Independent Countries. The
convention is broad and includes policies on land, self-determination,
labour, education, health, conflict and employment (Tomei and Swepson,
1996). Since the passage of the convention in 1991, only 13 countries have
ratified it. Nine of these are in Latin America: Mexico (ratified in 1990),
Bolivia (1991), Colombia (1991), Costa Rica (1993), Peru (1994), Paraguay
(1994), Honduras (1995), Guatemala (1996) and Ecuador (1998). In each of
the countries’ ratification of the convention was a contentious issue (IWGIA,
various years), even though ILO conventions are strictly guidelines and no
enforcement mechanisms exist.
In 1993 the United Nations (UN) declared the International Year for the
World’s Indigenous People,7 and the following year it announced that
1995–2004 would be the International Decade of the World’s Indigenous
People. In 2000 it established a permanent forum on indigenous issues. The
UN has also appointed a special rapporteur on the human rights and funda-
mental freedoms of indigenous peoples and prepared a draft declaration on
these rights – more than 100 indigenous organizations participated in its
preparation. The 2004 version covered the following issues:

● The right to self-determination, governmental participation and freedom

from discrimination.
● Threats to the survival of indigenous peoples, as distinct from non-
indigenous peoples.
● Recognition and protection of the spiritual, linguistic and cultural
identity of indigenous peoples.
● Recognition of education, information and labour rights.
● Recognition of the right to land and natural resources.
● Support for the development of indigenous institutions (UNICEF, 2003).

In 1991 the World Bank implemented Operational Directive 4.20 for

indigenous peoples. According to the directive, ‘World Bank-financed devel-
opment projects [must] not cause adverse impacts upon indigenous peoples,
and … [must] provide [indigenous peoples] with culturally-compatible
social and economic benefits’.8 All pertinent World Bank projects are
scrutinized for compliance with this policy, and the designers of many pro-
jects are required to prepare an evaluation of the possible impact on indige-
nous peoples and potential mitigation activities. A review of 72 World Bank
projects (from 1992 to 1997) in Latin America that would have a direct or
Human_01.qxd 25/10/05 6:15 PM Page 9

Gillette Hall, Heather Marie Layton and Joseph Shapiro 9

indirect impact on indigenous peoples found that during the planning stage
97 per cent of them acknowledged the presence of indigenous communities
in the project zone. Moreover 50 per cent incorporated indigenous commu-
nities into the project by including an indigenous peoples’ plan, with a com-
ponent or pilot project specifically for indigenous peoples, or by focusing
the entire project on indigenous populations. The World Bank has also cre-
ated the Grants Facility for Indigenous Peoples, a fund for small projects
planned and operated by indigenous peoples. The disbursement of grants
began in June 2004.
Finally, in 1994 the Inter-American Development Bank (IDB) developed a
strategic framework to guide IDB operations when working with indigenous
peoples. In 2004 a number of IDB employees redesigned this framework
under the guidance of the IDB board of directors, and with extensive con-
sultation with indigenous peoples. The IDB has also supported a variety of
projects targeted at indigenous peoples and studies of its work with indige-
nous peoples (see Deruyttere, 1997; Plant and Hvalkof, 2001; Renshaw, 2001;
UN Permanent Forum, 2003).

Constitutional revisions
Constitutional declarations of policies for indigenous peoples carry far more
weight than comparable congressional resolutions, and constitutional
guarantees provide legal support for non-constitutional measures (Cárdenas,
1997; Stavenhagen, 2002). Though some constitutional provisions for
indigenous peoples and ministries for indigenous affairs have existed since
the early twentieth century, since the early 1990s there has been an increase
in targeted constitutional measures across the region. Colombia has been a
leader in this. Already having passed legislation on indigenous education,
health and land devolution, the 1991 constitution mandated that two
senate seats be reserved specifically for indigenous people (World Bank,
2003a). In 1994 Bolivia amended its constitution and adopted special laws
that took account of the country’s multiethnic, multicultural and multilin-
gual origin; in 1996 Ecuador passed an amendment recognizing its pluricul-
tural and multiethnic heritage; and Guatemala (1986) and Peru (1993) have
made similar constitutional declarations (Stavenhagen, 2002).
Stavenhagen (ibid., p. 13) summarizes five of the most significant aspects
of these reforms:

1. The rights of indigenous peoples are recognized in the political constitu-

tion, rather than ordinary law or decree, giving them a higher symbolic
and juridical rank;
2. In some cases (Colombia, Ecuador, Paraguay, Venezuela) indigenous peo-
ples themselves directly participated in the drafting of some of the new
constitutions;
Human_01.qxd 25/10/05 6:15 PM Page 10

10 Introduction

3. The new reforms present a new conception of national identity that is

multiethnic and culturally diverse, which replaces a prior homogenizing
national myth;
4. The new reforms recognize rights that are collective in nature, and that in
some cases grant distinct powers or resources to indigenous communities
or populations, as opposed to individuals; and
5. The new reforms restore the colonial tradition of recognizing the public
authority and jurisdiction of indigenous authorities (usually at the
community or municipal level) and self-governing structures over some
issues, including the exercise of indigenous customary law.

Most of the constitutions in Latin America now have provisions for bilingual
intercultural education (BIE). Ecuador’s constitution mandates that the
education system should include programmes that reflect the country’s
diversity, and that all institutions of learning must provide BIE. Under the
Guatemalan constitution education is regionalized, so bilingual education is
only provided in areas where indigenous peoples are concentrated. Mexico
guarantees the provision of both BIE and scholarships for indigenous stu-
dents at all levels of education. Peru’s constitution declares the importance
of fostering BIE as a means of eradicating illiteracy. The Bolivian constitution
makes no mention of BIE, although in 2000 several indigenous languages
were declared as official national languages (Barié, 2003).
There are fewer constitutional provisions directed at indigenous peoples’
health. The constitutions of Bolivia, Guatemala, Mexico and Peru make no
mention of traditional medicine or tailoring public medicine to indigenous
peoples. However that of Ecuador does recognize traditional medical
practices. Despite this general constitutional neglect, traditional medicine is
generally covered elsewhere in national legislation. Bolivia’s 1984 law on tra-
ditional medicine granted licences to associations of traditional healers, but
the possession of licences is not widely enforced due to the state’s poor
administrative capacity. In Guatemala, medical licenses for traditional heal-
ers are issued by the Department of Public Health and the Guatemalan
Health Code, approved in 1997, formally acknowledges traditional medicine
as an area of practice. Mexico began to issue licenses to traditional healers in
1998. In Peru there are no such licenses, although the National Institute for
Traditional Medicine has been working on a legislative initiative to regulate
traditional medicine since 1998 (Nigenda et al., 2001).
Many Latin American constitutions now recognize the right to hold land
communally, which has been a frequent indigenous demand. Ecuador’s
constitution guarantees collective rights to land and the possession of ances-
tral communal lands. The Guatemalan constitution both recognizes titles to
communal lands and mandates the development of special programmes
to provide state land to needy indigenous communities. The Peruvian
Human_01.qxd 25/10/05 6:15 PM Page 11

Gillette Hall, Heather Marie Layton and Joseph Shapiro 11

constitution protects communal land tenure, though the language in which

this is couched is less specific than in other countries’ constitutions. In
Mexico there is some recognition of indigenous land rights, though in 1992
President Carlos Salinas Gotari amended the constitution to allow ejidal
lands (lands held communally, mostly by indigenous peoples) to be
parcelled and sold privately.
However there is some evidence of a discrepancy between the stated right
to hold land communally and actual practice. For example in Ecuador
indigenous leaders have cited a list of barriers to gaining communal titles,
including the lack of legal recognition of common organizational units and
traditional cultivation practices (Organization of American States, 1997). In
Peru the process of gaining title to communal land is long and complex,
often taking years and much money to resolve. Moreover under Article 88 of
the Peruvian constitution, land that falls into disuse can be appropriated by
the state. This has huge ramifications for communal lands, especially those
in the Andes, where the cultivation system is based on a period of heavy land
use followed by a period in which the land is left to rest, which could be
mistaken as neglect. In this regard the Inter-American Commision on
Human Rights has noted that ‘the legal framework [of Article 88] does not
offer the native communities effective security and legal stability over their
lands’ (Organization of American States, 2000).

National expenditure policy9

In the 1990s there was a general shift in expenditure policy in Latin America
in favour of increased social spending and better targeting of this expendi-
ture to help the poor. Social spending in the region had remained at a
constant share of 40 per cent of total spending during the 1970s and 1980s,
but it rose to 45 per cent in the first half of the 1990s and 54 per cent in
1996–99. However not all the countries gave equal priority to social spend-
ing, and the majority of those with large indigenous populations (three of
the five covered in this study) devoted far less than the regional average to
social spending at the close of the decade: Peru (21 per cent), Guatemala
(26 per cent) and Ecuador (32 per cent).
Social expenditure also rose as share of GDP across the region, climbing
from an average of 8 per cent in the 1970s to 12 per cent in the 1990s. The
size of the increase varied considerably across sectors, ranging from a
slight increase in spending on education (from an average of 3.3 per cent of
GDP in the 1970s to 3.7 per cent in the 1990s) and a more substantial rise
in expenditure on health care (from 1.6 per cent to 2.4 per cent) to the
more than doubling of social security spending (pensions and health insur-
ance), which rose from 2 per cent of GDP in the 1970s to 5.5 per cent by
the 1990s.
Human_01.qxd 25/10/05 6:15 PM Page 12

12 Introduction

Table 1.2 Percentage change in real per capita social

expenditure, Latin America, 1990–99

Total social Social expenditure excluding

expenditure social security

Bolivia 39 19
Ecuador – –
Guatemala 106 130
Mexico 55 20
Peru 178 151
Average 50 43

Source: Casteneda (2002), with permission.

These trends translated into real increases in per capita resource flows to
the social sectors. Between 1990 and 1999, total per capita social spending
rose by an average of 50 per cent in Latin America as a whole, and by signif-
icantly more in three of the countries included in this study. However in
many cases social security programmes accounted for much of the increase.
Excluding social security spending, the regional average increase in per
capita social spending during the 1990s was 7 percentage points lower
(43 per cent) and in some countries the difference was far greater: for exam-
ple in Mexico, if social security spending is excluded the average increase in
social spending drops from 55 per cent to just 20 per cent (Table 1.2). Since
social security expenditure largely benefited people in the formal employ-
ment sector and the middle and upper income brackets, the fact that so
much of the increase in spending was focused on this area meant that the
impact was less positive for poor families in general and indigenous peoples
in particular, since they tended to be among the poorest.
One of the principal reform efforts to sweep the region during the 1990s
was improved targeting of social expenditure on other major categories that
affected the poor: education, health care and social assistance. Each of these
will be discussed in turn below. Some of the better-known regional
initiatives, such as the Oportunidades programme in Mexico, involved a shift
from no targeting at all (universal subsidies) to means-tested benefits for
the poor.

Education
It has been clear for some time that indigenous peoples in Latin America
complete less schooling than non-indigenous people. For example a 1988
study conducted in rural areas of Peru found that 70 per cent of Quechua
speakers had no schooling, compared with 40 per cent of those Peruvians who
spoke non-indigenous languages (Hernandez, 1988), and Psacharopoulos and
Patrinos (1997) have found that the educational achievements of indigenous
Human_01.qxd 25/10/05 6:15 PM Page 13

Gillette Hall, Heather Marie Layton and Joseph Shapiro 13

Peruvians are significantly lower than those of non-indigenous Peruvians.

In Guatemala and Bolivia, indigenous adults had fewer years of schooling,
lower earnings and lower returns from schooling than non-indigenous
adults (Psacharopoulos, 1993; see also Rojas, 1991). In Argentina in the
1980s, 93 per cent of non-indigenous people had completed at least one
year of schooling, compared with only 44 per cent of Mapuche people
(Hernandez, 1988).
Recent data show that the indigenous/non-indigenous schooling gap
remains large. The average Paraguayan now has 7.0 years of schooling while
the average indigenous Paraguayan has 2.2 years and the average Manjui
indigenous Paraguayan just 0.7 years (DGEEC, 2002). In Costa Rica, where
about 2 per cent of the population are indigenous, only one in 100 indige-
nous children who begins high school completes it. The isolation of many
indigenous communities contributes to their lower educational attainment.
While there are more than 200 schools for indigenous students, many stu-
dents have to walk for several hours to attend class (Gólcher, 2004). In Chile,
32 per cent of non-indigenous and 23 per cent of indigenous peoples com-
plete higher education. Financial and educational barriers prevent many
indigenous Chileans from entering higher education (Repetto Vargas, 2003).
Patrinos and Psacharopoulos (1992) show that compared with non-
indigenous children, indigenous primary school children in Guatemala and
Bolivia are more likely to repeat a grade, and that indigenous children in
Peru are more likely to be older than the appropriate age for their grade.
More recent research has confirmed this finding. McEwan (2005) shows that
in both Bolivia and Chile indigenous students score 0.3 to 0.5 standard
deviations lower than non-indigenous students in maths and Spanish
exams. Only 20–40 per cent of that test score gap can be explained by the
lower socioeconomic status of indigenous families. Godoy et al. (2005),
using a novel data set covering four isolated indigenous communities of
hunter-gatherers in the Bolivian lowlands, find that even in remote societies
education increases income, and the impact of education on income
increase the closer an individual is to a town with a market.
There is some evidence that bilingual education programmes have
been effective in raising the educational level of indigenous children. In fact
these programmes have been the region’s greatest initiative with respect
to special social policies for indigenous peoples and they have spread
rapidly throughout Latin America. In the late 1970s only Argentina, Bolivia,
Ecuador, Guatemala, Mexico and Peru provided bilingual education, and of
these only Mexico’s programme was designed to offer national coverage.
Today an additional 11 countries (Brazil, Colombia, Costa Rica, Chile,
French Guyana, Honduras, Nicaragua, Panama, Paraguay, Suriname and
Venezuela) offer bilingual and intercultural education. Only Belize, El
Salvador, Guyana and Uruguay have failed to do so. The programmes vary in
scope and size between countries (Lopez, 2000).
Human_01.qxd 25/10/05 6:15 PM Page 14

14 Introduction

Table 1.3 Expansion of bilingual education, Mexico,

1952–2003

Number of teachers Number of students

1970 3 800 n.a.

1983 22 250 n.a.
1993 33 000 8 00 000
2003 51 000 12 00 000

Sources: INI, n.d.; DGEI, 1993; López-Cárdeña and Álvarez, 2003.

Bilingual education in Mexico began informally in the 1920s in the

Chiapas highlands. It became a formal federal programme in 1951, and by
2003 over 52000 teachers were educating 1.2 million indigenous students
across Mexico (Table 1.3). Also, by 2003 the Secretariat of Public Education
(SEP) had produced 189 books in 55 variants of 33 indigenous languages
(SEP, 2003). The General Directorate of Indigenous Education (DGEI) over-
sees indigenous education, though the majority of indigenous schools
receive support from SEP compensatory programmes implemented by the
National Council for Educational Development (CONAFE). Despite all this,
low-quality education, limited access and poorly trained teachers remain
the norm in many indigenous schools (Schmelkes, 2000). Bilingual educa-
tion policy is guided in part by Mexico’s State Education Law of 1992
(Ley Estatal de la Educación). Spanish, the law declares, should be used to
improve communication between communities, but the use of Spanish
should never cause the disappearance of local languages. Chapter IV of the
law also created an institution to study indigenous languages and produce
texts in local languages (Diario oficial de la Federacíon de México, 18 May 1992;
Licón, 2002).
Bilingual education in Guatemala began with a 1980–84 pilot project orga-
nized by the Guatemalan government and partially funded by the US
Agency for International Development (USAID). The project was conducted
in 40 schools with speakers of K’iche, Q’eqchi, Mam and Kaqchikel – the
most widely used Mayan languages. Bilingual teachers taught pupils in
preprimary, first grade and second grade at 10 schools for each language. As
Table 1.4 shows, enrolment in bilingual schools has increased rapidly over
the last 20 years or so, although enrolment at the preprimary level has not
grown significantly (Ministry of Education, 2000). If the student–teacher
ratio remained constant during the 1990s, then those schools would have
had about 500000 pupils by the end of the 1990s. At the same time, the
number of languages increased from four to 14. However, finding sufficient
well-trained bilingual teachers remains a problem (UN-ECOSOC, 2003).
In Peru, bilingual education began in 1953 when the Peruvian Summer
Institute of Linguistics introduced bilingual education to Peruvian villages.
Human_01.qxd 25/10/05 6:15 PM Page 15

Gillette Hall, Heather Marie Layton and Joseph Shapiro 15

Table 1.4 Enrolment in bilingual schools, Guatemala, 1980–2000

Number of languages Number of students Number of teachers

4 5600 n.a.
4 100 000 1 100
14 500 000* 5 200

Note: * Estimated.
Sources: Cummings and Tamayo, 1994; Dutcher and Tucker, 1997; Ministry of
Education, 2000.

By the 1980s there were several bilingual instruction programme across Peru.
One of the largest was the Project of Bilingual Education (PBE), which began
in the late 1970s and covered all six grades in 40 primary schools in Puno
(Cummings and Tamayo, 1994). PBE schools differ from other bilingual
schools in that the teachers use Quechua or Aymara for a third to a half of
instruction time, while non-PBE teachers use an indigenous language only as
a secondary language for translation purposes (Hornberger, 1987;
Cummings and Tamayo, 1994).
The first Bolivian indigenous school was founded in 1931, but it was not
until much later that the federal government became involved in indigenous
education (Heyneman, 1979). In 1984 the Ministry of Education founded a
literacy programme in which standardized Quechua and Aymara alphabets
were used to teach indigenous students (Albó and D’Emilio, 1990). In 1990
the Intercultural Bilingual Education Project (IBEP), a partnership between
the federal government and several international donors, established a
national bilingual education programme in the Quechua, Aymara and
Guaraní languages. Indigenous-language materials were used through to the
third grade. In 1993 the project covered 6500 students in 114 schools, super-
vised by 350 teachers and administrators in 12 regions of the Andes
(Choque, 1993). The IBEP eventually included more than 10 language
groups and indigenous groups and unions were extensively involved in its
operation.
An interesting parallel development in Bolivia was broadcast bilingual
education. In 1958 Maryknoll missionaries set up a bilingual radio station
north of La Paz and broadcast literacy and education courses. Twenty years
later the Ministry of Education launched a secular, bilingual, bicultural
programme through the Bolivian Educational Broadcast Network and its
subsidiary, Community Radio Education. As well as aiding adult bilingual
education, Albó and D’Emilio (1990) argue that the broadcasts inspired
indigenous pride.
Bilingual education in Ecuador began in 1945, when an indigenous
rights leader founded three schools in the city of Cayambe (Montaluisa, 2003).
Human_01.qxd 25/10/05 6:15 PM Page 16

16 Introduction

The government officially acknowledged the utility of bilingual education in

1981, and in 1986 set up the Intercultural Bilingual Education Project. In
1988, Executive Decree 203, a reform of the General Regulation of the
Education Law, created the National Directorate of Intercultural Bilingual
Education to oversee indigenous education (Hornberger, 2000). After exten-
sive consultation with indigenous communities, in 1993 the Ministry of
Education and Culture decreed Ecuador’s Model of Intercultural Bilingual
Education (Hornberger, 2000).
Today bilingual education in Ecuador is available throughout primary
school, and some university programmes are specifically geared to training
bilingual teachers. In 2000 about 85000 Ecuadorian children received bilin-
gual education, representing 4.4 per cent of total primary enrolment or
10.7 per cent of total rural primary enrolment. In 1997–98, 4000 teachers
from 10 ethnic groups taught in intercultural bilingual primary schools in
16 of Ecuador’s 21 provinces. About 70 per cent of those teachers spoke an
indigenous language, the rest spoke only Spanish (World Bank, 2003b).
Providing qualified indigenous teachers remains a challenge. In Mexico,
many of the teachers hired to provide bilingual education in fact lack spoken
and/or written skills in either Spanish or an indigenous language (Dutcher,
1982; World Bank, 2002). Another problem is that some teachers from urban
areas are reluctant to live in remote rural communities and leave when
another job opportunity arises (Zehr, 2002). To address these problems, many
countries have set up training courses on indigenous teaching. Bolivia now
has eight bilingual intercultural training institutes, Ecuador has five and Peru
has three. University-level courses on bilingual teaching have been established
at one university in Ecuador, Guatemala and Peru, two in Chile and six in
Colombia. Fifteen secondary schools in Guatemala prepare teachers for bilin-
gual instruction, and Argentina and Brazil have distinct methods of preparing
indigenous teachers for bilingual intercultural education (Lopez, 2000).
Mexico’s General Directorate of Indigenous Education now provides 120 days
of special training for bilingual teachers and offers scholarships to prospective
teachers who have finished high school or college (Moya, 1998). In addition
the National Pedagogic University offers a teaching degree in basic indigenous
education.10 Similar programmes have begun at the university’s Oaxaca
Campus, as well as at the Rafael Landívar University in Guatemala, The
National University of the Altiplano in Puno, Peru and the Mayor Universidad
de San Simón de Cochabamba for indigenous peoples from the Andean
region. In at least 11 Latin American countries the current education law men-
tions interculturality (Lopez, 2000).
Evaluations of the bilingual education programmes in Mexico, Guatemala
and Bolivia suggest that bilingual education is effective in raising the
educational level of indigenous students and closing the education gap
between them and their non-indigenous peers. In Mexico test scores have
Human_01.qxd 25/10/05 6:15 PM Page 17

Gillette Hall, Heather Marie Layton and Joseph Shapiro 17

risen among indigenous students in bilingual programmes (Dutcher, 1992;

World Bank, 2002; Shapiro and Moreno Trevino, 2004). Three studies of the
effectiveness of a national bilingual education programme (PRONEBI, later
renamed DIGEBI) in Guatemala found that the students in these programmes
were less likely to repeat a year on drop out, exhibited increased attendance
and grade promotion rates, and had better mathematics and science test
scores than students in traditional schools (Scott and Simón Chuta, 1987;
Morren, 1988; Patrinos and Velez, 1996). It has also been found that
PRONEBI was more efficient and cost-effective than traditional schooling.
Finally, a review of published interviews of educational administrators and
families found that students enrolled in bilingual intercultural education
had higher self-esteem than their peers in traditional schools, that commu-
nity members near these schools were more likely to attend school meetings
and visit classrooms, and that the provision of such education had encour-
aged local illiterate adults to attend school and learn to write in their own
language (D’Emilio, 1996).

Health care
Less information is available on health programmes and outcomes for
indigenous peoples in Latin America. In the mid 1990s the Pan American
Health Organization (PAHO) conducted a series of country studies of indige-
nous health, some of which are summarized in Health in the Americas (PAHO,
1998a). It appears that indigenous peoples are more likely than non-indige-
nous people to die from malaria, diarrhoea and other treatable conditions,
and that the maternal mortality rate is far higher in areas where indigenous
peoples are concentrated.
The available country-specific data are striking. Traditional health services
are widespread throughout Latin America, although many indigenous
peoples still lack access to mainstream health providers (Nigenda et al.,
2001). Paqueo and Gonzalez (2003) have estimated the determinants of
health service utilization in Mexico and show that, controlling for other
factors, being indigenous has no significant effect on people’s uptake of
modern preventative care. Possession of health insurance, however, is a very
large determinant of people’s willingness to seek preventative health care,
and few indigenous peoples have health insurance. In Colombia life
expectancy among the 800000 indigenous people is 10–15 years less than
the national average (Piñeros and Ruiz, 1998; Davis and Sanchez, 2003).
While Peru’s overall birth rate in 1996 was 3.1, the rate in most indigenous
communities in the Amazon was 7.9 per woman, and in Peru’s twelve largest
indigenous communities it ranged from 7.0 to 9.7. At the national level only
11 per cent of women aged 15–19 were mothers, but in 15 selected indige-
nous communities across the country, on average 34.4 per cent of women in
that age group had become mothers (PAHO, 1998b). In Mexico in 1990 the
Human_01.qxd 25/10/05 6:15 PM Page 18

18 Introduction

national mortality rate per 100000 residents was 520, while in indigenous
communities it was 586. Among investigated cases of infant death, in
indigenous communities 18 per cent were due to infectious intestinal
disease, compared with 15 per cent at the national level. A further 8 per cent
of infant deaths in indigenous communities were due to unknown causes,
compared with the national average of 2.5 per cent (PAHO, 1998c).
The incidence of disease also differs between the indigenous and
non-indigenous populations. Molnar and Carrasco (2001) report that com-
pared with non-indigenous municipalities, indigenous municipalities in
Mexico have three times the rate of death from intestinal infections. The five
leading causes of death in indigenous communities are all forms of intestinal
infection or respiratory illness, but none of these appears in the list of five
leading causes at the national level.
In the light of large differences in health outcomes between indigenous
and non-indigenous populations, it is useful to explore the extent to which
health policies have been tailored to meet the former’s needs. However this
is not an easy task, because although the meaning of indigenous-tailored
education policies is clear the definition of indigenous-tailored health
policies is not. Health programmes for indigenous peoples can involve
recognizing, financing or certifying traditional medicine. Nigenda et al.
(2001) have investigated traditional medicine provision in nine Latin
American countries. Most services focus on midwifery, and the majority are
local and not under the aegis of the national Health Ministry. Some indige-
nous-tailored health policies adapt Western practices to indigenous values
and traditions.
In 1988 Mexico’s National Indigenist Institute (NII) and Secretariat of
Health set up a partnership with universities, indigenous medical organiza-
tions and NGOs to improve the health of indigenous peoples. The NII
oversees 1081 clinics that serve around 60000 indigenous children. It
concentrates on primary health care and emphasizes the use of traditional
medicine. In 1996, The Universal Health Care Programme was expanded to
support rural indigenous peoples in isolated areas; the programme currently
covers 22 per cent of Mexico’s indigenous population. Since 2001 the Health
and Education Programme for Indigenous Peoples has coordinated medical
training, sanitation initiatives and capacity building for indigenous health-
care providers (Schlam, 2003).
In Bolivia the Ethnic Affairs Division of the Department of Public Health
regulates traditional medical practices. In January 1984 Supreme Resolution
198771 granted legal status to several types of traditional medical practi-
tioners, including naturistas, yatiris and kallaway doctors. However Nigenda
et al. (2001) have found that many public offices in Bolivia show little inter-
est in promoting traditional medicine, despite the passage of the resolution.
Traditional practitioners can apply for official licences, but only about 10 per
cent have done so.
Human_01.qxd 25/10/05 6:15 PM Page 19

Gillette Hall, Heather Marie Layton and Joseph Shapiro 19

While Ecuador’s Department of Health offers no licences for the practice

of traditional medicine, providers of traditional medicine have formed asso-
ciations to interact with the federal government. In the Constituent
Assembly of March 1998, two articles establishing a framework for tradi-
tional medicine were incorporated into the constitution (ibid.).
In Guatemala the Department of Public Health offers licences to
traditional practitioners, but as in Bolivia there has only been a 10 per cent
uptake. In 1997 the Guatemalan Health Code, a legal regulation of health
policy, acknowledged traditional medicine as a recognized form of care. The
1996 Peace Accords also recognized traditional health care, although this has
no legal force (ibid.).
Although Mexico’s General Health Act makes no mention of traditional
medicine, in 1976 traditional midwives were formally recognized, and in
1998 a move was made to develop an official licence for traditional thera-
pists. The state of Morelos has held public forums to discuss statewide regu-
lation of traditional medicine, and proposed legislation in Chiapas favours
the use of traditional medicine and protection of the areas where plants used
in traditional medicine are grown. Also in Chiapas, several organizations of
indigenous medical practitioners have been established (ibid.).
Peru has no official licence for the practice of traditional medicine. A reg-
ulation supporting traditional medicine was proposed in 1997, but it
remains mired in the legislative process. However the government’s National
Institute for Traditional Medicine has begun work on the regulation of tradi-
tional medicine (ibid.). Meanwhile an independent initiative by UNICEF and
Peruvian NGOs has resulted in the establishment of facilities that provide
traditional childbirth services to indigenous women and work to increase
awareness of health issues among indigenous families. Pregnant women
from distant communities can spend the last weeks of their pregnancy in
these facilities, together with their families (and sometimes their livestock).
In the Peruvian province of Paruro, this programme increased the propor-
tion of attended births in health centres from 10 per cent to 60 per cent in
one year.

Social assistance
Social assistance is the area in which specific help for indigenous peoples is
most limited. In fact only two countries in the region, Honduras and
Guyana, have introduced social assistance programmes specifically for their
indigenous populations. The Honduras Social Investment Fund (Fondo
Hondureno de Inversion Social) has a special branch whose funds are desig-
nated for use only in indigenous communities. Similarly the funds held by
the SIMAP Amerindian programme in Guyana are exclusively disbursed to
indigenous peoples. Both these programmes have been far more successful
at reaching indigenous communities and operating within them than
regular social assistance programmes (Renshaw, 2001).
Human_01.qxd 25/10/05 6:15 PM Page 20

20 Introduction

Despite the lack of social assistance specifically for indigenous peoples,

during the 1990s Latin America took the lead in innovative universal social
assistance policies, particularly in the case of conditional cash transfer pro-
grammes targeted at poor households. While none of these programmes was
specifically designed for indigenous families, given that the indigenous were
overrepresented among the poor they could be expected to reap the benefits
if the programmes were well-targeted. These programmes involved the pro-
vision of small, per-child cash benefits to poor households in exchange for
keeping their children in school and obtaining basic health care. Introduced
first in Brazil (Bolsa Escola) and Mexico (Progresa, now called Oportunidades),
the programmes proved extremely successful at getting resources to poor
families and stimulating school attendance by poor young children
(Skoufias et al. 2000). However, of the five countries in Latin America with
major indigenous populations, only Mexico operates such a programme.
In short the major innovations in publicly funded social assistance during
the 1990s of relevance to indigenous peoples were not targeted specifically at
them, but were universal programmes aimed at the poorest in society.
Whether these programmes successfully reached indigenous peoples is open
to question.

Employment, earnings and discrimination

The extent to which indigenous peoples engaged in the workforce, their

earnings vis-à-vis their non-indigenous counterparts and whether discrimi-
nation contributes to earnings differentials are important factors in their
well-being.
As only limited data were available before the early 1990s it is difficult to
compare indigenous and non-indigenous employment and earnings prior to
that time. According to Brush (1977) and Swetnam (1989) the unpaid work
of indigenous peoples in rural areas of Peru and Guatemala was often
wrongly characterized as unemployment. In a study using 1961 and 1972
census data, it was found that the percentage of indigenous language speak-
ers in the Peruvian labour force decreased between 1961 and 1972, but at the
same time their relative income increased (cited in Carnoy, 1979). Earnings
regressions confirmed that the effect of speaking an indigenous language on
a person’s earnings in Peru became smaller over those 11 years.
More recent studies have analyzed wage discrimination against
indigenous peoples in Peru, Bolivia, Guatemala and Panama. In the case of
Peru, Ñopo et al. (2004) find that two thirds of the earnings differences
between self-employed indigenous and non-indigenous people is due to
unobservable factors, including discrimination. MacIsaac and Patrinos
(1995) use standard Oaxaca–Blinder, Cotton and pooled Oaxaca–Ransom
decompositions to show that 30–50 per cent of the earnings differential
between indigenous and non-indigenous workers can be explained by
Human_01.qxd 25/10/05 6:15 PM Page 21

Gillette Hall, Heather Marie Layton and Joseph Shapiro 21

observed productive characteristics. Patrinos (2002), using 1989 and 1993

data, estimates that 23–29 per cent of the earnings differential in Bolivian
cities between indigenous and non-indigenous men is due to discrimina-
tion. Based on data from the 1993 Bolivian household survey Chiswick et al.
(2000) find that among both men and women, controlling for all observable
characteristics, monolingual Spanish speakers earn about 25 per cent more
than bilingual Spanish–indigenous language speakers. Among women, indi-
viduals who speak only an indigenous language earn about 25 per cent less
than individuals who are bilingual. However it should be noted that the
samples were not representative of the country as a whole as only major
cities were included in the household surveys until the mid 1990s. With
regard to Panama, Vakis and Lindert (1999) estimate that 55 per cent of the
wage differential between indigenous and non-indigenous people is due to
discrimination. In Guatemala, Q’eqchi’ indigenous people experience little
or no discrimination, the Kaqchikel and Mam people are subject to some,
and the K’iche and other indigenous groups experience very high levels of
discrimination (Patrinos, 1997).
Unfortunately there has been little policy intervention or legislation to
remedy labour market discrimination in Latin America. Among the rare
exceptions is the Mexican Federal Law on the Prevention and Elimination of
Discrimination, passed in June 2003. This law prohibits discrimination on
the basis of ethnic or national origin, gender, age, disability, socioeconomic
status, health status, pregnancy, language, religion, political opinions, sexual
preference and marital status. More specifically it prohibits employers from
establishing different pay structures for similar duties carried out by different
employees.11 On a somewhat lesser scale, in 1997 the Peruvian Congress
passed a law prohibiting racial and sexual discrimination in advertisements
for employment and/or training (US Department of State, 2003). Otherwise
there is little evidence of specific interventions aimed at reducing earnings
inequality in Latin America.

Conclusions

First, the political influence of indigenous peoples in Latin America – as

measured by the number of indigenous political parties and indigenous
elected representatives, constitutional provisions for indigenous peoples and
specially tailored health and education policies – has grown remarkably
since the early 1990s. Democratization, globalization and international pres-
sure are the most common explanations of this development, although
other factors are likely to have contributed as well. In Bolivia, Guatemala
and elsewhere there has been a significant increase in the percentage of
indigenous representatives in the national legislature. Likewise indigenous
candidates and political parties have won municipal and mayoral elections
across Latin America. However in all countries the number of indigenous
Human_01.qxd 25/10/05 6:15 PM Page 22

22 Introduction

peoples in national legislatures is still far from proportionate to the size of

the indigenous population.
Second, NGOs now play a very large part in indigenous political affairs. In
Mexico, Ecuador, Bolivia and elsewhere indigenous NGOs have spearheaded
protests to change national legislation, and sometimes national govern-
ments. In some limited cases, NGOs have had a greater influence on policy
than have the national electorate and politicians in the national legislature.
Despite these changes indigenous peoples still consider their voice to be
limited in governmental affairs, and associate this with ongoing poverty.
Third, international organizations and national governments have passed
progressive policies and important constitutional resolutions to help indige-
nous peoples, but the rights thereby granted are often unrealized. Many
countries have introduced a legal guarantee of bilingual education and free-
dom from discrimination, but discrimination remains widespread and the
reach of bilingual education continues to be limited. Moreover many of the
teachers are of low quality and are poorly qualified. Belize, El Salvador,
Guyana and Uruguay have yet to introduce bilingual education.
Fourth, over the past 10–20 years a limited number of health programmes
have been tailored to indigenous peoples’ needs, but they remain uncommon.
As there has been little evaluation of those programmes, their effectiveness in
improving health outcomes for indigenous peoples is yet to be established.
Fifth, very few social assistance programmes are specifically targeted at
indigenous peoples. However several countries have introduced social
assistance measures for poor people in general, and these also apply to
indigenous peoples. The payment of small cash sums to poor families in
exchange for keeping their children in school and seeking basic health care
has had positive results.
Sixth, there are few policy interventions to eliminate labour market dis-
crimination and equalize earnings. Throughout Latin America, indigenous
peoples earn less than non-indigenous people, and the proportion of earn-
ings inequality between indigenous and non-indigenous people that is
attributable to labour market discrimination ranges from 27 per cent to
57 per cent. Clearly there is room for improvement in this area.
A degree of caution is required when judging what the changes discussed
in this chapter mean for indigenous peoples in Latin America. While the last
decade has certainly brought changes in terms of constitutional provisions
for indigenous peoples increased social spending, bilingual education pro-
grammes and so on, not all countries have participated equally in this wave
of reform. For example not all countries have given equal weight to social
spending. In fact the three countries with the largest indigenous populations
(Ecuador, Guatemala and Peru) rank among the lowest in terms of social
spending, while the most sweeping changes seem to have occurred in coun-
tries with smaller indigenous populations, such as Colombia. Also it should
be recognized that the policy changes detailed here occurred in a much
Human_01.qxd 25/10/05 6:15 PM Page 23

Gillette Hall, Heather Marie Layton and Joseph Shapiro 23

broader context, including widespread economic reforms, economic crises,

international crises, globalization and democratization.
Finally, although the political representation of indigenous groups has
increased in recent decades, indigenous peoples still cite lack of sufficient
voice in government as a significant factor underlying their poverty. An
important issue when discussing people’s voice in governmental matters is
the size of the population in question relative to the degree of political rep-
resentation it enjoys. The next chapter discusses the most recent estimates of
the indigenous population in Latin America. It also outlines the difficulty of
arriving at these estimates and, highlights the importance of standardized
data collection if research on indigenous populations is to help them and
policy makers to improve their access to social and economic opportunities.
The other chapters of this book analyze the extent to which the changes
in the political and policy setting have been accompanied by improved liv-
ing conditions among indigenous peoples in Latin America. This is impor-
tant not just for indigenous peoples, but for all people in an increasingly
globalized world where conflict in one nation ripples out to affect other
nations. In his 1934 book Fire on the Andes, journalist Carleton Beals wrote
that ‘the uncut umbilical cord of South America’s future is its duality, still the
secret of political turmoil and national frustration. Until this duality is rec-
onciled [the region] can know no enduring peace, can achieve no real affir-
mation of its national life (quoted in Shifter, 2004). The fact that 70 years
later a book must still be written about this duality highlights the great
depth of the inequities, and the magnitude of the task ahead.

Notes
1. The UN (1993) stated that ‘The goal of the Decade is to strengthen international
cooperation for solving problems faced by indigenous people in such areas as
human rights, the environment, development, education and health’. The declara-
tion encouraged governments to prepare related programmes, plans and reports in
consultation with indigenous people, to give indigenous people greater responsi-
bility for their own affairs, and to establish national committees or other mecha-
nisms involving indigenous people.
2. While Mexico has the largest indigenous population in terms of sheer number
(roughly 10 million), the other four countries have the largest indigenous popula-
tions as a share of the total population, ranging from 6 per cent in Ecuador to
62 per cent in Bolivia.
3. An appendix that presents detailed information on the data and methodology used
in this study follows Chapter 8.
4. Discussions with indigenous leaders after presentation of the preliminary findings
of this report, United Nations Permanent Forum of Indigenous Peoples, May 2004,
New York.
5. Many recent works have focused on documenting and explaining this change (see
for example Van Cott, 1994, 2003; Yashar, 1998, 1999; Madrid, 2003).
6. There are various explanations of the rapid changes in voting and the rise of
non-governmental movements in the region. Yashar (1998, 1999) emphasizes
Human_01.qxd 25/10/05 6:15 PM Page 24

24 Introduction

democratization and a new concept of citizenship across Latin America.

Stavenhagen (2002) argues that public policies passed since the 1960s have also
been a significant cause of the recent rise of indigenous organizations. Van Cott
(2003) points to institutional changes that have opened up the electoral systems,
the collapse of traditional political parties, the consolidation of indigenous peo-
ples’ organizations and the ability of indigenous groups to benefit from national-
ist and anti-US sentiment. The Economist (19 February 2004) argues that the
continuation of poverty and discrimination, democratization across Latin
America, and globalization-inspired support for indigenous peoples by interna-
tional NGOs are three additional causes.
7. This title was contentious: indigenous groups at a human rights conference in
Vienna carried placards with the letter ‘s’ and protested that by not using the
plural, ‘Indigenous Peoples’, the UN had not properly recognized their collective
rights (IWGIA, 1994).
8. This directive is currently under revision.
9. Except where otherwise stated, this section is based on Castaneda (2002).
10. Information regarding these degrees can be found on the website: www.upn.mx
11. Congressional Decree of 10 June 2003.
Human_02.qxd 25/10/05 6:15 PM Page 25

2
Estimating the Number of
Indigenous Peoples in
Latin America
Heather Marie Layton and Harry Anthony Patrinos

According to national statistics the indigenous population of Latin America

is about 28 million. Other estimates range from 34 million (Gnerre, 1990) to
43 million (Barie, 2003).1 This wide range is the result of the many different
methods used to calculate the size of the indigenous population and the
varying definitions of ‘indigenous’. In some countries the discrepancy
between official government statistics and the estimates provided by indige-
nous organizations is a matter of some debate, due largely to the public pol-
icy ramifications of under- or overestimating the size of the population. The
reasons for defining an individual, a household or a population as indige-
nous run from the practical to the political. Estimating the size of any popu-
lation is important to the development of appropriate social policies in
terms of both scope and substance, for setting budgets and so on. Knowing
the size of their own population is also essential to indigenous groups when
making demands for better services.
Defining ‘indigenous’ is not an easy task. The definition varies between
countries, forcing researchers to use data on language, self-identification or
geographic concentration. Moreover different definitions often result in
widely disparate estimates of the size of the indigenous population and are
affected by social behaviour as well as technical complexities. However it is
important to be able to compare the differences between the indigenous and
the non-indigenous populations in terms of the social and financial gaps
between them and any improvements that have been made.
This chapter first provides an estimate of the indigenous population of Latin
America, using mostly census data, and discusses the problems with using cen-
sus data to arrive at a reliable estimate. It then discusses various definitions of
indigenous peoples and the operationalization of these definitions in empirical
work. The subsequent section looks at more specific estimates of the
indigenous populations of Bolivia, Ecuador, Guatemala, Mexico and Peru. The
chapter concludes with suggestions on how data collection could be improved.

25
Human_02.qxd 25/10/05 6:15 PM Page 26

26 Estimating the Number of Indigenous Peoples

Estimating the size of the indigenous population

of Latin America

Census data and statistics from other published works are used in this sec-
tion to provide an overview of the indigenous population of Latin America.
Despite the limited scope of the available data there is no doubt that indige-
nous peoples account for a large proportion of the population of some Latin
American countries.
Table 2.1 shows the estimated percentage of the population that is indige-
nous in each country in Latin America, excluding the Caribbean countries.2
As can be seen, the estimates range from 0.4 per cent of the total population
in Brazil to as much as 62 per cent in Bolivia. Using the figures in Table 2.1
and the most recent population estimates (World Bank, 2003g), 27.5 million
can reasonably be taken as the lower-bound estimate of Latin America’s
indigenous population.

Table 2.1 Indigenous peoples in South America, Mexico and Central America
(estimated percentage of the population)

Indigenous Method of
population (%) Year identification

South America
Argentina 1 1994 n.a.
Bolivia 62 2001 Self-identification
Brazil 0.4 2000 n.a.
Chile 5 2002 Self-identification
Colombia 2 1993 n.a.
Ecuador 6 2001 Self-identification
Guyana 6 1999 Self-identification
Paraguay 2 2002 Self-identification
Peru 17 1993 Indigenous mother tongue
Uruguay 0 — None
Venezuela 1 2001 n.a.
Mexico and Central America
Belize 20 2000 Self-identification
Costa Rica 2 2000 n.a.
El Salvador 8 1992 n.a.
Guatemala 42 1994 Self-identification
Honduras 1 1988 n.a.
Mexico 7 2000 Speaks indigenous language
Nicaragua 2 1995 Indigenous mother tongue
Panama 8 1990 Self-identification

Sources: National censuses; Psacharopoulos and Patrinos (1994); Living Standards Measurement
Survey, Guyana, 1999; Second Indigenous Census, Paraguay, 2002; Labour Force Survey, Belize,
1999; Chapin (1989).
Human_02.qxd 25/10/05 6:15 PM Page 27

Heather Marie Layton and Harry Anthony Patrinos 27

It is important to note that the accuracy of census data varies among

countries. Errors and undercounting are common due to transport, commu-
nication and other barriers. Among other factors that could affect the relia-
bility of census data are government priorities for adequate enumeration,
public faith in the government, political influence on census agencies, and
the degree to which census data is confidential and protected from misuse
(World Bank, 2003h). Added to this are inconsistent data collection proce-
dures and estimation methods, and the difficulties associated with develop-
ing an adequate definition of indigenous, as will be discussed in greater
detail later in the chapter. Nevertheless the use of census data is the most
consistent, if not precise, way to estimate population sizes.
The range of estimates that can be gleaned from census data,3 non-
governmental organizations and anthropological studies is wide – too wide
in some cases. For example while the Ecuadorian government estimates that
only 6 per cent of the country’s population is indigenous the National
Confederation of Indigenous Nationalities of Ecuador puts the figure at
approximately 32 per cent. The next section discusses how different
definitions affect these estimates.

Defining indigenous identity

What does it mean to be indigenous?

Being indigenous is a social construct that varies according to historical
epoch, cultural context and location. The physiognomic and cultural mark-
ers (dress, language, religion) used in different cultures, countries and times
are neither fixed nor universal. For example two individuals with a common
heritage and the same mother tongue may identify themselves as belonging
to different groups (for example ladinos and indios in Guatemala, cholos and
indios in Peru), and the children of indigenous parents may not consider
themselves to be indigenous. The importance that different cultures ascribe
to the identification of an ethnic or racial categorization is also not uniform
across countries, cultures and time. Being categorized as indigenous may
have a different meaning for individuals who identify themselves as such in
Bolivia than it does for self-identified indigenous peoples in Guatemala. This
can be due to the varying socioeconomic advantages and disadvantages of
indigenous self-identification. In addition self-identification tends to change
over time, even within the same generation or by an individual. In many
countries there have been instances of people redefining their indigenous
origins. For example in Puerto Rico descendents of the original Taino peoples
now identify themselves as Boricua, a Taino word for the natives of Boriken,
which Puerto Rico was called before it was renamed by the Spaniards (Veran,
2003). Often the proportion of the population who claim indigenous origins
increases by an amount that is too large to be due entirely to demographics.
For example during the 1990s the self-identified indigenous population of
Human_02.qxd 25/10/05 6:15 PM Page 28

28 Estimating the Number of Indigenous Peoples

Guatemala grew by over 6 percentage points. This may have been due to the
increased comfort of some Guatemalans with their indigenous status after
the peace accords and the Agreement on the Identity and Rights of
Indigenous Peoples were signed in the mid 1990s.
Similar physiognomic or cultural markers have different connotations for
individuals of different cultural backgrounds. The specific history of the role
of ethnicity and its political implications also have important consequences
and resonances for individuals from different countries with different cul-
tural backgrounds. The notion of race and ethnicity may be quite different
for an individual from the United States than for an individual from Asia or
Latin America.
With 500 hundred years of history, the Latin American social spectrum is
now more complicated than ever. Social class and ethnicity are highly inter-
related. In several countries indigenous peoples are viewed as peasants; but
not all peasants are indigenous and not all indigenous peoples are peasants.
In Peru, Guatemala and Bolivia the definitions indio, indigena and mestizo
were once social terms rather than ethnic concepts (Momer, 1970). Even
within countries there are distinct indigenous groups. Evidence of cultural
diversity abounds. For example Klein (1982) shows that in Bolivia there are
major differences between the highland and lowland groups. Although the
multiethnic perspective could provide a more accurate analysis, comprehen-
sive data are unavailable. Collecting such data requires a large allocation of
resources, and covering the whole spectrum of cultures and identities is an
overwhelming task.

Operational definitions of indigenous peoples

There are three basic ways to define indigenous peoples: self-identification,
language use and geographic location, each of which will be discussed below.
The need for a precise definition for research purposes notwithstanding, we
accept the right of people everywhere to identify themselves as they wish
(see for example the International Labour Organisation’s 1991 Convention
on indigenous and tribal peoples in independent countries). However there
are cases where individuals have the right to identify themselves as members
of an indigenous group, but that group (tribe, band, people and so on), may
determine who is or is not a member. For example under Canada’s
Constitution Act of 1982, individuals are considered to be Indian if they are
of Aboriginal descent and identify themselves as Indian.4 However Bill C-31,
which was passed in 1985 and made several amendments to the Indian Act
of 1876, allows bands (distinct indigenous groups) to set their own member-
ship criteria.5
Although the Latin American ethnic spectrum is very diverse, this chapter
categorizes the region’s population into two broad groups: indigenous and
non-indigenous. These two groups are not homogeneous communities; both
include a variety of cultures, identities, languages, traditions, faiths and
Human_02.qxd 25/10/05 6:15 PM Page 29

Heather Marie Layton and Harry Anthony Patrinos 29

beliefs. Furthermore some indigenous communities are wealthier than others,

and some are more integrated than others. However, for the most part the
available data aggregate information across indigenous groups. For example
census and household surveys often provide information on indigenous
peoples as a whole and do not differentiate among communities.

Language
Language is almost invariably taken into account when determining
whether people identify with one nation state or group over another
(Sagarin and Moneymaker, 1979). The United Nations claims that language,
especially a native mother tongue, is a key variable in identifying ethnic
groups (UNESCO, 1953; Romaine, 2002). The underlying assumption is that
language differences tend to persist unless social integration has occurred.
Language is a reliable indicator given indigenous peoples’ strong sense of
identity, maintained in large part by language use. In most societies a native
mother tongue can be used as an operational indicator of ethnicity,
especially in areas with a wide spectrum of groups exposed to bilingual
environments.
Latin American countries have used two types of questions about language
(Gonzalez, 1994). The first concentrates on native mother tongue, and the
second on the ability to speak an indigenous language (Table 2.2). Although
these questions result in useful statistics, the use of either form can underes-
timate the size of the indigenous population in a country because they are
likely to classify indigenous descendants whose current operational language
is Spanish as monolingual Spanish speakers.
In addition it is often difficult to make national and international com-
parisons due to variation in the formulation of the language question (ibid.).
For example in 1972 a question in the Peruvian census was ‘What is your
maternal language?’ In the 1981 census, however, the question was ‘Do you
speak an indigenous language?’ Another complicating factor is the existence
of bilingual or even multilingual populations. For example between 1930
and 2000 the size of the monolingual indigenous population of Peru plum-
meted from 52 per cent to 16 per cent, while the size of the bilingual indige-
nous population increased from 47 per cent to 81 per cent of the total

Table 2.2 The language question in Latin American survey work

Language Definitional problems

Native tongue May exclude indigenous descendants that declare

Spanish as native tongue
Ability to speak indigenous May exclude indigenous peoples who do not speak
language an indigenous language or deny knowledge of it
Human_02.qxd 25/10/05 6:15 PM Page 30

30 Estimating the Number of Indigenous Peoples

indigenous population. This trend reflects the integration efforts of the

Peruvian and other governments, with bilingual education playing a very
important role, and constitutes the first step in the process of indigenous
peoples losing their native language. In the long term, depending on the
definition used, people who do not speak an indigenous language may not
be identified as indigenous, therefore underestimating the true size of the
indigenous population.

Self-identification
Many countries, such as Guatemala, Colombia, Paraguay and Venezuela,
have used the self-identification method to define a population (ibid.). It can
also be used in combination with the geographic approach, which will be
explained below. According to Gonzalez (1994, p. 25), ‘The advantages of
the self-perception approach are that it avoids language proficiency issues,
allows individuals to choose, and does not require special tests or genealogi-
cal investigations for determining if an individual is indigenous.’ However,
self-identification may lead to underestimation, especially when a person is
asked ‘Are you indigenous?’ because discrimination and social prejudice in a
society can lead individuals to deny or downplay their indigenous origins.
For example some indigenous immigrants to Mexico City and Lima cease to
use their native language and/or traditional clothing (Urquillas et al., 2003).
This tendency is in line with Gary Becker’s (1957) theory of discrimination,
which holds that discrimination is either helpful to the majority or harmful
to the minority. One could infer that if it is harmful to the minority, then
individuals from the minority group have an incentive to obscure or aban-
don the traits that provoke discrimination. There is also the possibility that
some individuals believe they will receive special social benefits by declaring
themselves indigenous (Gonzalez, 1994).

Geographic concentration
Measures of geographic location or concentration of the indigenous popula-
tion, in practice, is usually used when the populations are concentrated in spe-
cific territories or indigenous reservations. It can be combined with the
self-identification and/or language questions. Gonzalez (1994) points out that
‘the benefits of this approach are that it avoids individual issues of identity
and problems of measurement and takes into account the community’s values
and opportunities’. However, there is a risk of identifying non-indigenous
individuals who live in an indigenous area as indigenous and vice versa.

Changes over time

Latin American countries have largely moved away from the language or
perception approach to one focused on self-identification (Table 2.3). It may
be that the concept of indigenousnous is evolving in the region in tandem
with greater recognition of indigenous peoples and their rights.
Human_02.qxd 25/10/05 6:15 PM Page 31

Heather Marie Layton and Harry Anthony Patrinos 31

Table 2.3 Definitions of ethnicity used in Latin America over time

Ethnicity Most recent Ethnicity

Early source definition source definition

Bolivia Census 1976, housing Census 2001 Self-identification

survey 1988 Language
Colombia Census 1973, 1985 Perception, location Census 2002 Self-identification
Guatemala Census 1973, 1981 Perception Census 1994 Self-identification
Honduras Census 1988 Language n.a. n.a.
Mexico Census 1988, 1990 Language Census 2000 Language
Panama Census 1980 Language Census 1990,
2000 Self-identification
Paraguay Census 1981, Census 2002,
indigenous census indigenous
1982 Location, perception census 2002 Self-identification
Peru Census 1972, 1981 Language Census 1993, Language,
(mother tongue), household language plus
language (spoken) survey 2001 self-identification
Venezuela Census 1981, Census 2001 Language plus
indigenous census self-identification
1982 Location, perception

Sources: CELADE (1992); statistical agencies for each country.

Data collection challenges

A major problem when analyzing indigenous populations is the limited
availability of data and the lack of a standard statistical classification system.
Although some Latin American countries have large indigenous popula-
tions, not all have collected information on their indigenous peoples.
Moreover the absence of a single accepted definition of indigenous poses a
challenge for researchers. Therefore in order to do comparative work over
time and within and between countries we must fall back on narrower or
more traditional concepts of indigenous, using language as the identifying
factor. However it is important to note that, for several reasons, relying on
one indicator of indigenous identity is insufficient. For example questions
on identity vary between countries and over time, impeding regional or
temporal studies. Selected examples of population changes over time are
presented in the following section.

Estimates of changes in the size of the indigenous populations

in Bolivia, Ecuador, Guatemala, Mexico and Peru

Bolivia
The indigenous population of Bolivia increased in absolute terms from
1.7 million in 1950 to 3.9 million in 2001, and indigenous peoples now
account for at least 50 per cent of the total population. Of course estimates
Human_02.qxd 25/10/05 6:15 PM Page 32

32 Estimating the Number of Indigenous Peoples

Table 2.4 Indigenous population, Bolivia, 2001

Percentage of total Percentage of rural

Definition population population

Normally uses an indigenous

language 52 50
Indigenous mother tongue 201 622
Self-identifies as indigenous 62

Notes
1
Aged four and over.
2
Aged six and over.
Source: 2001 census, Bolivia.

vary according to the type of identifier used. The 2001 census sought to
determine the size of the indigenous population by acquiring data on the
most used language, mother tongue and self-identification (Table 2.4).
In 2001 approximately 52 per cent of Bolivians aged six and over primar-
ily spoke an indigenous language. Quechua was the most commonly spoken
indigenous language (30 per cent), followed by Aymara (21 per cent).
Seventy-two per cent of the indigenous population lived in rural areas.
Despite the large size of the indigenous population, 95 per cent of Bolivians
in urban areas spoke Spanish, compared with 50 per cent in rural areas. In
the same year about 80 per cent of Bolivians aged four and over in urban
areas had first learned to speak Spanish, followed by Quechua (10 per cent),
Aymara (8.7 per cent) and other indigenous languages (0.18 per cent). In
rural areas 39.1 per cent of Bolivians aged six and over had first learned to
speak Quechua, followed by Spanish (35.2 per cent), Aymara (22 per cent)
and other indigenous languages (0.8 per cent).
In the 2001 census, 62 per cent of people aged 15 and over identified
themselves as indigenous. Of these about 31 per cent identified themselves
as Quechua, 25 per cent as Aymara and 5 per cent as belonging to another
indigenous group. The results of the last three censuses (Figure 2.1) show a
fall in the percentage of indigenous Bolivians. In 1976 indigenous peoples
accounted for 64.5 per cent of the total population, but this figure fell to
61.4 per cent in 1992 and 50.0 per cent in 2001.

Ecuador
More than any other country in Latin America, the literature on Ecuador
shows a large variation in estimates of the indigenous population. During
colonial times and in early republican times public authorities spent a large
amount of resources and bureaucratic efforts to collect the most accurate
data possible on the size of the indigenous population because indigenous
individuals and communities were subject to a special tax that constituted
an important source of revenue for the government. Attempts to estimate
Human_02.qxd 25/10/05 6:15 PM Page 33

Heather Marie Layton and Harry Anthony Patrinos 33

Figure 2.1 Percentage of indigenous peoples in the Bolivian population, 1976–2001

70

60

50

40

30

20

10

0
1976 1992 2001

the size of the indigenous population at the end of the eighteenth century
and the first half of the nineteenth century put it at around 14 to 15 per cent
of Ecuador’s population, though one study estimates that it was 40 per cent
of the total population (Paz y Miño, 1942).
It is difficult to determine the actual size of the indigenous population
because national statistics do not take into account the ethnic diversity of
the country. Both the 2001 Population and Housing Census and the 2000
Standard of Living Survey (ECV) suffer this deficiency (SIDENPE, 2004).
SIDENPE stipulates that using language, while important, is not sufficient to
identify the entire indigenous population of Ecuador since many people
who consider themselves to be indigenous do not speak an indigenous
language due to a host of factors such as: loss of language over time, the lan-
guage only being spoken at home, or fear of discrimination. Questions regard-
ing language were included in the 1950, 1990 and 2001 censuses, but are not
sufficient for identifying indigenous peoples, as evidenced by opposition
to the census by indigenous organizations such as the Confederation of
Indigenous Nationalities of Ecuador (Confederación de Nacionalidades
Indígenas de Ecuador) in 1990.
The 1950 census included two questions on persons older than six years of
age about language spoken at home and two other questions about cultur-
ally determined behaviours. The indigenous population, the individuals
who reported speaking an indigenous language, alone or combined with
Spanish, was estimated at 13.5 per cent of the national population. The next
census to include a question about language was in 1990. The question was
at the household level and specifically asked whether the language that most
of the individuals spoke at home was an indigenous language. The 2001
census included two questions at the individual level: language spoken
and self-identification. The proportion that self-identifies as indigenous is
6.1 per cent. Using language alone, the indigenous population is 4.6 percent,
Human_02.qxd 25/10/05 6:15 PM Page 34

34 Estimating the Number of Indigenous Peoples

which is very similar to an alternative estimate for 2000 (4.4 per cent)
calculated by the National Institute for Statistical Studies and Censuses (INEC).
Combining both language and self-identification, the indigenous popula-
tion rises to 6.6 per cent. INEC also calculated an alternative estimate of
6.6 per cent using the same criteria.
The INEC estimates are derived from data from the 2000 Measurement of
Childhood and Household Indicators Survey (Encuesta de Medición de
Indicadores de la Niñez y los Hogares – EMEDINHO). The EMEDINHO provides
data that makes it possible to estimate also the size of the indigenous popu-
lation using language spoken by parents (12.5 per cent). Combining parental
language with self-identity gives an estimate of 14.3 per cent. Still, this is
much higher than the estimates recorded for earlier years (see Table 2.5).
In order at least partially to adjust for potential underreporting and other
limitations of censuses, we can categorize an individual as indigenous if,

Table 2.5 Estimates of the indigenous share of the total population in Ecuador

Data Percentage of
year Author Data source Method used population

1936 Paz y Miño (1942) Historical Not described

data by author 40.0
1950 Saunders (1959) 1950 census Language spoken
by individuals 13.5
1990 INEC 1990 census Language spoken
by individuals 4.0
n.a (ii) Deruyttere (1997) I.I.I.(i) Not described
by author 24.9
n.a (ii) Moya (1997) Not described Not described
by author 24.9
n.a.(ii) PAHO Not described Not described
by author 43.0
2000 Larrea & EMEDINHO Language or
Montenegro (iii) self-identification
by households* 9.2
2001 Larrea & 2001 census Language or
Montenegro (iii) self-identification
by households* 9.2
2003 Larrea & ENEMDUR Self-identification
Montenegro (iii) by households** 10.5

Notes
(i) Instituto Indigenista Interamericano.
(ii) Information on the year of the data is not found in the publication or the references.
(iii) Calculated by authors of the chapter.
* Individuals belonging to households with at least one person self-identified as indigenous or
speaks an indigenous language.
** Individuals belonging to households with at least one person self-identified as indigenous.
Human_02.qxd 25/10/05 6:15 PM Page 35

Heather Marie Layton and Harry Anthony Patrinos 35

according to census questions, at least one member of the household (not

including domestic employees) either self-identifies as indigenous and/or
reports speaking an indigenous language. According to this approach, and
using 2001 census data, 9.2 per cent of Ecuador’s population is indigenous.
This estimate is remarkably consistent with estimates made using data from
various recent household surveys that use more sophisticated methods to
collect sensitive social and economic data (see Table 2.5). Table 2.5 also gives
estimates from varying sources that have used data for different years,
methodologies and various data types and quality.
Estimates that use census and household data based upon language
spoken by individuals and self-identification consistently provide higher
estimates than census data based solely upon language but considerably
lower than older estimates, based on historical projections or geographical
characterizations, that previously have been used widely by various authors.
Additionally, the decline in the estimated portion of the indigenous
population share in the last 50 years may stem mainly from urbanization
and regional migrations from the Highlands to the Coast and Amazon,
where individuals join a mainstream culture in which Spanish is used rou-
tinely. However, in rural areas of the Highlands, despite the reduction of the
Quechua language, more people identify with indigenous cultures than
speak indigenous languages. The indigenous identity changed very little in
the rural Highlands from 1950 to 2001, in spite of linguistic erosion.

Guatemala
According to census and household survey data the indigenous population
of Guatemala as a proportion of the total population decreased from 65 per
cent in 1921 to 36 per cent in 1989, but by 2000 that had risen to 41 per cent
(Figure 2.2). These changes in part reflect the fact the method used to iden-
tify indigenous peoples was switched from interviewers’ evaluations in early
surveys to respondents’ self-identification in later ones. Single identity ques-
tions (such as ‘Are you indigenous?’) may have resulted in an underestima-
tion of the indigenous population. In 2000, 41 per cent of the population
identified themselves as indigenous, 78 per cent of whom claimed to have
an indigenous mother tongue. Figure 2.2 shows the population trend
between 1778 and 2000.
Most of Guatemala’s indigenous peoples are of Mayan descent. The decline
in the indigenous population between 1921 and 1989 could be attributed
to the high infant and adult mortality rates, although some authors argue
that the current Guatemalan classification system, based on self-perception
instead of ancestry, leads to underestimates (see for example Smith, 1992).

Mexico
In absolute terms Mexico has the largest indigenous population on the con-
tinent. In 1980, according to the National Institute of Anthropology and
Human_02.qxd 25/10/05 6:16 PM Page 36

36 Estimating the Number of Indigenous Peoples

Figure 2.2 Indigenous population of Guatemala as a percentage of the total population,

1778–2000

90

80

70

60

50

40

30

20

10

0
1778 1833 1888 1943 1998

History, 429 municipalities registered a particularly high indigenous popula-

tion density; 217 of these were located in Oaxaca, 74 in Yucatán, 43 in
Puebla, 33 in Veracruz and 26 in Chiapas (INAH, 1987). After the Spanish
arrived in Mexico the indigenous population suffered a considerable decline,
falling from an estimated 11 million in 1519 to 1.2 million in 1650 (Cook
and Simpson, 1948). Borah (1989) attributes this to the consequences of the
conquest, the epidemics of 1540 and 1570, and the effects of discrimination.
According to the 1930 census, by that time just 14 per cent of the Mexican
population were indigenous; this percentage fell further to 10 per cent in
1950 and 8 per cent in 1990. Alternative estimates are shown in Table 2.6.
With regard to the decline in the use of indigenous language, census data
show that in 1990, 16 per cent of indigenous Mexicans were monolingual,
compared with 23 per cent in 1980.
In the first census (1895) the means of identifying indigenous peoples was
to ask people if they spoke Spanish, an indigenous language or a foreign lan-
guage. In 1921 race was added to the census to determine what percentages
of the population were mixed race, indigenous, white, other and foreign
(INI, 2000). According to the census, 18 per cent spoke some indigenous lan-
guage, but when race was added 29 per cent were classified as indigenous.
Human_02.qxd 25/10/05 6:16 PM Page 37

Heather Marie Layton and Harry Anthony Patrinos 37

Table 2.6 Indigenous population

of Mexico, 1930–2000 (percentage
of total population)*

1930 16.0
1940 14.8
1950 11.2
1960 10.4
1970 7.8
1980 9.0
1990 7.5
1995 6.8
2000 7.0

Note
* Those aged five and over who spoke
an indigenous language.
Sources: Consejo Nacional de Población
(2002); INI (2003).

In the most recent census (2000) two variables were used to identify the
indigenous population: language and self-perception. Based on the language
spoken, the proportion of the Mexican population aged five and over that
was considered indigenous was 7 per cent, a slight upturn since the previous
census and seemingly indicating stabilization of the indigenous population.
Of a total population of almost 100 million (five years and over), six million
were indigenous. Using the concept of the household – all family members
living in a household where an indigenous language was spoken – then the
indigenous population amounted 10.2 million, or almost 9.6 per cent of the
total population (Serrano, 2004).

Peru
In Peru in 2001, 32 per cent of the population spoke an indigenous mother
tongue but 41 per cent identified themselves as indigenous. Indigenous
language use and self-identification correlated more strongly in rural areas
(92 per cent) than in urban ones (64–71 per cent). According to the Instituto
Indigenista Interamericano, in the 1970s the Peruvian indigenous popula-
tion was over 9 million but the 1972 census estimated it as 3.5 million. The
1981 census put the figure at 3.6 million, while other sources estimated it at
over 9 million.
In the fifteenth century there were about 10 million indigenous Peruvians
but the population was reduced by one half to three quarters during the next
century (Alverson, 1979). In 1972, 32 per cent of the Peruvian population
was indigenous; by 1981 the figure had fallen to 27 per cent. Most
indigenous peoples live in the Sierra, a poor area traditionally known as La
Mancha India, or the Indian strip (ibid.). In 1972 and 1981, 50 per cent and
Human_02.qxd 25/10/05 6:16 PM Page 38

38 Estimating the Number of Indigenous Peoples

Table 2.7 Population of Peru, by ethnicity and domicile, 1972–2000 (per cent)

Non-indigenous Indigenous

1972 1981 1994 2000 1972 1981 1994 2000

Urban 81 83 83 87 19 17 17 13
Rural 50 55 56 58 50 45 44 42
All 68 73 74 77 32 27 26 23

Sources: CELADE (1992), National Living Standards Survey (1994; 2000).

Figure 2.3 Percentage of Peruvian households that were indigenous, 2001

50
43%

34%

25%
25

0
Frequently used Mother tongue Self-identification
language

45 per cent, respectively, of the rural population were indigenous and about
80 per cent of the urban population were non-indigenous (Table 2.7). In
1981 only 35 per cent of indigenous language speakers in Peru were
monolingual and 65 per cent were bilingual. Most of the bilingual speakers
(88 per cent) lived in urban areas and most of the monolingual speakers
(52 per cent) resided in rural regions.

Conclusion

The use of a single question to identify indigenous peoples can result in

underestimation of the size of an indigenous population. As shown in
Figure 2.3 the size of the indigenous population varies widely depending on
the question asked. Variations of the language question – such as asking
respondents to name their mother tongue rather than their most frequently
used language – will exclude indigenous peoples who learned Spanish before
other languages. Also, geographical-based surveys tend to miss out migrants.
Finally, research has shown that there are important differences between
indigenous groups within a country.
Human_02.qxd 25/10/05 6:16 PM Page 39

Heather Marie Layton and Harry Anthony Patrinos 39

This chapter has highlighted the multiethnic and multilingual nature of

Latin America, although the analysis has suffered from the lack of reliable
and consistent data. Therefore the challenge is to define a set of standardized
questions and operational indicators in order to identify indigenous peoples
accurately in census and sample surveys. The list of questions could include
self-identification, language (mother tongue, most commonly used lan-
guage, language used at home, secondary language), dominant group in the
local community, parents’ mother tongue and so on. Ideally each question
should allow respondents to name a specific indigenous group (Quechua,
Aymara and so on) rather than merely select ‘indigenous’.
Statisticians must also take into account the fact that indigenous areas are
often undersurveyed due to civil conflict and/or geographic isolation, and
therefore the size of indigenous populations is underestimated. This is impor-
tant to bear in mind if changes in the estimated size of these populations will
affect policy.
Statistical agencies could design a special survey module for indigenous
peoples that included traditional medical practices, religious/community
activities, land ownership, bilingual schooling, intermarriage and so on.
Some countries already conduct separate surveys for indigenous peoples, for
example Mexico’s employment survey and Venezuela’s indigenous census.
However it is unclear whether such surveys are of more help to researchers
than national surveys of both indigenous and non-indigenous people. More
useful, from a research and policy perspective, would be supplements to
national censuses, along the lines of Canada’s Aboriginal Peoples Survey,
which was designed and implemented in partnership with aboriginal
organizations and carried out in 1991 and 2001. It would be worthwhile to
analyze such surveys and the census questions used in the United States so
as to arrive at common questions that would be consistent between coun-
tries and over time.

Notes
1. The estimates in this chapter are drawn from the country chapters that follow.
2. Census data are not available for most Caribbean countries, but anthropological
sources show that their indigenous populations are so small that they do not
contribute substantially to the size of the overall indigenous population in Latin
America.
3. Two thirds of the countries in Latin America conduct censuses and/or household
surveys that include information on the indigenous population.
4. Congress of Aboriginal Peoples, www.abo-peoples.org/programs/C-31/c-31.html#TOC.
5. Bill C-31 put an end to many of the discriminatory practices under the Indian Act,
especially those affecting women.
Human_03.qxd 25/10/05 6:16 PM Page 40

3
Bolivia
Wilson Jiménez Pozo, Fernando Landa Casazola
and Ernesto Yañez Aguilar1

Introduction

The indigenous population of Bolivia increased from 1.7 million in 1950

to 3.9 million in 2001. It is estimated that in 2000 indigenous people
accounted for 62 per cent of the total population (see Chapter 2). The grow-
ing importance given to indigenous social movements in national policy,
often following radical demonstrations, is intended to end social exclusion
and increase recognition of Bolivia’s diversity. Social change could add to the
aspirations of these movements and pave the way for national development
based on identity and diversity.
In 1995 institutional advances, particularly those made during the previous
decade, culminated in modifications to the Bolivian political constitution,
which now recognizes Bolivia as a multiethnic, multicultural country2 and
promotes respect for and protection of the social, economic and cultural
rights of Bolivia’s indigenous peoples. The constitution also mentions the
right of indigenous peoples to hold communal lands of origin. Under the
Law of Agrarian Reform such lands cannot be repossessed. In the meantime
the 1994 Law of Popular Participation recognized the legal status of indigenous
and rural communities, indigenous associations and agrarian unions. Since
then progress has been made in incorporating community authorities into
national politics, marking a new phase in participatory democracy.
The education system has incorporated intercultural and bilingual education
into the curriculum of primary education. Since the late 1990s more than
1000 schools have provided education in indigenous languages and educa-
tional materials in indigenous languages have been developed.
The so-called National Dialogue, which began in 2000, resulted in a national
policy for indigenous development called ‘Development with Identity’ and the
establishment of an Advisory Committee of Indigenous Peoples. The com-
mittee has the responsibility of bargaining for policies to develop Bolivia’s
multicultural identity.

40
Human_03.qxd 25/10/05 6:16 PM Page 41

Wilson Jiménez, Fernando Landa and Ernesto Yañez 41

Despite the large proportion of indigenous peoples in the Bolivian

population, until 1997 indigenous political parties never accounted for more
than 2 per cent of the national legislature. However in the 2002 general
elections 41 indigenous politicians were voted into the national congress.
This was probably the most important political advancement for indigenous
peoples since universal suffrage (which favoured the indigenous population)
was introduced in 1953.
Thus the advances made for and by indigenous peoples include constitu-
tional recognition, popular participation, bilingual education and greater
parliamentary representation. However other social and economic policies
have been slow to change and have not managed to reverse the exclusion,
poverty and inequality that heavily affect indigenous communities.
This chapter analyzes the social and economic gaps that persist between
indigenous and non-indigenous people in Bolivia. Until the mid 1990s the
national household surveys only included the capital city of each depart-
ment of Bolivia, plus the city of El Alto. Thus the discussion considers trends
in human development indicators for those cities in the period 1989–96 and
for Bolivia as a whole from 1997–2002.

Demographic characteristics of the

indigenous population3

According to census data, in 2001 half of the Bolivian population spoke

an indigenous language, and since 1992 the share of the indigenous popula-
tion in the total population has remained at a fairly constant 60 per cent.
However indigenous people who reside in urban areas are gradually losing
their own languages, perhaps because formal education in urban areas is con-
ducted in Spanish. In rural areas the disappearance of indigenous languages
is less perceptible.
Between 1992 and 2001 the total population of urban areas grew at an
annual rate of 4 per cent, partly due to the migration of indigenous people
from the countryside to cities. In department capitals 37 per cent of the
population now speak an indigenous language. Indigenous urban dwellers
are concentrated in the western part of the country, mainly in the city of
El Alto, where 65 per cent of the approximately 600 000 inhabitants speak
both Spanish and indigenous languages. At least 6 per cent speak only indige-
nous languages. In rural areas 72 per cent spoke an indigenous language. At
the national level, 49 per cent of the Bolivian population spoke an indige-
nous language in 2002.
The demographics of the indigenous population differ from those of the
non-indigenous population. For example the average age of the indigenous
population (34 years) is higher than that of the non-indigenous population
(24 years). Of indigenous people aged 15 years and over, 68 per cent are
married, compared with 47 per cent of non-indigenous people.
Human_03.qxd 25/10/05 6:16 PM Page 42

42 Bolivia

According to the 2002 household survey, rural areas are primarily indigenous,
which explains the correlation between geographical area and the tendency
to use an indigenous language. In the highlands and valleys indigenous
people account for 67 per cent and 60 per cent of the population respectively.
On the plains, in contrast, 17 per cent are indigenous and 83 per cent are
non-indigenous. The Quechua and Aymara peoples predominantly reside in
the highlands and valleys.

Poverty and living conditions

In 1989 indigenous people were systematically impoverished and excluded

from the national economy (Psacharopoulos and Patrinos, 1994). In capital
cities the incidence of poverty among indigenous peoples exceeded 60 per cent;
the figure for non-indigenous people was less than 50 per cent. However in
the same year a certain degree of social mobility by indigenous peoples was
apparent. In particular the bilingual indigenous population accounted for
28 per cent of the non-poor, over 70 per cent of whom spoke only Spanish.
A significant number of bilingual individuals earned middle-class incomes,
suggesting economic and social mobility. Nonetheless indigenous peoples
accounted for 45 per cent of the extremely poor (Table 3.1), and given that
indigenous peoples comprised only 35 per cent of the total population it
appears that they were disproportionately affected by extreme poverty.
By 2002, nationwide the poverty rate was even higher among indigenous
than non-indigenous people (73 per cent versus 52 per cent nationally,
59 per cent versus 47 per cent in urban areas, and 86 per cent versus 73 per
cent in rural areas). At the national level poverty fell between 1997 and 2001
for both groups, but each experienced a rise in 2002, irrespective of urban or
rural location. In general, however, the indigenous population suffered a
greater increase in poverty (Table 3.2).
At the national level extreme poverty among indigenous peoples changed
little between 1997 and 2002, although it fell among non-indigenous people
(Table 3.3). In rural areas it increased for indigenous peoples but decreased

Table 3.1 Poverty among indigenous peoples, Bolivia, 1989 (per cent)

Indigenous

Description Monolingual Bilingual Non-indigenous Sample size

Not poor 0.8 28.3 70.8 6 762

Poor 1.2 34.4 64.4 4 411
Extremely poor 1.5 43.3 55.2 3 815

Source: Integrated Household Survey 1989.

Human_03.qxd 25/10/05 6:16 PM Page 43

Wilson Jiménez, Fernando Landa and Ernesto Yañez 43

Table 3.2 Poverty headcount, Bolivia, 1989–2002 (per cent)

1989 1993 1997 1999 2000 2001 2002

National n.a. n.a. 63.7 63.4 61.5 58.1 63.1

Indigenous n.a. n.a. 74.6 75.7 71.4 66.9 73.9
Non-indigenous n.a. n.a. 57.0 56.6 50.4 48.1 52.5
Urban n.a. n.a. 54.1 50.1 49.6 48.9 51.5
Indigenous n.a. n.a. 62.9 61.8 56.3 55.0 59.1
Non-indigenous n.a. n.a. 50.9 45.5 44.9 44.6 47.3
Rural n.a. n.a. 78.2 80.3 84.8 75.0 82.8
Indigenous n.a. n.a. 82.7 86.8 87.6 78.9 86.3
Non-indigenous n.a. n.a. 72.4 75.0 76.2 63.5 73.6
Main cities 54.9 53.1 48.2 44.1 47.2 45.3 48.6
Indigenous 61.9 60.8 59.4 55.2 54.8 52.3 56.8
Non-indigenous 51.1 48.9 44.4 40.0 41.7 40.5 44.0

Sources: Integrated Household Survey; National Employment Survey; MECOVI (2002).

Table 3.3 Extreme poverty headcount, Bolivia, 1997–2002 (per cent)

1989 1993 1997 1999 2000 2001 2002

National n.a. n.a. 39.1 40.7 40.7 34.5 39.5

Indigenous n.a. n.a. 51.7 52.5 52.4 44.8 52.5
Non-indigenous n.a. n.a. 31.3 34.1 27.8 23.0 26.9
Urban n.a. n.a. 25.2 21.8 24.5 22.5 23.9
Indigenous n.a. n.a. 32.6 28.5 30.0 26.7 29.9
Non-indigenous n.a. n.a. 22.5 19.2 20.6 19.6 20.6
Rural n.a. n.a. 59.8 64.6 72.6 56.7 66.2
Indigenous n.a. n.a. 64.8 71.4 76.3 63.1 71.6
Non-indigenous n.a. n.a. 53.4 58.9 61.4 37.8 52.1
Capital cities 25.5 24.5 20.2 18.1 22.6 19.3 22.2
Indigenous 32.4 30.1 27.0 23.7 28.5 23.7 28.6
Non-indigenous 21.7 21.5 17.9 16.0 18.3 16.2 18.7

Sources: Integrated Household Survey; National Employment Survey; MECOVI (2002).

slightly for non-indigenous people; in urban areas, it fell slightly for both
groups. One explanation of this is that better-off indigenous peoples in rural
areas migrated to cities, but fewer rural non-indigenous people did likewise.
The Bolivian poverty gap index fluctuated between 0.32 and 0.35 in
1999–2002. The index for the indigenous population was approximately
double that for the non-indigenous population (Table 3.4). In other words, if
gains were proportionately distributed, then the indigenous population
would require about twice as much income per person as the non-indige-
nous population in order to escape poverty. Even though household surveys
Human_03.qxd 25/10/05 6:16 PM Page 44

44 Bolivia

Table 3.4 Poverty indicators, Bolivia, 1999–2002 (per cent)

Indigenous
Total
Monolingual Bilingual All Non-indigenous population

1999
Headcount 92.82 66.42 69.12 44.57 58.60
Poverty gap 67.56 39.05 41.97 19.69 32.41
FGT P2 index 54.57 28.41 31.08 11.79 22.81
2000
Headcount 93.51 68.67 71.39 50.41 61.47
Poverty gap 74.36 42.56 46.05 25.53 36.35
FGT P2 index 64.31 32.16 35.69 16.54 35.69
2001
Headcount 84.74 64.97 66.88 48.15 58.06
Poverty gap 59.42 36.96 39.14 21.92 31.03
FGT P2 index 47.63 26.39 28.45 13.09 21.22
2002
Headcount 83.68 71.69 73.86 52.55 63.05
Poverty gap 59.53 42.78 45.81 24.90 35.21
FGT P2 index 48.93 31.28 34.48 15.45 24.83

Source: MECOVI (2002).

Table 3.5 Incidence of poverty, by educational level, Bolivia, 2002 (per cent)

Indigenous Non-indigenous

Poor Extremly poor Poor Extremely poor Sample size

No education 84.9 65.4 69.5 41.9 2 063

Incomplete primary 79.2 58.8 64.8 36.3 8 066
Complete primary 70.6 50.6 53.6 24.6 856
Incomplete secondary 67.5 40.3 48.9 21.6 1 481
Complete secondary 55.6 29.2 37.6 13.3 831
Some or complete
university 29.0 7.9 18.6 5.4 436

Source: MECOVI (2002).

may not be fully representative, it is also notable that the poverty gap index
for the monolingual indigenous population was substantially higher than
that for the bilingual indigenous population.
Even among individuals with the same level of education, in 2002 the
poverty rates were much higher for indigenous peoples than for non-
indigenous people (Table 3.5). Of indigenous individuals with no education,
Human_03.qxd 25/10/05 6:16 PM Page 45

Wilson Jiménez, Fernando Landa and Ernesto Yañez 45

85 per cent were poor, compared with 69.5 per cent of their non-indigenous
counterparts. Similarly, among those with some primary schooling 79 per
cent of the indigenous were poor compared with 65 per cent of the non-
indigenous. While the poverty gap between indigenous and non-indigenous
people narrowed in the case of individuals with university education, as the
table shows not even higher education could be guaranteed to eliminate the
differences between them.

Poverty and demographic determinants

The factors that affect a person’s probability of being poor have been estimated
with a model that controls for individual and geographical characteristics
(Table 3.6). Factors that increase the likelihood of a person being poor are
age, being indigenous, being an unemployed head of household and work-
ing in agriculture. Factors that reduce the chance of being poor are living on
the plains, additional years of schooling and working in a non-agricultural
sector.
Controlling for other relevant observable characteristics, being indigenous
increases a person’s probability of being poor by about 13 per cent. If the
household head is unemployed the probability of being poor rises by 18 per
cent, and working in agriculture increases the probability by 19 per cent.
Conversely, every additional year of education reduces a person’s probability
of being poor by 3 per cent. Working in mining, electricity, commerce, trans-
port and finance reduces the likehood by 16 per cent, 26 per cent, 9 per cent,
11 per cent and 11 per cent respectively. People who live on the plains are
9 per cent less likely to be poor.4
Table 3.7, calculated from Table 3.6, shows the probability of being poor
according to individual characteristics. As can be seen, indigenous women
have a 74.5 per cent probability of being poor, compared with 50.8 per cent
for non-indigenous women. Having no education raises the probability of
being poor to 79.9 per cent at the national level, but here again indigenous
peoples have a greater chance of being poor than non-indigenous people.
The same applies to those with a university education. While gender, employ-
ment sector and state of health have large and significant effects on the
probability of being poor, lack of education has the largest effect.

Income distribution
The differences in well-being between non-indigenous and indigenous
peoples are associated with income and consumption inequality. Dividing
the population into deciles according to levels of per capita consumption
shows that the consumption of the richest 10 per cent of Bolivians is
22 times that of the poorest 10 per cent (Table 3.8). While indigenous people
are present in all 10 deciles, almost two thirds fall into deciles 1–5 – the poorest
50 per cent of the population.
Human_03.qxd 25/10/05 6:16 PM Page 46

46 Bolivia

Table 3.6 Determinants of poverty, Bolivia, 20021

Marginal
Variable Coefficient Mean value effects t-ratio
2
Region
Highlands 0.00 0.40 0.00 0.07
Plains 0.39* 0.31 0.09 7.5
Female 0.06 0.51 0.01 1.42
Age 0.03* 28.50 0.01 3.48
Age squared 0.00* 1147.83 0.00 5.43
Indigenous 0.59* 0.49 0.13 12.34
Healthy 0.31* 0.17 0.07 5.75
Years of schooling 0.15* 6.38 0.03 27.5
Number of residents aged 0–6 0.32* 0.04 0.07 2.51
Number of residents aged 7–24 0.22* 1.52 0.05 11.24
Number of residents aged 25–59 0.18* 0.84 0.04 11.24
Number of residents aged 60 0.34* 0.11 0.07 5.31
Age of household head 0.01* 44.76 0.00 3.64
Household unemployed 0.99* 0.02 0.18 2.97
Sector3
Agriculture 0.94* 0.24 0.19 15.53
Mining 0.66* 0.01 0.16 3.71
Manufacturing 0.07 0.06 0.01 0.72
Electricity 1.13* 0.00 0.26 2.32
Construction 0.08 0.03 0.02 0.64
Commerce 0.38* 0.10 0.09 5.4
Transport 0.48* 0.02 0.11 3.43
Financing 0.47* 0.01 0.11 2.28
Female household head 0.18 0.05 0.04 1.85
Constant 0.78 5.82
Chi3 2 363.09
N 21 017

Notes
1
Dependent variable: indigenous identity.
2
Reference category: valley.
3
Reference category: service sector.
* Significant at the 95 per cent level.
Source: MECOVI (2002).

Employment and income5

Income and consumption inequality between indigenous and non-indigenous

people is correlated with differences in occupational characteristics and
labour force participation. Unemployment, occupational structure and wage
distribution tend to differ between the two groups. Although the data for
employment activities are more relevant to urban areas, they are presented
below for the nation as a whole.
Human_03.qxd 25/10/05 6:16 PM Page 47

Wilson Jiménez, Fernando Landa and Ernesto Yañez 47

Table 3.7 Calculated probability of an individual being poor, Bolivia

(per cent)

Indigenous Non-indigenous Total population

Men 73.3 54.2 63.4

Women 74.5 50.8 62.7
Years of schooling
None 83.5 71.7 79.9
6 years 73.9 57.8 65.5
12 years 53.0 35.0 41.1
16 years 35.1 20.7 25.4
Employed 73.9 44.9 63.0
Unemployed 70.2 48.2 56.5
Healthy 77.0 56.0 68.6
Not healthy 73.0 51.9 61.9

Source: MECOVI (2002).

Table 3.8 Indigenous population, by consumption decile, Bolivia, 2002

Mean per capita Percentage of Multiple factor of

consumption indigenous people in indigenous population
bolivianes decile relative to average

Decile 1 (poorest) 501.0 17.7 35.9

Decile 2 92.9 13.8 28.0
Decile 3 128.7 11.8 24.0
Decile 4 162.5 10.8 22.0
Decile 5 200.2 10.2 21.0
Decile 6 251.5 8.8 17.8
Decile 7 309.5 8.1 16.4
Decile 8 383.3 7.5 15.2
Decile 9 528.1 6.8 13.8
Decile 10 (richest) 1127.7 4.6 9.4

Source: MECOVI (2002).

In 2002 the rate of labour force participation was 80.8 per cent for the
indigenous population and 63.9 per cent for the non-indigenous population
(Table 3.9). This difference can be mostly attributed to the fact that indigenous
people are concentrated in rural areas, where unremunerated family work is
common. Notably, indigenous women have a much higher participation
rate than non-indigenous women.
On average indigenous peoples are about 3 percentage points less likely
than non-indigenous people to be unemployed. As there are no obvious
differences in the number of hours worked by indigenous and non-indigenous
Human_03.qxd 25/10/05 6:16 PM Page 48

48 Bolivia

Table 3.9 Labour force participation, Bolivia, 2002 (per cent)

Indigenous Non-indigenous All

Labour force participation rate 80.8 63.9 72.9

Male 91.1 77.3 84.6
Female 71.3 50.9 61.9
Unemployment rate 3.9 7.0 5.2
Male 3.0 6.9 4.3
Female 4.8 9.5 6.6
Total hours worked per week,
employed individuals 44.6 44.8 44.7
Male 47.0 47.7 47.3
Female 41.6 40.3 41.1
Among employed, percentage who
do unpaid work 28.6 13.3 22.4
Male 15.1 10.0 12.9
Female 44.9 18.2 35.1

Source: MECOVI (2002).

people a better measure of job quality is the percentage of unpaid workers.

Such jobs are usually of poor quality and are mostly related to farming, craft
work and family businesses in both rural and urban areas. According to this
indicator, 28.6 per cent of employed indigenous peoples received no pay for
their work in 2002, compared with 13 per cent of non-indigenous employed
people. Most unpaid work was carried out by women.
Employment is linked to a large extent with migration, particularly internal
migration. According to the MECOVI survey about 89 per cent of migration
is domestic. Five years prior to the survey approximately 10 per cent of the
population had lived in another city or area. Migration is more common for
non-indigenous peoples than for indigenous people, though the difference
is small (11 per cent and 10 per cent respectively). This is consistent with
the hypothesis that migration is engaged in by people with different income
levels and is not driven only by poverty. The survey, however, did not
include the 11 per cent of migrants living outside Bolivia at the time.
The Bolivian job market is characterized by a prevalence of informal sector
work, which consists mainly of voluntary work carried out by unpaid family
members, plus waged work in establishments with fewer than five employ-
ees. Based on these criteria, nearly 78 per cent of the employed population
worked in the informal sector in 2002 (about 84 per cent of the indigenous
population and almost 67 per cent of the non-indigenous population –
Table 3.10). Women, especially indigenous women, are most likely to work
in the informal sector. Working in the informal sector is strongly correlated
with extreme poverty as a significant proportion of informal work is undertaken
by the extremely poor.6
Human_03.qxd 25/10/05 6:16 PM Page 49

Wilson Jiménez, Fernando Landa and Ernesto Yañez 49

Table 3.10 Informal sector employment, Bolivia, 2002 (per cent)

Indigenous Non-indigenous All

All individuals 84.4 66.6 77.7

Male 81.4 64.9 74.9
Female 88.0 69.1 81.3
Not poor 64.1 54.0 58.8
Poor 60.2 37.8 51.2
Extremely poor 91.8 88.2 90.9

Source: MECOVI (2002).

Table 3.11 Earnings and employment type, Bolivia, 2002

Indigenous Non-indigenous All

Male Female Male Female Male Female

Percentage of total labour force 48.0 38.4 36.6 23.4 41.2 31.7
Average income 658.9 333.2 1 357.5 803.2 939.9 508.0
Formal sector 1 227.1 816.2 2 082.7 1 284.5 1 697.2 1 090.3
Informal sector 499.2 252.1 878.7 551.7 628.9 345.6
Status of employed people (%)
Employee 31.9 14.6 49.8 32.7 39.6 21.5
Self-employed 61.4 79.7 43.3 53.0 53.6 69.5
Employer 6.5 2.2 6.8 7.0 6.6 4.0
Other 0.2 3.5 0.1 7.3 0.1 5.0

Source: MECOVI (2002).

Even controlling for gender, non-indigenous people earn more. On

average, in 2002 employed non-indigenous males had a monthly income of
1357.5 bolivianos,7 compared with 658.9 bolivianos for indigenous males
(Table 3.11). There was a similar discrepancy between the incomes of indige-
nous and non-indigenous women, although both groups earned less than
men. Part of these wage differentials was due to differences in employment
type between the indigenous and non-indigenous populations. A significant
proportion of indigenous peoples are involved in traditional informal work
and in livestock rearing, which is associated with lower income and lower
productivity. On average, in 2002 males in the informal sector earned
345.6 bolivianos, compared with the 1090.3 bolivianos earned by males in
the formal sector.
Self-employment is very common in Bolivia. About 70 per cent of women
are self-employed, primarily in agriculture, trade and informal services. For
men the figure is almost 54 per cent. Self-employment is more prevalent
among the indigenous than the non-indigenous.
Human_03.qxd 25/10/05 6:16 PM Page 50

50 Bolivia

Differences in Labour earnings

Differences in education and demographics may influence the marked
earnings differentials between indigenous and non-indigenous people
(Table 3.12). To measure the extent to which these earnings differentials are
due to differences in personal characteristics we have conducted regressions
of the determinants of incomes in 2000 and compared the results with 1989
data from Wood and Patrinos (1994). To maximize comparability, the regres-
sions include the same variables and sample universes as those used in 1989.
The results show that in both 1989 and 2000, schooling had a significantly
positive effect on earnings (Table 3.13). However the returns from schooling
were about 3 percentage points greater for non-indigenous than for indige-
nous peoples. This means that for a single year of schooling, non-indigenous
people enjoyed a 3 per cent greater wage benefit than indigenous peoples.
The returns from schooling increased between 1989 and 2002 by similar
amounts for both groups. At 9.4 per cent the returns from schooling for non-
indigenous people were near the global average of 10 per cent. However for
indigenous peoples (6.4 per cent) they were far below the global mean. The
returns from nine years of schooling would have increased non-indigenous
people’s wages by 85 per cent while for indigenous peoples the increase
would have been only 58 per cent, thus perpetuating inequality between the
two groups.
In terms of occupational position, employers (the reference category) had
the highest earnings, while self-employed people and those working in
unspecified (other) occupations, including home workers, received the lowest.
Among the other characteristics that affected earnings, being married
increased wages by about 14 per cent for indigenous workers and 32 per cent
for non-indigenous workers. Working more hours increased the wages of
both groups. In 1989 work experience had a greater effect on indigenous
wages while in 2000 it had a greater effect on non-indigenous wages,
although the difference was only about 1 per cent. Since these regressions do
not control for age, since work experience is a function of age, these data
may simply indicate that being older confers a greater earnings benefit on
indigenous than on non-indigenous people.
Even with the same restrictions on the sample universes, in 2000 the sample
for capital cities was significantly smaller than the 1989 sample. This was

Table 3.12 Mean monthly earnings, Bolivia, 2002 (bolivianos)

Indigenous Non-indigenous All

Total population 513.1 1 126.8 751.8

Men 658.9 1 357.5 939.9
Women 333.2 803.2 508.0

Source: MECOVI (2002).

Human_03.qxd 25/10/05 6:16 PM Page 51

Wilson Jiménez, Fernando Landa and Ernesto Yañez 51

Table 3.13 Determinants of labour earnings, Bolivia, 1989–20021

1989 2000

Indigenous Non-indigenous Indigenous Non-indigenous

Schooling 0.057* 0.086* 0.064* 0.094*

(14.1) (23.7) (7.05) (7.77)
Work experience 0.027* 0.045* 0.049* 0.037*
(6.8) (13.3) (5.71) (3.54)
Work experience squared 0.0003* 0.0006* 0.0007* 0.0005*
(5.2) (9.8) (4.43) (2.31)
Log of hours worked 0.154* 0.238* 0.325* 0.349*
(3.5) (6.5) (3.77) (4.06)
Health 0.081* 0.700* 0.101 0.041
(2.2) (2.1) (1.25) (0.3)
Married 0.294* 0.239* 0.144 0.320*
(6.0) (6.9) (1.68) (4.08)
Employee type2
Labourer 0.672* 0.788* 0.139 0.242
(8.6) (13.7) (0.58) (1.41)
Employee 0.673* 0.628* 0.043 0.112
(9.0) (12.6) (0.19) (0.77)
Self-employed 0.607* 0.499* 0.519 0.694*
(8.1) (9.4) (2.21) (4.48)
Other 1.196* 1.102* 0.055 1.002
(8.5) (6.9) (0.13) (1.59)
Constant 4.372 3.758 3.534 3.642
N 2 394 4 070 681 622
R3 0.201 0.328 0.3322 0.4023

Notes
1
Employed males living in large cities only. T-statistics in parentheses. The dependent variable is
the natural logarithm of monthly earnings from the principal occupation. Regional department
controls were also used. These include Oruro, Potosí, Cochabamba, Chuquisaca, Tarija, Trinidad
(Beni) and Santa Cruz, with EI Alto and La Paza used as the reference category.
2
Individuals aged 15–64 with positive earnings and years of experience. Reference category:
Employer.
* Significant at 95 per cent level.
Sources: Wood and Patrinos (1994); MECOVI (2002).

because the 1989 survey included only capital cities, and while the 2000
survey was of a similar size and was statistically representative of capital
cities, it also included households in other urban areas and rural areas. This
smaller sample size may explain the loss of significance for a number of the
explanatory variables in 1989. However the explanatory power (R3) of earn-
ings functions for both indigenous and non-indigenous workers increased
between 1989 and 2000, which implies that more easily observable factors
explained earnings in 2000 than in 1989.
Human_03.qxd 25/10/05 6:16 PM Page 52

52 Bolivia

Table 3.14 Contribution of variables to indigenous/non-indigenous earnings

differential, Bolivia, 2000

Contribution to Contribution as percentage

earnings differential of total differential

Endowments Pay structure Endowments Pay structure

Years of schooling 0.206 0.284 60.3 83.3

Work experience 0.220 0.270 64.4 70.0
Work experience squared 0.317 0.110 40.1 32.3
Log of hours worked 0.012 0.125 3.6 36.5
Healthy 0.003 0.117 0.8 34.3
Married 0.050 0.143 14.8 41.9
Labourer 0.003 0.018 0.8 5.3
Employee 0.013 0.057 3.7 16.7
Self-employed 0.073 0.072 21.4 21.1
Other 0.001 0.003 0.4 1.0
Constant 0.000 0.108 0.0 31.6
Total 0.250 0.091 73.2 26.8

Source: Calculated from Table 3.13.

Table 3.14 shows the results of a decomposition of earnings functions

based on the Oaxaca–Blinder model outlined in the Appendix of this
book. This decomposition assumes that, in the absence of discrimination, all
workers would have received the returns from observed variables that indige-
nous workers received. Overall, 73 per cent of the earings differential
between indigenous workers was due to observable factors. The remaining
27 per cent was due to discrimination and unobserved factors such as qual-
ity of schooling, culture and ability. Since those factors could have increased
or reduced the earnings of both groups, 27 per cent is a mid-range estimate
of discrimination. Other studies (Wood and Patrinos, 1994; Patrinos, 1998;
Contreras and Galván, 2003) have analyzed discrimination in Bolivia using
earlier data, and wherever possible we shall compare our 2000 results with
those findings.
According to our results, in 2000 schooling and experience had the largest
effect on relative earnings. The returns from schooling were significantly
greater for non-indigenous workers, as also found by Wood and Patrinos
(1994). However the greater benefits from work experience enjoyed by
indigenous workers reduced the earnings differential between indigenous
and non-indigenous workers by about 57 percentage points. Self-perceived
good health, which had a greater effect on indigenous earnings than on
non-indigenous earnings, reduced the observed earnings differential by
about 34 per cent. Working in any job category other than employer (the ref-
erence category) reduced the wages of both groups, while the preponderance
Human_03.qxd 25/10/05 6:16 PM Page 53

Wilson Jiménez, Fernando Landa and Ernesto Yañez 53

Table 3.15 Wage discrimination, Bolivia, 2000 (per cent)

Inequality
attributable to

Endowments Pay structure

Evaluated at indigenous means 73.3 26.8

Evaluated at non-indigenous means 62.7 37.3
Cotton 67.9 32.2
Oaxaca–Ransom 69.4 30.6

of self-employment and employee-type jobs among indigenous peoples,

combined with the wage penalty of those jobs, increased the earnings differ-
ential between indigenous and non-indigenous workers.
Four decompositions of wages were undertaken.8 Table 3.15 shows that
while these produced estimates of discrimination against indigenous peoples
that varied from 27 per cent to 37 per cent, the two mid-range methods pro-
duced an estimate of 31–2 per cent discrimination.9 This was only slightly
higher than the 28 per cent produced by the 1989 data for Bolivian capital
cities (Wood and Patrinos, 1994) and the 25–28 per cent produced by an
entirely different methodology using 1994 and 1999 data (Contreras and
Galván, 2003).
The results indicate a slight increase in discrimination against indigenous
people in capital cities during the 1990s. One possible explanation of this is
that increased political activity by indigenous people provoked further
discrimination against them. Indigenous groups across Bolivia grew in
prominence throughout the 1990s, culminating in broad success in legisla-
tive elections and the effective overthrow of the president early in the fol-
lowing decade. Another possibility is that discrimination by employers did
not change, but the characteristics of indigenous people did. The increased
incidence of discrimination against indigenous peoples in the capital cities
could also be explained by a rise in the size of the indigenous population due
to rural-urban migration and the increased use of indigenous languages,
dress and observance of traditions due to the influence of indigenous political
movements.

Child labour
Child labour and dropping out of school can prevent children from escaping
poverty and can transmit poverty from one generation to the next. Although
these problems are not exclusive to indigenous peoples they are more common
among them.
In Bolivia children under the age of 10 are considered too young to work.
However the 2002 household survey found that indigenous boys and girls
Human_03.qxd 25/10/05 6:16 PM Page 54

54 Bolivia

Table 3.16 Incidence of child labour, Bolivia, 2002

Indigenous Non-indigenous

Mean Percentage Percentage Mean Percentage Percentage

earnings of family of group Sample earnings of family of group Sample
(bolivianos) income working size (bolivianos) income working size

All children
aged 6–18 42.9 40.5 1 210 182.1 41.1 928
6–8 3.5 0.4 20.5 126 0.0 0.0 0.0 66
9–11 4.0 0.6 31.2 248 27.5 2.0 8.4 156
12–14 26.7 3.7 48.7 345 117.9 8.8 17.1 263
15–18 84.4 45.1 62.9 491 293.2 44.8 28.9 443
Male 37.8 4.5 41.2 641 158.4 9.4 16.0 573
Female 48.8 6.8 34.7 569 216.0 12.7 10.8 355

Source: MECOVI (2002).

were contributing 40.5 per cent of the family income. Over 20.5 per cent of
indigenous children aged six to eight attended school and did not work. The
rest either worked and went to school or neither worked nor went to school.
The probability of studying decreased with age. Of those aged 12–14 only
about half were studying full time and did not work. The incidence of child
labour was higher among indigenous than among non-indigenous children
in every age group. For example in 2002, 8.4 per cent of non-indigenous chil-
dren between the ages of nine and 11 worked. The figure for their indigenous
peers was 31.2 per cent – nearly four times higher (Table 3.16).
The contribution made by indigenous children to household income is
small, but for extremely poor families it can be quite important. Thus the
high opportunity cost of staying in school could contribute to indigenous
children’s higher drop-out rate.
There are many difference between the characteristics of non-indigenous
and indigenous children who work (Table 3.17). In 2002 the average age of
child and adolescent labourers was 13 years for the indigenous population
and 14 years for the non-indigenous population. The younger working age
of indigenous children reflected the higher labour participation rate of the
indigenous population and family organization around work.
Moreover the educational level of children who worked was lower in the
indigenous population. Four per cent of the indigenous children and adoles-
cents who worked had no schooling at all. The educational level of parents is
also a significant factor in child labour. In 2002 mothers of indigenous chil-
dren on average had just 2.7 years of schooling, compared with 6.6 years for
non-indigenous mothers. The figures for fathers were 4.8 and 8.2 respectively.
We have estimated the conditional probability of combining work and
schooling using data from the 2002 household survey (Table 3.18; see also
Cartwright and Patrinos, 1999). The methodology consists of four stages.
Human_03.qxd 25/10/05 6:16 PM Page 55

Wilson Jiménez, Fernando Landa and Ernesto Yañez 55

Table 3.17 Characteristics of working children, Bolivia, 2002

Indigenous Non-indigenous

Male (%) 53.8 59.0

Rural (%) 87.6 43.3
Age 13.2 13.9
Educational level (%)
None 4.0 1.7
Incomplete primary 73.8 63.9
Incomplete secondary 12.5 20.2
Average years of schooling 5.0 6.1
Female household head (%) 0.5 0.2
Number of years of schooling, mother 2.7 6.6
Number of years of schooling, father 4.8 8.2

Source: MECOVI (2002).

Table 3.18 Sequential decision model of child labour, Bolivia, 2002

Probability Probability Probability

Probability that a child that child that a child is
that a will work and a wage a family
child will work not attend school worker enterprise worker

Indigenous 0.50* 0.18 0.03 0.37

Male 0.18* 0.01 1.18* 0.33
Years of schooling,
mother 0.04* 0.08* 0.06 0.09*
Siblings 0.02* 0.02 0.13* 0.01
Urban 0.82* 0.12 1.64* 1.19*
Region (valleys excluded) 0.32 0.27* 0.63* 0.00*
Highlands 0.04 0.23 0.35 0.50*
Plains 0.02* 0.03 0.30* 0.06
Number of
bedrooms in home 0.02 0.07 0.32 0.21
Water 0.00 0.05 0.56* 0.41*
Constant 0.42* 0.01 6.05* 3.81*
ln (household income) 2751.54 682.44 58.70 69.82
Log likelihood
Chi2 804.30 40.70 58.11 51.17
N 6511 1414 296 296

Note: * Underlying coefficient significantly different from zero at 90 per cent level.
Source: MECOVI (2002).

The first estimates the probability that a child will work, controlling for
individual and household characteristics plus geographical area of residence;
the second estimates the probability that a child will work and not attend
school; the third estimates the probability of a child engaging in remunerated
Human_03.qxd 25/10/05 6:16 PM Page 56

56 Bolivia

work, and the fourth estimates the probability that a child will work for the
family enterprise.
The probability of working is greater for indigenous children, controlling
for characteristics such as the educational level of the mother, number of
siblings, place of residence and household income. The educational level of
the mother has a negative and significant coefficient, which indicates that
female education helps to deter child labour. Geographically child labour is
most frequent in rural areas and in the valleys.
With regard to the probability of working and not attending school,
although the effect of being indigenous is still positive it is smaller. However,
the more extensive the mother’s education and the greater the family income,
the lower the probability of working. Thus child labour depends heavily on
household income and the mother’s education. Indigenous children are
slightly more likely to receive a wage if they work. Being male and living in
an urban area have the largest impact on the probability of a child worker
receiving a wage. Also, being indigenous increases the probability that a
child will be employed in a family enterprise.
The decision to work is determined alongside the decision to go to school
or carry out household tasks. These decisions have been estimated using a logis-
tic model that considers the following alternatives: work and attend school,
work only, or help with household duties. The probability of each option is
estimated, controlling for the same characteristics as in the previous model.
The probability of combining work and study rises if a child is indigenous,
male and has siblings (Table 3.19). Conversely, the probability is reduced for
each additional year of the mother’s education and if the household is

Table 3.19 Simultaneous decision model of child labour, Bolivia, 2002

Work and school Work only Home care

Indigenous 0.96 0.64 0.57

Male 0.29 1.03 0.22
Years of schooling mother 0.06 0.24 0.23
Siblings 0.06 0.14 0.03
Urban 1.44 0.23 2.21
Highlands 0.51 1.13 0.84
Plains 0.03 0.20 0.70
Bedrooms 0.01 0.15 0.11
Water 0.04 0.22 0.11
Constant 1.21 8.11 1.24
ln (household income) 0.05 0.74 0.05
Log pseudo likelihood 3 416.98
Chi3 820.1
N 6 182

Source: MECOVI (2002).

Human_03.qxd 25/10/05 6:16 PM Page 57

Wilson Jiménez, Fernando Landa and Ernesto Yañez 57

Table 3.20 Percentage of children who work, Bolivia, 2002

Indigenous Non-indigenous

Age Male Female Male Female

7–8 29.7 35.9 17.2 17.2

9 35.0 36.9 18.4 9.7
10 28.3 25.8 27.7 18.2
11 34.1 28.9 30.4 6.7
12 32.4 28.4 24.5 14.7
13 28.9 28.3 26.7 16.1
14 29.7 24.9 27.3 18.2
15 31.7 24.6 25.4 18.3
16 28.9 24.1 34.6 12.3
17 27.6 21.0 29.4 22.0
18 29.7 24.9 27.5 17.9

Source: MECOVI (2002).

located in an urban area. Being indigenous has a negative effect on the

probability of working and not attending school as do being male, having
siblings and having a large household income.
Analysis of the distribution of child labour among different age groups
generates a fairly even pattern. The only exceptions are indigenous boys and
girls aged eight and under, who have labour participation rates of 22 per cent
and 28 per cent respectively (Table 3.20).

Education

In 1989, people in major Bolivian cities had an average of 7.5 years of schooling.
The non-indigenous population had an average of 7.9 years of schooling and
the bilingual indigenous population had 6.9 years. The monolingual indige-
nous population had virtually no schooling (Table 3.21). Fewer years of
schooling were correlated with poverty for all groups.
In 2002 school enrolment remained low: 18 per cent of non-indigenous
people aged 15 years or older were in school, compared with 8 per cent of
indigenous peoples. The trend was similar for males and females. Secondary
and tertiary schooling for indigenous peoples was similarly low (Table 3.22).
Low enrolment translated into low schooling achievement in the adult
population. Nearly 18 per cent of indigenous peoples aged 15 years and over
had had no education at all, in contrast to 5.5 per cent of non-indigenous
people. The differences were more dramatic among women: 26 per cent
of indigenous women had no education, compared with 8 per cent of
non-indigenous women. There were also significant differences in higher
Human_03.qxd 25/10/05 6:16 PM Page 58

58 Bolivia

Table 3.21 Mean years of schooling, major cities, Bolivia, 1989

Indigenous
Non-
Monolingual Bilingual indigenous All

Individuals 0.1 6.9 7.9 7.5

Not poor 0.0 8.1 9.0 8.7
Poor 0.1 6.2 6.7 6.4
Extremely poor 0.1 5.8 6.4 6.1
Female 0.1 5.9 7.8 7.0
Not poor 0.0 7.1 8.9 8.3
Poor 0.1 5.2 6.7 5.9
Extremely poor 0.1 4.9 6.3 5.6
Household head 0.0 7.5 10.4 8.8
Not poor 0.0 8.7 11.3 10.1
Poor 0.0 6.7 9.1 7.5
Extremely poor 0.0 6.3 8.6 7.0

Source: Integrated Household Survey, 1989.

Table 3.22 Gender and educational achievement, Bolivia, 2002 (people aged 15 and
over, per cent)

Indigenous Non-indigenous

Male Female All Male Female All All

Still in school 9.4 7.3 8.3 18.6 16.9 17.7 12.6

If not still in school, highest
educational achievement
None 7.7 26.4 17.5 3.1 7.8 5.5 12.0
Incomplete primary 49.5 46.4 47.9 31.7 30.6 31.1 40.3
Complete primary 7.6 5.1 6.3 8.4 7.4 7.9 7.0
Incomplete secondary 15.8 9.1 12.3 20.9 19.6 20.2 15.9
Complete secondary 9.7 6.2 7.9 17.1 16.5 16.8 11.9
University 9.7 6.8 8.2 18.9 18.2 18.6 12.9

Source: MECOVI (2002).

education. Only 8 per cent of indigenous peoples had reached university

level, in contrast to 19 per cent of non-indigenous people.
An analysis of educational achievement by birth cohort reveals progress
over time (Table 3.23). In 2002, on average indigenous women born before
1930 had barely one year of schooling, while non-indigenous males in
the same birth cohort had 5.8 years. Although indigenous women continued
to have the lowest levels of education, over the generations their average
Human_03.qxd 25/10/05 6:16 PM Page 59

Wilson Jiménez, Fernando Landa and Ernesto Yañez 59

Table 3.23 Years of education, by period of birth, Bolivia, 2002

Indigenous Non-indigenous

Male Female Male Female

Before 1930 3.8 1.0 5.8 4.8

1930–39 4.1 1.9 6.2 5.5
1940–49 5.3 2.7 7.9 5.9
1950–59 6.1 3.7 9.6 8.2
1960–69 6.6 5.3 7.3 7.4

Source: MECOVI (2002).

Table 3.24 Age–grade distortion, Bolivia, 2002 (per cent)

Indigenous Non-indigenous

1st grade 3.4 2.7

2nd grade 7.5 3.3
3rd grade 9.3 4.7
4th grade 7.7 3.8
5th grade 11.6 6.0

Source: MECOVI (2002).

years of education had increased from one year to more than five years. This
indicates that substantial improvements had been made to the education
system (Urquiola, 2000).
However the age–grade distortion had increased and was systematically
higher for indigenous people. By the fifth year of primary school the pro-
portion of indigenous students who were older than the typical age for each
grade was practically double that of non-indigenous students (Table 3.24).
In summary, although progress was made between 1989 and 2002, a signif-
icant gap in educational achievement remained. On average, in 2002 women
had 1.5 fewer years of schooling than males, indigenous peoples had 2.5 fewer
years of schooling than non-indigenous people, and the education gap among
children aged seven to fourteen continued to exist (Table 3.25).
Illiteracy is widespread in the indigenous population. Although the situa-
tion has improved for the younger age groups the illiteracy rate in 2000 was
well over 40 per cent, and as high as 58–64 per cent for women. Even among
women aged 35–39, one in four was illiterate.
The determinants of school enrolment have been estimated, controlling
for gender, age, educational level of parents, language spoken, number of
Human_03.qxd 25/10/05 6:16 PM Page 60

60 Bolivia

Table 3.25 Mean years of schooling, Bolivia, 2002

Indigenous Non-indigenous Total population

Men Women All Men Women All Men Women All

All individuals aged 15

and over 6.9 4.9 5.9 9.9 9.3 9.6 8.3 6.9 7.5
Household heads 6.4 4.3 6.0 9.6 9.3 9.6 7.5 6.3 7.2
Children aged 7–14 3.4 3.2 3.3 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.4 3.4

Source: MECOVI (2002).

Table 3.26 Illiteracy rate, Bolivia, 2002 (per cent)

Total population Indigenous

Age Total Male Female Total Male Female

10–14 1.3 1.1 1.5 1.6 0.9 2.5

15–19 1.0 0.6 1.3 1.5 0.3 2.8
20–24 3.0 1.1 4.8 5.3 1.0 9.0
25–29 5.7 3.1 8.0 9.1 5.0 13.0
30–34 7.6 3.4 11.3 11.1 4.9 16.1
35–39 9.6 2.6 15.7 14.5 3.3 25.1
40–44 15.5 5.8 23.9 20.2 6.8 31.9
45–49 17.2 6.6 28.2 23.1 8.4 36.6
50–54 21.7 9.4 34.8 27.1 12.2 43.3
55–59 28.6 13.6 44.1 35.2 16.3 54.9
60–64 33.9 20.9 46.4 41.4 24.4 58.0
65–69 40.7 23.8 55.8 45.9 27.8 64.0
Urban (15–69) 4.5 1.2 7.4 8.1 1.7 13.7
Rural (15–69) 22.4 11.4 34.1 25.3 12.4 38.5

Source: MECOVI (2002).

children in the household, housing characteristics, family income and

whether or not the child attends a private school (Table 3.27). The analysis
shows that in 2002 indigenous peoples were significantly less likely to enrol
their children in school, even when their household resources and individual
characteristics were similar to those of non-indigenous people.
The probability of being enrolled in primary school differed and was
statistically significant (18.2 percentage points) between indigenous and
non-indigenous children, even after controlling for individual and house-
hold characteristics (Table 3.28). Moreover, there was a marked gender gap in
the enrolment of indigenous children.
Human_03.qxd 25/10/05 6:16 PM Page 61

Wilson Jiménez, Fernando Landa and Ernesto Yañez 61

Table 3.27 Determinants of school enrolment, youth sub-sample, Bolivia, 2002

Mean Coeff. z Marginal effect

Constant 3.19* 5.34

Age 10.46 0.23* 5.47 0.008
Male 0.52 0.15 0.95 0.005
Mother’s schooling 5.27 0.10* 3.36 0.004
Indigenous 0.34 0.26 1.19 0.011
No. of siblings 2.71 0.08* 1.56 0.003
No. of rooms 1.76 0.36 3.65 0.014
Urban 0.60 0.33* 1.56 0.014
Highland 0.40 0.67* 3.22 0.024
Plains 0.32 0.43* 1.94 0.019
Private school 0.11 0.35 0.74 0.007
Family income 4.86 0.16* 2.24 0.006
Male head of household
R3 0.1095

Note: * Significant at the 90 per cent level.

Source: MECOVI (2002).

Table 3.28 Probability of being enrolled in school, Bolivia,

2002 (7–14 year olds, per cent)

Indigenous Non-indigenous All

Male 63.8 70.9 68.5

Female 39.1 69.3 58.9
All 51.9 70.1 63.8

Source: Calculated from Table 3.27.

Bilingual education
The Bolivian education authority has sought to reduce the learning and
achievement gaps between indigenous and non-indigenous people through
bilingual education. It argues that in order to overcome the barriers to par-
ticipation and improve the quality of education for indigenous peoples,
indigenous children should learn to read and write in their mother tongue
(Aymara, Quechua or Guaraní) as well as Spanish (Ministry of Education,
2004). Mathematics, science and other subjects are taught in both languages,
in rural areas. By 2001 nearly 2400 schools were primarily providing bilingual
education – more than twice the number in 1997.
However, an evaluation of school enrolment reveals that despite the
progress made in expanding the coverage of primary education during
the 1990s, the net enrolment and completion rates reveal a high drop-out
Human_03.qxd 25/10/05 6:16 PM Page 62

62 Bolivia

rate, especially in rural areas and by indigenous children. Rural areas also
suffer from a shortage of teachers and a lack of educational provision for the
last few years of elementary education. Unlike access to schooling, the drop-
out rate and age–grade distortion are related to households’ socioeconomic
characteristics, such as limited income and lack of basic infrastructure services.

Educational achievement
Based on the results of language and mathematics exams, it is evident
that gaps in educational achievement exist between indigenous and non-
indigenous children. At least one third of the gap is explained by the
unequal allocation of family resources (McEwan, 2004). An evaluation of the
structure of the gap and the determinants of educational achievement
reveals the following.
The educational gap between the indigenous and non-indigenous children
is perpetuated by the fact that indigenous families have fewer economic
resources, the parents are less educated and have less access to basic services.
Moreover, indigenous children tend to be concentrated in poorly-performing
schools that have few materials and no classroom equipment.
After controlling for household and individual characteristics and school
conditions, a large part of the gap remains unexplained. This could be
attributed to unobservable variables, such as differential treatment of indige-
nous and non-indigenous students by teachers or unequal distribution of
resources among students in the same class. It is also probable that indige-
nous students cannot take advantage of school resources due to language
barriers, especially when materials have been designed for Spanish-speaking
students (McEwan, 2004).
In order to improve educational achievement, solutions such as setting a
minimum standard for the distribution of materials to schools and imposing
restrictions on class size have been proposed (Urquiola, 2000). Such mea-
sures, as well as extended and improved bilingual education, including
indigenous texts, could help narrow the gap.

Health care

Inequality in health care between indigenous and non-indigenous people is

as evident as gaps in education and income. For example 55 per cent of non-
indigenous women but only 30 per cent of indigenous women have their
babies in hospital. Fifty-one per cent of indigenous women give birth to their
children at home, compared with just 13 per cent of non-indigenous women
(Table 3.29). While the preponderance of home births might be due to
indigenous cultural traditions, it can pose a considerable risk if there are
complications.
Disease and accidents are more common among indigenous people,
21.2 per cent of whom suffered an illness or injury during the 30 days prior
Human_03.qxd 25/10/05 6:16 PM Page 63

Wilson Jiménez, Fernando Landa and Ernesto Yañez 63

Table 3.29 Location of most recent birth, Bolivia, 2002 (per cent)

Indigenous Non-indigenous All

Public hospital 29.7 55.1 40.0

Health centre 6.3 4.5 5.5
Health post 3.7 2.7 3.3
Social security 4.3 11.0 7.1
Private clinic 4.4 12.6 7.8
Own home 51.4 12.7 35.6
Other 0.3 1.3 0.7

Source: MECOVI (2002).

Table 3.30 General health conditions, Bolivia, 2002 (per cent)

Indigenous Non-indigenous

Rural Urban All Rural Urban All All

Sick or injured in the past 30 days 12.4 8.8 21.2 3.1 10.6 13.7 17.4
Received medical help (excluding
self-treatment and home cures) 28.6 49.8 37.6 41.8 53.0 50.5 42.8

Source: MECOVI (2002).

to the 2002 survey, compared with 13.7 per cent of non-indigenous people
(Table 3.30). Of the latter, 50.5 per cent received medical care but only
37.6 per cent of the sick or injured indigenous peoples did so.
In 2002 indigenous peoples received more medical care at home than
in hospitals, health centres, social health fund sites or private hospitals
(Table 3.31). One in five non-indigenous people had no medical treatment
in the event of illness, compared with one in four indigenous peoples.
Indigenous families spend less than non-indigenous families on private
health care, with the exception of hospitalization (Table 3.32). This lower
spending may be due to the availability of social health fund (caja) facilities
in isolated rural and indigenous areas. Although the health insurance cover-
age rate is low throughout the country, indigenous peoples have less public
health insurance and far less private health insurance than non-indigenous
people (Table 3.33).
In order to improve access to health care, especially for indigenous peoples
one national health policy that has been considered is an indigenous basic
health insurance. This proposal arose out of social conflict that took place in
Bolivia at the end of 2000, when various social and indigenous organizations
demanded the extension of the country’s Basic Health Insurance scheme to
rural areas. Despite having increased the package of services provided and the
geographical reach of the scheme rural communities were still not covered.
Human_03.qxd 25/10/05 6:16 PM Page 64

64 Bolivia

Table 3.31 Place where illness was treated, Bolivia, 2002 (per cent)

Indigenous Non-indigenous All

No treatment 24.7 20.1 22.8

Public hospital 13.1 17.3 14.9
Health centre 9.4 10.2 9.7
Health post 7.8 6.9 7.4
Social health fund (Caja) 8.5 11.3 9.7
Private hospital 4.8 8.9 6.5
Physician 4.8 6.0 5.3
Pharmacy 5.8 7.2 6.4
Own home 45.2 30.9 39.3
Other 0.6 1.2 0.9

Source: MECOVI (2002).

Table 3.32 Expenditure on health care in the two weeks prior to the
survey, per individual, Bolivia, 2002 (current bolivianos)

Indigenous Non-indigenous All

Medical consultation 56.9 95.0 77.1

Medicine 72.0 93.9 82.6
Hospitalization 783.6 586.5 674.2
Other 251.4 299.5 277.9
Non assignable 284.3 505.9 373.2

Note: The data include only individuals who were sick or injured in the month
prior to the survey.
Source: MECOVI (2002).

Table 3.33 Medical insurance coverage, Bolivia, 2002 (per cent)

Indigenous Non-indigenous All

Public medical insurance 10.1 14.4 12.3

Private medical insurance 1.6 5.0 3.3
No insurance 87.9 79.9 83.9
Other 0.3 0.7 0.5

Source: MECOVI (2002).

The proposed scheme for indigenous people would extend 10 new benefits
to 232 indigenous municipalities, with services being tailored to the local
beliefs and customs. Included among these benefits were the provision of
the basic health insurance scheme in rural areas, setting of special offices in
health facilities to serve and defend the rights and traditions of indigenous
Human_03.qxd 25/10/05 6:16 PM Page 65

Wilson Jiménez, Fernando Landa and Ernesto Yañez 65

peoples, and establishing a mobile clinic service for scattered indigenous

communities.
Those proposals were accompanied by suggestions for other cultural
adaptations to the services, including intercultural health offices to support
indigenous peoples and ensure that they receive decent health services. Also,
a bill of rights for indigenous women guaranteeing good health care during
pregnancy and the birth process has been implemented. Intercultural health
brigades work in the most vulnerable 200 indigenous municipalities of the
country to promote family and community health in order to use human and
health resources more effectively.

Conclusions

This chapter has discussed a broad range of issues related to the welfare of
the indigenous and non-indigenous peoples of Bolivia. Using the language
criterion, at least half of the Bolivian population is indigenous. During the
1990s the indigenous population grew in absolute terms and gained political
ground. The 2002 election resulted in greater parliamentary representation
of indigenous peoples, reflecting their demand for social, economic and
political inclusion and a voice in the development of the country. These
demands prompted a radical questioning of the political and economic bases
of the Bolivian economy.
Indigenous communities now receive more basic services and have
improved access to education, health care and other public services. However
significant human development gaps remain between the indigenous and
non-indigenous populations. Most indigenous peoples have yet to escape
poverty and are just as poor as they were in 1989, especially in rural areas,
although the incidence of poverty is also significant among non-indigenous
people. In major cities the size of the non-indigenous, non-poor population
has remained more or less constant since 1989. However there has been a
modest reduction in the size of the non-indigenous poor population and a
slight decrease in that of the poor indigenous population, in part due to the
greater possibility of social mobility in urban areas.
Finding work in the formal sector can be difficult for indigenous peoples,
and the consequently high incidence of employment in the informal sector
is one of the larger structural problems of the Bolivian labour market. Large
wage differentials remain between the indigenous and non-indigenous popu-
lations. On average, in 2002 non-indigenous people earned 1127 bolivianos
a month. Indigenous peoples earned less than half that amount, (513 boli-
vianos).
Child labour is prevalent among indigenous peoples. In 2002, 31 per cent
of indigenous children aged nine to eleven had jobs, compared with 8 per
cent of non-indigenous children. Indigenous adolescents aged 12–14 and
young people aged 15–18 enter the labour force at much higher rates than
Human_03.qxd 25/10/05 6:16 PM Page 66

66 Bolivia

their non-indigenous peers. The opportunity cost of staying in school may

contribute to the higher drop-out rate for indigenous children. In 2002,
while only 18 per cent of non-indigenous 15 year-olds were still in school,
school attendance at that age was even lower for indigenous youngsters
(8 per cent). Educational opportunities at the secondary and tertiary levels
are limited for the indigenous population, which will have consequences for
the achievements of indigenous adults in the future.
Health indicators are just as troubling. Despite the creation of special health
insurance, ill-health and the morbidity rate remain worse for indigenous than
for non-indigenous people.

Notes
1. The authors thank Sergio Criales for his contributions.
2. Under Law 1615 of 6 February 1995.
3. The analysis of household surveys in this chapter uses expansion factors to estimate
values for indigenous and non-indigenous populations, but the sample size in each
table shows only the number of relevant observations used in the sample.
4. This is partly due to the availability of natural resources on the plains and the effects
of regional productivity. In recent years most private and public returns have been
generated in Santa Cruz, Beni and Pando – the departments that include the plains.
5. To allow comparability with other countries in this study, this section covers
people aged 15–65.
6. Similar trend is observed when the household head is the unit of analysis.
7. One boliviano  $0.13.
8. See the Appendix of this book for the methodology used.
9. The results presented here are restricted to the 2000 data, although decompositions
were also conducted with 2001 and 2002 data. The spread between the different
methods for measuring decomposition – the range between the estimates of discrim-
ination using returns at indigenous and non-indigenous means – give one indica-
tion of the representivity of the decompositions. Since these decompositions were
limited to observed factors to estimate discrimination. The wide range suggests
that the predictive power of observed factors to explain the differences between
indigenous and non-indigenous earnings is limited. The 2000, 2001 and 2002 sur-
veys used slightly different questions on background and earnings. Wider ranges
between the different methods resulted from estimating discrimination with the
2001 and 2002 data than with the 2000 data. Although differences in mean values
and returns to endowments were small between the 2000, 2001 and 2002 surveys
and the mid-range estimates of discrimination were similar, modifications to the
variables included in the earnings functions had larger effects on the earnings
functions and discrimination estimates of the 2001 and 2002 data and smaller
effects on the 2000 data. These sensitivity tests and the consistency of the discrim-
ination estimates between the methods suggest that in combination thus more
accurately measure discrimination.
Human_04.qxd 25/10/05 6:16 PM Page 67

4
Ecuador
Carlos Larrea and Fernando Montenegro Torres

Introduction

Since pre-Columbian times the region that is now Ecuador has been an area
of great cultural diversity. In part this diversity is due to the country’s terrain.
Over the last thousand years and before the demographic changes of the
mid-twentieth century, most of the population inhabited the region where
the Andes mountains reach their narrowest point. Here generous rainfall
and volcanic soil ensure the narrow valleys’ fertility. Elsewhere the landscape
ranges from high-altitude moors (known as páramos) to the rainforests of the
Amazon basin and the Pacific coastal plains. In this diverse geographical
setting the indigenous peoples did not evolve into demographically large
empires but lived in complex networks of smaller societies (Salomon, 1987).
Another relevant cultural characteristic of the peoples of the northern
Andes was the importance that each group placed on its unique cultural
identity, even in the case of smaller groups living near each other within the
boundaries of a relatively small geographical area. The related traditions and
practices, however, coexisted with a multitude of intergroup and intercom-
munity relationships. The markets (tianguez) scattered throughout the land
were of utmost importance to these relationships. Strong trading traditions
and trade routes linked populations divided by mountain ranges, rivers and
deep ravines. The indigenous peoples shared for productive purposes a
variety of ecological niches and were able to adapt their socioeconomic prac-
tices in times of peace and war. While forging alliances that would persist
long after the Spanish conquest, the peoples of the northern Andes nonethe-
less often fought wars for control of the best maize-producing lands in
the highlands, while at the same time sharing resources with their adver-
saries for the production of cotton and other highly valued crops at lower
altitudes.
The capacity to adapt was made possible by intimate knowledge of
the region’s environment (Salomon and Schwartz, 1999) and thorough
understanding of the local meteorological cycles. The resilience of these

67
Human_04.qxd 25/10/05 6:16 PM Page 68

68 Ecuador

communities ensured their survival even in the event of military conquest

by larger and more powerful groups and their capacity to reassert their
cultural identity created highly complex community dynamics (Cruz, 1997).
Thus since earlier times – from the fifteenth-century Inca invasion to the
nineteenth-century hacienda expansion – indigenous peoples showed a
remarkable ability to adapt to changing circumstances, and this also has
been evident in their political involvement in recent decades (Selverston-
Scher, 2001; Gerlach, 2003).
In the 1980s the indigenous peoples of Ecuador relied on their own
organizations rather than working through alliances with or within other
political parties, which had previously been the predominant strategy.
Founded in 1986, the Confederación de Nacionalidades Indígenas de
Ecuador (CONAIE) is the largest pan-Ecuadorian indigenous organization. In
1988 CONAIE achieved its first important political victory by striking a deal
with the president of Ecuador for the incorporation of bilingual education
into the national education system. Because of its vast indigenous backing
CONAIE was often able to negotiate with the highest governmental author-
ities on various social and political issues. In 1990 a number of demands by
the indigenous population, accompanied by mass mobilization, demonstra-
tions and road blocks, resulted in direct negotiations with the president of
Ecuador and catapulted indigenous organizations to the forefront of
national politics.
The capacity of indigenous groups to mobilize their own communities and
other organized groups has had undeniable consequences for policy making,
particularly in the areas of agrarian reform, education, health care and
matters relating to poverty. There is now widespread acknowledgement of
the contribution of Ecuador’s indigenous movement to the new social and
democratic agendas (Barrera, 2001a).
Although indigenous groups account for a smaller share of the population
in Ecuador than in Bolivia, Guatemala and Peru, they have been highly
effective in shaping the political arena over the last decade (Beck and
Mijeski, 2001). Today they effectively control 27 municipalities and provin-
cial governments across the country, and in the past five years have had
sufficient political leverage to elect key members of the national congress, to
appoint an indigenous woman as vice-president of the congress and, in the
early months of the current presidential administration, to select the first
indigenous ministers for key cabinet positions (foreign affairs and agricul-
ture) that have traditionally been the stronghold of the dominant elites.
Despite these advances poverty, measured according to income as well as
physical and human capital, continues to affect indigenous peoples dispro-
portionately. Moreover, Ecuador experienced a severe economic shock dur-
ing the period of this study, with overall per capita income dropping by 10
per cent between 1997 and 1999 (Larrea, 2004). This facts creates a particu-
larly interesting back drop against which to assume changes in poverty and
Human_04.qxd 25/10/05 6:16 PM Page 69

Carlos Larrea and Fernando Montenegro Torres 69

human development. This chapter provides a comprehensive analysis of the

social and economic circumstances of the Ecuadorian indigenous peoples
during the 1990s as compared to the non-indigenous population, drawing
on data from national household surveys and censuses. It assesses trends in
poverty, employment, earnings, education and health, generating estimates
that are comparable not only over time but also with data from other coun-
tries in the region.

Demographics

The demographics of indigenous peoples are generally different from those

of non-indigenous people. On average indigenous peoples are younger,
likely to migrate and live in larger households.
Based on an extended version of the definition of ‘indigenous’ in the
2001 census and adding self-identification and the language spoken at the
household level, the average indigenous household has 4. 8 members, com-
pared with 4.2 in non-indigenous households. The average age of the indige-
nous population is 25.5 years, while that of the non-indigenous population
is 27.6 years. Households with two resident spouses are more prevalent in
the indigenous population. In 1998, according to living standards measure-
ment survey (LSMS), 82 per cent of married indigenous household heads and
their spouses lived together, compared with 74 per cent in non-indigenous
rural households and 71 per cent in urban households.
As noted above, indigenous peoples are also less prone to migrate. Only
6 per cent of indigenous peoples had migrated within Ecuador during the five
years prior to the 2001 census, compared with 9 per cent of non-indigenous
people (Table 4.1), and while indigenous people accounted for 9.2 per cent
of population, their share of international emigration was only 5.7 per cent.

Table 4.1 Internal migration rates, Ecuador, 1996–2001 (per cent)

Non-indigenous Indigenous Total population

Rural 6.5 3.3 5.9

Urban 10.4 13.3 10.5
All 9.0 6.1 8.8

Source: National census, 2001.

Poverty among indigenous peoples in Ecuador

The current socioeconomic context

Ecuador is one of the least developed countries in Latin America. In 2001,
national per capita income was US$1461, substantially below the regional
Human_04.qxd 25/10/05 6:16 PM Page 70

70 Ecuador

average of $3864. The country also ranks low on the UNDP’s human devel-
opment index (ninety-seventh of the 175 countries in the world), holding
the second-worst position in South America, above only Bolivia (UNDP,
2003). Primary products still account for 88 per cent of exports, principally
oil, bananas, shrimps, coffee, cocoa and flowers. The social, regional and eth-
nic disparities that have historically affected the country remain pervasive.
While significant economic growth and social improvements were stimu-
lated by banana exports in the 1950s and oil exports in the 1970s, since then
the economy has experienced an extended period of stagnation. In fact per
capita income is slightly below what it was in 1980.
During the late 1990s a series of adverse events sparked a severe economic
and social crisis, deepening the effects of the prolonged stagnation. First, in
1998 the worst floods ever recorded devastated the coastal region as a result
of El Niño (the name given to the warming of the eastern tropical Pacific that
disrupts the weather pattern in the region). As about 45 per cent of the
national population were located on the coast and the bulk of Ecuador’s
export crops were grown there, the economic and social costs of the floods
were immense, including the destruction of roads, crops and infrastructure
and the spread of infectious diseases. It is estimated that the economic loss
amounted to 14.5 per cent of GDP (CEPAL, 1999).
The second shock was the fall of the oil price from $18 per barrel in 1996
to $9 in 1998. Given that oil was the main source of revenue, accounting for
about 40 per cent of national resources, the impact of the plummet in price
was immense and the fiscal situation, already affected by the cost of recon-
struction in the coastal region, became critical.
This precarious situation turned into collapse as a result of a third factor:
the international consequences of the financial crisis in Southeast Asia in July
1997. The effect in Latin America was a sudden and massive withdrawal of
short-term capital from the region. In 1998 the public sector was unable to
prevent a widespread financial crisis, and as a result 70 per cent of private
banks were bankrupted or transferred to the state. Per capita income dropped
by 9 per cent in 1999, and according to former President Osvaldo Hurtado
(2000) the cost of the financial crisis was equal to about 22 per cent of GDP.
In the midst of the crisis, foreign exchange scarcity and speculation fuelled
a rapid devaluation of the national currency. To prevent hyperinflation the
government eliminated the national currency and officially adopted the US
dollar in January 2000. Although social unrest and political conflict resulted
in a change of government, successive governments endorsed dollarization
as a long-term strategic option.
Although per capita income recovered slowly from 2000 onwards, as of
2004 it is still slightly below its 1998 level and comparable to that in 1980.
The social cost of this has been considerable. The national poverty head-
count increased from 56 per cent in 1995 to 69 per cent in 2000, declining
to 61 per cent in 2001 and 60 per cent in 2003. Unemployment in urban
areas soared from 8 per cent in 1998 to 17 per cent in 1999, and then
Human_04.qxd 25/10/05 6:16 PM Page 71

Carlos Larrea and Fernando Montenegro Torres 71

dropped to 10 per cent in 2004. The crisis also spurred a massive migration
to North America and Europe – about 700,000 Ecuadorians emigrated
between 1998 and 2004 (Larrea, 2004).
The World Bank (2004a) has developed poverty maps based on the 1990
and 2001 censuses and the 1994 and 1999 LSMS surveys. According to these
estimates the national poverty headcount rose from 40 per cent to 45 per cent
between 1990 and 2001. Urban areas were most affected by this increase.

Indigenous peoples and poverty

Table 4.2 summarizes the incidence of poverty in Ecuador in 1998, the most
recent year with national data coverage and aggregate consumption infor-
mation. Indigenous peoples were among the poorest in society, with a
poverty rate of 87 per cent nationwide and 96 per cent in the rural high-
lands. Extreme poverty affected 71 per cent of indigenous rural highlanders
and 56 per cent of the total indigenous population. The difference in poverty
rates between indigenous and non-indigenous people in the rural Amazon
area were less marked.
Figure 4.1, shows the distribution of per capita consumption by ethnicity.
Poverty lines assumed in this chapter are compatitive unit these used in the
World Bank Poverty repeat (1996) and official estimates from 1999. See the
Appendix for a detailed explanation. The curve is skewed to the left for

Table 4.2 Poverty incidence by region, Ecuador, 1998

Poor Extremely
(%) poor (%) Population Sample size

Rural highlands 82.2 50.3 2245532 1175

Indigenous 95.6 70.5 435091 222
Non-indigenous 78.9 45.1 1810441 953
Urban highlands
minus Quito 47.7 13.0 1125175 600
Quito 27.9 4.9 1173138 754
Rural coast 83.2 42.5 2128590 1064
Urban coast minus
Guayaquil 63.8 19.8 2049005 822
Guayaquil 45.7 11.0 2070600 765
Rural Amazon 75.1 24.9 302048 288
Indigenous 71.3 32.2 53283 37
Non-indigenous 75.9 24.0 248765 251
Urban Amazon 45.3 24.9 75180 325
Total indigenous 86.9 55.6 610720 351
Total non-indigenous 61.1 25.2 10410712 5404
National total 62.5 26.9 11021432 5755

Note: Population figures estimated through a weighted sample.

Source: Living Conditions Survey, 1998.
Human_04.qxd 25/10/05 6:16 PM Page 72

72 Ecuador

Figure 4.1 Smoothed distribution of per capita consumption, Ecuador, 1998

Indigenous
Frequency

Non-indigenous

0
0
Extreme Poverty
poverty
Per capita consumption (1 500 000 sucres/month)

Source: Living Conditions Survey, 1998.

indigenous households, indicating that more of them at lower consumption

levels, well below the extreme poverty line. The official poverty lines follow
a similar pattern, albeit with lower rates. According to them, in 2001 the
incidence of poverty was 86 per cent for indigenous peoples and 45 per cent
for non-indigenous people, with a national average of 46 per cent (SIISE,
2001). In summary, poverty in Ecuador affects mostly rural areas and indige-
nous households.
The degree of poverty is also greater in indigenous communities. The
poverty gap gauges the average difference between per capita consumption
and poverty lines, with a gap of zero for non-poor households. In 1998 the
poverty gap was 49 per cent for indigenous peoples, compared with 26 per cent
for the non-indigenous population. In other words, in order to overcome
poverty indigenous households would have to double their consumption
(assuming an equal distribution of gains) while non-indigenous people
would only have to increase it by a third. Similar differences exist in the case
of the extreme poverty gap and poverty severity (Table 4.3).
As different poverty lines have been used in Ecuador it is important to
determine whether the differences between indigenous and non-indigenous
people hold regardless of the poverty line used. Figure 4.2 presents the per
capita consumption curves for 1994 and 1998, broken down by ethnicity.
Human_04.qxd 25/10/05 6:16 PM Page 73

Carlos Larrea and Fernando Montenegro Torres 73

Table 4.3 Poverty gap and severity, Ecuador, 1998 (per cent)

Indigenous Non-indigenous

Poverty gap 48.51 26.26

Poverty severity 31.28 14.38
Extreme poverty gap 21.78 7.70
Extreme poverty severity 11.28 3.36

Source: Living Conditions Survey, 1998.

Figure 4.2 Per capita cumulative consumption, Ecuador, 1994 and 1998
Cummulative percentage of population

100

Indigenous 1998
80
Indigenous 1994

60
Non-indigenous 1998
40 Non-indigenous 1994

20

0
0 1 2 3 4
Per capita consumption (basic food basket)

Sources: Living Conditions Survey, 1994, 1998.

These curves represent the cumulative distribution of consumption for a

range of levels of per capita consumption that are suitable as poverty lines.
In both years indigenous peoples were consistently poorer, regardless of the
poverty line used. The figure also demonstrates the effect of the economic
crisis that began in 1998, suggesting across-the-board consequences as
poverty increased in similar proportions for both groups.

Ethnicity, poverty and crisis

Empirical evidence of the effects of the crisis on indigenous peoples is
limited. The national LSMS surveys covered only the 1994–98 period (the
1999 LSMS did not include the Amazon region), and other national surveys
conducted in 2000, 2001 and 2003 produced no information on consump-
tion and had less detailed questions on income. Monthly information on the
evolution of the crisis and recovery in urban areas is available, but it is not rel-
evant here as it lacks desegregation between indigenous and non-indigenous
households. Recognizing these limits on comparability, a second-best way to
Human_04.qxd 25/10/05 6:16 PM Page 74

74 Ecuador

compare poverty data from national sources is to combine consumption-

based poverty estimates up to 1999 with the income-based data that are avail-
able for 2000, 2001 and 2003. The results are presented in Tables 4.4 and 4.5.
As can be seen in Table 4.4, the crisis had a greater impact in urban areas,
where poverty increased by 18 per cent but diminished in 2001 and 2003,
while extreme poverty remained well above its initial level. In rural areas the
initial impact was concentrated on the coast. However the increase in poverty
in the highlands, particularly extreme poverty, is striking. Moreover, there is
evidence of continued deterioration through 2003, particularly in rural areas.
The pace of recovery may be somewhat overestimated due to the fact that
consumption (used as the measure in the earlier years) tends to recover faster
than income (used since 2000). The data show that the severe increase in
indigenous poverty had not completely reversed by 2003. Extreme poverty
among the indigenous population remained higher than in 1994.2
As poverty rates were high even before the crisis, an investigation of the
evolution of average per capita consumption (or income) is useful
(Table 4.6). The indigenous/non-indigenous per capita consumption ratio
declined from 0.52 in 1994 to 0.41 in 1999, recovering only in 2003. Thus it
appears that indigenous peoples were indeed more vulnerable to the crisis,

Table 4.4 Poverty, by area and region, Ecuador, 1995–2003 (per cent)

Poverty Extreme poverty

Area/region 1995 1998 2000 2001 2003 1995 1998 2000 2001 2003

Rural
Coast 74.9 83.7 84.8 78.1 86.6 30.5 43.1 59.1 52.1 57.4
Highlands 77.7 81.5 83.9 77.0 77.7 39.1 49.7 58.6 48.7 49.4
Amazon 69.9 75.1 83.0 77.8 82.7 23.8 38.7 52.2 53.7 61.7
All 75.8 82.0 84.1 77.5 81.1 33.9 46.1 58.2 50.5 53.5
Urban
Coast 42.5 54.4 65.7 60.0 57.6 9.2 15.3 34.9 31.7 28.4
(Guayaquil) 37.5 45.8 57.9 51.3 48.1 8.0 10.9 26.7 26.0 19.8
Highlands 42.2 38.9 53.2 40.5 36.3 12.6 9.3 24.5 15.5 14.0
(Quito) 29.9 29.5 49.1 36.4 25.9 7.8 5.3 19.6 12.9 8.2
Amazon 47.2 45.3 57.1 44.6 40.3 14.4 9.8 24.5 19.8 19.2
All 42.4 48.6 60.3 51.6 48.5 10.6 13.0 30.3 24.7 22.3
Total
Coast 53.9 64.3 71.1 65.0 64.7 16.6 24.7 41.8 37.3 35.8
Highlands 57.6 59.9 65.4 55.3 52.9 24.1 29.2 38.1 29.0 28.2
Amazon 65.5 69.3 77.0 69.5 69.0 22.0 33.0 45.9 45.2 48.0
All 55.9 62.6 68.8 60.8 59.6 20.0 26.9 40.3 33.8 32.9

Sources: Living Conditions Survey, 1995, 1998; Measurement Survey of Childhood and Household
Indicators, 2000; Employment, Unemployment, and Underemployment Survey, 2001, 2003.
Human_04.qxd 25/10/05 6:16 PM Page 75

Carlos Larrea and Fernando Montenegro Torres 75

Table 4.5 Poverty, by ethnicity, Ecuador, 1994–2003 (per cent)

Poverty Extreme poverty

Indigenous Non-indigenous All Indigenous Non-indigenous All

1994 79.8 50.9 52.8 47.6 13.6 13.6

1995 64.6 55.3 55.9 27.2 19.5 19.5
1998 87.0 61.2 62.6 55.6 25.2 25.2
1999 91.8 64.1 66.2 74.1 25.7 25.7
2000 84.3 67.6 68.8 63.3 38.6 38.6
2001 80.3 59.3 60.8 56.0 32.0 32.0
2003 80.2 57.9 59.6 56.6 31.0 32.9

Note: From 1994 to 1999 poverty is based on consumption; from 2000 to 2003 it is based on
income.
Sources: Living Conditions Survey, 1995, 1998; Measurement Survey of Childhood and Household
Indicators, 2000; National Statistics and Census Institute, 2001; Employment, Unemployment,
and Underemployment Survey, 2003.

Table 4.6 Average per capita consumption (1994–9) and income (2000–3), Ecuador

Non-indigenous Indigenous All Indig./non-indig. ratio

1994 2.82 1.47 2.73 0.524

1995 2.46 2.10 2.44 0.855
1998 2.46 1.12 2.39 0.454
1999 2.27 0.93 2.17 0.411
2000 2.31 1.15 2.24 0.495
2001 2.96 1.49 2.85 0.503
2003 2.91 1.53 2.81 0.524

Note: Calculations based on the basic food basket for the years 1994–99, and on income for 2000–3.
Sources: Living Conditions Survey, 1994, 1995, 1998, 1999; Measurement Survey of Childhood
and Household Indicators, 2000; Employment, Unemployment, and Underemployment Survey,
2001, 2003.

and some effects of the crisis remain. As income is more sensitive than con-
sumption to short-term fluctuations, recovery may be even slower. Both the
higher relative impact of the crisis on household income and the slower
pace of recovery among indigenous households are striking, taking into
account their already widespread poverty. Those levels may also be an effect
of the growing integration of indigenous peoples into the labour market. As
land has become more scarce as a result of population growth, land owner-
ship fragmentation and soil erosion, indigenous households have come to
depend more on income from waged agricultural and non-agricultural
work – mostly labouring and artisan production. Thus indigenous peoples
Human_04.qxd 25/10/05 6:16 PM Page 76

76 Ecuador

were severely affected by the increasing unemployment, lower wages and

shrinking domestic markets brought about by the crisis.
Another consequence of the crisis was mass emigration from 1998
onwards, mostly to Spain, Italy and the United States. Subsequently foreign
remittances from emigrants, which increased from $200 million in 1992 to
$1432 million in 2002, became one of the most important factors in
economic recovery (Larrea, 2004).

Poverty, identity and human capital

Table 4.7 shows the 1998 distribution of three basic indicators of human
capital: years of schooling, school enrolment for children aged 10–18 who

Table 4.7 Education, nutrition and child labour, by income quintile Ecuador, 19981

Percentage of Percentage of
children minors
Years aged 0–4 (aged 10–18) who
of with chronic attended school
Ethnicity schooling malnutrition2 and were not employed

Quintile 1 Non-indigenous 4.2 42 36

(poorest Indigenous 2.9 62 10
20 per cent) All 4.0 45 33
Quintile 2 Non-indigenous 5.3 28 38
Indigenous 4.2 54 18
All 5.2 30 37
Quintile 3 Non-indigenous 6.3 21 49
Indigenous 5.7 61 35
All 6.3 22 48
Quintile 4 Non-indigenous 7.6 17 54
Indigenous 6.8 30 66
All 7.6 18 55
Quintile 5 Non-indigenous 10.0 12 69
(richest Indigenous 9.4 7 42
20 per cent) All 10.0 12 69
Total population Non-indigenous 6.9 26 49
Indigenous 4.3 59 22
All 6.7 28 47

Notes
1
The questions on labour participation were more detailed in the 1998 Living Conditions Survey
than in the 2001 census, resulting in a higher figure for child labour and a lower figure for children
who attended school and were not employed. According to the 2001 census, 65.5 per cent of non-
indigenous children aged 10–18 attended school and were not employed, the corresponding figure
for indigenous children was 48 per cent.
2
Chronic malnutrition, or stunting prevalence, was estimated from anthropometric data using the
standard WHO definitions.
Source: Living Conditions Survey, 1998.
Human_04.qxd 25/10/05 6:16 PM Page 77

Carlos Larrea and Fernando Montenegro Torres 77

did not also engage in paid or unpaid work, and chronic malnutrition of
children under 5 years of age. In all three cases, indigenous individuals were
consistently worse off than the rest of the population. They had lower
human capital endowments, both in comparison with the rest of the popu-
lation and within consumption quintiles.
In addition to lower human capital endowments, indigenous peoples may
be affected by lower human capital returns. In other words human capital
investment may be less effective in improving the living standard of indige-
nous peoples than of non-indigenous peoples. To investigate the differential
effects of human capital on living standards a number of logistic regression
analyses have been conducted. These estimate the probability of households
and individuals being poor, controlling for schooling, health status and
other variables such as the age of the household head, the number of family
members and their age, plus gender, area of residence and ethnicity. Even
after allowing for these factors the results of each of the models used in the
analyses show a positive association between being indigenous and the like-
lihood of being poor.
The results of the model for individuals are presented in Table 4.8. The
individual probability of being poor depends on all the included variables.

Table 4.8 Determinants of poverty, Ecuador, 1998 (logit regression, dependent variable
poverty)

Coefficient Odds ratio Marginal effect Mean x

Coast 0.570*** 1.768 0.125 0.512

Highlands 0.359*** 1.433 0.078 0.452
Female 0.224*** 0.799 0.049 0.399
Age 0.021** 1.021 0.005 34.200
Age squared 0.000*** 1.000 0.000 1427.900
Indigenous 0.871*** 2.389 0.161 0.067
Years of schooling 0.218*** 0.804 0.048 7.644
Number of household
residents aged 0–6 0.817*** 2.263 0.179 0.844
Number of residents aged 7–24 0.395*** 1.485 0.087 2.418
Number of residents aged 25–59 0.077* 1.080 0.017 1.952
Number of residents aged 60 0.682*** 1.977 0.149 0.362
Age of household head 0.009** 1.009 0.002 47.385
Agricultural worker 1.166*** 3.208 0.232 0.322
Unskilled worker 0.165* 1.179 0.036 0.321
Female household head 0.467*** 1.595 0.096 0.149
Constant 1.005***

Notes: * Significant at the 95 per cent level; ** significant at the 99 per cent level; *** significant at
the 99.9 percent level.
Source: Living Conditions Survey, 1998.
Human_04.qxd 25/10/05 6:16 PM Page 78

78 Ecuador

Table 4.9 Estimated probabilities of being poor, Ecuador, 1998

Total
Indigenous Non-indigenous population

Male 0.840 0.602 0.616

Female 0.871 0.546 0.572
Years of schooling
0 0.930 0.869 0.884
6 0.850 0.705 0.714
12 0.601 0.345 0.352
16 0.268 0.148 0.150
Healthy 0.841 0.594 0.611
Not healthy 0.867 0.568 0.588
Total 0.855 0.580 0.599

Source: Calculated from Table 4.8.

Thus all other factors remaining constant, each additional year of schooling
reduces the probability of being poor by 4.8 per cent, having a female house-
hold head increases it by 9.6 per cent, and being indigenous increases it by
16 per cent. Hence indigenous peoples have greater difficulty escaping from
poverty than non-indigenous people, even when their endowments and
circumstances are similar.
The predicted individual probabilities of being poor estimated from logit
models are shown in Table 4.9. Here again there is a distinct difference
between indigenous and non-indigenous people. For example an indigenous
male who has completed secondary school has a 60 per cent probability of
being poor, compared with 35 per cent for a non-indigenous person with the
same background. The predictions for households, based on different logit
models, are similar.

Labour earnings

Decomposition models
The labour market, particularly with respect to returns from education, gov-
erns the economic opportunities of most poor people, for whom the ability
to work is one of their most important assets. This section explores differ-
ent socioeconomic and ethnic determinants of labour earnings, with partic-
ular attention to differences between indigenous and non-indigenous
workers.
Average indigenous labour earnings amount to only 55 per cent of those
of non-indigenous workers. This may be due to differences in education,
skills, work experience, working conditions, hours worked and so on. On
the other hand it may involve discrimination, so that even among people
Human_04.qxd 25/10/05 6:16 PM Page 79

Carlos Larrea and Fernando Montenegro Torres 79

with similar education and skills, indigenous workers will be paid less than
non-indigenous wakers.
Labour earnings differences can be decomposed into two components,
labour endowments and wage discrimination. This decomposition, based
on two separate regressions of labour earnings for indigenous and non-
indigenous workers, including all possible determinants, is explained in the
Appendix of this book. The results are presented in Table 4.10. The indepen-
dent variables include years of schooling in quadratic form as a proxy for

Table 4.10 Determinants of labour earnings, Ecuador, 1998 (regression model:

Oaxaca–Blinder decomposition method; dependent variable labour earnings)

Non-indigenous Indigenous

Mean Xn Bn Mean Xi Bi

Years of schooling 8.3310 0.0382 5.7536 0.0768

Years of schooling squared 89.9114 0.0020 48.6577 0.0007
Work experience (years) 20.6300 0.0797 22.0912 0.0218
Work experience squared 608.2834 0.0025 671.3642 0.0001
Work experience cubed 21 475.4862 0.00002 23 732.6285 0.00001
Ln (hours worked per week) 3.7451 0.4544 3.7727 0.6231
Sector
Informal 0.5224 0.3225 0.7153 0.2684
Agriculture 0.2801 0.6039 0.3683 1.4931
Type of work
Domestic 0.0022 2.3019 0.0030 1.5571
Labourer1 0.1252 0.2282 0.1045 1.2659
Employee2 0.5070 0.4621 0.3594 0.5063
Self-employed3 0.2454 0.4322 0.4580 0.3649
Area/region
Rural 0.3769 0.1919 0.7346 0.0786
Coast 0.5995 0.0462 0.0768 0.4946
Amazon 0.0252 0.1656 0.1025 0.0670
Household head 0.6605 0.1700 0.7332 0.5596
Union member 0.0611 0.3379 0.0282 1.1727
Constant 1.0000 11.2198 1.0000 10.4175
R2 0.2800 0.3200

Indigenous/
Non-indigenous Indigenous Difference non-indigenous ratio

Mean labour earnings 2 038 706 1 302 370 7 36 336 0.638

Notes
1
Includes temporary and permanent agricultural workers and domestic employees.
2
Other wage earners not included as labourers.
3
All independent workers.
Source: Living Conditions Survey, 1998.
Human_04.qxd 25/10/05 6:16 PM Page 80

80 Ecuador

education, labour experience in cubic parabolic form to avoid distortions due

to the symmetry of quadratic parabolic functions,3 number of working hours
in logarithmic form, and dummy variables for gender, informal and agricul-
tural sectors, a domestic service, labourers, employees and self-employed
workers, regional dummy variables for the countryside, coastal region and
Amazon basin, and variables for household heads and union members. The
variables were selected for their statistical significance.
In the case of male workers it is estimated that 55 per cent of the wage gap
can be explained by endowment differences (mostly in schooling) and the
employment of indigenous workers in the informal sector (Table 4.11). The
remaining 45 per cent can be attributed to labour market discrimination.

Table 4.11 Decomposition of earning differences, indigenous pay structure, Ecuador,

1998 (Oaxaca–Blinder method)

Contribution as a
Decomposition percentage of total
differential
Endowments Pay structure
bn (Xn  Xi) Xi (bn  bi) Endowments Pay structure

Years of schooling 0.098 0.222 14.23 32.13

Years of schooling squared 0.082 0.132 11.89 19.17
Work experience (years) 0.117 1.281 16.86 185.27
Work experience squared 0.157 1.581 22.71 228.70
Work experience cubed 0.050 0.710 7.30 102.75
Ln (hours worked per week) 0.013 0.636 1.81 92.07
Sector
Informal 0.062 0.039 9.00 5.60
Agriculture 0.053 0.327 7.71 47.38
Type of work
Domestic employee 0.002 0.002 0.27 0.32
Labourer 0.005 0.108 0.68 15.69
Employee 0.068 0.016 9.87 2.30
Self-employed 0.092 0.031 13.30 4.45
Area/region
Rural 0.069 0.083 9.93 12.04
Coastal 0.024 0.042 3.49 6.01
Amazon 0.013 0.010 1.85 1.46
Household head 0.012 0.286 1.79 41.33
Union member 0.011 0.024 1.61 3.40
Constant 0.000 0.802 0.00 116.07
Total 0.383 0.309 55.35 44.65
0.691 100.00

Notes: See notes for Table 4.10.

Source: Living Conditions Survey, 1998.
Human_04.qxd 25/10/05 6:16 PM Page 81

Carlos Larrea and Fernando Montenegro Torres 81

Table 4.12 Decompositions of earnings advantage, Ecuador, 1998

Amount of inequality attributable to

Pay structure
Endowments (discrimination)

Evaluated at indigenous means 55.4 44.7

Evaluated at non-indigenous means 17.4 82.6
Cotton 53.5 46.5
Oaxaca–Ransom 59.8 40.3

Source: Living Conditions Survey, 1998.

Alternative regression models with different specifications produce similar

results.
For men and women combined it is estimated that 74 per cent of the wage
gap is due to endowment differences (again mostly in education, with 4.1
fewer years of schooling for indigenous workers) and the concentration of
indigenous workers in agriculture, the informal sector and rural areas. The
remaining 26 per cent can be attributed to labour market discrimination.
The results of four alternative methods of decomposing earnings differ-
ences, based on different assumptions about the labour structure in the
absence of discrimination, are presented in Table 4.12. Here the share attrib-
uted to discrimination changes slightly, with a minimum value of 40 per
cent, except when the earnings differential is evaluated at non-indigenous
means (or indigenous pay structure), which produces a very high share of
83 per cent.

Child labour
Adequate access to education and health services can reduce the intergener-
ational transmission of poverty. Analysis of child labour by ethnicity shows
that young indigenous peoples have limited access to education. According
to the national census, in 2001 only 58 per cent of indigenous children aged
five to 18 attended school and did not engage in work, compared with 73 per
cent of non-indigenous children (Table 4.13). Moreover 28 per cent of
indigenous children were working, and one in three of these did not go to
school at all. Limited school attendance and child labour may be in part a
consequence of the poor quality of education in Ecuador. According to
recent cross-country research, the quality of basic education in Ecuador is
the worst among 19 Latin American countries (Fretes-Cibils et al., 2003).
Only the primary school attendance rates are adequate (about 90 per cent)
and the attendance differences between indigenous and non-indigenous
children aged six to 12 are small. Thereafter school attendance declines
steadily both for indigenous and non-indigenous children, but with a
Human_04.qxd 25/10/05 6:16 PM Page 82

82 Ecuador

Table 4.13 Child schooling and labour conditions, Ecuador, 2001 (percentage of
children aged 5–18)

Non-indigenous Indigenous

Male Female All Male Female All

School only 71 74 73 57 59 58
School and work 6 3 4 12 9 10
Work and no school 13 6 9 21 16 18
No work, no school 10 17 13 10 17 14

Source: National census, 2001.

widening gap between the two groups at higher education levels. In 2001
only 28 per cent of indigenous 18-year-olds were still in school, compared
with 41 per cent of non-indigenous children. There were marked gender dif-
ferences, with females having higher school attendance rates and lower child
labour rates. Figures 4.3 to 4.6 illustrate these ethnic and gender differences.

Probit models for estimating the probability of child labour

To explore the factors that influence the probability that a child will work
and the type of work the child will do, a number of sequential probit regres-
sion models have been estimated, using data from the 1998 living standards
survey (Table 4.14). Controlling for all background variables, indigenous
identity clearly has a positive and significant effect on the probability of a
child working, as well as the probability of attending school if the child is
working. The negative association with wage employment suggests that
indigenous children tend to work in unpaid activities such as self-employment
or unremunerated family tasks, which are generally associated with low
productivity. Male children are more likely than females to work, to attend
school while working, and to engage in waged activities. Age, family size and
having a female household head increase the probability of a child working.
As could be expected, if the parents are educated the probability that a child
will work decreases.
In summary, child labour disproportionably affects indigenous peoples,
reducing human capital formation and contributing to the intergenerational
transmission of poverty. Child labour is more common among male
children, but females leave school to help with domestic chores. This seems
to be the result of subsistence strategies by poor households, although the
work carried out by indigenous children is associated with low productivity.

Child labour earnings

Indigenous households have more children than their non-indigenous
counterparts, and therefore have more children who are likely to work. The
Human_04.qxd 25/10/05 6:16 PM Page 83

83

Figure 4.3 Incidence of child labour, Ecuador, 2001 (per cent)

100.0

90.0

80.0
Indigenous males
70.0 Non-indigenous
males
60.0

50.0 Indigenous females

40.0

30.0 Non-indigenous
females
20.0

10.0

0.0
5 7 9 11 13 15 17 19 21 23 25
Age

Source: Population census, 2001.

Figure 4.4 Percentage of children and young people who attended school and were
not employed, Ecuador, 2001

100.0

90.0
Non-indigenous females
80.0
Non-indigenous males
70.0
Indigenous females
60.0

50.0

40.0

30.0

20.0

10.0 Indigenous males

0.0
5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24
Age

Source: Population census, 2001.

Human_04.qxd 25/10/05 6:16 PM Page 84

84

Figure 4.5 Percentage of children and young people who both attended school and
were employed, Ecuador, 2001

18.0

16.0

14.0 Indigenous males

12.0 Indigenous
females
10.0

8.0 Non-indigenous
males
6.0

4.0
Non-indigenous females
2.0

0.0
5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24
Age

Source: Population census, 2001.

Figure 4.6 Percentage of children and young people who worked and did not attend
school, Ecuador, 2001

90.0

80.0

70.0
Indigenous males
60.0
Non-indigenous
males
50.0

40.0
Indigenous
30.0 females

20.0
Non-indigenous
10.0 females

0.0
5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24
Age

Source: Population census, 2001.

Human_04.qxd 25/10/05 6:16 PM Page 85

Carlos Larrea and Fernando Montenegro Torres 85

Table 4.14 Child labour, sequential probit regressions, Ecuador, 1998

Working Wage Unpaid family

aged Studying if earner if worker if
10–18 working working working

Indigenous 0.592**** 0.388**** 0.269** 0.161

Male 0.508**** 0.099 0.278**** 0.300****
Age 0.138**** 0.281**** 0.189**** 0.181****
Mother employed 0.673**** 0.151** 0.240**** 0.337****
Father employed 0.596**** 0.133 0.447*** 0.410***
Female head of household 0.866**** 0.061 0.267 0.265
Number of years of
schooling, mother 0.035**** 0.047**** 0.008 0.012
Number of years of
schooling, father 0.040**** 0.017 0.043**** 0.034***
Male siblings aged 16 0.155**** 0.053 0.090 0.014
Cost of schooling to 2.6E-**** 1.02E-**** 1.9E- 2.51E-**
family 7 6 7 7
Ln (per capita
household
consumption) 0.024 0.297**** 0.027 0.065
Household size 0.023** 0.017 0.029** 0.025*
Father is union member 0.290**** 0.767**** 0.223 0.102
Region
Coast 0.317*** 0.223 0.472*** 0.450***
Highlands 0.190* 0.169 0.435*** 0.447***
Constant 2.487**** 0.447 3.169**** 3.931****

Notes: * Significant at the 90 per cent level; ** significant at the 95 per cent level; *** significant at
the 99 per cent level; **** significant at the 99.9 per cent level.
Source: Living Conditions Survey, 1998.

average number is 2.5 for indigenous families and 2.1 for non-indigenous
ones. It is important to explore children’s contribution to total family
income and the relationship of this to ethnicity. The relevant statistics are
summarized in Table 4.15.
In 1998 more than two thirds of working children were between 15 and
18 years of age, though the proportion of younger working children was
higher in indigenous families. Two thirds of income-earning children were
male – a figure that was similar for both indigenous and non-indigenous
children. Their educational level was mostly incomplete secondary.
Children’s earnings accounted for 11.6 per cent of indigenous families’
income and 10.5 per cent of that of non-indigenous families. Considering
that poverty is widespread, these figures demonstrate the necessity of child
labour for household subsistence. Therefore any policy aimed at reducing
 Human_04.qxd
86

25/10/05
Table 4.15 Child and youth employment and earnings, Ecuador, 1998

6:16 PM
Mean earnings (sucres) Percentage of family income Percentage of group working

Indigenous Non-indigenous All Indigenous Non-indigenous All Indigenous Non-indigenous All

Age

Page 86
10–11 2 612 2 025 2 058 0.25 0.10 0.10 5.4 5.1 5.1
12–14 29 713 15 200 16 003 2.83 0.75 0.81 29.7 22.6 23.0
15–18 89 712 196 036 190 153 8.56 9.65 9.62 64.9 72.3 71.8
Male 82 607 179 267 173 919 7.88 8.83 8.80 66.7 69.5 69.3
Female 39 430 34 654 34 918 3.76 1.71 1.77 33.3 30.5 30.7
No schooling 1 531 2 017 1 990 0.15 0.10 0.10 2.5 1.9 2.0
Primary (incomplete) 16 224 100 610 95 940 1.55 4.95 4.85 19.3 17.9 18.0
Primary (complete) and
secondary (incomplete) 101 629 98 313 98 497 9.69 4.84 4.98 76.7 75.5 75.6
All children 122 037 213 273 208 224 11.64 10.50 10.53 100.0 100.0 100.0

Source: Living Conditions Survey, 1998.

Human_04.qxd 25/10/05 6:16 PM Page 87

Carlos Larrea and Fernando Montenegro Torres 87

child labour should be accompanied by measures to ensure other sources of

family income.

Returns from schooling

Predicted labour earnings have been estimated as a function of education for
indigenous and non-indigenous workers, as well as for the group as a whole.4
The results are plotted in Figures 4.7 and 4.8. The returns from education
change both with additional years of schooling and with ethnicity. The
weighted averages are 7.1 per cent for indigenous workers and 7.7 per cent
for non-indigenous workers, with a statistically significant difference at the
1 per cent level. The returns from education increase with each year of
schooling for both groups, but only for non-indigenous workers do they
change substantially, rising from 3 per cent in the first year of primary
education to 15 per cent in the upper level of higher education. In contrast
the returns for indigenous workers rise from 6 per cent in the first year of
primary school to 9 per cent in the last years of higher education. Thus the
gap in labour earnings increases with education (affecting mostly indigenous

Figure 4.7 Predicted earnings, by educational level, Ecuador, 1998 (1998 sucres)

4 000 000
Primary level Secondary level Higher education
3 500 000
Non-indigenous
3 000 000

2 500 000
All
2 000 000

1 500 000

1 000 000

5 00 000 Indigenous

0.00
0 3 6 9 12 15 18 21
Years of schooling

Notes: Predicted earnings correspond to male, non-head-of-household employees in the formal

sector, with average experience and average working hours per week. Averages correspond to each
group.
Source: Living Conditions Survey, 1998.
Human_04.qxd 25/10/05 6:16 PM Page 88

88 Ecuador

Figure 4.8 Educational returns, by years of schooling, Ecuador, 1998

0.16

0.14 Non-indigenous

0.12

0.10 All

0.08

0.06 Indigenous

0.04

0.02

0.00
0 3 6 9 12 15 18 21
Years of schooling

Source: Living Conditions Survey, 1998.

skilled workers and professionals) and therefore discourages investment in

education by indigenous peoples.
To summarize, although the returns from education are similar for both
groups at the primary level they diverge at higher levels. Indigenous returns
are lower and change little, while a parabolic function with increasing
returns prevails for non-indigenous workers. Thus the predicted earnings
ratio goes up from 1.58 for completed primary to 2.35 for 21 years of educa-
tion. In essence the structure of the labour market discourages education
among indigenous workers and reduces the likelihood of their escaping
poverty via education.

Educational attainment

Educational attainment in Ecuador has significantly improved in recent

decades, but indigenous peoples have not shared equally in the benefits of
this. Figure 4.9 shows the average years of schooling by year of birth for adult
Ecuadorians between 1949 and 1968. As can be seen, non-indigenous people
born between 1964–68 on average had 9.6 years of schooling while indige-
nous peoples had only 6.9 – a difference of almost 2.7 years. Moreover the
gap has widened since 1949.
Human_04.qxd 25/10/05 6:16 PM Page 89

Carlos Larrea and Fernando Montenegro Torres 89

Figure 4.9 Average years of schooling, by year of birth, Ecuador, 1949–68

10.0

8.0
Years of schooling

6.0

4.0

2.0

0.0
1949–53 1954–58 1959–63 1964–68
Period of birth
Indigenous Non-indigenous

Source: Living Conditions Survey, 1998.

When the data are broken down by gender (Figure 4.10 and Table 4.16) it
becomes clear that the gap has widened more for women than for men, par-
ticularly in the case of those born after 1958. By 1998 indigenous women
were the most disadvantaged group in terms of educational attainment.
Thirty-three per cent had no formal education at all, compared with 14 per
cent of indigenous males, and 5 per cent of the non-indigenous population.
An OLS regression has been conducted to examine the association
between ethnicity and years of schooling among children aged 15 and
younger. The results of the analysis (Table 4.17) do not provide evidence of a
statistically significant negative association between the proxy variable used
for indigenous identity and the number of years of schooling. However the
interaction term for being an indigenous female has an inverse relationship
with the dependent variable: number of years of school completed. This con-
trasts with the fact that non-indigenous females typically complete more
years of schooling than non-indigenous males, but it is consistent with the
analysis of age–grade distortion and with the finding by Ponce (2000b) that
girls from rural areas with a high concentration of indigenous peoples have
higher grade-repetition and drop-out rates.
Previous research has shown that individuals who suffer from chronic
malnutrition in their early years consistently have lower levels of schooling
and income. One consequence of this is inadequate investment in human
Human_04.qxd 25/10/05 6:16 PM Page 90

90 Ecuador

Figure 4.10 Average years of schooling, period of birth and gender, Ecuador, 1998

12

10
Non-indigenous males

8 Non-indigenous
Years of schooling

females

Indigenous males Indigenous females

0
Before 1939 1939–48 1949–53 1954–58 1959–63 1964–68 1969–73 1974–78
Period of birth

Source: Living Conditions Survey, 1998.

Table 4.16 Educational attainment, Ecuador, 1998 (individuals aged 15 and over,
per cent)

Indigenous Non-indigenous
Total
Male Female All Male Female All population

Still in school 11 12 11 15 14 15 14
Level attained if not
still in school
None 14 33 24 4 5 5 6
Incomplete primary 27 21 24 16 18 17 18
Complete primary 29 24 26 28 24 26 26
Incomplete secondary 19 17 18 26 25 25 25
Complete secondary 5 3 4 11 13 12 12
Incomplete university* 6 3 4 10 11 11 10
Complete university 2 1 1 5 4 5 5

Note: * Includes other types of higher level educational institution.

Source: Living Conditions Survey, 1998.
Human_04.qxd 25/10/05 6:16 PM Page 91

Carlos Larrea and Fernando Montenegro Torres 91

Table 4.17 Determinants of years of schooling, Ecuador, 1998

(children ages 6–14)

Coeff. Mean t

Age 0.78** 10.59 74.80

Female 0.22** 0.49 4.73
No. of children under 18 0.08** 4.16 5.38
Years of schooling, mother 0.06** 6.18 11.50
Female head of household 0.06 0.85 1.05
Indigenous 0.17 0.15 1.37
Indigenous women 0.51** 0.07 4.07
Area/region
Rural 0.09 0.03 1.09
Highlands 0.31** 0.50 4.30
Amazon 0.29** 0.46 2.78
Kitchen 0.05 0.13 0.54
Running water 0.25* 0.80 3.18
No. of rooms 0.09** 0.54 4.46
Constant 4.44** 3.10 27.80
N 5649
R2 0.758

Notes: *Significant at the 10 per cent level; ** significant at the 1 per cent level.
Source: Living Conditions Survey, 1998.

capital across generations and perpetuation of the poverty trap, which can
affect the ability of the national economy to achieve sustained economic
growth (Galor and Mayer, 2002). Recent research on the relation between
low levels of human capital investment and nutrition confirms that malnu-
trition affects the decisions made by extremely poor parents about allocating
their children’s time between school attendance and productive or domestic
activities (Montenegro Torres, 2004).
Table 4.18 shows school enrolment rates in 1998 by age and grade. At age
of six the rate for indigenous children was far lower than that for non-
indigenous children, but it rose sharply thereafter. Indeed a logistic regres-
sion reveals that indigenous children aged 6–14 have a greater likelihood of
being enrolled in school than non-indigenous children of the same age group
(Table 4.19). This surprising finding is consistent with that from previous
research (Patrinos, 1994).
Table 4.20 lists the reasons people gave in 1998 for not enrolling in school
in the past year. A larger number of individuals cited age and cost as the
main reasons, but an even larger proportion cited work outside the house-
hold and domestic work.
Human_04.qxd 25/10/05 6:16 PM Page 92

92

Table 4.18 School enrolment rate, children aged 6–14,

Ecuador, 1998 (per cent)

Age and grade Indigenous Non-indigenous

Primary school
6 (first grade) 68 85
7 (second grade) 98 92
8 (third grade) 96 96
9 (fourth grade) 98 96
10 (fifth grade) 95 97
11 (sixth grade) 95 96
Secondary school (basic)
12 (seventh grade) 91 90
13 (eighth grade) 69 78
14 (ninth grade) 74 72

Source: Living Conditions Survey, 1998.

Table 4.19 Determinants of school enrolment, children aged

6–14, Ecuador, 1998

Mean t Coeff.

Age 10.14 18.97 0.20**

Female 0.49 3.93 0.17**
Number of children younger
than 18 4.13 4.85 0.07**
Years of schooling, mother 6.21 10.48 0.05**
Female head of household 0.15 9.85 0.07
Indigenous 0.07 1.22 0.14
Region/area
Rural 0.49 0.82 0.08
Highlands 0.46 4.55 0.31**
Amazon 0.12 2.95 0.33*
Kitchen 0.79 0.72 0.06
Running water 0.54 2.35 0.21*
Number of rooms 3.07 3.45 0.07**
Constant 2.99 0.50*
N 5125
R2 0.276

Notes: * Significant at the 10 per cent level; ** significant at the 1 per cent
level.
Source: Living Conditions Survey, 1998.
Human_04.qxd 25/10/05 6:16 PM Page 93

Carlos Larrea and Fernando Montenegro Torres 93

Table 4.20 Reasons for not enrolling in school, children aged

6–14, Ecuador, 1998 (per cent)

Reason Indigenous Non-indigenous

Age 29 17
Cost 18 13
Work 31 34
Domestic work 9 14
Finished studies 1 5
Not interested 7 7
Illness 1 2
Lack of school/teachers 2 3
Distance/transportation 0 1
Other 3 4

Source: Living Conditions Survey, 1998.

Table 4.21 Age–grade distortion, primary school, Ecuador,

1998 (per cent)

Grade Indigenous Non-indigenous All

First 19.9 18.1 18.3

Second 29.5 18.9 19.7
Third 26.9 25.1 25.2
Fourth 34.4 25.2 25.9
Fifth 35.1 26.4 27.0
Sixth 31.2 24.2 24.5

Source: Living Conditions Survey, 1998.

Other factors need to be explored in order to understand more fully the

educational attainment differences between indigenous and non-indigenous
children. Data on age–grade distortion, which gauges the proportion of chil-
dren who are older than is appropriate for their grade, permit comparisons
of how young indigenous and non-indigenous children are faring in
Ecuador’s education system. Table 4.21 shows that from the start indigenous
children are more prone than non-indigenous children to fall behind the
appropriate grade for their age, and that the gap between them widens
markedly from the second grade.
A regression analysis of the determinants of age–grade distortion shows
that being indigenous is not a significant factor (Table 4.22). However living
in a rural area, socioeconomic stratum and geographical region are highly
significant. Given that a large proportion of indigenous peoples live in rural
areas and have low incomes, these factors may account for a large part of the
differential in age–grade distortion between non-indigenous and indigenous
children. In 1998 the average number of times children had enrolled in the
Human_04.qxd 25/10/05 6:16 PM Page 94

94 Ecuador

Table 4.22 Determinants of age–grade distortion, children aged 6–14, Ecuador, 1998

Marginal
Coefficient effect Mean t

Age 0.20** 0.04 10.14 5.78

Female 0.24* 0.05 0.49 2.31
Number of children under 18 0.12** 0.03 4.13 4.45
Years of schooling, mother 0.15** 0.03 6.21 7.08
Female head of household 0.04 0.01 0.15 0.24
Indigenous 0.55* 0.12 0.07 2.76
Area/region
Rural 0.78** 0.16 0.49 3.41
Highlands 0.09 0.02 0.46 0.57
Amazon 0.31 0.07 0.12 1.32
Kitchen 0.16 0.03 0.79 1.07
Running water 0.31* 0.06 0.54 1.73
Number of rooms 0.20** 0.04 3.07 4.01
Constant 3.91** 7.88
N 5407
R2 0.289

Notes: * Significant at the 90 per cent level; ** significant at the 99 per cent level.
Source: Living Conditions Survey, 1998.

same grade was larger for indigenous (1.11) than for non-indigenous
children (1.06). This difference, though small, is statistically significant at
the 99 per cent level. It may be related to differences in the quality of educa-
tion provided in schools attended mainly by indigenous or non-indigenous
children, or the language in which courses are taught.
Bilingual education has been provided in Ecuador for more than two
decades (López and Kueper, 1999) and has the support of major indige-
nous organizations (Box 4.1). However there have been few studies of its
efficacy so further research is needed. This could yield important find-
ings upon which to base a better allocation of resources for human capital
development, in which indigenous teachers and organizations could play a
key role.

Health care

Illness and accidents

There are no large differences between the percentages of indigenous and
non-indigenous individuals who report an illness. In 1998, 48 per cent of
indigenous individuals reported having had an illness or accident during the
previous month, compared with 46 per cent of the population as a whole
Human_04.qxd 25/10/05 6:16 PM Page 95

Carlos Larrea and Fernando Montenegro Torres 95

Box 4.1 Bilingual education in Ecuador

The Educación Bilingüe Intercultural (EBI) programme was sanctioned by the

Ministry of Education after years of pressure and concerted action by indigenous
peoples and organizations. The process began as early as the 1930s, when Dolores
Cacuango developed and applied the first modern methods of bilingual education
(Rodas, 1998). Much later, in the 1970s, a group of indigenous professionals spear-
headed innovations in participative, bilingual, intercultural education (Brisset
Martín, 1992). The EBI programme was introduced in schools in the main indige-
nous areas of Ecuador, but it was not until 1985 that bilingual education for indige-
nous children was officially incorporated into the country’s education system.
Indigenous organizations, however, retained technical and managerial control of
the EBI programme.
Thus indigenous intellectuals and leaders, together with Ecuadorian and
European NGOs, played a key part in shaping the social development of Ecuador’s
indigenous peoples (Abram, 1989). Moreover their education projects led to con-
stitutional acknowledgement of the pluricultural nature of Ecuador – something
that indigenous organizations had striven for over the decades.

Table 4.23 Percentage of people who were ill or injured and sought medical care
during the month prior to the survey, Ecuador, 1998

Indigenous Non-indigenous
Total
Rural Urban All Rural Urban All population

Ilness or injury 50 48 48 50 44 46 46
Bed-ridden more than
one week 26 23 25 34 29 32 31
Received medical care 79 75 77 76 77 76 76

Source: Living Conditions Survey, 1998.

(Table 4.23). Illnesses classified as serious (preventing the sufferer from work-
ing or attending school for more than seven days) were experienced by
32 per cent of non-indigenous and 25 per cent of indigenous peoples. In
rural areas the figures were 34 per cent and 26 per cent respectively, while in
urban areas they were 29 per cent and 23 per cent.
As can be seen in the table, a comparatively large proportion of the
individuals concerned had sought treatment and received medical care. A
logistic regression to estimate the likelihood of seeking professional medical
care does not show a statistical significance for the variable ‘ethnicity’, even
after controlling for various demographic factors (Table 4.24). However this
does not necessarily mean that indigenous peoples are as healthy (or
unhealthy) as the rest of the population and have the same access to health-
care services. Extensive research has shown that socioeconomic and demo-
graphic factors – such as education, ethnicity and area of residence – influence
Human_04.qxd 25/10/05 6:16 PM Page 96

96 Ecuador

Table 4.24 Likelihood of seeking professional medical care in the event of illness or
accident, Ecuador, 1998

Marginal
Coeff. effect Mean t

Age 0.00 0.000 33.04 0.58

Female 0.08 0.012 0.47 0.63
Indigenous 0.28 0.045 0.03 0.89
Years of schooling 0.01 0.002 6.55 0.79
Health insurance coverage 0.97** 0.122 0.24 4.80
Bed-ridden for more than
7 days 0.58** 0.085 0.44 4.13
Area/region
Rural 0.10 0.015 0.40 0.48
Highlands 0.03 0.004 0.44 0.14
Amazon 0.27 0.036 0.04 1.15
Poor 0.02 0.003 0.36 0.10
Not poor 0.65* 0.094 0.44 2.87
Constant 0.78* – – 2.17
N 2236
F (11, 240) 7.990
Prob.  F 0.000

Notes: * Significant at the 90 per cent level; ** significant at the 99 per cent level.
Source: Living Conditions Survey, 1998.

individuals’ propensity to report an illness or accident (Dewey and Parker,

2000; Sadana et al., 2000; Doctor, 2001). People living in rural areas and poor
people seem to be less inclined to report an illness as serious than more edu-
cated and wealthier urban individuals. Therefore the actual incidence of seri-
ous illness may be greater than the self-reported data indicates, given that a
large proportion of indigenous peoples are poor and live in rural areas.
Analysis of the severity of disease suggests that, excluding chronic mental
health problems, morbidity and mortality in rural areas are much greater
than in urban areas, particularly in the case of infant mortality (CEPAR,
1999). There is also evidence that indigenous peoples suffer from more
disabling illnesses than non-indigenous individuals do, but are less likely to
abandon their daily activities or describe their condition as ill health.
A comparison of patients’ travelling and waiting times (Table 4.25) at first
appears to suggest that indigenous individuals have an advantage over their
non-indigenous counterparts. However, the data do not take account of
the quality of medical services or the urgency of the treatment sought.
Indigenous individuals may be dependent on publicly financed primary
health-care centres in their area, while non-indigenous individuals may be
Human_04.qxd 25/10/05 6:16 PM Page 97

Carlos Larrea and Fernando Montenegro Torres 97

Table 4.25 Average travelling time to and waiting time at place of

health-care service, Ecuador, 1998 (minutes)

Indigenous Non-indigenous All

Travelling time 38 45 45
Waiting time 138 139 139

Source: Living Conditions Survey, 1998.

Table 4.26 Place where health-care service received, Ecuador, 1998

(per cent)

Indigenous Non-indigenous All

Public hospital 12 16 16
Public health centre or subcentre 26 18 18
Private practice or hospital 34 40 40
Other (non-institutional) 28 26 26

Source: Living Conditions Survey, 1998.

Table 4.27 Reason why medical care was not sought in the event of illness or injury,
Ecuador, 1998 (per cent)

Indigenous Non-indigenous
Total
Rural Urban All Rural Urban All population

Not necessary/mild illness 20 23 21 28 45 36 34

Lacked time 5 7 5 3 9 6 6
Health facility too far 1 0 1 11 0 6 6
Not enough money 64 60 63 47 36 42 44
Poor quality of services 1 6 2 2 2 2 2
Other 9 5 8 8 9 9 9

Source: Living Conditions Survey, 1998.

better off and willing to travel further and wait longer for treatment at a pub-
lic or private health-care establishment that is perceived to offer better care.
Empirical evidence of this is provided in Table 4.26. As can be seen, in 1998
a larger percentage of indigenous peoples used public health centres or sub-
centres, which in Ecuador typically have fewer human, diagnostic and ther-
apeutic resources than public hospitals or private providers. Moreover, as
Table 4.27 shows, the percentage of indigenous individuals who did not seek
medical care because of financial constraints was much larger (63 per cent)
than the percentage of non-indigenous individuals (42 per cent).
Human_04.qxd 25/10/05 6:16 PM Page 98

98 Ecuador

Prenatal care and childbirth

Further evidence of inequities in access to health-care services is provided by
data on prenatal care and childbirth. In 1998, 77 per cent of non-indigenous
women gave birth in a hospital (public or private), compared with just 27 per
cent of indigenous women. As can be seen in Table 4.28, 68 per cent of
indigenous women gave birth at home, in contrast to 20 per cent of non-
indigenous women.
The intergroup differences in receipt of prenatal care are also large. In
1998, 36 per cent of indigenous women received no prenatal checkup at all
during their most recent pregnancy, compared with 12 per cent of non-
indigenous women (Table 4.29). Among those who did have checkups the
average number of check-ups received was much lower for indigenous
women (3.5) that for non-indigenous women (5.9). Moreover a considerably
smaller percentage of indigenous women (56 per cent) than non-indigenous
women (75 per cent) had their first checkup in the first trimester. Finally,
only 50 per cent of indigenous women received an antitetanus injection dur-
ing their pregnancy, compared with 69 per cent of non-indigenous women.

Table 4.28 Place of delivery of most recent child, Ecuador, 1998

(per cent)

Indigenous Non-indigenous All

Public hospital 25 55 53
Health centre or subcentre 5 3 4
Private practice or hospital 2 22 21
Home or other 68 20 23

Source: Living Conditions Survey, 1998.

Table 4.29 Prenatal care provider, time of initiation and number of

visits, Ecuador, 1998 (per cent)

Indigenous Non-indigenous All

No prenatal care 36 12 13
Traditional, traditional midwife
and others 3 3 3
Nurse or nursing aid 13 1 2
Physician/professional midwife 48 84 82
Prenatal care initiated in first
trimester 56 75 74
Mean number of prenatal visits 3.5 5.9 5.8

Source: ECV98.
Human_04.qxd 25/10/05 6:16 PM Page 99

Carlos Larrea and Fernando Montenegro Torres 99

Table 4.30 Likelihood of knowing at least one contraceptive

method, Ecuador, 1998

Marginal
Coeff. effect Mean t

Age 0.03** 0.00 28.98 6.06

Indigenous 0.11 0.01 0.04 0.51
Years of schooling 0.20** 0.02 8.91 13.05
Married/partner 1.25** 0.15 0.56 13.03
Area/region
Rural 0.65** 0.08 0.35 4.65
Highlands 0.41** 0.05 0.42 3.03
Amazon 0.46* 0.06 0.03 1.93
Poor 0.33* 0.04 0.35 2.87
Not poor 0.63** 0.07 0.46 5.05
Constant 1.54 – – 5.67
N 6 216
R2 0.276

Notes: * Significant at the 90 per cent level; ** significant at the 99 per cent
level.
Source: Living Conditions Survey, 1998.

The knowledge and use of contraception is much lower among indigenous

women than among non-indigenous women. A regression analysis of the
likelihood of knowledge of at least one method of contraception shows that
being indigenous is not statistically significant in this regard, controlling for
the other variables listed in Table 4.30. However, there is a statistically sig-
nificant and negative relationship between being indigenous and practising
contraception (Table 4.31). Indigenous women are 15 per cent less likely to
practise contraception, controlling for the same variables. This might be due
to specific cultural factors, and therefore ethnicity may be an important mat-
ter to consider when designing reproductive health measures that go beyond
the dissemination of information.

Infant mortality, childhood malnutrition and vaccination

The infant mortality rate is higher among indigenous peoples than in the
population as a whole. Census data reveal large differences (Table 4.32). In
2001 infant mortality in the indigenous population was almost twice the
national mean. Similarly the child mortality rate was 10.5 per cent for the
indigenous population and 5.1 per cent for non-indigenous population
(Table 4.33).
Data on diarrhoea among children under five years of age show that
among the poor and extremely poor, oral rehydration therapy is less
Human_04.qxd 25/10/05 6:16 PM Page 100

100

Table 4.31 Likelihood of using a contraceptive method, Ecuador,

1998

Marginal
Coeff. effect Mean t

Age 0.03** 0.01 29.85 3.52

Indigenous 0.79* 0.15 0.03 3.24
Years of schooling 0.02 0.00 9.43 1.65
Married/partner 2.57** 0.48 0.62 14.9
Area/region
Rural 0.20* 0.04 0.29 1.82
Highlands 0.06 0.01 0.39 0.65
Amazon 0.05 0.01 0.02 0.28
Poor 0.14 0.03 0.34 0.89
Not poor 0.02 0.00 0.51 0.14
Constant 3.20** – – 14.6
N 4 926
R2 0.276

Notes: * Significant at the 90 per cent level; ** significant at the 99 per cent
level.
Source: Living Conditions Survey, 1998.

Table 4.32 Infant mortality rates, Ecuador, 2001 (per cent)

Total
Non-indigenous Indigenous population

Rural 2.8 4.3 3.1

Urban 1.8 2.3 1.8
All 2.1 3.7 2.3

Source: National census, 2001.

Table 4.33 Child mortality rates, Ecuador, 2001 (per cent)

Total
Non-indigenous Indigenous population

Rural 7.2 12.4 8.0

Urban 4.1 5.4 4.2
All 5.1 10.5 5.5

Source: National census, 2001.

Human_04.qxd 25/10/05 6:16 PM Page 101

Carlos Larrea and Fernando Montenegro Torres 101

Table 4.34 Percentage of children who had diarrhoea and

received oral rehydration therapy, Ecuador, 1998 (per cent)

Indigenous Non-indigenous All

Not poor 0 11 10
Poor 1 9 8
Extremely poor 5 9 8

Source: Living Conditions Survey, 1998.

Table 4.35 Malnutrition in children under five, Ecuador, 1998 (per cent)

Total
Indigenous population

Monolingual Bilingual All Non-indigenous Rural Urban All

Chronic malnutrition 55 59 59 26 33 24 28
Acute malnutrition 9 3 3 3 3 2 3
Global malnutrition 32 30 30 14 19 12 15

Source: Living Conditions Survey, 1998.

commonly administered to indigenous children (Table 4.34). There is also

evidence that indigenous peoples, and especially children, have a greater
incidence of chronic malnutrition (Table 4.35). Malnourished children are
more likely to suffer from illness, and there is considerable evidence that
malnutrition before the age of five has a severe impact on health during
adult life (Caballero, 2001). Early-childhood malnutrition also has negative
repercussions on the returns from education. Studies conducted in Latin
America show that chronic malnutrition is associated with lower educa-
tional performance and attainment, as well as lower wages in adult life
(Larrea, 2003; Mayer, 2003).
Finally, while the vaccination rates have improved in rural areas, impor-
tant differentials between indigenous and non-indigenous children are
revealed when the data on fully immunized children are analyzed (Table 4.36).
In 1998 only 43 per cent of indigenous children had received all the
required vaccinations by the twenty-fifth month of their lives, compared
with 50 per cent of non-indigenous children.

Health insurance
As Table 4.37 shows, in 1998 just 12 per cent of indigenous peoples were
covered by health insurance, despite the expansion of public health insurance
programmes. In urban areas health insurance is provided by the Ecuadorian
Institute of Social Security (Instituto Ecuadoriano de Seguridad Social, IESS).
Human_04.qxd 25/10/05 6:16 PM Page 102

102 Ecuador

Table 4.36 Vaccination rates, Ecuador, 1998 (per cent)

Indigenous Non-indigenous All

Received polio vaccine 100 100 100

Received tuberculosis vaccine 94 94 94
Received measles vaccine 72 75 75
Received DPT, 1st dose 99 100 99
Received DPT, 2nd dose 91 93 93
Received DPT, 3rd dose 79 82 82
Fully immunized 70 76 75
Fully immunized (age under 25 months) 43 50 49

Source: Living Conditions Survey, 1998.

Table 4.37 Health insurance coverage, Ecuador, 1998 (per cent)

Indigenous Non-indigenous
Total
Urban Rural All Urban Rural All population

No insurance 85 89 88 80 74 88 78
Seguro Social Campesino 0 9 7 0 22 9 9
IESS and other public
insurances 11 2 4 14 3 4 9
Private 3 0 1 4 0 1 2
Mixed 1 0 0 2 0 0 1

Source: Living Conditions Survey, 1998.

In rural areas there is a publicly funded health insurance programme for

farmers, fishermen and rural communities (Seguro Social Campesino, SSC).
The SSC covers all the members of insured families and utilizes the network
of IESS providers, while IESS insurance only covers employees, women dur-
ing pregnancy and childbirth, and children up to one year of age. The IESS
programme is financed by employees, employers and the central govern-
ment. While expansion of this programme has been strongly advocated by
indigenous organizations, coverage by it and the SSC continues to be limited.
Financial constraints and structural rigidities restrict individuals covered
by the SSC to health-care providers that belong to the Social Security
Institution and are often geographically distant. However those covered ben-
efit from risk-pooling mechanisms, and access to IESS providers enables
economies of scale in the provision of health-care services, and particularly
inpatient services. Indigenous leaders firmly insist that improvements to the
health insurance programme should increase risk-pooling and not fragment
it. New amendments to the IESS programme provide for the gradual
Human_04.qxd 25/10/05 6:16 PM Page 103

Carlos Larrea and Fernando Montenegro Torres 103

expansion of coverage to other members of insured people’s families, which

will benefit some indigenous peoples.

Conclusions

Ecuador is endowed with a rich cultural diversity including the presence

of multiple indigenous groups in all three main regions of the country.
Although the indigenous population is smaller than in Bolivia, Guatemala
and Peru, since the 1990 uprising indigenous peoples in Ecuador have
become important political actors. Nevertheless they continue to suffer dis-
proportionately from poverty and exclusion.
The development of human capital – particularly in terms of education
and health – and improved employment opportunities and wages are essen-
tial to alleviating poverty among indigenous households. As the public sec-
tor provides most social services, improved public policies are needed to
overcome disparities in the future.
On average indigenous peoples have only 4.3 years of formal education,
compared with 6.9 for non-indigenous people. Chronic malnutrition affects
59 per cent of preschool indigenous children and 28 per cent of non-
indigenous children. Human capital endowments are lower for indigenous
households, even after controlling for per capita consumption. Within the
same consumption quintiles, indigenous individuals have less education,
lower schooling attendance and worse nutritional conditions than non-
indigenous individuals. Moreover, logistic models show that the probability
of being poor is greater for indigenous individuals and households, even
after controlling for education, health and other factors. Therefore indige-
nous peoples are more likely to live in poverty than non-indigenous people
with similar education and health endowments.
Wage labour is an essential component of indigenous households’ subsis-
tence strategies, however the average labour earnings of indigenous workers
are only 53 per cent of those of non-indigenous workers. Nearly half of this
difference may be due to discrimination, according to decompositions of
earnings differentials between the two groups.
A comparison of the returns to education reveals that the indigenous/
non-indigenous gap widens with increased education, which discourages
indigenous households from investing in secondary and higher education.
The expected earnings ratio between non-indigenous and indigenous work-
ers rises from 1.6 for completed primary education to 2.4 for the upper lev-
els of higher education.
Moreover, school attendance by indigenous children is eroded by child
labour: 43 per cent of indigenous children both go to school and work. Thus
child malnutrition, limited labour market incentives, poverty and poor edu-
cation combine to reduce educational attainment among indigenous chil-
dren and young people, generating a poverty trap and the intergenerational
reproduction of poverty.
Human_04.qxd 25/10/05 6:16 PM Page 104

104 Ecuador

In 1998 poverty affected 63 per cent of Ecuadorians, but its incidence was
significantly higher among indigenous peoples (87 per cent). The latter
group is disproportionately affected by poverty regardless of where the
poverty line is drawn. In the case of extreme poverty the gap between
indigenous and non-indigenous people is even wider (56 per cent versus
27 per cent).
As a consequence of the devastating floods on the coast, followed by
plummeting oil prices and a breakdown of the financial system, per capita
income fell by about 10 per cent in 1998–99, unemployment soared and
poverty increased. Even though the crisis mostly affected urban areas
and the coastal region, rural indigenous households were deeply affected by
this economic downturn and recovered more slowly due to their depen-
dence on diminishing off-farm employment and domestic markets.
International migration played an important part in the financial recovery
process, but as indigenous peoples were less prone to migrate they benefited
less from foreign remittances.
There are large differentials in educational attainment between non-
indigenous and indigenous peoples. In general indigenous children enroll at
an older age than non-indigenous children, and by the end of primary
school the age–grade distortion (presence in a grade at an older age than is
appropriate for that grade) is 31 per cent for indigenous children and 24 per
cent for non-indigenous children. Although years of schooling are increas-
ing relatively rapidly for indigenous boys, thus reducing the gap with non-
indigenous boys, indigenous girls are being left behind. Indigenous girls
aged six to 14 have significantly fewer years of schooling than indigenous
boys, even after controlling for other relevant variables. Although there has
been no nationwide evaluation of educational outcomes in Ecuador that
includes ethnicity as a variable, there is evidence that the quality of educa-
tion received is a very important factor in the educational gap between non-
indigenous and indigenous children.
Indigenous and non-indigenous people do not have the same access to
health care. This particularly affects women and children. In rural areas the
child mortality rate among indigenous peoples is 70 per cent higher than
among non-indigenous people. Prenatal check-ups are three times more
common among non-indigenous than indigenous women, and the rates of
hospital and health centre deliveries are much lower among indigenous
women: 68 per cent of indigenous women give birth at home, compared with
just 20 per cent of non-indigenous women. Chronic malnutrition affects
more indigenous children under five years of age (59 per cent) than non-
indigenous children (26 per cent). Indigenous peoples also depend more
heavily on health-care provision by public health centres and subcentres, and
have far less health insurance coverage than non-indigenous people.
As most social services are provided by the state, appropriate social policies
are essential to reducing the gap in quality and access between indigenous
Human_04.qxd 25/10/05 6:16 PM Page 105

Carlos Larrea and Fernando Montenegro Torres 105

and non-indigenous people. Despite better targeting of social programmes

and the introduction of specific programmes for indigenous communities,
large discrepancies remain between indigenous and non-indigenous people
with respect to nutrition, health care and education. Therefore extra effort
should be made to address these problems by improving the coverage and
quality of targeted programmes, and providing credit, technical assistance
and training to facilitate productive employment.

Notes
1. Figure 4.1 represents a smoothed distribution of per capita consumption both for
indigenous and non-indigenous population. The horizontal axis plots per capita
consumption and the vertical axis corresponds to densities. Poverty lines are mea-
sures of per capita consumption and are presented in the horizontal axis. Areas
below distribution curves are proportional to population, so the poverty rate is
graphically proportional to the area below the distribution curve, for income val-
ues lower than the poverty line. Areas proportional to poor people are shaded in
the figure.
2. The 1995 figure for indigenous poverty, which is unusually low, seems to be an out-
lier. Several problems of comparability have been detected in the case of the 1994
and 1995 LSMS surveys. As the 1995 LSMS survey was the first one to be conducted
by the National Statistics and Census Institute, this source may not be completely
reliable.
3. The cubic parabolic function is not constrained by symmetry. Thus it is more flex-
ible than the quadratic parabola. In the case of the latter, the way in which labour
earnings initially rise as experience increases before reaching a maximum must be
the same in the declining phase, when the returns from experience become nega-
tive. As this symmetry does not seem applicable we have adopted the more flexible
cubic form.
4. The predicted values were estimated from separate models for indigenous and non-
indigenous groups, and a pooled regression was used for the general model.
Human_05.qxd 25/10/05 6:17 PM Page 106

5
Guatemala
Joseph Shapiro1

The heritage of Guatemala’s indigenous peoples embraces tradition, religion,

family and community as endowments of well-being (UNDP, 2001; Feiring,
2003; and World Bank, 2003d). Land is also central to indigenous well-being
and identity – it not only provides income from corn but also has religious
significance (Wearne, 1994; Rojas Lima, 1995; UNICEF, 2003). For example
according to the Popol Vuh, the sacred text of Guatemala’s largest Mayan
group, the first humans were made of corn. If well-being refers to strength of
tradition and community, Guatemala’s indigenous peoples are quite wealthy.
But there is also poverty, which for indigenous peoples means lack of
work, hunger, discrimination and inferior education (Box 5.1). To earn suffi-
cient income to buy nutritionally adequate food and receive basic education
should be a basic right for all the world’s citizens.
Any discussion of indigenous poverty in Guatemala in the 1990s –
however poverty is defined – must acknowledge the economic and sociologi-
cal changes that occurred in that decade. The civil war (1960–96) claimed
many indigenous lives but later inspired the formation of indigenous politi-
cal movements. In 1992 K’iche Mayan Rigoberta Menchú won the Nobel
Peace Prize for her writing and work on behalf of indigenous Guatemalans.
The civil war ended in 1996 with the signing of the peace accords, which
included the Agreement on the Identity and Rights of Indigenous Peoples,
developed one year earlier (Government of Guatemala and URNG, 1995). The
accords acknowledged the history of discrimination against indigenous peo-
ples and emphasized the need for linguistically and culturally appropriate
indigenous education. At the same time indigenous representation in the
legislature increased from 8 per cent of representatives in 1985 to 12.4 per
cent in 2000 (see Chapter 1).
This chapter focuses on education, health, income and other traditional
indicators of poverty. Consequently some issues that are particularly
important to indigenous people are excluded, including land tenure.
Guatemala’s last agricultural census was in 1978, and studies of that census
have revealed both the relative lack of access by indigenous people to land

106
Human_05.qxd 25/10/05 6:17 PM Page 107

Joseph Shapiro 107

Box 5.1 Indigenous concepts of well-being

A qualitative poverty assessment compared linguistic approximations of ‘welfare’

in Guatemalan indigenous communities. Some examples are:

● Maaká chik tink’aáuxla – not having to worry about anything (Q’eqchi’)

● Sa tatwanq – to live well (Q’eqchi’)
● Quicotemal – to be content (K’iche)
● Q’ino – to be rich (Mam)

Indigenous peoples have described well-being in several ways:

● Material or physical definitions: ‘What we think about is our work, our milpa
[corn]… . Well-being means having corn and beans’ (K’iche). ‘Having
food … having clothing … having money … having a job’ (Kaqchikel). ‘Having
land… . Having a house with two storeys’ (Q’eqchi’).
● Social/emotional/spiritual: ‘[T]hat there is peace in the family and the
community … that there is no alcoholism’ (Q’eqchi’). ‘Welfare is to look for
God’ (Q’eqchi’). ‘Welfare is that husbands don’t hit their women’ (Kaqchikel).
● Public services: ‘To have water’ (K’iche). ‘To have midwives in the community; to
have health centres, hospitals’ (Mam).
● Education: ‘That we have knowledge’ (Q’eqchi’). ‘When children study to
improve their futures’ (Q’eqchi’). ‘To know how to read and write… . To have an
education’ (Kaqchikel)

Source: World Bank (2003d).

and the importance of land in explaining indigenous poverty (USAID, 1979;

Davis and Hodson, 1982; World Bank, 1995; MINUGUA, 2001). Hence this
chapter does not provide an exhaustive discussion of indigenous poverty,
but an empirical, human development-centred analysis of indicators of
indigenous poverty gleaned from household surveys.
This chapter investigates the change over time in inequality between indige-
nous and non-indigenous people for several reasons. First, prior empirical
studies have evaluated the education and health of indigenous Guatemalans
and the conditions in which they live (Steele, 1994; PNUD, 2000; World Bank,
2003d). Second, comparing the circumstances of indigenous peoples with
those of non-indigenous people provides insight into the distinct hurdles that
indigenous peoples encounter when attempting to escape poverty. Third,
inequality between indigenous and non-indigenous people can prevent social
cohesion and undermine efforts to forge a multicultural national identity. The
Guatemalan constitution (1986) refers to the importance of indigenous lan-
guages and culture to the country’s multicultural identity. Guatemala may
best be able to build a national identity by ensuring that indigenous and
non-indigenous people benefit equally from development efforts. Fourth,
research has already emphasized that indigenous peoples are poorer than
Human_05.qxd 25/10/05 6:17 PM Page 108

108 Guatemala

Table 5.1 Basic demographics, Guatemala, 1989–2000

(per cent)

Indigenous Non-indigenous

1989 2000 1989 2000

Male 48 48 48 48
Age 30 31 31 31
Urban 20 26 47 51

Sources: Steele (1994); ENCOVI (2000).

non-indigenous people, so a more important research question is whether

indigenous peoples’ circumstances are improving relative to those of non-
indigenous people.

Demographics

According to ENCOVI (2000), about 39 per cent of Guatemalans identify

themselves as indigenous. While estimates of the size of the indigenous pop-
ulation vis-à-vis the total population vary slightly, nearly every census or
household survey since the 1960s has arrived at figure of 35–45 per cent.
Between 1989 and 2000 the average age of the indigenous population rose
at about the same rate as that of the population. During the same period
the portion of the indigenous population that lived in urban areas rose by 6
per cent and the non-indigenous population by 4 per cent (Table 5.1). Those
changes were not due to higher birth rates in urban areas, so they were prob-
ably a consequence of rural to urban migration, with the rate of indigenous
migration exceeding the rate of non-indigenous migration.
The ENCOVI survey only asked whether the respondents had migrated,
and not whether other members of their households had migrated. Thus we
are unable fully to ascertain the tendency of indigenous and non-indigenous
people to migrate. However it is known that during the civil war many
indigenous people emigrated to Mexico and the United States, with thou-
sands of Mayans clustering in Los Angeles, Florida, New York, Oregon and
elsewhere. One Mayan calls them the ‘new Indian nation in North America’,
and remittances from them provide important support to Mayans remaining
in Guatemala (Burns, 1993; Wellmeier, 1998; Popkin, 1999).

Poverty and inequality

Poverty measures
In this section we use several approaches to compare poverty rates in 1989
and 2000. We first use the Guatemalan national poverty lines in 2000,
Human_05.qxd 25/10/05 6:17 PM Page 109

Joseph Shapiro 109

deflated to have the same real value in 1989. We measure change in poverty
headcounts using a restricted set of five income questions asked in both the
1989 and the 2000 survey. We also calculate alternative measures of change
in poverty headcounts using consumption figures for 1989 (see the
Appendix of this book for more information). To show the level of poverty,
we use consumption (expenditure) data from the year 2000. Finally, we pre-
sent income distribution curves for indigenous and non-indigenous people
in 1989 and 2000. Taken together, the results show that since indigenous
Guatemalans were so far below the poverty line in 1989, a greater increase in
incomes was required to lift them out of poverty than was the case with their
non-indigenous counterparts. Hence indigenous peoples are not escaping
poverty at the same rate as non-indigenous people.
This section uses the Guatemalan national poverty lines of 4319 quetzales
($1.52) per day in 2000 for general poverty and 1912 quetzales ($0.67) per
day in 2000 for extreme poverty. In 2000 these lines represented the mini-
mum amount of consumption necessary to purchase a nutritionally ade-
quate basket of food items (extreme poverty), and the minimum amount of
consumption necessary to purchase food and other items (general poverty).
These lines were developed jointly by the National Statistical Institute (INE),
the national planning agency (SEGEPLAN) and representatives of the
Universidad Rafael Landivar, with technical assistance by the World Bank.
Governmental, academic and non-governmental organizations have
accepted these lines as the most appropriate measures of poverty in
Guatemala. They differ from the $1 per day and $2 per day lines used by
Steele (1994), and from the separate rural, urban and Guatemala City lines
used for the World Bank’s first poverty assessment of Guatemala (1995),
which used data from the national sociodemographic survey (ENSD, 1989).
Due to the lack of consumption data in the 1989 survey, to calculate trends
and allow comparability between years, the calculation of poverty rates was
based on income, as revealed by the five questions on income in the survey
(see the Appendix of this book). The poverty lines in 1989 were deflated
from the poverty lines in 2000, using consumer price data from the IMF
(2003).
The results show that the while national poverty and extreme poverty
rates fell for both indigenous peoples and non-indigenous people, indige-
nous peoples were not catching with their non-indigenous counterparts.
The poverty headcount for indigenous people fell by 14 per cent in
1989–2000, while that for the non-indigenous fell by 25 per cent. The
indigenous–non-indigenous gap was smaller in the case of extreme poverty,
with the extreme poverty headcount for indigenous peoples falling by
29 per cent and that for the non-indigenous by 34 per cent (Table 5.2). Those
changes were statistically significant for indigenous peoples, non-indigenous
people and the population as a whole. As can be seen in the table, poverty
fell by a far larger percentage in urban areas than in rural ones.
Human_05.qxd 25/10/05 6:17 PM Page 110

110 Guatemala

Table 5.2 Percentage change in poverty headcount, Guatemala, 1989–2000 (individuals

aged 10 and over)

Indigenous Non-indigenous
Total
Rural Urban All Rural Urban All population

Poor 5.2 28.6 14.2 15.0 36.6 24.8 19.0

Extremely poor 24.5 41.1 29.2 25.3 49.6 34.0 29.9

Sources: ENSD (1989); ENCOVI (2000).

Table 5.3 Poverty headcount, Guatemala, 2000 (per cent)

Indigenous Non-indigenous
Total
Rural Urban All Rural Urban All population

Poor 82.3 48.8 73.7 59.9 16.1 37.6 51.6

Extremely poor 30.2 7.6 24.3 12.6 00.6 6.5 13.4
Not poor 17.7 51.2 26.3 40.1 83.9 62.4 48.4

Notes: Includes only respondents aged 10 and over; when respondents of all ages are included the
results are comparable to those in World Bank (2003d). Statistics based on consumption data.
Source: ENCOVI (2000).

Since Guatemala’s 2000 national poverty lines are based on consumption

rather than income, consumption data can paint a more accurate picture of
the extent of poverty. Table 5.3 shows that in 2000, 74 per cent of indigenous
Guatemalans were poor, compared with 38 per cent of non-indigenous peo-
ple. In rural areas the difference was more stark: 30 per cent of indigenous
peoples were extremely poor but only 13 per cent of the non-indigenous
were. In urban areas less than 1 per cent of non-indigenous people were
extremely poor.
Simple headcounts of the proportion of people below the poverty line give
no indication of the severity of poverty. In Table 5.4 two additional poverty
measures are used to overcome this. The first, the poverty gap index, shows
the average distance of the population from the poverty line, with the non-
poor having a distance of zero. The poverty gap index of 0.53 for indigenous
peoples is nearly double the non-indigenous index of 0.27. Second, the
Foster–Greer–Thorbecke (FGT) poverty index shows the square of a popula-
tion’s average distance from the poverty line, with the non-poor again
having an index of zero. As with the poverty gap index, indigenous peoples
have a far higher FGT index (0.40) than the non-indigenous (0.19). Also, the
percentage changes in the table show that between 1989 and 2000 indige-
nous peoples did not catch up with the non-indigenous.
Human_05.qxd 25/10/05 6:17 PM Page 111

Joseph Shapiro 111

Table 5.4 Poverty gap and severity, Guatemala, 1989–2000 (per cent)

Indigenous Non-indigenous

1989 2000 Change 1989 2000 Change

Poverty gap 0.68 0.53 0.22 0.38 0.27 0.29

Rural 0.72 0.59 0.18 0.53 0.42 0.20
Urban 0.52 0.32 0.38 0.22 0.13 0.44
FGT P2 0.54 0.40 0.26 0.27 0.19 0.29
Rural 0.58 0.46 0.20 0.38 0.31 0.19
Urban 0.38 0.22 0.42 0.14 0.07 0.46

Sources: ENSD (1989); ENCOVI (2000).

Figure 5.1 Income distribution, Guatemala, 1989 and 2000

Kernel density (Pseudo

1989
portion of population)

0.4 Indigenous incomes Non-indigenous

0.3 incomes
0.2
0.1
0
2 4 6 8 10
Ln (income)
Kernel density (Pseudo

2000
portion of population)

Non-indigenous
0.5 incomes
0.4 Indigenous incomes
0.3
0.2
0.1
0
2 4 6 8 10
Ln (income)

Indigenous peoples did not proportionally escape poverty because the

median indigenous income was far below the extreme poverty line in 1989
and close to it in 2000, while the median non-indigenous income was just
below the extreme poverty line in 1989 and above the general poverty line
in 2000. In 1989–2000 Guatemala’s mean annual growth rate was 4 per cent,
as was the increase in household consumption (World Bank, 2003g). Hence
improved living conditions were associated with economic growth. However
because indigenous peoples began so far below the poverty line, that growth
pulled more non-indigenous than indigenous peoples out of poverty
(Figure 5.1).
Controlling for background differences between indigenous peoples and
non-indigenous peoples shows that the main reason why the former are
Human_05.qxd 25/10/05 6:17 PM Page 112

112 Guatemala

Table 5.5 Determinants of poverty, Guatemala, 1989–2000

1989 2000

Mfx Mean Mfx Mean

Male 0.01 0.48** 0.00 0.48

(3.75) (0.32)
Indigenous 0.11 0.36** 0.14 0.39**
(9.60) (5.31)
Age 0.00 30.42** 0.00 30.97**
(6.43) (4.19)
Age squared 0.00 1226.00 0.00 1274.00*
(1.14) (1.84)
Number of years of 0.03 3.15** 0.04 4.07**
schooling (28.90) (13.89)
Household head variables
Age 0.00 45.93** 0.00 46.16*
(4.80) (2.26)
Employed 0.06 0.87** 0.01 0.89
(4.85) (0.34)
Male 0.00 1.15 0.05 0.85
(0.16) (1.57)
Urban 0.14 0.37** 0.20 0.41**
(12.1) (7.46)
Chi2 6 821.0 2 205.0
N 33 262 26 096

Notes: * Significant at the 90 per cent level; ** significant at the 99 per cent
level. T-statistics in parentheses. Regional indicators for the north, north-
east, south-east, central, south-west, north-west, Petén and Guatemala City
are included.
Source: ENCOVI (2000).

poor is that they have more disadvantaged backgrounds than the non-
indigenous. Region of residence has the strongest association with a person’s
probability of being poor. For example, living in an urban area was associ-
ated with a reduction of 14 per cent in the probability of being poor in 1989
and a 20 per cent reduction in 2000. Living in any region besides Guatemala
City also significantly increased the probability that a person would be poor.
A person’s age had a significant but small negative association with the prob-
ability of being poor, and each year of schooling reduced the probability of
being poor by 3 per cent in 1989 and 4 per cent in 2000.
Being indigenous had a large and significant effect on the probability that
a person would be poor: it was associated with an 11 per cent increase in
probability in 1989 and a 14 per cent increase in 2000 (Table 5.5). The large
coefficients on the indigenous indicator may reflect factors such as geo-
graphic isolation, for which this regression does not control. Nonetheless
Human_05.qxd 25/10/05 6:17 PM Page 113

Joseph Shapiro 113

controlling for the most important background differences between indige-

nous peoples and non-indigenous peoples leaves indigenous identity associ-
ated with a 14 per cent increase in the probability of living in poverty.
These regressions allow a prediction of what poverty rate a group would
have if its education, employment status or other background characteristics
changed. A person’s gender and employment status have a minimal effect on
that person’s expected poverty rate. But for both indigenous peoples and
non-indigenous peoples, schooling strongly affects the probability of being
poor. About 81 per cent of indigenous peoples were poor in 2000. If the aver-
age indigenous person were to finish primary school, so that the mean years
of schooling of indigenous peoples increased from 2.4 years to 6.0 years,
holding all other factors constant, the indigenous poverty rate would fall
from 81 per cent to 70 per cent. If the average person were to finish high
school, and therefore receive 12 years of schooling, all other factors remain-
ing constant the indigenous poverty rate would fall from 81 per cent to
39 per cent. Thus improving the educational achievement of indigenous
peoples would be a highly effective means of helping indigenous peoples to
escape poverty (Table 5.6).
Additional primary education would have the largest effect on helping the
non-indigenous to escape poverty, while additional secondary education
would help both indigenous peoples and their non-indigenous counterparts to
do so. Increasing the average years of schooling from zero to six would change
the non-indigenous poverty headcount from 0.74 to 0.44, a decrease of
41 per cent, and the indigenous poverty headcount from 0.88 to 0.70, a decrease
of 20 per cent. A further increase in years of schooling from six to twelve years
would reduce the poverty rate for both groups by 55 per cent (Table 5.6).

Table 5.6 Calculated probabilities of individuals being poor, Guatemala, 1989–2000

(per cent)

Indigenous Non-indigenous Total population

1989 2000 1989 2000 1989 2000

All/typical 95 81 68 51 77 63
Male 94 80 68 51 77 62
Female 95 83 68 51 78 63
Years of schooling
0 96 88 85 74 92 82
6 88 70 58 44 63 50
12 60 39 25 20 27 22
16 12 26 9 9 9 10
Employed 95 80 67 48 78 61
Unemployed 95 84 69 55 76 65

Source: Calculated from Table 5.5.

Human_05.qxd 25/10/05 6:17 PM Page 114

114 Guatemala

This difference in the effectiveness of primary education for the two groups
may be due to the fact that poor indigenous peoples incomes are further
below the poverty line. Thus the average poor indigenous person needs more
years of schooling than the average poor non-indigenous person to escape
poverty.

Labour markets

Labour force participation

In general indigenous peoples and non-indigenous people have similar
employment patterns. Similar proportions of the two populations participate
in the labour force, although the increase in labour force participation between
1989 and 2000 was larger for indigenous peoples. Indigenous women had a
19 percentage point lower participation rate than non-indigenous women in
1989, but the gap between the two had essentially disappeared by 2000.
Almost 22 per cent of non-indigenous people and 15 per cent of indigenous
peoples are underemployed. In 2000 indigenous peoples worked fewer hours
per week than the non-indigenous and the gap had widened since 1989. The
gap was particularly wide among women: in 2000 the average employed
indigenous woman worked 36 hours per week and the average non-indige-
nous woman 43 hours. For both groups the number of hours worked fell
between 1989 and 2000 (Table 5.7).
Data on unpaid work show that more indigenous peoples work without
pay, although indigenous–non-indigenous inequality in this regard has
diminished. Unpaid work need not be negative: a parent who gives extra
care to young children, improves the conditions of the home or works in a
household business makes an important contribution to family welfare.
Nonetheless engaging in such work does not provide the household with
much needed money. In 1989 twice as many indigenous peoples as non-
indigenous people worked without pay. For women the difference was three-
fold. However the gap had closed somewhat by 2000 (Table 5.7).
Indigenous peoples in both rural and urban areas are far more likely than
the non-indigenous to work in agriculture, fishing and livestock. Work in
the agricultural sector decreased for both groups between 1989 and 2000,
particularly in the cause of indigenous peoples. Very few indigenous peoples
work in health or social services (Table 5.8).
A primary purpose of studying informal sector employment is to gauge the
proportion of the workforce that lacks upward mobility, training, health and
social security benefits, and so on. So an ideal measurement of informal sec-
tor employment is not firm size, which is a weak proxy for informal sector
employment, but contributions to social security or the possession of formal
work contracts, which directly measure informal sector work.
Using the data collected in 2000, we can compare the firm size definition
with the formal work contract and social security contribution definitions of
Human_05.qxd 25/10/05 6:17 PM Page 115

Joseph Shapiro 115

Table 5.7 Labour indicators, Guatemala, 1989–2000 (individuals

aged 15–64)

Indigenous Non-indigenous

1989 2000 1989 2000

All respondents
Labour force participation
rate (%) 56.0 68.1 58.0 66.1
Male 94.1 93.7 86.5 88.6
Female 21.8 45.3 32.1 46.0

Employed respondents
Number of hours worked
per week 46.2 43.2 47.1 48.3
Male 48.6 47.2 48.4 51.4
Female 36.9 35.8 43.8 42.9
Unpaid work (%) 23.6 27.0 10.2 15.0
Male 22.4 24.4 10.9 15.1
Female 28.5 31.8 8.6 14.8
Underemployment rate (%) – 15.2 – 21.6
Male – 16.7 – 22.5
Female – 12.5 – 20.1

Sources: ENSD (1989); ENCOVI (2000).

Table 5.8 Employment by sector, Guatemala, 1989–2000 (per cent)

Indigenous Non-indigenous

1989 2000 1989 2000

Agriculture, fishing and livestock 68.7 49.0 37.2 26.5

Industrial manufacturing 12.2 15.0 14.8 14.1
Construction 2.7 5.3 4.7 6.5
Commerce/trade 8.7 19.0 16.2 24.3
Health, social and personal services 7.3 6.4 26.3 13.5

Notes: Includes all employed individuals over the age of 10. Totals do not add to 100 per cent due
to the exclusion of less common employment categories, such as mining, electricity, hospitality,
transportation and finance.
Sources: ENSD (1989); Steele (1994); ENCOVI (2000).

participation in the informal sector. In 2000 only 7 per cent of informal sec-
tor workers, as defined by firm size, contributed to Guatemala’s Social
Security Institute (IGSS), while 67 per cent of formal sector workers, again
defined by firm size, made social security contributions. There was still less
correspondence between the firm size definition of informality and the
Human_05.qxd 25/10/05 6:17 PM Page 116

116 Guatemala

Table 5.9 Informal sector employment, Guatemala, 1989–2000 (per cent)

Indigenous Non-indigenous Total population

1989 2000 1989 2000 1989 2000

All individuals 84.7 86.1 58.2 68.2 67.7 75.3

Male 83.1 83.1 55.2 66.4 66.0 73.1
Female 90.9 91.6 65.0 71.3 72.2 79.1
Household heads 82.9 83.7 55.7 66.4 65.7 1.2
Male 82.4 82.8 53.4 65.5 64.4 72.5
Female 89.4 91.8 74.5 72.9 78.5 79.5

Notes: Includes individuals aged 15–64. In 1989 the informal sector meant that a worker’s firm
employed up to nine people; in 2000 it meant that the firm employed up to ten people. The dif-
ference between the 1989 and 2000 definitions is due to differences between the questions asked
in each survey.
Sources: ENSD (1989); ENCOVI (2000).

possession of a formal work contract. So the firm size definition identifies

the size of the informal sector with limited accuracy. However, since data on
social security contributions and formal contracts are available for 2000 but
not 1989, firm size has to be used.
In 2000 indigenous peoples were about 18 per cent more likely than non-
indigenous people to work in the informal sector, compared with almost
27 per cent in 1989. This percentage change occurred in the context of infor-
mal sector work increasing for the entire population, with an especially large
increase for non-indigenous men (Table 5.9). By 2000 almost 92 per cent of
indigenous women were working in the informal sector.
Remittances have become an increasingly important source of income for
Latin American families – for Guatemala alone, remittances amount to about
$500 million a year (IDB, 2001). Indigenous peoples are less likely than non-
indigenous people to benefit from remittances: about one in six indigenous
Guatemalans lives in a household that receives remittances, compared with
nearly one in four non-indigenous. This difference pertains in both rural and
urban areas (Table 5.10). Estimating the proportion of income accounted for
by remittances is difficult as if the individuals who send remittances were not
working away they would be working at home, and therefore any estimate of
the effect of remittances on income must include the income they would
have earned if they had not moved away. Adams (2004) calculates that
Guatemalan households with incomes in the bottom decile – predominantly
indigenous households – receive over half of their income from remittances.
While remittances have only a minor effect on the poverty headcount, they
have a large effect on the severity of poverty. Since indigenous households are
overrepresented in the bottom deciles of income distribution, they are likely
to benefit substantially from remittances.
Human_05.qxd 25/10/05 6:17 PM Page 117

Joseph Shapiro 117

Table 5.10 Remittances to and within Guatemala, 2000 (per cent)

Indigenous Non-indigenous

Rural Urban All Rural Urban All

Overall 15.0 18.3 15.9 20.7 26.4 23.7

From the United States 6.3 6.8 6.4 9.1 10.7 9.9
Within Guatemala 8.6 12.1 9.5 11.9 17.1 14.6

Note: Percentage of individuals living in a household that receives remittances.

Source: 2000 National Living Standards Survey.

Labour earnings
Calculations of earnings functions by gender and indigenous identity enable
us to compare the effect of various factors on a worker’s wages. In 2000
earnings were highest in Guatemala City, and union membership had a sig-
nificantly positive impact on earnings.2 For all groups, schooling had a large
effect on earnings – each additional year of school was associated with an
increase in earnings of 12 per cent. Working additional hours significantly
increased earnings, as did additional experience. The earnings of workers
who were self-employed were 18 per cent lower than those of workers who
were not self-employed. Rural residency was associated with significantly
lower earnings, as was employment in the informal sector. In general
education, number of hours worked, rural residency and employment in the
informal sector had the largest effects on earnings. It is notable that rural
residency was associated with a 27 per cent reduction in earnings for indige-
nous peoples but only a 12 per cent reduction for non-indigenous people.
Other factors had similar effects on indigenous peoples and non-indigenous
people (Table 5.11).
The regressions in Table 5.11 include the same variables as the earnings
functions in Steele (1994), allowing comparison of how the determinants of
earnings had changed between 1989 and 2000. Schooling had a smaller
effect on earnings in 2000 than it had in 1989. The effect of hours worked
increased slightly over the 11 years, and experience had similar effects in
both years. The effect of self-employment decreased for indigenous peoples
and increased for non-indigenous people, but that may have been due to dif-
ferences in the construction of the variable in the two years.3 The effect of
rural residency on earnings decreased during the period. The effect of formal
sector employment on earnings was similar in both years for indigenous
peoples but dropped precipitously for the non-indigenous.
The earnings functions include no indicator for indigenous identity.
However, many of the variables have strong associations with indigenous
peoples – informal sector employment, rural residency, little schooling and
Human_05.qxd 25/10/05 6:17 PM Page 118

118 Guatemala

Table 5.11 Extended earnings functions, Guatemala, 2000

Indigenous Non-indigenous
Total
Men Women All Men Women All population

Years of schooling 0.09* 0.11* 0.10* 0.11* 0.09* 0.11* 0.11*

(11.02) (10.04) (14.72) (15.8) (14.57) (20.5) (24.69)
Log (hours) 0.41* 0.52* 0.62* 0.38* 0.39* 0.49* 0.55*
(5.99) (10.22) (14.51) (6.6) (10.60) (15.25) (19.83)
Work experience 0.04* 0.05* 0.04* 0.04* 0.03* 0.03* 0.04*
(5.04) (5.51) (6.33) (6.97) (4.08) (7.76) (10.23)
Work experience 0.00* 0.00* 0.00* 0.00* 0.00* 0.00* 0.00*
squared (4.85) (5.19) (5.51) (5.22) (2.36) (5.17) (7.68)
Self-employed 0.03 0.10 0.17* 0.04 0.22* 0.18* 0.17*
(0.52) (1.21) (3.17) (0.78) (3.05) (3.85) (4.53)
Rural 0.30* 0.48* 0.29* 0.15* 0.33* 0.13* 0.22*
(5.12) (5.11) (5.18) (3.18) (5.10) (3.15) (5.89)
Formal sector 0.30* 0.39* 0.29* 0.25* 0.43* 0.28* 0.30*
(5.6) (3.27) (6.27) (6.36) (5.82) (7.76) (9.5)
Married 0.10 0.02 0.15* 0.18* 0.02 0.18* 0.15*
(1.55) (0.30) (2.95) (4.50) (0.43) (4.83) (4.98)
Constant 4.09* 3.16* 3.06* 4.17* 4.13* 3.67* 3.37*
(14.00) (13.04) (16.45) (15.55) (26.41) (24.7) (26.86)
Mean (dep. variable) 6.34 5.53 6.07 6.97 6.42 6.77 6.52
R2 0.23 0.32 0.32 0.42 0.45 0.43 0.43
N 2 544 1 233 3 777 3 996 2 322 6 318 10 095

Notes: OLS regressions, t-statistics in parenthesis. Dependent variable: Natural log of labour earn-
ings. Includes all employed individuals aged 10 and over with positive incomes. * Significant at the
99 per cent level.
Source: ENCOVI (2000).

so on – and significant negative associations with earnings. In addition

the regressions give no precise indication of the extent to which indigenous
peoples’ lower earnings are due to their lower endowments or to discrimina-
tion. Nonetheless, the decomposition techniques outlined earlier in this book
allow an estimation of the proportion of the indigenous – non-indigenous
earnings differential that is due to observable human capital and demo-
graphic differences and that which is due to discrimination.
A difficulty with such estimations is that household data cannot show
what the returns from endowments would be if there were no discrimi-
nation. It could be that discrimination benefits the non-indigenous but in
absolute wage terms it does not harm indigenous peoples – that is, even in
the absence of discrimination the returns from endowments would remain the
same for indigenous peoples. It could also be that if discrimination disappeared
the returns would be unchanged for non-indigenous people but for indige-
nous peoples they would increase to equal these for the non-indigenous.
A more likely scenario is that in the absence of discrimination the returns
Human_05.qxd 25/10/05 6:17 PM Page 119

Joseph Shapiro 119

Table 5.12 Earnings differentials, Guatemala, 1989–2000

Percentage of earnings differential due to

differences in

Endowments Wage structure

1989 2000 1989 2000

Women
At indigenous means 76 71.5 24 28.5
At non-indigenous means 69 83.3 31 16.7
Cotton 75.2 76.2 24.8 23.8
Oaxaca–Ransom 80.7 79.9 19.3 20.1
Men
At indigenous means 48 58.0 52 42.0
At non-indigenous means 57 58.1 43 41.9
Cotton 55.6 58.1 44.4 41.9
Oaxaca–Ransom 63.3 63.9 36.7 36.1

Notes: The 1989 data evaluated at indigenous and non-indigenous means are from
Steele (1994), where there are no decimals. The 1989 data evaluated according to the
Cotton and Oaxaca–Ransom methods are original evaluations using the 1989 ENSD
data, and hence show the decimals.
Sources: ENSD (1989); Steele (1994); ENCOVI (2000).

from endowments would lie somewhere between the existing ones for
indigenous and non-indigenous people. The returns could be weighted
by the proportion of non-indigenous and indigenous people in the labour
force (Cotton, 1988), or they could resemble the returns in the overall econ-
omy (Oaxaca and Ransom, 1994). Table 5.12 presents the estimates of
discrimination produced by four methods.
The proportion of the overall earnings differential that is due to differ-
ences between the endowments of indigenous and non-indigenous people
ranges from 71–83 per cent for women and 58–64 per cent for men, depend-
ing on the method used. With the pooled Oaxaca–Ransom method, differ-
ences in endowments explain 80 per cent of the earnings differential among
women and 63 per cent among men. The remainder – 21 per cent for women
and 36 per cent for men – is attributable to unexplained factors such as
quality of education, years of unemployment and discrimination. Since
unobserved factors could increase or reduce the unexplained component,
that component can be interpreted as a midpoint estimate of discrimination.
Table 5.13 shows the contribution of observed background variables to the
overall earnings differential between indigenous and non-indigenous
women. Positive entries in the third column relate to variables that
contribute to the earnings advantage of non-indigenous workers. A few
indicators of workers’ endowments explain much of non-indigenous
Human_05.qxd 25/10/05 6:17 PM Page 120

120 Guatemala

Table 5.13 Contribution of independent variables to indigenous/non-indigenous

earnings differential, Guatemala, 2000

Contribution as a percentage
Decomposition of total differential

Endowments Pay structure Endowments Pay structure

Variable bn(Xn  Xi) Xi(bn  bi)

Years of schooling 0.38 0.04 43.19 4.02
Log (hours worked) 0.07 0.45 7.96 50.73
Work experience 0.09 0.69 10.43 78.20
Work experience squared 0.05 0.44 5.57 49.82
Self-employed 0.03 0.07 3.59 8.33
Rural 0.10 0.09 11.37 10.55
Formal sector 0.09 0.00 10.09 0.43
Married 0.00 0.00 0.15 0.04
Constant 0.00 0.97 0.00 108.94
Total 0.63 0.25 71.50 28.50
0.89 100.00

Note: The data are for all women, estimated from the observed returns from endowments for
indigenous peoples.
Source: ENCOVI (2000).

people’s earnings advantages: years of schooling, rural residency and

employment in the formal sector. Differences in years of schooling have a
large effect on the earnings gap between indigenous and non-indigenous
people: the effect of years of schooling is more than three times greater than
the effect of any other variable. This may due to the fact that inequality in
educational achievement is large, given that indigenous peoples have
approximately half the mean years of schooling of non-indigenous people,
as will be discussed later. The finding that work experience benefits indige-
nous peoples more than non-indigenous people might be a consequence
of the experience variable defined as age minus year of schooling minus six,
and since indigenous peoples have fewer years of schooling they appear to
have more work experience. Thus in the case of returns from endowments,
indigenous peoples have the largest disadvantages in returns from schooling,
work experience and rural residency, resulting in lower wages than those
received by the non-indigenous with similar endowments.
These results are generally similar to those obtained by Steele (1994), apart
from a notable decrease in discrimination in the wages of male workers and a
slight decrease in discrimination in those of female workers. In both 1989 and
2000 the unexplained part of the indigenous – non-indigenous earnings gap
was larger for men than women, suggesting that indigenous men encoun-
tered more discrimination than indigenous women against their indigenous
identity. However since women may have experienced discrimination based
Human_05.qxd 25/10/05 6:17 PM Page 121

Joseph Shapiro 121

on gender, on balance they may have been more affected by discrimination.

Overall, in 2000 discrimination accounted for less than half of the earnings
difference between indigenous and non-indigenous people, so while elimi-
nating discrimination may be an important factor in reducing indigenous
poverty, improving the human capital endowments of indigenous peoples
would have a greater effect.
A number of studies in the United States have found that after passage of
the 1964 Civil Rights Act the earnings inequality between blacks and whites
reduced significantly (Bound and Freeman, 1989; Donohue and Heckman,
1991; Card and Krueger, 1992; Gottschalk, 1997; Darity and Mason, 1998).
While that Act was more far-reaching than the 1995 Guatemalan Peace
Agreement on the Identity and Rights of Indigenous Peoples, one might pre-
sume that the latter could have had a similar if less pronounced effect on dis-
crimination. However lack of data from the mid 1990s makes it impossible
to verify this. While discrimination against adult men did reduce, it is not
clear that the Agreement had caused the change.

Returns from schooling

Mincerian earnings functions allow estimation of the returns from schooling,
measured as the percentage increase in a worker’s wages that can be attrib-
uted to an additional year of education. In 2000, for both indigenous peo-
ple and their non-indigenous counterparts the returns from schooling were
about 13 per cent (Table 5.14), so for every additional year of schooling
an employed person had had, that person’s wages rose by 13 per cent.
Surprisingly the returns from schooling were highest for indigenous women,
at about 14 per cent, but lowest for indigenous men, at about 11 per cent. The
returns from work experience were similar for indigenous and non-indige-
nous men, but were markedly lower for non-indigenous women than for
indigenous women. The high returns from schooling for indigenous women
were particularly notable in light of the fact that their mean years of school-
ing were a low 2.6.
While the return from schooling differential between indigenous and
non-indigenous Guatemalans was already small in 1989, and it fell in 2000
(Table 5.15). However this was due to a general decline in the returns from
schooling, even in the context of increased years of schooling in the country
as a whole. While this drop in returns is a matter of concern, returns of
11–14 per cent are fairly high relative to those in other countries in Latin
America and low-income countries elsewhere (Psacharopoulos and Patrinos,
2002) – a finding that is consistent with other analyses of returns from
schooling in Guatemala (Steele, 1994; Funkhouser, 1996; Edwards, 2002).

Child labour
Child labour is a complex policy issue. In 2001 Guatemala ratified the
International Labour Organisation’s Worst Forms of Child Labour
Human_05.qxd 25/10/05 6:17 PM Page 122

122 Guatemala

Table 5.14 Mincerian earnings functions, Guatemala, 2000

Indigenous Non-indigenous
Total
Men Women All Men Women All population

Years of schooling 0.11 0.14 0.13 0.13 0.12 0.13 0.13

(15.46) (12.19) (19.32) (18.08) (17.61) (22.37) (28.5)
Log (hours) 0.53 0.58 0.69 0.43 0.47 0.55 0.62
(7.61) (10.78) (15.77) (8.41) (13.33) (17.7) (22.86)
Potential experience 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.02 0.04 0.04
(8.64) (6.18) (9.9) (9.9) (3.69) (9.71) (13.13)
Potential experience
squared 0.0006 0.0008 0.0007 0.0006 0.0003 0.0005 0.0006
(7.09) (5.55) (7.75) (7.38) (2.18) (6.95) (9.81)
Constant 2.60 1.72 1.52 3.27 2.95 2.62 2.10
(6.87) (5.38) (6.14) (10.57) (14.62) (14.29) (13.17)
Mean of dependent
variable 6.39 5.54 6.11 6.95 6.43 6.76 6.52
R2 0.20 0.27 0.29 0.41 0.38 0.39 0.40
N 2 545 1 232 3 777 3 994 2 322 6 316 10 093

Notes: T-statistics in parentheses. Dependent variable: natural log of monthly labour earnings.
Includes all individuals aged 15–64 with positive years of experience and earnings. All variables are
significant at the 99 per cent level.
Source: ENCOVI (2000).

Table 5.15 Returns from schooling, Mincerian earnings functions, Guatemala, 1989–2000

Indigenous Non-indigenous
Total
Male Female All Male Female All population

1989
Average years of schooling 1.80 1.33 1.70 4.89 5.89 5.18 4.19
Returns from schooling (%) 11.9 13.7 13.0 13.2 15.2 13.6 15.4
2000
Average years of schooling 3.70 2.61 3.35 6.21 6.51 6.32 5.21
Returns from schooling (%) 10.7 13.9 12.5 12.6 12.4 12.6 13.5

Note: Includes employed individuals aged 15–64 with positive earnings and years of experience.
Sources: ENSD (1989); ENCOVI (2000).

Convention, which prohibits child soldiery, slavery, prostitution and traffick-

ing. Yet many child labourers work at home or in the fields, and some both
attend school and work. The government of Guatemala designates as child
labour all work by children under 14, unless the Ministry of Labour issues a
child with a work permit. Between 1995 and 1999, only 507 such permits
Human_05.qxd 25/10/05 6:17 PM Page 123

Joseph Shapiro 123

Table 5.16 Characteristics of working children, Guatemala,

1989–2000 (per cent)

Indigenous Non-indigenous

1989 2000 1989 2000

Male 51 52 50 51
Rural 82 79 59 55
No schooling 44 23 16 10
Male household head 88 85 83 82
Informal sector 93 92 77 85
Unpaid worker 77 72 60 67
Mean years of schooling 1.56 2.29 3.14 3.51
Mean age 11.9 11.9 12.0 12.1

Source: ENCOVI (2000).

were issued. The UN special rapporteur on the sale of children, prostitution

and pornography has reported that child prostitution and trafficking exist
on a significant scale in Guatemala, although exact figures are not cited
(UCW, 2003). Work can take time and energy that could be devoted to
school, and can often cause children to leave school. Thus while child labour
can increase households’ short-term earnings, in the long term it can reduce
them by curtailing education.
In both 1989 and 2000 employed children were predominantly rural, une-
ducated and indigenous (Table 5.16).4 During this period the proportion of
working children with no schooling fell by 48 per cent to 23 per cent among
indigenous peoples, and by 38 per cent to 10 per cent among the non-
indigenous. While the gender balance in the two groups was similar, the
average age of indigenous child workers was slightly lower. Indigenous child
workers were more likely to work in the informal sector: 92 per cent com-
pared with 85 per cent of the non-indigenous. Moreover indigenous chil-
dren were less likely to be paid for their work: 72 per cent of indigenous
children and 67 per cent of non-indigenous were unpaid.
In 2000 indigenous children were less likely than their non-indigenous
counterparts to attend school, and of those who did attend school a larger
proportion also engaged in work. More indigenous children than non-
indigenous children were inactive and neither attended school nor worked
(Table 5.17). However it is possible that some may have in fact being doing
some work but did not report it in the household surveys (UCW, 2003).
A sequential probit analysis has been conducted to estimate the effect of
being indigenous on the likelihood of a child working. As Table 5.18 shows,
indigenous children are about 12 per cent more likely than non-indigenous
children to work, although the two groups are equally likely to receive
wages. These results also show that, controlling for relevant background fea-
tures, indigenous children are no more likely than non-indigenous children
Human_05.qxd 25/10/05 6:17 PM Page 124

124 Guatemala

Table 5.17 Schooling and child labour, Guatemala, 2000 (per cent)

Indigenous Non-indigenous

School School Work, no No work, School School Work, no No work,

Age only and work school no school only and work school no school

10–14 47 24 14 15 69 14 8 9
10 61 20 5 14 82 8 2 8
11 52 23 8 16 78 15 1 6
12 52 27 9 12 72 14 4 9
13 37 29 18 17 62 17 10 11
14 29 21 31 19 51 16 21 12

Source: ENCOVI (2000).

Table 5.18 Probability of a child working, sequential probit, Guatemala, 2000

Second stage Third stage Third stage

First stage P(employed P(employed P(employed
P(child child only child receives child works at
works) works) income) home)

Indigenous 0.12** 0.00 0.03 0.02

Household head in
agriculture 0.15** 0.07 0.12* 0.12
Urban 0.04 0.08 0.29** 0.22**
Male 0.16** 0.09* 0.05 0.04
Age 0.09** 0.11** 0.1** 0.08**
Household head
employed 0.04** 0.01 0.02 0.01
Household head male 0.09* 0.04 0.17* 0.14*
Educational level of
household head 0.01** 0.02* 0.00 0.00
Number of children
aged 0–4 0.03* 0.03* 0.04 0.03
Chi2 399.5 51.6 58.2 44.0
N 4 354 1 385 503 503

Notes: Children aged 8–14. The values are marginal effects. * Significant at the 90 per cent level; **
significant at the 99 per cent level.
Source: ENCOVI (2000).

to attend school if they work. Table 5.19 presents the results a multinomial
logit analysis. Although the results of the two analyses are essentially the
same, the latter suggests that indigenous school children are more likely to
work and are less likely to receive pay for their work.
Human_05.qxd 25/10/05 6:17 PM Page 125

Joseph Shapiro 125

Table 5.19 Probability of a child working, multinomial logit, Guatemala, 2000

Work and
school Work only Home care

Indigenous 0.56** 0.57** 0.60**

Household head in agriculture 0.87** 0.23 0.85**
Urban 0.09 0.03 0.91**
Male 0.92** 0.61** 0.71**
Age 0.30** 1.2** 0.67**
Household head employed 0.26** 0.26** 0.18*
Household head male 0.48* 0.84* 0.04
Educational level of
household head 0.04** 0.10* 0.14**
Number of children aged 0–4 0.08 0.38** 0.14
Constant 5.30** 17.52** 11.24
Chi2 1 156.5
N 4 327

Notes: Includes children aged 8–14. Excluded category: school only. * Significant at the 90 per cent
level; ** significant at the 99 per cent level.
Source: ENCOVI (2000).

In the 2000 survey the respondents were asked about the age at which
they had begun working. Combining the responses to that question with the
respondents’ age allows us to estimate the prevalence of child labour over
time. We have excluded the 1900–40 data because by 2000 many of the peo-
ple would have died, and including those who remained alive would have
biased the results. Thus the analysis only includes respondents aged 20–60
in the year 2000, giving a time horizon of 1940–80. This approach may
overestimate child labour. While over 90 per cent of indigenous peoples
responded that they had worked before the age of 14, only 60 per cent of
indigenous children of that age were working at the time of the 2000 survey.
Therefore the results shown in Figure 5.2 do not represent the percentage of
children who were working in any given year, but the percentage of those
born in a given year who had worked at some point in their childhood.
Between 1940 and 1980 child labour decreased among non-indigenous
people but increased slightly among indigenous peoples, with a prevalence of
nearly 80 per cent. This pattern varied by location. In urban areas indigenous
child labour decreased at a faster rate than that for the non-indigenous,
with indigenous–non-indigenous inequality decreasing by about 0.6 per cent
per year. Conversely in rural areas the gap grew by 0.21–0.68 per cent per year.
Qualitative evidence from other studies suggests a reason for this develop-
ment. It is common in indigenous communities for young boys to work as
apprentices and girls to learn household chores. According to Heckt (1999),
Mayan families value work not only as a means to acquire income but also
Human_05.qxd 25/10/05 6:17 PM Page 126

126 Guatemala

Figure 5.2 Child labour in Guatemala, by year of birth, 1940–80 (percentage of those
who first worked at the age of 14 or earlier)

95

90
Indigenous
85

80

75

70

65

60
Non-indigenous
55

50

Source: ENCOVI (2000).

as a worthwhile activity in its own right. Meanwhile the World Bank (2003b)
has found that indigenous Guatemalan families expect boys to take on
apprenticeships and girls to learn productive household tasks (Box 5.2).
However indigenous norms by no means entirely explain why so many
indigenous children are employed; rather it is probable that the poverty and
isolation of indigenous peoples are more pertinent factors.
One Guatemalan non-governmental organization has surveyed organiza-
tions in Guatemala on their agreement with the statement, ‘Children’s work
is dignifying because it allows them to satisfy their basic needs, increases
their self-esteem and improves the living conditions of their family in an
honest way for their future development’ (CALDH, 1999). While half of the
indigenous organizations surveyed agreed with this statement, only 14 per
cent of government institutions, 9 per cent of doctors and none of the inter-
national organizations surveyed did so.

Box 5.2 Comments by Guatemalan Mayas on child labour

The Guatemalan National Statistics Institute conducted a series of interviews with

Mayan people in order to understand their perspectives on child labour. Based on
these interviews the institute offers the following comments:
In general, when discussing child labour Mayan leaders mixed comments of an
economic nature with comments of an educational nature, such as learning from
one’s father, the relation between learning and working, and being disciplined
Human_05.qxd 25/10/05 6:17 PM Page 127

Joseph Shapiro 127

and respected. That is, child labour was viewed as a way of training children to
lead a responsible life …
Working in the family business was seen as having a valuable role in educa-
tion and training, incorporating the concept and practice of living. Values such
as honour, dignity, development and learning were expressed in connection
with the work of children in the family environment. The relation between
corn and land was also established, as were differences between the sexes: ‘In
the Mayan community it’s very important from childhood to begin communi-
cating with the corazón [heart] of corn, that’s what girls do, and boys begin
communicating with the corazón of the land.’…
In general, indigenous children are prepared for work from a very young
age, with the certainty of being an employee, not an employer, and they are
also prepared to work in occupations that do not require prolonged academic
preparation.

Sources: INE and OIT (2003).

Education

Guatemala’s education indicators are worse than all other countries in the
Western hemisphere but Haiti (World Bank, 2003d). Only half of
Guatemalan children complete sixth grade, compared with 65–92 per cent of
children in other Central American countries. The mean years of schooling
are nearly the lowest in the region, and total public expenditure on educa-
tion as a proportion of GDP is just 2.6 per cent – only a little over half the
mean of 4.5 per cent for Latin America and the Caribbean (World Bank,
2003c).

Educational achievement
Indigenous peoples have abysmally low levels of schooling, although
they are catching up with the non-indigenous. In 2000 the average indige-
nous adult had had 2.5 years of schooling, an increase of 92 per cent or
1.2 years above the 1989 average of 1.3 years. There was also a positive but
smaller increase of 24 per cent or 1.1 years for non-indigenous people
(Table 5.20).
Looking at changes in years of schooling by age group gives a more
detailed picture. Only in the 1970s did indigenous peoples begin to catch up
with the non-indigenous. Table 5.20 shows that indigenous individuals born
after 1965 (that is, those aged under 35 in the 2000 survey) were the first
cohort to have a larger increase in years of schooling than non-indigenous
individuals in the same age group. As can be seen in Figure 5.3, however,
indigenous peoples remain far below their non-indigenous counterparts in
the number of years of schooling. The trend lines in the figure (which are
 Human_05.qxd
128

25/10/05
Table 5.20 Years of schooling, by gender, Guatemala, 1989–2000

Indigenous Non-indigenous

Male Female All Male Female All

6:17 PM
1989 2000 1989 2000 1989 2000 1989 2000 1989 2000 1989 2000 Diff*

10–13 1.6 2.2 1.2 2.0 1.4 2.1 2.9 3.2 2.8 3.3 2.8 3.2 0.30
14–19 2.9 4.3 1.8 3.1 2.4 3.7 5.2 5.9 4.9 5.6 5.1 5.7 0.70

Page 128
20–24 2.7 4.6 1.3 2.7 1.9 3.6 6.2 6.8 5.4 6.7 5.7 6.7 0.70
25–29 2.3 4.5 0.9 2.2 1.5 3.2 5.7 6.9 5.2 5.8 5.3 6.3 0.70
30–34 1.9 3.0 0.6 1.8 1.2 2.4 5.5 6.7 4.7 5.7 5.1 6.1 0.20
35–39 1.5 3.1 0.4 1.0 0.9 2.0 4.5 6.8 3.9 5.1 4.1 5.9 0.70
40–44 1.0 2.8 0.4 0.9 0.7 1.9 4.4 7.1 3.2 5.0 3.7 6.0 1.10
45–49 0.9 2.2 0.3 0.8 0.6 1.5 3.6 5.6 2.8 4.3 3.2 4.9 0.80
50–54 0.7 1.5 0.2 0.6 0.4 1.0 3.2 4.9 2.7 3.2 3.0 4.0 0.40
55–59 0.8 1.2 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.7 3.3 3.0 2.5 3.5 2.9 3.2 0.00
60 0.5 0.8 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.5 2.4 3.1 2.0 2.5 2.1 2.8 0.50
15–65 1.9 3.3 0.8 1.8 1.3 2.5 5.0 6.2 4.2 5.3 4.6 5.7 0.04
15–31 2.6 4.4 1.3 2.7 1.9 3.5 5.7 6.5 5.1 6.1 5.4 6.3 0.66

Notes: * Difference between increases in schooling for the indigenous and non-indigenous populations. A positive difference denotes indigenous advantage.
Sources: Steele (1994); ENCOVI (2000).
Human_05.qxd 25/10/05 6:17 PM Page 129

Joseph Shapiro 129

Figure 5.3 Years of schooling, by year of birth, Guatemala, 2000 (per cent)

7 Non-indigenous

3
Indigenous
2

0
1940 1950 1960 1970 1980
Year of birth

Source: ENCOVI (2000).

quadratic) show that while non-indigenous people’s years of schooling

increased at a decreasing rate between 1940 and 1980, those of indigenous
peoples increased at an increasing rate. Unfortunately the availability of sur-
vey data for just two years prevents an accurate estimation of the number of
years needed to equalize the levels of schooling.
Indigenous men aged 16–65 are catching up with non-indigenous men at
a rate of 0.04 years of schooling per 11 years, and indigenous men aged
15–31 are catching up at a rate of 0.66 years per 11 years. In the 16–65 age
group, indigenous women are not catching up with non-indigenous women,
but younger indigenous women aged 16–31 are catching up with non-
indigenous women of the same age by a rate of 0.4 years of schooling per
11 years. In short inequality is reducing slowly but the duration of schooling
is increasing quickly.
We can also calculate changes over time in the proportion of the popula-
tion with no schooling. About 20 per cent fewer indigenous peoples born in
1980 had no schooling than was the case with the non-indigenous born in
the same year, but the gap had shrunk since 1940. A linear extrapolation of
the trends in Figure 5.4 shows that within 15 years, all indigenous and
non-indigenous people are likely to have at least one year of schooling.
However ensuring that extremely the poor children attend school will be dif-
ficult, so a linear projection may be unrealistic.
Regressions to estimate years of schooling can also show, controlling for
background differences, the relationship of being indigenous to the decision
to stay in school. Simple regressions for 1989 and 2000 give nearly identical
Human_05.qxd 25/10/05 6:17 PM Page 130

130 Guatemala

Figure 5.4 Percentage of people with no schooling, by year of birth, Guatemala,

1940–80
100

y = –0.0125x +
Indigenous y = –0.009x +
80

60

40

20 Non-indigenous

0
1940 1980

Source: ENCOVI (2000).

Table 5.21 Determinants of years of

schooling, Guatemala, 1989–2000

1989 2000

Age 0.06 0.08

(40.80) (22.52)
Male 0.87 1.19
(17.70) (19.23)
Indigenous 3.21 3.31
(62.80) (16.64)
Constant 6.35 7.97
R2 0.21 0.20
N 10 888 17 693

Notes: Includes adults aged 19 and over.

OLS regression, t-statistics in parenthesis.
Sources: Steele (1994); ENCOVI (2000).

results and have similar explanatory power (Table 5.21). The coefficients for
the variables male, indigenous and age are of similar magnitude and signifi-
cance in both years.
Because of the increase in years of schooling literacy is improving rate slowly,
but indigenous peoples remain far behind non-indigenous people. In 2000
only 53 per cent of indigenous peoples aged 15–64 could read and write in
Human_05.qxd 25/10/05 6:17 PM Page 131

Joseph Shapiro 131

Spanish, compared 82 per cent of the non-indigenous. The indigenous–non-

indigenous gap was larger among older than among younger people, which is
encouraging since it suggests that inequality in literacy will eventually disap-
pear. Nonetheless, even among young people aged 10–19 indigenous peoples
have a lower literacy rate (74 per cent) than non-indigenous people (90 per
cent). More distressingly, indigenous women remain far behind indigenous
men and non-indigenous people of all ages: only 39 per cent of indigenous
women are literate, in contrast with 68 per cent of indigenous men and 77 per
cent of non-indigenous women. Even in the 10–19 age group only 67 per cent
of indigenous females are literate, compared with 80 per cent of indigenous
males and 89 per cent of non-indigenous females (Table 5.22).
The 2000 survey included a question on why children do not enrol in
school; the most common reasons are listed in Table 5.23. The lack of a
nearby school was a very uncommon reason. This has important policy
implications – as the absence of a local school was not a principal reason for

Table 5.22 Literacy rates, Guatemala, 2000 (per cent)

Indigenous Non-indigenous

Age Female Male All Female Male All

10–19 67 80 74 89 91 90
20–29 50 78 63 85 91 88
30–39 34 67 49 76 89 82
40–49 21 58 40 71 86 78
50–59 13 42 26 57 70 63
60–69 6 32 20 47 68 58
15–64 39 68 53 77 87 82

Source: ENCOVI (2000).

Table 5.23 Reasons why children do not enrol in school, Guatemala, 2000 (percentage
of each group who cited one of the listed reasons)

Indigenous Non-indigenous

Rural Urban All Rural Urban All

Illness 1.5 1.8 1.6 2.0 1.7 1.9

Work in household
business 23.1 18.1 21.8 23.0 14.9 19.1
Employment elsewhere 28.7 31.0 29.3 33.8 35.1 34.4
No money 14.5 13.5 14.2 12.8 15.1 13.9
Not interested 10.4 10.8 10.5 8.5 8.7 8.6
No school in the area 1.6 1.4 1.6 01.9 0.3 1.1
Age 15.4 18.3 16.2 12.1 13.9 13.0

Source: ENCOVI (2000).

Human_05.qxd 25/10/05 6:17 PM Page 132

132 Guatemala

not attending school, simply building more schools of similar quality to the
existing ones would be unlikely to improve school enrolment. For both
indigenous and non-indigenous people, engagement in work and the cost of
schooling were the leading reasons for non-attendance. Age was a more rele-
vant factor for indigenous peoples (16 per cent) than for the non-indigenous
(13 per cent). It is also notable that 2 per cent more indigenous peoples than
non-indigenous people had no interest in attending school.
Since 3 per cent more indigenous than non-indigenous people listed age as
a reason for not enrolling in school, one might deduce that indigenous stu-
dents are often older than the appropriate age for their grade. Indeed as
Table 5.24 shows, in 2000 a high percentage of indigenous students (and to
a lesser degree non-indigenous students) were at least a year older than the
normal age for their grade. Grade repetition and late primary school enrol-
ment may be significant factors in age–grade distortion. A recent study has
shown that the age–grade distortion among indigenous students varies by
indigenous group. Q’eqchi’ students are much less likely and Kaqchikel stu-
dents much more likely to be too old for their grade, while K’iche and Mam
students have a similar probability as non-indigenous students of being the
appropriate age for their grade (World Bank, 2003c).
Guatemala provides bilingual education for many students, and research
has shown that this can be both effective in raising test scores and cost-
effective (Patrinos and Velez, 1996). In 2000 nearly 37 per cent of rural indige-
nous students received bilingual education in the first grade, although that
figure had dropped to 28 per cent by the fifth grade. Only a small proportion
of indigenous students in urban areas received bilingual education, but in
this case the percentage steadily increased through to the fifth grade. Even
fewer students enrolled in Mayan-only schools, and this was not available
after third grade (Table 5.25).

Quality of education
One explanation of the limited educational attainment of indigenous
vis-à-vis non-indigenous people is that the quality of their education is
inferior. For primary schools the gross enrolment rate is 103 per cent for the

Table 5.24 Age–grade distortion, Guatemala,

2000 (percentage of students more than one
year behind the appropriate grade for their age)

Grade Indigenous Non-indigenous

Third 79 75
Fourth 71 63
Fifth 59 54
Sixth 59 50

Source: ENCOVI (2000).

Human_05.qxd 25/10/05 6:17 PM Page 133

Joseph Shapiro 133

Table 5.25 Languages used in schools with indigenous children, Guatemala, 2000
(per cent)

Rural Urban

Spanish Maya Spanish Maya

Grade Spanish and Maya only Spanish and Maya only

First 59.8 36.6 3.6 97.0 3.0 0.0

Second 68.2 27.5 2.7 93.6 6.4 0.0
Third 70.0 27.5 2.5 85.4 13.5 1.2
Fourth 73.6 26.4 0.0 84.5 15.5 0.0
Fifth 71.7 28.3 0.0 83.7 16.3 0.0
Sixth 77.3 22.7 0.0 89.9 10.1 0.0

Source: ENCOVI (2000).

Table 5.26 Grade repetition and drop-out rates, Guatemala, 2000 (per cent)

Grade repetition rate Drop-out rate

Grade Non-indigenous Indigenous All poor Non-indigenous Indigenous All poor

First 24.6 18.5 24.2 31.4 44.2 28.8

Second 13.0 15.4 15.0 n.a. 27.8 14.2
Third 8.0 10.7 9.3 14.8 28.5 23.1
Fourth 9.0 6.2 8.8 n.a. 35.2 28.3
Fifth 4.1 2.5 3.8 21.3 35.1 16.1
Sixth 3.6 7.0 4.8 n.a. 29.7 n.a.

Sources: World Bank (2003d); Edwards (2002).

non-indigenous but 94 per cent for indigenous students. For secondary

schools these rates drop to 41 per cent and 19 per cent respectively, and for
universities to 29 per cent and 8 per cent respectively.
The grade-repetition and drop-out rates among indigenous students are
disproportionately high. In 2000 a striking 44 per cent of indigenous first
graders dropped out of school during first grade, versus 31 per cent of non-
indigenous (Table 5.26). Although the data are incomplete, it can be seen
from the table that the drop-out rate for indigenous students remained far
higher than that for non-indigenous students in subsequent grades.
Furthermore indigenous children perform significantly worse than non-
indigenous students in standard exams. In 2000 and 2001, the third grade
exam performance of indigenous students in Spanish and maths was well
below that of their non-indigenous contemporaries (Table 5.27). In fact the
difference between the indigenous and non-indigenous maths scores actu-
ally widened a little between 2000 and 2001.
Human_05.qxd 25/10/05 6:17 PM Page 134

134 Guatemala

Table 5.27 Third grade mathematics and Spanish

test scores, 2000–1 (mean score, standard deviation in
brackets)

Indigenous Non-indigenous

2000 2001 2000 2001

Maths 40.0 39.7 48.5 49.0

(16.3) (15.5) (17.3) (16.9)
Spanish 45.0 43.5 63.6 61.9
(16.4) (15.7) (16.5) (16.2)

Sources: World Bank (2003c); Baessa (2000–1).

The World Bank (2003c) has used a hierarchical linear modelling approach
to estimate the determinants of maths and reading scores on a test devel-
oped by UNESCO’s Regional Office in Latin America and the Caribbean.
Among other findings, in grades three and four speaking Mam had a larger
effect on reading and maths scores than any other variable. Speakers of
Kaqchiqel and K’iche significantly underperformed as well, while speakers of
Q’eqchi’ underperformed only in reading exams. Notably indigenous stu-
dents did not consistently perform any better or worse in reading than in
maths. In both subjects all indigenous groups but the Q’eqchi’ performed
worse than their non-indigenous peers.

Education policy
Low enrolment and the poor quality of education are the principal causes of
the low educational achievement of indigenous peoples. In the mid 1990s
the US Agency for International Development (USAID) oversaw the Eduque a
la Niña programme in Guatemala, which among other interventions paid
families 25 quetzals (US$4) a month for their daughters to attend school.
According to Chesterfield and Rubio (1997) this, in combination with the
efforts of outreach workers to encourage girls to go to school, increased the
daily attendance, completion and promotion rates by 2–5 per cent. Despite
its effectiveness the programme was concluded in 1997.
However at about the same time the Guatemalan government introduced
a scholarship programme for girls from poor rural families. The programme
began in 1996, and by 2000 it was supporting 48000 students (World Bank,
2001). Expanding such programmes, and including indigenous identity in
their targeting criteria, would help remedy both the schooling gap between
indigenous and non-indigenous people and the poor educational achieve-
ment in Guatemala in general.
As fiscal constraints could prevent the development or expansion of
demand-side education programmes, one means of cost-effectively improv-
ing the quality of education within the existing budgets could be to extend
Human_05.qxd 25/10/05 6:17 PM Page 135

Joseph Shapiro 135

and refine bilingual education. Research in Guatemala and elsewhere has

shown that bilingual education can be an effective means of keeping indige-
nous children at school and improving their learning. At the moment less
than a third of indigenous first-grade children receive bilingual education,
and the proportion falls in subsequent grades. Providing bilingual education
to more indigenous children could improve overall educational achievement
in Guatemala, and it might also reduce the indigenous–non-indigenous gap
in school completion.
Measures to improve the enrolment and achievement rates in primary
school should be accompanied by improved provision of secondary educa-
tion. The gap in net enrolment between indigenous and non-indigenous stu-
dents is about 10 per cent in primary school and 20 per cent in secondary
school, which points to the need for accessible and relevant secondary edu-
cation for indigenous students. Mexico and Colombia have experimented
with telesecundarias – distance learning by television – for isolated rural chil-
dren. While another solution might be more appropriate in Guatemala, in
light of the 10–30 per cent secondary net enrolment rates policy makers
should begin to explore fiscally tenable means of expanding secondary
schooling.

Health care

In general indigenous peoples have more limited access to health-care ser-

vices than non-indigenous peoples, but much of that difference is due to
indigenous peoples’ lower incomes and concentration in rural areas. The
following sub-sections discuss health-care provision, reproductive health,
contraceptive use, nutrition and health policies.

Health-care provision
A non-indigenous person who becomes ill has a 64 per cent likelihood of
receiving medical care; an indigenous person has only a 54 per cent likeli-
hood. Of those who do receive care, the non-indigenous are nearly twice as
likely to visit a private clinic (Table 5.28). These data, however, are based on
self-diagnosis of illness, which may be influenced by a person’s income and
culture (Sadana et al., 2000). Indigenous peoples’ hesitation to have their ill-
ness treated is also in part due to their lack of medical insurance. In 2000
only 5 per cent of indigenous Guatemalans had medical insurance, com-
pared with 18 per cent of their non-indigenous counterparts (Table 5.29).
Other factors are rural residence, recent illness and family circumstances
(Table 5.30).

Reproductive health
An area of particular concern is pregnant women’s access to sufficient care to
have safe births and healthy children. Twenty-seven per cent of indigenous
Human_05.qxd 25/10/05 6:17 PM Page 136

136 Guatemala

Table 5.28 Place where medical treatment was sought,

Guatemala, 2000 (per cent)

Indigenous Non-indigenous

No treatment sought 46.3 35.9

Public hospital 4.2 6.6
IGSS hospital 1.6 4.6
Private hospital 1.8 1.6
IGSS clinic 0.2 1.2
Health centre 8.5 8.2
Health post 5.3 3.2
Community centre 1.8 0.7
Private clinic 16.0 27.9
Private pharmacy 5.3 3.6
State pharmacy 1.3 0.4
Home 3.7 3.4
Other 4.1 2.7

Source: ENCOVI (2000).

Table 5.29 Possession of medical insurance, Guatemala, 2000

(per cent)

Indigenous Non-indigenous All

Private insurance 1 4 3
IGSS insurance 4 13 10
IGSS and private insurance 0 1 0
Other insurance 0 0 0
No insurance 95 82 87

Source: ENCOVI (2000).

women and 18 per cent of non-indigenous women receive no prenatal care.

Of those who do, non-indigenous women are twice as likely to visit a doctor
or gynaecologist; less than a third of pregnant indigenous women do so,
with about half visiting a midwife or traditional midwife. Indigenous
women are also less likely to seek prenatal care in the first trimester and on
average have one less prenatal visit during pregnancy (Table 5.31). According
to Glei (1999) the fact that indigenous peoples are significantly less likely to
see a health-care provider during pregnancy is not due to the unavailability
of medical services.
In 2000 only 15 per cent of indigenous women gave birth in a hospital,
compared with 51 per cent of non-indigenous women. Over 75 per cent of
indigenous women but only 34 per cent of non-indigenous women gave
birth at home. In urban areas indigenous women were nearly four times
Human_05.qxd 25/10/05 6:17 PM Page 137

137

Table 5.30 Determinants of outpatient medical facility

visits, Guatemala, 2000

Marginal
Coefficient Mean effect

Income 0.00** 5 894 0.00

(3.31)
Urban 0.33** 0.47 0.05
(2.73)
Years of schooling 0.00 4.10 0.00
(0.28)
Male 0.08 0.43 0.03
(1.18)
Indigenous 0.15 0.40 0.02
(1.22)
Family size 0.04 5.83 0.01
(1.90)*
Insured 0.28 0.15 0.09
(2.40)*
Constant 0.01
(0.03)

Notes: Logit regressions, t-statistics in parenthesis. * Significant at

the 90 per cent level; ** significant at the 99 per cent level. Regional
indicators for the north, north-east, south-east, central, south-west,
north-west, Petén and Guatemala City are included.
Source: ENCOVI (2000).

Table 5.31 Prenatal care, Guatemala, 2000 (per cent)

Indigenous Non-indigenous

No prenatal care 30.0 20.0

Type of prenatal care
Traditional (curandero, hierbero, naturista) 3.3 1.1
Midwife or traditional midwife (comadrona) 50.2 23.0
Pharmacist 0.4 0.0
Helper, assistant, health worker 2.7 1.3
Nurse, nursing assistant 10.9 8.0
Doctor, gynaecologist 31.2 66.1
Parent or household member 0.9 0.3
Other 0.5 0.2
Time and amount of prenatal care
Prenatal care initiated in first trimester 20.0 30.0
Mean number of prenatal visits 3.2 4.4

Source: ENCOVI (2000).

Human_05.qxd 25/10/05 6:17 PM Page 138

138 Guatemala

Table 5.32 Location of last birth, Guatemala, 2000 (per cent)

Indigenous Non-indigenous

Rural Urban All Rural Urban All

Public hospital 9 22 12 31 40 35
IGSS hospital 1 7 2 5 19 11
Private hospital 1 3 1 1 9 5
Health centre 1 2 1 5 4 4
Private clinic 1 4 2 3 12 7
Traditional midwife 2 6 3 5 1 3
Own home 85 55 78 50 15 34

Source: ENCOVI (2000).

Table 5.33 Vaccination received during the most recent pregnancy, Guatemala, 2000
(per cent)

Indigenous Non-indigenous

Rural Urban All Rural Urban All

Tetanus vaccine 25 23 25 20 18 19
Hepatitis vaccine 32 26 30 36 24 30

Source: ENCOVI (2000).

more likely than non-indigenous women to give birth at home (Table 5.32).
Giving birth at home need not be bad, and many indigenous women simply
prefer home births to hospital births (Glei, 1999). But if there are complica-
tions the necessary care may not be available. In 2000 indigenous women
were as or more likely than to non-indigenous women to have tetanus and
hepatitis vaccinations during pregnancy (Table 5.33).

Contraception
Indigenous women in both rural and urban areas are far less likely than non-
indigenous women to use or know about contraceptives. In rural areas
non-indigenous women are twice as likely to know of contraceptives and
five times more likely to use them, although in urban areas the non-
indigenous–indigenous ratio is lower (Table 5.34).
It is possible that indigenous peoples know less about contraceptives and
are less likely to use them because they live in isolated areas or have low
incomes. Regression analyses, controlling for age, urban residency, region of
residence, marriage and income, show that in 2000 indigenous women were
31 per cent less likely than non-indigenous women to have knowledge of
contraceptive methods, and 22 per cent of those who did were less likely to
use them (Tables 5.35 and 5.36).
Human_05.qxd 25/10/05 6:17 PM Page 139

Joseph Shapiro 139

Table 5.34 Contraception, Guatemala, 2000 (percentage of women aged 15–49)

Indigenous Non-indigenous

Rural Urban All Rural Urban All

Contraceptive prevalence rate 5 23 12 22 60 57

Knowledge of modern
contraception method(s) 25 55 32 56 88 71

Source: ENCOVI (2000).

Table 5.35 Likelihood of knowing about contraceptives,

Guatemala, 2000 (percentage of women aged 15–49)

Coefficient Mean Marginal effect

Indigenous 1.30** 0.42 0.31

(8.50)
Age 0.02** 28.27 0.00
(2.65)
Urban 1.01** 0.36 0.23
(6.92)
Married 0.30* 0.87 0.07
(1.77)
Income 0.00** 4 196 0.00
(2.72)
Constant 0.63
(1.62)
Chi2 515.6
N 3 914

Notes: Logit regressions, t-statistics in parenthesis. * Significant at

the 90 per cent level; ** significant at the 99 per cent level. Income
measured in quetzals. Regional indicators for the north, north-east,
south-east, central, south-west, north-west, Petén and Guatemala
City are included.
Source: ENCOVI (2000).

More than 30 years ago an early study of family planning including

both non-indigenous and indigenous peoples (ICAPF, 1972) found that
indigenous peoples were less aware of and less inclined to use contracep-
tives. More recent research has shown that neither access to contraceptives
nor the demographic background of families can entirely explain the differ-
ence between indigenous and non-indigenous Guatemalans in contracep-
tive use and awareness (Chen et al., 1983; Montieth et al., 1985; Seiber and
Human_05.qxd 25/10/05 6:17 PM Page 140

140 Guatemala

Table 5.36 Likelihood of using contraceptives if

contraceptives known about, Guatemala, 2000 (percentage
of women aged 15–49)

Coefficient Mean Marginal effect

Indigenous 1.48** 0.42 0.22

(7.81)
Age 0.01 28.27 0.00
(1.48)
Urban 1.20** 0.36 0.21
(8.05)
Married 0.87** 0.87 0.11
(4.00)
Income 0.00** 4 196 0.00
(5.72)
Constant 1.92**
(5.39)
Chi2 181.0
N 2 151

Notes: Logit regressions, t-statistics in parenthesis. * Significant at

the 90 per cent level; ** significant at the 99 per cent level. Income
measured in quetzals. Regional indicators for the north, north-east,
south-east, central, south-west, north-west, Petén and Guatemala
City are included.
Source: ENCOVI (2000).

Bertrand, 2002; Marini and Gragnolati, 2003). One particularly interesting

study (Bertrand et al., 1979) found that advice tailored to indigenous peoples
was largely ineffective in increasing the use of contraceptives. In 1976 the
authors interviewed non-indigenous, K’iche and Q’eqchi’ people on their
attitudes towards and knowledge of family planning practice, and then con-
ducted an intensive two-year campaign with tailored communications. At
the same time Ministry of Health clinics in indigenous areas received con-
traceptive supplies for distribution among local communities. In 1978, while
more indigenous peoples had heard of family planning, the proportion of
K’iche people who had heard of three specific contraceptive methods was
unchanged, and the proportion of Q’eqchi’ people who had heard of them
actually decreased. The most commonly stated reasons for rejecting family
planning were that it was sinful (nearly all the Q’eqchi’ and more than half
the K’iche) and that discussing anything to do with sex was taboo.

Nutrition
According to Marini and Gragnolati (2003) the rate of chronic malnutrition
is 58 per cent for indigenous children and 32 per cent for non-indigenous
children.5 Chronic malnutrition among children in Guatemala is far greater
Human_05.qxd 25/10/05 6:17 PM Page 141

Joseph Shapiro 141

Table 5.37 Child malnutrition, Guatemala, 2000 (per cent)

Severely Severely Severely

Stunted stunted Wasted wasted Underweight underweight

(Height for age) (Weight for height) (Weight for age)

Total population 44.2 22.3 2.8 0.9 22.3 5.1

Indigenous 57.6 30.0 2.6 1.2 27.8 7.2
K’iche 59.0 30.2 3.7 1.8 27.7 7.7
Q’eqchi’ 44.8 16.9 3.3 0.5 18.7 5.2
Kaqchikel 54.5 22.2 1.1 2.2 19.9 3.1
Mam 65.3 41.2 1.6 0.0 39.4 10.5
Non-indigenous 32.5 15.5 3.0 0.6 17.4 3.3

Source: Marini and Gragnolati (2003).

than in any other country in Latin America and the Caribbean. Elsewhere
in the world, only Bangladesh and Yemen have higher rates of stunting.
While the incidence of stunting decreased from 59 per cent in 1987 to 44 per
cent in 2000 (Table 5.37), this decrease was the slowest in the region. Mam
children are particularly likely to be stunted or underweight, and K’iche chil-
dren are particularly likely to be wasted. Even after controlling for income,
education, infrastructure and other observable characteristics, indigenous
children are significantly more likely than non-indigenous children to be
malnourished (Marini and Gragnolati, 2003).
Malnutrition during childhood reduces life expectancy, impairs cognitive
development, undermines learning ability and increases the danger of health
problems later in life. Poverty, disease and inadequate education, family
planning, breastfeeding and community infrastructure all affect children’s
nutritional intake worldwide, and particularly in Guatemala. However, while
35 per cent of women are affected by anaemia – the second highest rate in
Central America – fewer than 2 per cent of adults are mildly malnourished
(Gragnolati, 1999; Marini and Gragnolati, 2003).

Health policies
It appears that, controlling for other factors, indigenous identity and indige-
nous values have little effect on the probability of receiving medical services
in the event of illness but a large effect on the use of contraceptives.
Discomfort with formal medical establishments may cause a large number of
indigenous women to give birth in non-formal locations such as the home
and with less well-trained helpers, for example traditional midwives. Further
research is needed to explore the extent to which the underutilization of
health services by indigenous peoples is due to their different values, prefer-
ences, languages and backgrounds. The findings so far in this chapter suggest
Human_05.qxd 25/10/05 6:17 PM Page 142

142 Guatemala

that indigenous peoples are less likely to use some but not all medical ser-
vices than non-indigenous people with similar backgrounds, and that the
uptake of health services would benefit from differentiated provision to
indigenous peoples.
In the case of malnutrition, while Guatemala has implemented a number
of nutrient fortification programmes, service interruption and poor targeting
have impeded their success, and few rigorous evaluations of them have been
conducted (Marini and Gragnolati, 2003).

Social assistance, public services and social capital

This section begins with a discussion of a school nutrition programmes – the

provision of breakfast, a snack and a glass of atol, a cornmeal beverage, – and
a programme that provides a pack of school materials to students. The nutri-
tion programme is overseen by the Ministry of Education (MINEDUC) and
the Community Managed Programme for Educational Development (PRON-
ADE) and covers about a million students a year. The pack of school materi-
als, also overseen by MINEDUC, is received by about 1.45 million primary
school students (World Bank, 2003c). There are several other school benefit
programmes, but none consistently reaches more than 5 per cent of the
population.
Overall these programmes more or less equally benefit indigenous and
non-indigenous people, so there appears to be no systematic bias for or
against the latter. As Table 5.38 shows, within each consumption quintile in

Table 5.38 Receipt of school nutrition and materials programmes, by

consumption quintile, Guatemala, 2000 (per cent)

Quintile

1 2 3 4 5

School snack
Indigenous 47 56 46 46 11
Non-indigenous 41 42 47 36 12
School breakfast
Indigenous 42 40 38 29 7
Non-indigenous 45 46 30 16 5
Glass of Atol
Indigenous 55 57 45 42 10
Non-indigenous 53 46 46 34 12
School materials pack
Indigenous 49 37 31 30 7
Non-indigenous 38 35 29 24 9

Note: Includes only individuals enrolled in school.

Source: ENCOVI (2000).
Human_05.qxd 25/10/05 6:17 PM Page 143

Joseph Shapiro 143

60

50 Indigenous
40

30

20

10

0
1 2 3 4 5
Quintile

Figure 5.5 Percentage of enrolled primary school children who received a school
materials pack by consumption quintile, Guatemala, 2000
Source: ENCOVI (2000).

2000, similar percentages of indigenous and non-indigenous people were

recipients of the programmes, but in most cases the percentage of indige-
nous peoples was somewhat higher. Since these data refer to the proportion
of people within a quintile who received support, the distribution of the
population between consumption quintiles does not skew the data — for
example the fact that there are more indigenous than non-indigenous peo-
ples in the first consumption quintile does not affect an interpretation of
the data.
Figure 5.5 shows the distribution of the school materials pack among con-
sumption quintiles. Both the school nutrition and the school materials pro-
gramme cover all quintiles, although the coverage is lower in the case of the
top consumption quintile. The distribution suggest that a more exact means
is required to target the poorest students – based for example on a poverty
map or a school marginality index – and not the wealthier students in the
top consumption quintiles.
With regard to households’ access to public services and utilities, the pro-
vision of electricity and sanitation services6 increased for all between 1989
and 2000 groups, with the rate of increase for indigenous peoples exceeding
that for the non-indigenous because the latter had already been almost fully
covered in urban areas in 1989 (Table 5.39). In 2000, 97 per cent of indige-
nous peoples in urban areas received sanitation services and 89 per cent had
access to electricity. Predictably the rates were lower in rural areas, but they
too improved markedly between 1989 and 2000.
Recent studies have emphasized the digital divide between industrialized
and developing countries, but a severe digital divide also exists between
groups in Guatemala. While overall possession of a personal computer in
Guatemala is low, only 0.7 per cent of indigenous Guatemalans have one,
Human_05.qxd 25/10/05 6:17 PM Page 144

144 Guatemala

Table 5.39 Households access to services, Guatemala, 2000 (per cent)

Indigenous Non-indigenous

Rural Urban Rural Urban

1989 2000 1989 2000 1989 2000 1989 2000

Electricity 15 50 66 89 38 62 92 97
Telephone 0 3 0 15 0 8 0 47
Refuse disposal 0 80 0 97 0 77 0 98
Computer 0 0 0 2 0 1 0 12
Sanitation 47 80 83 97 62 77 97 98

Sources: Steele (1994); ENCOVI (2000).

Table 5.40 Participation in organizations and communal activities, Guatemala, 2000

(per cent)

Indigenous Non-indigenous

Rural Urban All Rural Urban All

Participate in organization 33 30 33 29 32 31
Type of organization
Women’s group 1 0 1 0 0 0
Religious group 26 23 25 21 20 21
Indigenous group 1 0 1 1 0 1
Communal activities
Construction of public facilities 59 31 52 47 18 32
Exchange labour (mano de obra) 34 21 31 29 11 20
Voluntry work for charitable
organization 18 21 19 15 17 17

Source: ENCOVI (2000).

compared with 6.1 per cent of non-indigenous people. The gap is even wider
in urban areas: 2 per cent versus 12 per cent.
Finally, with regard to building up social capital by participating in orga-
nizations, in 2000 about a third of both indigenous and non-indigenous
people participated in some type of organization (Table 5.40). Only 1–2 per
cent participated in organizations such a women’s group, indigenous group
or sports group, but about 25 per cent of indigenous people and 21 per cent
of non-indigenous people participated in religious organizations in both
rural and urban areas.
Over half of indigenous peoples (52 per cent) participated in the construc-
tion of public facilities such as roads and schools, compared with less than a
third (32 per cent) of non-indigenous people. In urban areas the figures for
Human_05.qxd 25/10/05 6:17 PM Page 145

Joseph Shapiro 145

exchanges of labour were 21 per cent and 11 per cent respectively. There were
smaller but still notable differences between the percentages of indigenous
and non-indigenous people who did voluntary work for a charitable organiza-
tion. While some of these differences in participation may have been due to
the greater poverty of indigenous peoples or their isolation in small villages, it
seems that indigenous peoples are more inclined than non-indigenous people
to involve themselves in community organizations and activities.

Conclusions

The analysis in this chapter allows a number of general conclusions about

trends in indigenous peoples’ non-indigenous people circumstances. First,
indigenous peoples are escaping poverty at a slower rate than non-indigenous
people in both rural and urban areas. About 72 per cent of Q’eqchi’, 65 per
cent of Mam and 37 per cent of K’iche and Kaqchikel people are extremely
poor, compared with only 24 per cent of non-indigenous people. Mam
school children perform worst of all groups in Spanish and maths exams;
Mam children are also the most likely to be malnourished and Mam workers
experience the most discrimination. While isolation may be an important
factor in the varying degrees of exclusion and poverty suffered by the differ-
ent indigenous groups, lack of nationally representative data prevents a
proper analysis of this.
Second, indigenous peoples in Guatemala have abysmally low levels of
schooling, even in the context of increased years of schooling for the popu-
lation as a whole. Today, indigenous Guatemalans aged 15–31 on average
have had 3.5 years of schooling. Primary school enrolment did increase dur-
ing the twentieth century, and within the next 20 years it is possible that
nearly all indigenous and non-indigenous children will at least begin primary
school. Nonetheless it remains the case that Guatemala has the worst educa-
tion indicators of any country in the Western hemisphere apart from Haiti,
and indigenous adults in Guatemala have under half the mean years of
schooling of non-indigenous adults. The poor quality of schooling appears to
be a significant reason why indigenous Guatemalans have fewer years of
schooling; the unavailability of nearby schools is a relatively unimportant
reason, with fewer than 2 per cent of indigenous and non-indigenous
Guatemalans citing the absence of a nearby school as a reason for not enrolling
in school. Schools attended by indigenous children have higher drop-out and
grade-repetition rates, and far lower Spanish and maths test scores. Although
research has shown that bilingual education can be both effective and
cost-effective, less than a third of indigenous Guatemalans receive bilingual
education.
Third, indigenous peoples continue to be more likely than non-
indigenous people to be employed in the informal sector, to work in agricul-
ture and to hold unpaid jobs. Although the gap between the two groups in
Human_05.qxd 25/10/05 6:17 PM Page 146

146 Guatemala

all three of these indicators narrowed between 1989 and 2000, over half of
indigenous peoples are still employed in agriculture, fishing and livestock
production. In urban areas indigenous peoples are four times more likely
than non-indigenous people to work in these sectors. A quarter of indigenous
workers receive no pay for their work, compared with 16 per cent of non-
indigenous workers; among female workers the indigenous–non-indigenous
gap is wider. Ninety-three per cent of indigenous and 77 per cent of non-
indigenous people work in the informal sector (defined as consisting of firms
with fewer than 10 employees). In general indigenous earn far less than
non-indigenous peoples. Although this is largely a consequence of the for-
mer’s lesser education, concentration in rural areas and type of employment,
about 20 per cent of non-indigenous–indigenous wage inequality among
female workers and 36 per cent among male workers is due to discrimina-
tion. While discrimination against indigenous male workers decreased
between 1989 and 2000, it appeared to be unchanged among female work-
ers, so it might well be that women suffer the additional burden of gender
discrimination.
Fourth, child labour is more prevalent and persistent among indigenous
children than among non-indigenous children, despite increased school
attendance. Although indigenous peoples account for only 39 per cent of the
population aged 10 and over, the majority of child workers aged 10–14 are
indigenous. Children predominantly work in the informal sector and in
rural occupations, and many receive no pay for their work. Indigenous chil-
dren often combine school and work, although it is unclear whether they are
more likely than non-indigenous children to attend school if they work.
Between 1940 and 1980 the proportion of non-indigenous people who
worked during childhood fell from 70 per cent to 62 per cent, while that of
indigenous peoples rose from 80 per cent to about 83 per cent.
Fifth, indigenous peoples make less use of health services, although this
appears to be due to indigenous–non-indigenous differences in background
and not to unique characteristics of indigenous peoples. During illness
54 per cent of indigenous peoples receive some medical care, compared with
64 per cent of non-indigenous people. This could be in part due to lack of
insurance – only 5 per cent of indigenous Guatemalans have medical
insurance, versus 18 per cent of non-indigenous people. The time spent on
travelling to health-care providers and the waiting time at medical facilities
are much the same for both groups.
Pregnant indigenous women receive significantly less prenatal care and
hospital treatment. About 27 per cent of indigenous women receive no
prenatal care, compared with 18 per cent of non-indigenous women. Of
those who do receive prenatal care, over half of indigenous women and
23 per cent of non-indigenous women receive it from a midwife or a tradi-
tional midwife. On average indigenous women have one less prenatal visit
(3.2) than non-indigenous women (4.4), and indigenous women are about
Human_05.qxd 25/10/05 6:17 PM Page 147

Joseph Shapiro 147

10 percentage points less likely to seek prenatal care during the first
trimester. Only 15 per cent of indigenous women give birth in a hospital,
compared with 51 per cent of non-indigenous women. In urban areas
indigenous women are nearly four times more likely than non-indigenous
women to give birth at home. A similar percentage of indigenous and non-
indigenous women, however, receive tetanus and hepatitis vaccinations
during pregnancy.
Indigenous women are also significantly less likely to know about or use
contraceptives. Only 12 per cent use some form of contraception, versus
57 per cent of non-indigenous women. Only 32 per cent of indigenous
women claim to have knowledge of a contraceptive method, compared with
71 per cent of non-indigenous women, even when their backgrounds are
similar.
Sixth indigenous Guatemalans’ access to basic public services such as
electricity supply, sanitation and refuse disposal has improved markedly,
especially in urban areas, where the indigenous–non-indigenous divide in
service provision has all but disappeared. However only 15 per cent of
indigenous peoples have a telephone connection, compared with 47 per
cent of non-indigenous people.
Finally, participation in non-family organizations – a key factor in build-
ing social capital – is similar for indigenous and non-indigenous people.
Membership of religious groups is particularly high. In the case of commu-
nal activities indigenous peoples are about 20 percentage points more likely
than non-indigenous people to participate in the construction of communal
facilities.
Table 5.41 summarizes the findings of this chapter in respect of the fight
against poverty in Guatemala and the narrowing of the human development
gap between indigenous and non-indigenous peoples. It should be noted
that the findings relate to population averages, and it is possible that young
indigenous peoples under the age of 30 are catching up in the case of most
human development indicators, but older indigenous peoples are not.
Increased schooling has probably begun to improve the wages of younger
labour market participants, so in 10–20 years the poverty gap may be far less
pronounced.

Policy recommendations
First, plentiful nationally representative data are needed to aid understand-
ing of indigenous poverty. Different definitions of who is indigenous pro-
duce widely varying estimates of the size of the indigenous population and
how poor indigenous peoples are. No single definition is perfect, so combin-
ing several definitions might produce more useful results. Also, the collec-
tion of comprehensive data on relative isolation – access to roads,
transportation and markets – might help us to understand why different
indigenous groups have such different poverty levels.
Human_05.qxd 25/10/05 6:17 PM Page 148

148 Guatemala

Table 5.41 Changes in the circumstances of indigenous peoples, Guatemala,

1989–2000

Elimination of general poverty No

Elimination of extreme poverty No
Reduction of the poverty gap No
Reduction of within-group inequality No
Increased years of schooling Yes
Increased number of people with some schooling Yes
Increased returns from schooling Yes
Reduced incidence of unpaid work Yes
Reduced incidence of informal sector work Yes
More people working outside the agricultural sector Yes
Reduction of discrimination Yes
Elimination of child labour No
Increased provision of electricity and sanitation Yes

Second, measures are required to improve the quality of education

provided to indigenous children and encourage them to attend school. A
start could be made by reintroducing the Eduque a la Niña programme and
expanding the Guatemalan government’s scholarship programme for girls
from poor rural families. Better targeting of such programmes would help
remedy both the schooling deficit of indigenous peoples with respect to
non-indigenous people and the poor educational attainment of the
Guatemalan population as a whole. While fiscal constraints may prevent
extensive expansion of these programmes, their proven effectiveness should
put them high on the list of candidates for additional funding when the edu-
cation budget allows. In addition, less than a third of indigenous children
receive bilingual education, and the proportion reduces after the first grade.
As improved provision could help to reduce grade-repetition and drop-out
rates it could be an effective means of increasing the educational level of the
indigenous population and reducing the indigenous–non-indigenous gap in
school completion.
Third, research is needed to explore the extent to which the underutilization
of health services by indigenous peoples is due to their particular values,
preferences and languages, or to their personal circumstances. The findings
presented in this chapter suggest that indigenous peoples are less likely
than non-indigenous people to use certain medical services and that tailored
provision may be required.
Finally, Guatemala’s nutritional and educational material programmes
would benefit from more precise targeting. The Ministry of Education oper-
ates programmes that provide school children with breakfast, a snack, a
drink and school materials. These programmes cover people in all consump-
tion quintiles and there is no bias for or against indigenous recipients.
However, since the programmes are ostensibly designed to fight poverty,
Human_05.qxd 25/10/05 6:17 PM Page 149

Joseph Shapiro 149

efforts should be made to ensure that a larger proportion of the benefits

reaches the poorest students.

Notes
1. This chapter has benefited immensely from advice given by Gillette Hall, Harry
Anthony Patrinos, Irma Yolanda Avila Argueta, Shelton H. Davis, Heather Marie
Layton, Kathy Lindert, George Psacharopoulos, Neeta G. Sirur, Carlos Sobrado,
other members of the World Bank Regional Study Team, and participants in the
March and July 2004 Latin American and Caribbean Human Development discus-
sion seminars.
2. Union identity was based on the questions: Does a union or employee solidarity
association or organization exist at your workplace? Are you a member of one of
these associations? Do you have a collective agreement on worker conditions?
3. The 1989 survey included the question: In your job, are (were) you in a job? – with
‘self-employed’ among other possible responses. The 2000 survey includes the
question, Your occupation is … ? with ‘domestic worker’, ‘owner of the business or
farm’, or ‘worker in your own business or on your own farm’ as possible responses.
The differences between the alternative choices for the self-employment questions
in the 1989 and 2000 surveys makes the self-employment indicators imperfectly
comparable.
4. To allow comparison between 1989 and 2000 and to maintain consistency within
this chapter, the data cover only children aged 10–14, except where otherwise
noted.
5. These rates are based on the body-mass index for indigenous and non-indigenous
children. Research by Rao and Sastry (1977) and Johnston et al. (1973) shows that
prior to puberty, ethnic differences in growth potential are insignificant (see also
Gragnolati, 1999).
6. Access to sanitation services in 2000 meant all types of waste removal.
Human_06.qxd 25/10/05 6:17 PM Page 150

6
Mexico
Alejandro Ramirez1

Introduction

Poverty in Mexico, particularly extreme poverty, cannot be fully understood

independently of indigenous identity. Being an indigenous person in
Mexico has been and continues to be associated with significant economic
and social disadvantages. This chapter explores the degree to which an indi-
vidual’s indigenous background, among other characteristics, contributes to
his or her probability of being poor and ill-educated, and whether the earn-
ings differences between Mexico’s indigenous and non-indigenous popula-
tions are merely attributable to group differences in income-generating
characteristics or may also reflect discrimination in the labour market. The
chapter also analyzes the evolution and dynamics of indigenous poverty in
Mexico between 1992 and 2002, plus the changing demographics, labour
market participation and human development achievements of the indige-
nous and non-indigenous populations, in order to assess whether the eco-
nomic and social gaps between them are narrowing or widening.
The chapter begins by reviewing indigenous demographics and the
various definitions of indigenous identity that are used in Mexico. The
subsequent sections review trends in poverty, education, labour market par-
ticipation and earnings, child labour, health, nutrition and social protection.
The final section presents conclusions and policy recommendations.

Demographics

Estimating the number of indigenous peoples living in Mexico is not a

simple task as indigenousness is complex and cannot be reduced to any
single measure. In the case of Mexico, language is perhaps the most reliable
and objective proxy for differentiating the indigenous and non-indigenous
populations. It is also the only indicator of ethnicity that allows us to ana-
lyze historical trends. Here, all speakers of an indigenous language aged five
years and older are counted as indigenous, as are all individuals that are part

150
Human_06.qxd 25/10/05 6:17 PM Page 151

Alejandro Ramirez 151

Table 6.1 Sample demographics, Mexico, 20001

All indigenous Non-indigenous All urban All rural2 Total population

(n  10 688 535) (n  86 326 332) (n  59 166 352) (n  37 848 515) (n  97 014 867)

Male (per cent) 49.3 48.6 48.4 49.3 48.7

Average age 24.8 26.1 26.6 25.4 25.8
Urban (per cent) 27.5 65.1 100.0 0.0 60.9
Married (per cent;
aged 15 and over
only) 46.5 49.3 48.4 50.0 49.0
Percentage of
total sample 11.0 89.0 61.0 39.0 100.0

Notes
1
Unit of analysis: indigenous households.
2
Fewer than 15 000 inhabitants.
Source: National Population Census, 2000.

of a household where the household head or his or her spouse speaks

an indigenous language. Although our unit of analysis is the individual, our
criterion for differentiating indigenous and non-indigenous individuals is
the household. The self-identification criterion is not used because it does
not allow for intertemporal comparisons. (For more information on the
methods used to identify the indigenous population and varying estimates
of the size of the population, see Chapter 2.)
About 11 per cent of Mexican people are indigenous.2 They predomi-
nantly live in rural communities of fewer than 15 000 inhabitants – only
35 per cent of the non-indigenous population live in rural areas, compared
with more than 72 per cent of the indigenous population. This high rural
concentration is even more marked in the case of the monolingual indige-
nous population – 97 per cent compared with 64 per cent of the bilingual
indigenous population. Table 6.1 presents selected statistics.
The typical indigenous household is larger, has more children and is more
often headed by a male than the average non-indigenous household, regard-
less of area of residence (Table 6.2).
Moreover the members of indigenous households are younger than their
non-indigenous counterparts: 66.3 per cent of the indigenous population
are aged 29 or younger, compared with 61.8 per cent of the non-indigenous
population. Approximately the same proportion of indigenous and non-
indigenous people reaches old age: around 8 per cent of both groups were
older than 60 in 2000.
With regard to geographical distribution, 80 per cent of indigenous
peoples live in the southern region of Mexico,3 15 per cent live in the
central region,4 and 7 per cent live in the northern region and the Mexico
City metropolitan areas.5
 Human_06.qxd
152

25/10/05
Table 6.2 Household data, Mexico, 20001

Indigenous2 Non-indigenous3
Total
Rural Urban All Rural Urban All population

6:17 PM
(n  5 603 615) (n  5 084 920) (n  10 688 535) (n  19 001 788) (n  67 324 544) (n  86 326 332) (n  97 014 867)

Average household size 6.4 5.8 6.1 5.8 5.1 5.2 5.3
Average number of people
aged 15 and under 4.0 3.3 3.7 3.6 2.7 2.9 3.0

Page 152
Average number of people
aged 65 or older 1.4 1.5 1.4 1.5 1.4 1.4 1.4
Male household head
(per cent) 85.5 82.4 84.0 82.6 77.9 78.9 79.4
Female household head
(per cent) 14.5 17.6 16.0 17.4 22.1 21.1 20.6
If married, household
head and spouse live
at home (per cent) 90.5 90.5 90.5 90.9 90.3 90.4 90.4

Notes
1
Unit of analysis: indigenous households. Average by household, so larger households do not have more weight.
2
Head of household is indigenous.
3
Head of household is not indigenous.
Source: National Population Census, 2000.
Human_06.qxd 25/10/05 6:17 PM Page 153

Alejandro Ramirez 153

Income and poverty

This section examines average income and poverty by ethnicity, as well as

the determinants of poverty.

Income
Table 6.3 compares the average monthly income of indigenous and
non-indigenous residents of municipal areas in 1989 and 2002. As can be
seen, the higher the percentage of indigenous peoples in a municipality, the
lower their income, regardless of age, educational level and occupation. In 2002
the average income of individuals living in municipalities where 10–40 per
cent of the population were indigenous was 46 per cent of that of individu-
als who resided in non-indigenous municipalities, while in predominantly
indigenous municipalities (more than 40 per cent indigenous) individuals’
income amounted to just 26 per cent of that of people in non-indigenous
municipalities. In 1989 the average income in indigenous municipalities was
also lower than in non-indigenous municipalities, but the income gap was
smaller than in 2002. On average, between 1989 and 2002 the income gap
widened by 12 percentage points in municipalities with an indigenous pop-
ulation of 10–40 per cent, and by almost 10 percentage points in predomi-
nantly indigenous municipalities.
While the gap between indigenous and non-indigenous income levels was
larger for older people than for younger people, the widening of the income
gap between 1989 and 2002 can be mainly explained by the growing income
gap between the following groups: (1) younger individuals (the 20–29 and
30–39 age groups), (2) individuals with more than secondary schooling and
(3) non-agricultural workers. For the 20–29 age group, the income gap
widened by 8 percentage points in the moderately indigenous municipalities
and by 9 percentage points in the predominantly indigenous municipalities.
For the 30–39 age group the figures were about 20 percentage points and
9 percentage points respectively. For individuals in the older age group, with
little or no schooling or working in agriculture, the income gap either stayed
constant or narrowed between 1989 and 2002.

Poverty
Two national poverty lines are used to examine the incidence, depth and
severity of income poverty: one for extreme poverty and one for moderate
poverty (see the Appendix of this book for information on the methodology
used to estimate poverty lines). These national poverty lines are higher in
dollar terms than the national poverty lines of many other Latin American
countries, and this partly explains why the estimated incidence of poverty in
Mexico is also higher.
As Table 6.4 shows, the incidence of poverty is much higher in indigenous
than in non-indigenous municipalities. For example, while only 15 per cent
 Human_06.qxd
154
Table 6.3 Average per capita monthly income in Mexican municipalities, August 1989 and 2002 (in nominal pesos)*

25/10/05
1989 2002

Percentage Percentage
of of
Non- indigenous/ Non- indigenous/
Indigenous Indigenous

6:17 PM
indigenous non- indigenous indigenous non-
(0–10%) (10–40%) (40–100%) (40–100%) (0–10%) (10–40%) (40–100%) indigenous

Age
20–29 483 323 214 44.3 3429 2013 1223 35.7

Page 154
30–39 661 450 259 39.2 4958 2420 1487 30.0
40–50 730 328 242 33.2 5105 2350 1517 29.7
Education
None 284 155 103 36.2 1590 955 646 40.6
Primary 441 294 171 38.8 2566 1716 1214 47.3
Secondary 484 328 274 56.5 5287 3274 2660 50.3
Employment
Agricultural
worker 258 161 115 44.4 1729 1169 920 53.2
Non-agricultural
worker 580 394 354 61.0 4539 2788 2186 48.2
Total 548 317 197 35.8 3894 1784 1020 26.2

Note: *Exchange rates: August 1989, $1  2.57 pesos; August 2002, $1  9.83 pesos.
Sources: Panagides (1994); National Income and Consumption Survey, 2002.
Human_06.qxd 25/10/05 6:17 PM Page 155

Alejandro Ramirez 155

of people in non-indigenous municipalities were extremely poor in 2002,

69 per cent of those living in predominantly indigenous municipalities were
extremely poor. The figures for moderate poverty were 47 per cent and
90 per cent respectively. Thus an individual living in a municipality where
over 70 per cent of the people were indigenous was four times more likely to
be extremely poor and twice as likely to be moderately poor than an indi-
vidual living in a non-indigenous municipality. Furthermore, in 2002 the
incidence of extreme poverty was three times higher in rural than in urban
localities (35 per cent and 11 per cent respectively), and moderate poverty
was also significantly higher. Indigenous municipalities as a whole had a sig-
nificantly higher incidence of poverty than rural municipalities, suggesting
that indigenous peoples are poor for reasons other than the fact that they
mainly live in rural areas.
The trends in Table 6.4 show that between 1992 and 1998 indigenous
poverty moved in the same direction as national poverty, but between 1998
and 2002 they diverged. By 2002 fewer non-indigenous Mexicans were living
in poverty, but in predominantly indigenous municipalities moderate poverty
remained unchanged and extreme poverty had fallen only slightly in both
absolute and relative terms. Between 1992 and 2002 the incidence of extreme
poverty dropped by 20 per cent in non-indigenous municipalities but by only
3 per cent in indigenous municipalities. This means that the already large gap
that existed in 1992 between indigenous and non-indigenous groups

Table 6.4 Trends in poverty, head count index Mexico, 1992–2002 (per cent)

1992 1994 1996 1998 2000 2002

Extremely poor
Indigenous municipalities1 70.8 69.2 83.7 65.1 85.4 68.5
Non-indigenous
municipalities2 18.7 17.9 33.3 29.3 20.8 14.9
Rural 35.5 36.6 52.2 51.9 42.1 34.5
Urban 13.4 9.7 26.2 21.1 12.5 11.4
Total 22.4 21.0 36.9 33.7 24.1 20.3
Moderately poor
Indigenous municipalities 90.0 89.6 96.5 83.1 95.3 89.7
Non-indigenous
municipalities 49.1 52.8 67.2 60.3 50.6 46.7
Rural 64.8 71.9 80.6 74.7 69.0 67.3
Urban 43.8 43.2 61.4 55.4 43.5 42.0
Total 52.4 55.3 69.3 63.3 53.5 51.7

Notes
1
More than 70 per cent indigenous.
2
Less than 10 per cent indigenous.
Sources: National Income and Consumption Survey, 1992, 1994, 1996, 1998, 2000, and 2002.
Human_06.qxd 25/10/05 6:17 PM Page 156

156 Mexico

increased by 21 per cent in the subsequent decade. In 1992 the incidence of

extreme poverty was four times higher in indigenous than in non-indigenous
municipalities. In 2002 it was five times higher. A similar trend pertained for
moderate poverty. The incidence of moderate poverty in non-indigenous
municipalities decreased by 5 per cent between 1992 and 2002, while in
indigenous municipalities it fell by just 0.3 per cent, showing that the
indigenous/non-indigenous poverty gap widened regardless of the poverty
line used.
The trend between 1992 and 2002 was by no means steady, due largely to
the crisis of the peso in 1994–95. Between 1994 and 1996 the incidence of
both extreme and moderate poverty skyrocketed (Table 6.4). In both
absolute and relative terms, the increase of poverty in non-indigenous
municipalities was higher than in indigenous ones: in the former extreme
poverty rose by 86 per cent and moderate poverty by 27 per cent, while in
the latter the figures were 21 per cent and 8 per cent respectively. This, how-
ever, can be explained by the already high levels of poverty in indigenous
municipalities. With indigenous poverty reaching as high as 90 per cent
there was little room for the increases that took place in non-indigenous
municipalities, where the original levels were below 50 per cent.
The recovery from the economic crisis was quite rapid, and by 1998 the
overall incidence of extreme and moderate poverty was on the decline. The
decline in non-indigenous poverty continued thereafter, but in indigenous
areas both extreme poverty and moderate poverty rose sharply again
between 1998 and 2000. In 2002, moderate poverty in indigenous munici-
palities was almost at the same level it had been a decade earlier.
It is possible that the recorded peak in indigenous poverty in 2000 was
partly related to a significantly lower representation of indigenous munici-
palities in the 2000 National Income and Consumption Survey. While 17.2 per
cent of the municipalities sampled in the 2002 survey had indigenous con-
centrations of above 40 per cent and 9.8 per cent had concentrations of
above 70 per cent, only 6.4 per cent of those sampled in 2000 had concen-
trations of above 40 per cent and just 3.6 per cent had concentrations of
above 70 per cent. This much lower representation of indigenous popula-
tions may have biased the poverty results upwards, thus producing the peak
in 2000.6
While the analysis of poverty in the rest of the chapter will be based solely
on the Mexican poverty lines, it is important to establish a common poverty
line to facilitate international comparisons. Table 6.5 uses purchasing power
parity (PPP) poverty lines of PPP$1 per day and PPP$2 per day to estimate
the incidence of poverty in Mexico. As can be seen, the incidence of both
extreme and moderate poverty is much lower when international rather
than national poverty lines are used, although the trends are similar. Both
moderate and extreme poverty declined more in non-indigenous areas than
in indigenous areas between 1992 and 2002.
Human_06.qxd 25/10/05 6:17 PM Page 157

Alejandro Ramirez 157

Table 6.5 Incidence of poverty, by purchasing power

parity (PPP), Mexico, 1989–20021

1989 1992 2002

Extremely poor (PPP $1 per day)

Indigenous2 n.a. 45.1 29.8
Non-indigenous3 n.a. 6.1 1.3
Total n.a. 8.8 3.6
Moderately poor (PPP $2 per day)
Indigenous 80.6 84.3 67.1
Non-indigenous 17.9 24.2 11.2
Total 22.6 28.5 16.8

Notes
1
The World Bank Indicators’ conversion factor was used to convert
local currency to PPP $.
2
More than 70 per cent indigenous.
3
Less than 10 per cent indigenous.
Sources: Panagides (1994); National Income and Consumption
Survey, 1992, 2002.

Table 6.6 Mean per capita monthly income in a population living in poverty, (pesos)
Mexico, 2002

Non- Non-
indigenous indigenous
(less than (less than
10% 30% Indigenous 70% and
indigenous) indigenous) 30–70% over All

Extremely poor 426.1 413.3 320.5 287.2 387.1

Moderately poor 758.9 736.8 463.5 382.8 695.6

Source: National Income and Consumption Survey, 2002.

Not only do indigenous populations have a higher incidence of poverty

than non-indigenous ones, but also indigenous peoples are on average
poorer than non-indigenous people. As Table 6.6 shows, the average income
of the population declines as the proportion of indigenous peoples in a
municipality rises, regardless of the poverty line used.
More comprehensive measures of the depth and severity of poverty are
presented in Table 6.7, where the poverty gap index and the
Foster–Greer–Thorbecke index (FGT P2) are used. The poverty gap index,
which is also known as the FGT P1 index, measures the depth of poverty by
averaging the distance of each observation from the poverty line, while the
FGT P2 weights each individual according to his or her poverty gap. With
Human_06.qxd 25/10/05 6:17 PM Page 158

158 Mexico

Table 6.7 Depth of poverty, aggregate poverty gap (FGT P1 index) Mexico,
1992–2002 (per cent)

1992 1994 1996 1998 2000 2002

Extremely poor
Indigenous1 28.5 30.9 43.5 35.0 45.0 29.0
Non-indigenous2 5.9 5.7 12.0 10.6 7.0 4.0
Rural3 13.1 13.4 22.4 23.4 16.2 12.0
Urban4 3.6 2.7 8.2 6.6 3.3 2.7
Total 7.5 7.1 14.0 13.5 8.4 6.3
Moderately poor
Indigenous 51.8 55.5 65.9 53.0 66.0 54.7
Non-indigenous 19.1 21.5 31.7 28.0 21.0 17.7
Rural 29.6 34.7 43.1 41.7 34.6 31.5
Urban 16.1 15.6 27.5 23.2 15.9 14.8
Total 21.6 23.7 33.9 31.0 23.2 21.1

Notes
1
More than 70 per cent indigenous.
2
Less than 10 per cent indigenous.
3
Localities with fewer than 15 000 inhabitants.
4
Localities with more than 15 000 inhabitants.
Sources: National Income and Consumption Survey, 1992, 1994, 1996, 1998, 2000, 2002.

the FGT P2, the more unequal the income distribution among the poor, the
higher the index.
As can be seen in Tables 6.7 and 6.8, in 1992–2002 the depth and severity
of poverty were significantly greater in indigenous than in non-indigenous
municipalities. In 2002, for example, the FGT P1 and FGT P2 indices for
extremely poor indigenous municipalities were seven times higher than
those for non-indigenous ones. Furthermore, during this period the indices
fluctuated even more than the headcount index of poverty during the 1990s.
In the case of extreme poverty, the FGT P1 index increased significantly
between 1992 and 1996 in indigenous and non-indigenous areas alike as a
result of the economic crisis, and then dropped considerably in 2002. In
2002 the index for non-indigenous areas was lower than it had been a
decade earlier, while in indigenous areas it was slightly higher. For the mod-
erately poor, both indices declined marginally for non-indigenous munici-
palities and increased slightly for indigenous ones.
As with the headcount index of poverty (Table 6.4), the FGT P1 and (P2)
indices were significantly higher for rural than for urban areas. In 2002 the
FGT P1 index for extreme poverty in urban and rural areas was slightly lower
than it had been a decade earlier, while for moderate poverty it was lower for
urban areas but slightly higher for rural ones. In 2002 the FGT P2 index for
both urban and rural areas was more or less the same as it had been in 1992.
Human_06.qxd 25/10/05 6:17 PM Page 159

Alejandro Ramirez 159

Table 6.8 Severity of poverty, FGT P2 index, Mexico, 1992–2002

1992 1994 1996 1998 2000 2002

Extremely poor
Indigenous 14.4 17.0 26.6 21.4 27.8 15.1
Non-indigenous 2.7 3.8 4.5 6.3 3.3 2.0
Rural 6.5 7.3 9.0 13.6 8.3 6.5
Urban 1.5 2.4 3.6 4.3 1.6 1.0
Total 3.5 4.4 5 8.1 4.3 3.1
Moderately poor
Indigenous 33.4 38.2 48.2 38.5 49.2 36.7
Non-indigenous 10.0 11.7 27.7 16.3 11.4 8.8
Rural 17.2 20.7 36.3 27.6 21.2 18.6
Urban 8.0 7.9 15.5 13.0 7.9 7.1
Total 11.8 13.3 28.5 18.9 13.1 11.4

Notes: See notes for Table 6.7.

Sources: National Income and Consumption Survey, 1992, 1994, 1996, 2000, 2002.

Table 6.9 Poverty incidence, by educational level, Mexico, 2002

Extremely poor Moderately poor

Probability of being Indigenous Non-indigenous Gap* Indigenous Non-indigenous Gap*

No education 63.0 30.9 2.0 92.1 67.4 1.3

Incomplete primary 61.6 24.6 2.5 87.2 61.7 1.4
Complete primary 57.9 18.5 3.1 86.3 54.1 1.6
Incomplete secondary 51.3 10.2 5.0 81.3 41.3 1.9
Complete secondary 34.3 3.6 9.4 67.8 26.1 2.6
Some or full
university education 12.1 2.1 5.6 35.9 13.7 2.6

Note: *Indigenous divided by non-indigenous.

Source: National Income and Consumption Survey, 2002.

Throughout the decade the two indices were significantly higher for indige-
nous areas than for rural ones.
In summary, while the incidence (P0), depth (P1) and severity (P2) of
extreme and moderate poverty declined in non-indigenous municipalities
between 1992 and 2002, in indigenous municipalities the incidence of mod-
erate poverty remained unchanged, extreme poverty decreased slightly, and
the depth and severity of poverty increased.
Table 6.9 shows the relationship between the incidence of poverty and
educational attainment. Even among those with similar educational levels,
indigenous peoples have a much higher probability of being poor than do
non-indigenous people. Moreover the gap between the two groups widens as
higher educational levels are attained.
Human_06.qxd 25/10/05 6:17 PM Page 160

160

Table 6.10 Determinants of poverty for individuals aged 18 and over, Mexico, 2002
(dependent variables: percentage of population in extreme poverty and moderate
poverty)

Extreme poverty Moderate poverty

Independent Marginal Marginal

variable Coefficient Mean effect Coefficient Mean effect

Rural (0,1) 0.40* 0.4 0.03 0.09* 0.4 0.023

Female 0.03* 0.5 0.003 0.04* 0.5 0.009
Age 0.02* 39.7 0.001 0.02* 39.7 0.005
Indigenous 0.02* 7.2 0.002 0.02* 7.2 0.006
Years of schooling 0.18* 7.6 0.02 0.21* 7.6 0.051
Number of residents
aged 0–6 0.59* 0.6 0.05 0.73* 0.6 0.180
Number of residents
aged 7–24 0.31* 1.8 0.03 0.36* 1.8 0.088
Number of residents
aged 25–59 0.15* 1.9 0.01 0.01* 1.9 0.003
Number of residents
aged 60 or over 0.36* 0.4 0.03 0.27* 0.4 0.065
Age of household
head 0.00* 48.8 0.00 0.01* 48.8 0.001
Household head
unemployed 1.01* 0.3 0.12 0.76* 0.3 0.186
Occupational
Agriculture 0.57* 0.1 0.06 0.58* 0.1 0.143
Mining 1.49* 0.0 0.07 0.57* 0.0 0.133
Electricity 1.13* 0.0 0.06 0.56* 0.0 0.130
Construction 0.01* 0.0 0.001 0.03* 0.0 0.007
Manufacturing 0.42* 0.1 0.03 0.28* 0.1 0.067
Transport 0.28* 0.0 0.02 0.21* 0.0 0.051
Services 0.32* 0.1 0.02 0.36* 0.1 0.087
Female household
head 0.07* 0.1 0.006 0.08* 0.1 0.021
Constant 1.09* 1.11*
Mean of dependent
variable 0.16 0.45
Wald chi 9.74E  06 1.30E  07
Pseudo R2 0.2737 0.2538
N (not expanded) 42 903 42 903
N (expanded) 62 136 018 62 136 018

Notes: Logit regression; the dependent variable takes on a value of 0 or 1, depending on whether
or not the person is extremely/moderately poor. Indigenous refers to the proportion of indigenous
people in the municipality where the individuals in the survey live. It is a continuous variable with
a value of 0–100 per cent.
* Significant at the 99 per cent level.
Source: National Income and Consumption Survey, 2002.
Human_06.qxd 25/10/05 6:17 PM Page 161

Alejandro Ramirez 161

The results of a logistic regression analysis of the probability of being poor

(Table 6.10) show that age, years of schooling, number of working-age people
in the household, the age of the household head and employment sector
are strong determinants of the probability of being poor for individuals aged
18 years and over.7 The variables with the greatest negative impact for both
sample are the non-agricultural work sectors – that is, mining, electricity,
manufacturing, services and transport. Working in mining or the electricity
industry reduces the probability of being moderately poor by 13 per cent
relative to the 45 per cent mean of the dependent variable. Working in the
service or manufacturing sectors decreases the probability of being moder-
ately poor by 8.7 per cent and 6.7 per cent, respectively, relative to the 45 per
cent mean of the dependent variable, at the mean values of all other
variables.
Years of schooling have a large impact on the probability of being poor.
Years of schooling ranged from 0 to 18 years in the sample, with an average
of 7.59 years. The estimated coefficient of 5.1 per cent in the moderate
poverty regression means, all other factors remaining constant, that
7.59 years of schooling reduce the probability of being moderately poor by
38.7 per cent relative to the 45 per cent mean of the dependent variable.
Similarly the estimated coefficient of 1.5 per cent in the regression for
extreme poverty means, keeping all other factors constant, that 7.59 years of
education reduce an individual’s probability of being extremely poor by
11.4 per cent relative to the 16 per cent average of the dependent variable.
This represents a greater potential reduction of the probability of being poor
than would be possible with any other variable. However more years of
schooling do not necessarily equate with quality of education, so 7.59 years
of education for indigenous peoples may involve less learning than for non-
indigenous people.
The variables that increase an individual’s probability of being poor are
living in a rural area, living in a municipality with a high proportion of
indigenous peoples, living in a household where the head is female or unem-
ployed, the presence of children, adolescents and elders in the household,
and working in the agricultural or construction sectors. Living in a house-
hold where the household head is unemployed increases an individual’s
probability of being extremely poor by 12.2 per cent relative to the 16 per
cent mean of the dependent variable, and increases the probability of being
moderately poor by 18.8 per cent relative to the 45 per cent average of the
dependent variable, keeping all other factors constant.
The positive coefficients in the indigenous municipality variable mean
that as an individual’s probability of being indigenous increases,8 so does the
individual’s probability of being poor – by approximately 0.2 per cent in the
extreme poverty regressions and 0.6 per cent in the moderate poverty
regression. Living in a municipality where 50 per cent of the population is
indigenous increases an individual’s probability of being extremely poor by
Human_06.qxd 25/10/05 6:17 PM Page 162

162 Mexico

10 per cent and of being moderately poor by 30 per cent, representing a

larger potential increase in the probability of being poor than would be pos-
sible with any other variable. However the operative factor in determining
poverty might be ‘being indigenous’, even though living in an indigenous
municipality is the observed variable.
Living in a rural area and working in agriculture also negatively affect
individuals’ probability of escaping poverty. An individual who lives in a
rural area is 3.3 per cent more likely to be extremely poor and 2.2 per cent
more likely to be moderately poor than someone who lives in an urban area.
Working in agriculture increases the probability of being extremely poor by
5.6 per cent and being moderately poor by 14.4 per cent relative to the
16 per cent and 45 per cent poverty headcount indices, keeping all other
factors constant.
With regard to the presence of children in the household, especially small
children, each additional child below the age of six years increases an indi-
vidual’s probability of being moderately poor by 20 per cent relative to the
45 per cent average of the headcount index of poverty, all other factors
remaining constant. This finding is very significant considering that the
average Mexican household includes three children under the age of 15, and
that the average indigenous household includes 3.7 children below that age.
As Table 6.11 shows, an indigenous person has a 57 per cent probability of
being extremely poor, compared with a 13 per cent probability for a non-
indigenous individual. Similarly an indigenous rural inhabitant has a 62 per
cent probability of being extremely poor while a non-indigenous rural inhab-
itant has a 23 per cent probability. Even within the same educational group
or occupational sector, indigenous peoples are much more likely to be poor
than non-indigenous people. In the agricultural sector an indigenous worker
has a 72 per cent probability of being extremely poor, compared with 34 per
cent for a non-indigenous worker. Finally, among individuals with 6–11 years
of schooling, indigenous peoples are twice as likely to be poor and four times
more likely to be extremely poor than non-indigenous individuals.

Determinants of earnings

The above analysis of poverty clearly illustrates that significant income

disparities exist between indigenous and non-indigenous people in Mexico.
This section examines the possible determinants of labour earnings and
explores whether ethnic discrimination in wages might partially explain
indigenous workers’ lower earnings.
Indigenous peoples participate in the labour force at a slightly lower rate
than non-indigenous people (68 per cent and 74 per cent respectively) and
receive lower remuneration for their work. Table 6.12 lists the average earn-
ings in the main occupational sectors by ethnic group. As can be seen, there
are large differences between the wages of indigenous and non-indigenous
Human_06.qxd 25/10/05 6:17 PM Page 163

163

Table 6.11 Calculated probabilities of an individual being extremely poor or moderately

poor, Mexico, 2002 (per cent)

Extremely poor Moderately poor

Non- Non-
Indigenous indigenous All Indigenous indigenous All

All 57 13 16 84 42 45
Rural inhabitant 62 23 29 88 56 61
Female 57 13 16 85 43 46
Male 56 12 15 84 41 44
Years of schooling
0–5 66 25 31 90 63 66
6–11 48 11 12 81 42 44
12–15 23 4 4 58 22 23
15 and over 7 1 1 7 7 7
Household head unemployed 66 23 23 91 54 54
Female head of household 50 12 14 80 12 41
Occupational sector
Agriculture 72 34 42 93 71 76
Mining 17 2 2 67 26 27
Electricity 31 2 2 87 24 24
Construction 51 17 19 86 53 55
Manufacturing 47 8 10 82 38 40
Transport 36 8 8 75 37 38
Services 34 7 8 67 28 30

Source: Calculated from Table 6.10.

Table 6.12 Average monthly wages for selected sectors by municipal category,
Mexico, 2002 (US dollars)*

Non-indigenous Indigenous All

Agriculture, hunting and forestry 151 81 139

Mining 772 674 770
Electricity, gas and water supply 609 244 608
Construction 331 166 319
Manufacturing 396 126 389
Commerce 374 160 368
Transport, storage and communications 404 261 401
Services 427 236 420

Note: * The average exchange rate in August 2002 was 9.846 pesos per dollar.
Source: National Income and Consumption Survey, 2002.
Human_06.qxd 25/10/05 6:17 PM Page 164

164 Mexico

Table 6.13 Sample statistics on male workers, Mexico, 2002

Municipalities

Total Less than 30% More than 30%

sample indigenous indigenous

Natural log of earnings 10.03 10.18 7.52

Mean income (pesos per month) 4031 4182 1557
Years of schooling 8.34 8.54 5.38
Work experience (years) 20.20 20.00 23.31
Natural log of working hours 3.77 3.782 3.73
Mean of working hours (week) 46.76 46.87 44.96
Married (proportion) 0.53 0.53 0.51
Employment type (proportion)
Non-agricultural worker 78.18 80.30 45.90
Agricultural worker 12.70 11.20 35.60
Employer 0.70 0.80 0.40
Informal sector (proportion) 50.39 48.20 82.50
Unionization (proportion) 12.56 13.09 4.40

Source: National Income and Consumption Survey, 2002.

workers in all sectors. This suggests the possibility of wage discrimination

against indigenous workers.
Table 6.13 shows the means for various earnings function characteristics
for municipalities with different proportions of indigenous peoples. In 2002
indigenous municipalities not only had lower average earnings than non-
indigenous municipalities but also a lower endowment of income-generating
characteristics, with the exception of work experience. The average for years
of schooling was 58 per cent higher in non-indigenous municipalities.
Though still high, the ethnic gap in years of schooling had decreased since
1989, when workers in non-indigenous municipalities had 91 per cent more
schooling than workers in indigenous areas. The higher levels of work expe-
rience in indigenous municipalities reflect their lower number of years of
schooling, due to the way the experience variable is constructed (ageyears
of schooling6). Non-agricultural workers accounted for 80 per cent of
workers in non-indigenous municipalities versus 46 per cent in more indige-
nous municipalities. Agricultural workers, by contrast, accounted for only
11 per cent of the workforce in non-indigenous municipalities and 36 per cent
in more indigenous areas. The percentage of employers in less indigenous
municipalities is significantly higher, as is the percentage of unionized work-
ers, which partly reflects the greater tendency for unionization among urban
workers. Finally, the percentage of workers in the informal sector is 71 per
cent higher in indigenous municipalities than in non-indigenous ones.9
Human_06.qxd 25/10/05 6:17 PM Page 165

Alejandro Ramirez 165

The first column in Table 6.14 presents the coefficients estimated from an
ordinary least squares regression of labour earnings for the full sample of
employed adults. It shows that the variables years of schooling, work experi-
ence, being an employer, being an agricultural or non-agricultural worker,
being male, being married and belonging to a union positively affect earn-
ings. An indigenous variable, indicating the probability of being indigenous,
was included in the regression. The estimated coefficient on this variable is
negative, indicating that for every additional 1 per cent of indigenous peo-
ples in a municipality, the log of earnings of an individual in that munici-
pality falls by 0.8 per cent. This indicates that, all other factors remaining
constant, individuals in more indigenous areas have a higher probability of
lower earnings than individuals in non-indigenous areas. It does not, how-
ever, suggest how much of the difference in earnings between indigenous
and non-indigenous municipalities is due to differences in human capital
endowments and other income-generating characteristics, and how much
remains ‘unexplained’ and could therefore constitute an upper bound estimate
of discrimination.
The last two columns of Table 6.14 show the results of the expanded
earnings function, estimated separately for indigenous (above 30 per cent
indigenous) and non-indigenous (below 30 per cent indigenous) municipal-
ities. The average return from schooling in non-indigenous municipalities is
11 per cent for each additional year. In indigenous municipalities it is slightly
lower at 9 per cent. The returns from labour market experience and the
premium for hours worked are slightly higher in indigenous than in non-
indigenous municipalities.
Employment type has the greatest impact on earnings, especially in
indigenous areas. A non-agricultural worker in a non-indigenous area earns
86 per cent more than someone in the residual category (self-employment in
the informal sector), and an agricultural worker earns 52 per cent more. The
returns from type of employment are much higher in indigenous areas: a
non-agricultural worker earns 179 per cent more than someone who is self-
employed, and an agricultural worker earns 106 per cent more than a self-
employed person. Being an employer brings the greatest returns: in
non-indigenous areas an employer earns 272 per cent more than someone
who is self-employed in the informal sector. In indigenous areas an employer
earns as much as 363 per cent more than someone in the residual category.
Union membership serves to increase earnings for both ethnic groups, but
it has a much larger impact on indigenous earnings. Being a member of a
union increases earnings in non-indigenous areas by 33 per cent and in
indigenous areas by 117 per cent. Living in a rural area, on the other hand,
lowers the earnings of both ethnic groups by approximately 25 per cent.
Similar differences were found when separate OLS regressions were run for
subgroups of men and women in indigenous and non-indigenous areas.
Women have slightly higher returns from schooling than do men (11 per cent
Human_06.qxd 25/10/05 6:17 PM Page 166

166 Mexico

Table 6.14 Determinants of earnings in Mexico (all employed individuals)

All employed All employed in

in indigenous non-indigenous
municipalities municipalities
All employed (more than 30% (less than 30%
individuals indigenous) indigenous)

Coeff. % dummies Coeff. % dummies Coeff. % dummies

Male 0.326* 39 – – –
Education 0.104* – 0.09* – 0.11* –
Work experience 0.044* – 0.06* – 0.05* –
Work experience
squared 0.001* – 0.0008* – 0.00* –
Log (hours worked) 0.557* – 0.74* – 0.62* –
Employment type
Non-agricultural
worker 0.758* 111 1.04* 179 0.63* 87
Agricultural worker 0.499* 64 0.74* 106 0.43* 52
Employer 1.392* 290 1.55* 363 1.35* 273
Cooperative member 0.594* 77 0.69 65 0.55* 69
Rural 0.254* 23 0.30* 26 0.27* 24
Indigenous** 0.008* – – – – –
Married 0.055* 6 0.04 4 0.18* 20
Union member 0.302* 35 0.78* 118 0.29* 33
Constant 3.499* – 2.19* – 3.35* –
N 18 656 1 630 17 028
R2 0.5191 0.4789 0.476

Note: * Significant at the 99 per cent level. ** Percentage of the population that is indigenous.
Source: National Income and Consumption Survey, 2002.

and 12 per cent per year for indigenous and non-indigenous women respec-
tively). Living in a rural area has a larger negative impact on women’s earn-
ings than on men’s, while union membership benefits women’s earnings
more than men’s. Finally, marital status affects men’s and women’s earnings
in different ways. On average married men earn 24 per cent more than sin-
gle men, while married women earn 4 per cent less than single women. In
the indigenous and non-indigenous subsamples, however, the coefficients
on marital status retain their sign but are significant only for the non-
indigenous male subsample.
Using a refined version of the Blinder–Oaxaca decomposition technique
it is possible to estimate how much of the earnings differentials between
indigenous and non-indigenous people is due to differences in income-
generating personal characteristics such as human capital endowment, and
how much could be due to unexplained factors, including wage discrimina-
tion. Table 6.15 presents the results of a decomposition of the six earnings
Human_06.qxd 25/10/05 6:17 PM Page 167

Alejandro Ramirez 167

Table 6.15 Decomposition of ethnic earnings differentials, Mexico, 2002 (per cent)

Differentials due to
differences in

Specification Endowments Wage structure

Total population n(n  i)  i(

ˆ ˆn  ˆ
i) 59 41

i(n  i)  n(

ˆ ˆn  ˆ
i) 64 36

Men n(n  i)  i(

ˆ ˆn  ˆ
i) 58 42

i(n  i)  n(

ˆ ˆn  ˆ
i) 62 38

Women n(n  i)  i(

ˆ ˆn  ˆ
i) 63 37

ˆ
i(n  i)  n(
ˆn  ˆ
i) 68 32

Source: National Income and Consumption Survey, 2002.

functions detailed in Table 6.14. It shows that the variables included in the
earnings functions can explain 59–64 per cent of wage inequality between
indigenous and non-indigenous people, 58–62 per cent of wage inequality
between indigenous and non-indigenous men, and 63–68 per cent of wage
inequality between indigenous and non-indigenous women.
If we take the first specification for the total population, 59 per cent of the
earnings differential is explained by differences in the productive character-
istics of indigenous and non-indigenous workers. This means that if indige-
nous workers were endowed with the same productive characteristics as
non-indigenous workers the earnings differential between the two groups
would narrow by 59 per cent. However the remaining 41 per cent difference
in earnings remains unexplained. It could be due to unmeasured effects on
earnings, such as differences in ability, culture and quality of education, as
well as labour market discrimination. This unexplained percentage can thus
be considered an upper bound estimate for discrimination. Depending on
which specification is used (both are equally valid), wage discrimination in
Mexico against those who live in predominantly indigenous areas may
explain 35–41 per cent of the earnings differential between indigenous and
non-indigenous people. Comparing these results with those presented in
Panagides (1994), wage discrimination either fell by 6 percentage points
between 1989 and 2002 (according to the first specification) or increased by
4 percentage points (using the second).
For the male sample, wage discrimination can explain 38–42 per cent of
the indigenous/non-indigenous earnings differential. For the female sample,
the percentage of the indigenous/non-indigenous earnings differential
explained by differences in productive endowments is larger than in the
male sample. Thus the maximum percentage that can be attributed to wage
Human_06.qxd 25/10/05 6:17 PM Page 168

168 Mexico

discrimination is slightly lower for women than for men, ranging from
32 per cent to 37 per cent.
We may conclude that the proportion of the earnings differential between
indigenous and non-indigenous male workers that can be attributed to wage
discrimination did not change much between 1989 and 2002. Regardless of
whether the indigenous or the non-indigenous pay structure is used, the dif-
ference between the 1989 and 2002 explained and unexplained portions of
the earnings differential is marginal. In both years around 60 per cent of the
earnings differential between indigenous and non-indigenous male workers
can be explained by differences in human capital endowments, and the
remaining 40 per cent is unexplained, constituting an upper bound estimate
for discrimination. We can also conclude that indigenous/non-indigenous
discrimination tends to be greater for men than for women. This is not to
say that in general women suffer less than men from discrimination, but
that the discrimination between indigenous and non-indigenous men is
greater than between non-indigenous and indigenous women. In fact other
studies have shown that Mexican women suffer from wage discrimination in
the labour market (for example World Bank, 2001), so it would be fair to say
that indigenous women suffer from a double disadvantage in the labour
market in the form of gender and ethnic discrimination.
It is equally valid to use either the indigenous means or the non-indigenous
means specification, but the estimates of the returns from endowments and
of the upper bound estimate for discrimination vary according to which
specification is utilized. In order to determine whether, in the absence of dis-
crimination, the returns from endowments will be at the level of indigenous
peoples, of non-indigenous people or somewhere in between, other decom-
position methods can be used. The Cotton method assumes that returns are
an indigenous/non-indigenous balance weighted by their respective shares
of the employed labour force. The Oaxaca–Ransom method weighs the
returns from each factor based on the regression coefficient for that factor in
a pooled indigenous/non-indigenous regression. The results of these additional
decomposition methods for the male sample are presented in Table 6.16,
which shows that the percentages of inequality that can be attributed to
endowments and to the pay structure using the Cotton method are the same
as those obtained using the indigenous means specification in the standard
un-weighted Blinder–Oaxaca method. Conversely, when the Oaxaca–Ransom
method is used the percentages of inequality that can be attributed to endow-
ments and to the pay structure are the same as those obtained with the non-
indigenous means specification of the standard Blinder–Oaxaca method.
Table 6.17 shows the contribution of each variable to the earnings differ-
ential of male workers in indigenous and non-indigenous areas using the
indigenous pay structure. A positive value indicates an earnings advantage
for workers in non-indigenous areas, while a negative value indicates an
earnings advantage for workers in indigenous areas. For the differential in
Human_06.qxd 25/10/05 6:17 PM Page 169

Alejandro Ramirez 169

Table 6.16 Decomposition of male ethnic earnings differentials using different

methods, Mexico (per cent)

Percentage of inequality
attributable to

Endowments Pay structure (discrimination)

Evaluated at indigenous means 58 42

Evaluated at non-indigenous means 62 38
Cotton 58 42
Oaxaca–Ransom 62 38

Table 6.17 Contribution of each variable to the earnings differential, according to the
indigenous pay structure, Mexico, 2002 (per cent)

Decomposition Contribution as a percentage

of total differential
Endowments Pay structure
Variable (bn [Xn  Xi]) (Xi [bn  bi]) Endowments Pay structure

Years of schooling 0.312 0.124 31.4 12.5

Experience 0.190 0.012 19.1 1.2
Experience squared 0.146 0.008 14.7 0.9
Log of hours 0.030 0.347 2.9 34.9
Employment type
Non-agricultural worker 0.212 0.288 21.3 29.0
Agricultural worker 0.097 0.134 9.8 13.5
Employer 0.002 0.000 0.2 0.0
Cooperative 0.001 0.002 0.1 0.2
Rural 0.144 0.011 14.4 1.1
Married 0.000 0.101 0.0 10.2
Union (1,0) 0.018 0.020 1.8 2.1
Constant 0.000 1.015 0.0 102.1
Subtotal 0.578 0.416 58.1 41.9

Total 0.994 100.00

Source: Nation Income and Consumption Survey, 2002.

earnings due to endowments, the variables that play the largest part in
non-indigenous advantage are years of schooling and non-agricultural work,
reflecting the higher educational attainment and predominantly non-
agricultural work in non-indigenous areas. For most of the non-indigenous
population, urban residence also contributes to the earnings differential
between indigenous and non-indigenous workers. Conversely the greater
Human_06.qxd 25/10/05 6:17 PM Page 170

170 Mexico

labour market experience of indigenous peoples serves to reduce the earnings

differential between indigenous and non-indigenous workers. Similarly
the negative value for the agricultural worker variable is a reflection of the
predominance of agricultural work in indigenous areas.
The percentage contribution of each variable to the unexplained portion
of the indigenous/non-indigenous earnings differential is shown in the last
column of Table 6.17. Again, the greater educational attainment in non-
indigenous areas contributes significantly to the unexplained portion of the
earnings differential. Hours worked and non-agricultural work, on the other
hand, are the most significant factors in reducing this differential. By far the
greatest contributor to the unexplained part of the earnings differential is
the constant term. The very high value of this means that regardless of edu-
cation, work experience, hours worked, employment category, sector of resi-
dence, marital status or union membership, workers in indigenous areas are
paid less than those in non-indigenous areas. This increases the possibility
that a significant portion of the unexplained earnings differential is due to
discrimination.

Child labour

Child labour is a phenomenon that affects both indigenous and non-

indigenous children. Statistics from the National Employment Survey in
Indigenous Areas (ENEZI) allow us to analyze the percentage of children
aged 6–17 who work, with or without pay, divided by ethnicity and gender.10
As Table 6.18 shows, substantially more indigenous children work than
non-indigenous children, and significantly more boys work than girls in
both ethnic groups (except for non-indigenous 17 year olds). As can be seen,
indigenous children start working at a younger age than non-indigenous
children. The proportion of children who work increases significantly with
age. By the age of 17 over three quarters of indigenous boys and more than
40 per cent of indigenous girls work, compared with 42 per cent of non-
indigenous boys and 52 per cent of non-indigenous girls. The large increase
in the percentage of children working from the age of 12 is explained by
the fact that the ENEZI was mainly conducted in rural areas, where children
customarily help with agricultural activities.
With regard to wages, mean earnings increase with age and non-indigenous
children earn slightly higher wages than indigenous children (except in the
12–15 age group). The mean earnings of indigenous children amount to 74
per cent of the mean earnings of non-indigenous children in the 16–17 age
group. The contribution that working indigenous and non-indigenous chil-
dren make to family income is similar: 33 per cent for indigenous children
and 27 per cent for non-indigenous children.
Table 6.19 shows the results of logit estimation of the determinants of
child labour. It shows that age, being male and living in a municipality with
Human_06.qxd 25/10/05 6:17 PM Page 171

Alejandro Ramirez 171

Table 6.18 Percentage of working children, Mexico, 1997*

Indigenous Non-indigenous
Total
Age Males Females All Males Females All population

6 4.9 2.48 3.8 0.0 0.0 0.0 3.6

7 9.0 6.86 8.0 12.8 0.0 5.7 7.9
8 15.6 9.36 12.4 4.2 2.0 3.4 12.1
9 13.9 7.93 10.8 2.9 13.0 7.7 10.7
10 23.4 15.7 19.7 3.2 5.1 3.8 18.9
11 33.1 14.0 24.0 7.5 4.4 6.3 23.0
12 47.2 20.2 33.7 12.5 10.9 13.7 32.8
13 46.5 20.6 34.1 26.3 10.5 18.6 33.6
14 65.7 28.4 46.6 13.3 2.4 8.4 44.4
15 68.7 34.2 49.2 32.0 13.5 19.8 48.1
16 77.9 35.7 56.2 31.4 24.5 29.0 55.0
17 79.0 41.6 60.3 42.3 52.9 50.1 59.8
Total 36.3 18.8 27.8 12.9 10.5 12.3 27.1

Note: * Unit of analysis: indigenous households.

Source: National Employment Survey in Indigenous Areas, 1997.

a large proportion of indigenous peoples increase the probability that a child

will work. The age and education of the household head, being female,
having brothers over 10 years of age, household income and the number of
schools in the municipality, on the other hand, reduce the probability that a
child will work.
Table 6.20 presents the results of a multinomial logit estimation of the
probability that a child will both work and attend school, or will work with-
out attending school. Similar factors influence the two probabilities. Age,
being male or of indigenous origin and having male siblings under the age of
10 increase the probability that a child will work, with or without schooling.
The educational level of the household head, household income and having
male siblings over 16 years of age, on the other hand, reduce the probability
that a child will work and not attend school. An indigenous child has a
greater probability of working and going to school than a non-indigenous
child, and even greater probability of working without schooling. Household
size increases the probability that a child will both work and study.
Table 6.21 shows the results of a sequential probit estimation of the
following probabilities:

● That a child will work and attend school.

● That a child will work, and not attend school regardless of pay.
● That a child will work, and not attend school and receive a wage.
● That a child will work in the household and not attend school.
Human_06.qxd 25/10/05 6:17 PM Page 172

172 Mexico

Table 6.19 Logit estimates of the probability that a child will work

Work only Z-ratio Mfx Odds-ratio

Number of schools (primary and

secondary) by municipality 0.38* 66.42 0.058 0.7
Educational level of household head 0.07* 78.16 0.012 0.9
Indigenous 0.92* 64.08 0.115 2.5
Male 1.20* 216.24 0.194 3.3
Age 0.34* 392.06 0.055 1.4
Age of household head 0.02* 18.35 0.003 1.0
Age of household head squared 0.00* 14.84 0.000 1.0
Male siblings aged 0–5 0.19* 33.54 0.031 1.2
Male siblings aged 6–9 0.32* 55.7 0.053 1.4
Male siblings aged 10–15 0.02* 5.43 0.004 1.0
Male siblings aged 16 0.24* 41.57 0.038 0.8
Female siblings aged 0–5 0.08* 14.3 0.014 0.9
Female siblings aged 6–9 0.18* 32.06 0.030 1.2
Female siblings aged 10–15 0.06* 11.88 0.010 0.9
Female siblings aged 16 0.10* 15.54 0.017 1.1
Household size 0.002 1.42 0.0003 1.0
Household income 0.0001* 44.87 0.00002 1.0
Constant 5.79* 266.50
Log likelihood 562 932.57
Chi2 202 663.22
N 1 231 393
Pseudo R2 0.2172

Notes: Sequential probit regressions with dependent variables as a 0–1 indicators (dummies) for
whether a child will work, individuals aged 6–17.
* Significant at the 99 per cent level.
Source: National Employment Survey in Indigenous Areas, 1997.

The results for the work plus school and work only regressions are very
similar to those from the multinomial logit model. The main difference with
the sequential probit model is that being male reduces the probability of
working and not attending school. Being male also reduces the probability
of engaging in paid work and not attending school, and of engaging solely
in household activities. Being of indigenous origin increases the probability
that a child will work and study, work and not study, and work in the house-
hold, but reduces the probability that he or she will receive pay for his or her
work. In other words indigenous children have a greater probability of work-
ing but a lower probability of receiving a wage for that work. Another inter-
esting finding is that household size is negatively correlated with the
probability that a child will work outside the household. In other words, the
larger the household the greater the probability that a child will end up
working exclusively in home-related activities.
Human_06.qxd 25/10/05 6:17 PM Page 173

Alejandro Ramirez 173

Table 6.20 Multinomial logit results (probability derivates at the mean, children aged
6–17, percentage points)

Work and school Work only

Marginal Marginal
Coefficient prob. Coefficient prob.

Number of schools (primary and

secondary) by municipality 0.32* 0.042 0.48* 0.01
Educational level of
household head 0.05* 0.006 0.19 0.01
Indigenous (per cent) 0.94* 0.100 1.27* 0.03
Male 1.03* 0.144 0.49* 0.01
Age 0.25* 0.032 0.70* 0.02
Age of household head 0.003* 0.001 0.05* 0.002
Age of household head squared 0.0001* 0.00001 0.00* 0.00002
Male siblings aged 0–5 0.21* 0.030 0.28* 0.01
Male siblings aged 6–9 0.36* 0.054 0.14* 0.003
Male siblings aged 10–15 0.12* 0.017 0.08* 0.004
Male siblings aged 16 0.13* 0.018 0.07* 0.002
Female siblings aged 0–5 0.07* 0.011 0.06* 0.003
Female siblings aged 6–9 0.24* 0.035 0.11* 0.002
Female siblings aged 10–15 0.09* 0.013 0.05* 0.002
Female siblings aged 16 0.04* 0.006 0.01 0.00005
Household income 0.0002* 0.00003 0.00* 0.000004
Household size 0.01* 0.001 0.01* 0.0004
Constant 5.42* 9.97*
Observations 1 075 950
Wald chi2 211 964.22
Pseudo R2 0.2369

Note: * Significant at the 99 per cent level.

Source: National Employment Survey in Indigenous Areas, 1997.

Education

As discussed in the previous section, additional years of schooling signifi-

cantly reduce the probability of being poor. This section analyzes the educa-
tional characteristics of the indigenous and non-indigenous populations.
Figure 6.1 shows that there is a strong correlation between educational
attainment and income. It is interesting to note that in 2002 indigenous
income was below non-indigenous income at every educational level, and
that the returns from schooling were higher for non-indigenous than for
indigenous peoples at every level except post-secondary. Post-tertiary
education corresponds with a sharp increase in returns from education for
non-indigenous people. This can be explained by the fact that indigenous
 Human_06.qxd
Table 6.21 Sequential probit results (children aged 6–17)

174
Work plus school Work only Waged work Household work

Marginal Marginal Marginal Marginal

25/10/05
Coefficient prob. Coefficient prob. Coefficient prob. Coefficient prob.

Number of schools (primary

and secondary) by municipality 0.22* 0.068 0.13* 0.049 0.27* 0.09 0.58* 0.221
Educational level of household head 0.05* 0.016 0.09* 0.033 0.05* 0.02 0.01* 0.004

6:17 PM
Indigenous 0.58* 0.151 0.22* 0.082 0.61* 0.22 0.45* 0.171
Male 0.48* 0.153 0.40* 0.154 0.28* 0.09 0.76* 0.297
Age 0.22* 0.071 0.26* 0.099 0.15* 0.05 0.13* 0.051
Age of household head 0.01* 0.004 0.04* 0.016 0.01* 0.00 0.01* 0.005

Page 174
Age of household head squared 0.00* 0.000 0.0004* 0.000 0.00* 0.00 0.00* 0.000
Male siblings aged 0–5 0.15* 0.047 0.004 0.002 0.28* 0.09 0.11* 0.045
Male siblings aged 6–9 0.14* 0.047 0.10* 0.036 0.16* 0.05 0.08 0.030
Male siblings aged 10–15 0.02 0.008 0.20* 0.077 0.09* 0.03 0.03* 0.011
Male siblings aged 16 0.06* 0.019 0.09* 0.033 0.15* 0.05 0.03* 0.012
Female siblings aged 0–l5 0.02* 0.006 0.14* 0.054 0.06* 0.02 0.08* 0.034
Female siblings aged 6–9 0.10* 0.033 0.06* 0.023 0.10* 0.03 0.23* 0.093
Female siblings aged 10–15 0.02 0.007 0.07* 0.026 0.13* 0.04 0.06* 0.026
Female siblings aged 16  0.00 0.001 0.03* 0.011 0.09* 0.03 0.04* 0.014
Household size 0.00* 0.001 0.02* 0.007 0.05* 0.02 0.01* 0.004
Household income 0.0001* 0.000 0.00 0.000 0.0005* 0.00 0.0004* 0.0002
Constant 3.32* 2.33* 2.26* 2.35*
Observations 1 075 387 333 405 138 060 135 105
Wald chi2 216 032 66 613 14 042 20 834
Pseudo R2 0.24 0.2241 0.2137 0.184
Log-likehood 508 623 175 473 65 512 76 191

Note: * Significant at the 99 per cent level.

Source: National Employment Survey in Indigenous Areas, 1997.
Human_06.qxd 25/10/05 6:17 PM Page 175

Alejandro Ramirez 175

Figure 6.1 Income and educational attainment, Mexico, 2002

7 000
Average income (thousands of pesos)

Average income, non-indigenous municipalities

6 000

5 000

4 000

3 000

2 000

1 000 Average income, indigenous

municipalities
0
None Primary Secondary Tertiary Post-tertiary
Educational attainment

Source: ENIGH, 2002.

peoples are predominantly concentrated in rural areas, where the demand

for post-tertiary education is lower. It could also suggest, as Panagides (1994)
has pointed out, that there are greater non-market returns at higher educa-
tional levels in non-indigenous areas than in indigenous ones, or that labour
market discrimination exists in indigenous areas. It might equally indicate
that indigenous peoples receive lower-quality education.

Illiteracy
The illiteracy rate among indigenous peoples is significantly higher than
for the population as a whole. As Table 6.22 shows, even among young peo-
ple the indigenous illiteracy rate was more than twice the national rate in
2000. Except for the youngest age group in the sample, the female illiteracy
rate was higher than that for males, with the widest gender gaps occurring in
the indigenous population. These high indigenous illiteracy rates cannot be
explained by the fact that most indigenous peoples live in rural areas as the
rural indigenous illiteracy rate was almost twice that of the rural population
as a whole, and the urban indigenous illiteracy rate was three times the
national urban rate.

Educational achievement
Although the educational achievement of indigenous peoples has improved
over the past few decades it still lags behind that of non-indigenous people
(Table 6.23). Men have a higher degree of educational achievement than
women in both groups. Figure 6.2 shows that the older age groups have less
schooling than the younger ones, that indigenous peoples have fewer years
Human_06.qxd 25/10/05 6:17 PM Page 176

176 Mexico

Table 6.22 Illiteracy rates in Mexico, 2000 (per cent)

Total population Indigenous Non-indigenous

Age Male Female All Male Female All Male Female All

10–14 3.0 2.6 2.8 6.9 7.5 7.2 2.5 1.9 2.2
15–19 2.9 3.0 3.0 6.6 10.5 8.6 2.4 2.0 2.2
20–24 3.6 4.1 3.9 9.5 16.1 12.9 2.9 2.8 2.8
25–29 3.6 4.7 4.2 11.5 21.4 16.6 2.8 3.1 2.9
30–34 4.2 6.4 5.4 13.4 27.5 20.7 3.4 4.4 3.9
35–39 5.6 9.2 7.5 17.6 35.8 27.2 4.4 6.5 5.5
40–44 6.4 11.3 9.0 20.5 41.8 31.4 5.0 8.3 6.7
45–49 8.7 15.8 12.4 25.2 51.2 38.7 6.9 11.8 9.4
50–54 11.5 19.9 15.9 31.3 57.8 44.8 9.2 15.7 12.5
55–59 15.3 25.8 20.8 35.7 64.5 50.3 12.8 21.3 17.2
60–64 19.3 29.9 24.9 42.2 69.0 55.6 16.2 25.1 20.9
65–69 21.4 33.7 27.9 41.8 71.4 57.1 18.8 29.3 24.4
All aged 15–69 6.4 9.9 8.2 17.1 31.6 24.6 5.2 7.5 6.4
All urban aged 15–69 3.7 6.3 5.1 10.9 21.3 16.3 3.2 5.3 4.3
All rural aged 15–69 15.1 22.2 18.8 23.5 42.4 33.2 12.8 16.6 14.8

Source: National Population Census, 2000.

Table 6.23 Educational achievement, people aged 15 and over, Mexico, 2000
(per cent)

Indigenous Non-indigenous
Total
Male Female All Male Female All population

None 17.1 27.3 22.4 7.3 8.9 8.1 9.6

Incomplete primary 51.3 45.7 48.4 38.9 41.7 40.4 41.2
Complete primary 16.9 12.1 14.4 25.6 22.9 24.2 23.2
Complete secondary 5.7 4.7 5.2 13.5 14.3 13.9 13.0
High school 3.6 2.5 3.0 11.1 8.5 9.7 9.1
University 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.7 0.3 0.5 0.5
Still in school 8.7 6.8 7.8 10.6 9.7 10.1 10.0
No answer 4.9 7.2 6.1 2.6 3.1 2.9 3.2

Source: National Population Census, 2000.

of schooling than non-indigenous people across all age groups, and that
women have less schooling than men regardless of age group or ethnicity.
Non-indigenous men aged 22–31 have the highest educational achievement
(nine years of schooling) and indigenous women aged 61 and over have the
lowest (one year of schooling). It is important to note that although there
continues to be an indigenous/non-indigenous gap in years of schooling,
this gap has steadily shrunk over the decades. For example the average
Human_06.qxd 25/10/05 6:17 PM Page 177

Alejandro Ramirez 177

Figure 6.2 Average educational achievement, by age group, Mexico, 2000

10

9
Non-indigenous men
8 Non-indigenous women
Years of schooling (average)

7 Indigenous men
6
Indigenous women
5

0
> 61 52 – 61 42 – 51 32 – 41 22 – 31 15 – 21
Age group

non-indigenous person born before 1939 had 121 per cent more years of
schooling than an indigenous person born in the same period, but a
non-indigenous person born between 1969 and 1978 only had 45 per cent
more years of schooling than an indigenous person in the same age group.
In other words the indigenous/non-indigenous differential reduced by two
thirds in about 30 years. Meanwhile the intragroup gender gap has nar-
rowed, and in the non-indigenous population it has all but disappeared. The
slightly downward slope of the graphs for non-indigenous men and women
is due to the fact that 10 per cent of those aged 15–21 were still in school
when the 2000 census was conducted.
As Table 6.24 shows, in 2000 the indigenous/non-indigenous educational
gap for those aged 15 years and over was present in both urban and rural
areas, although it was wider in urban areas. In the latter non-indigenous
people on average had 35 per cent more years of schooling than indigenous
peoples, compared with 28 per cent in rural areas. In the 7–14 age group
non-indigenous children have 8 per cent more years of schooling than
indigenous children, but this gap grows with age as indigenous children
tend to leave school at an earlier age than non-indigenous children.
Even among the poor, indigenous peoples have a lower educational
achievement than non-indigenous people. Table 6.25 shows mean years of
schooling by ethnicity and poverty level. In 2002 the educational gap
between the indigenous and non-indigenous poor was almost a year more
among the moderately poor than among the extremely poor. With regard to
Human_06.qxd 25/10/05 6:17 PM Page 178

178 Mexico

Table 6.24 Mean years of schooling, Mexico, 2000

Indigenous Non-indigenous

Rural Urban Rural Urban

Male Female All Male Female All Male Female All Male Female All

All individuals aged

15 and over 4.4 3.4 3.9 6.8 5.8 6.3 5.1 4.9 5.0 8.8 8.2 8.5
All enrolled children
aged 7–14 3.3 3.2 3.2 3.6 3.6 3.6 3.5 3.6 3.5 3.9 4.0 3.9

Source: National Population Census, 2000.

Table 6.25 Mean years of schooling, people aged 15 and over, Mexico, 2002

Indigenous Non-indigenous
Indigenous/
Gender Gender non-indigenous
Male Female All gap (%) Male Female All gap (%) gap (%)

All individuals 5.01 4.3 4.6 17.1 8.3 7.6 7.9 8.5 71.2
Moderately poor 4.48 3.8 4.1 17.0 6.3 5.9 6.1 6.1 47.5
Extremely poor 4.3 3.5 3.9 23.4 5.1 4.8 4.9 4.5 27.3
Household heads 3.9 2.6 3.77 47.7 7.6 6.0 7.3 25.2 97.5
Moderately poor 3.2 2.2 3.1 45.3 5.3 4.0 5.0 33.2 64.7
Extremely poor 3.1 1.9 2.9 64.2 4.1 3.2 3.9 29.7 34.6

Source: National Income and Consumption Survey, 2002.

the gender gap, in indigenous areas this was larger among the extremely
poor, while in non-indigenous areas it was slightly larger among the moder-
ately poor. The gender and the indigenous/non-indigenous gaps were larger
in the household head sample than in the sample of all individuals aged 15
and over.
Multivariate regression analysis confirms the above trends. Table 6.26
shows the results of an ordinary least square regression of years of schooling
by age, gender, indigenous concentration and area of residence (urban/
rural). Being male increases average schooling by 0.7 years. As already indi-
cated, age is negatively correlated with educational achievement, reflecting
improved access to schooling over the past decades. The coefficient for
‘indigenous’ is negative, indicating that for every 1 percentage point of
indigenous peoples in a municipality there is a 0.03 drop in the average years
of schooling. This means that an individual who lives in a municipality
where 50 per cent of the population are indigenous will on average have,
1.3 fewer years of schooling. Finally, the coefficient for ‘living in a rural area’
Human_06.qxd 25/10/05 6:17 PM Page 179

Alejandro Ramirez 179

Table 6.26 Determinants of educational achievement,

adult subsample, Mexico, 2002

Var. Dependent variables,

mean years of schooling (OLS)

Age 41.14 0.12*

Male 0.47 0.695*
Indigenous 7.15 0.026*
Rural 0.352 2.88*
13
Var. mean 7.47
N 40124
R2/ Wald chi2 0.3122

Notes: Includes people aged 20 and over.

* Significant at the 95 per cent level.
Source: National Income and Consumption Survey, 2002.

is also negative, indicating that, all other factors remaining constant, living
in a rural area reduces average schooling by 2.8 years. This suggests that on
average an individual in a predominantly indigenous rural municipality
will have 4.1 fewer years of schooling than someone who lives in an non-
indigenous urban municipality.

Primary school completion and the age–grade distortion

Indigenous children are much more likely than non-indigenous children to
be in a lower grade year than is appropriate for their age. The 2002–3 school
census reveals that the age–grade distortion is significantly higher in indige-
nous primary schools11 than in general primary schools in mainly non-
indigenous catchment areas, and that above third grade over half of
indigenous children are lagging at least one year behind. Rural community
schools suffer from even more severe age–grade distortions (Table 6.27).
These schools, which are managed by the National Council for Educational
Development, serve communities with fewer than 100 inhabitants (with one
teacher teaching all grades), or populations with special needs, such as
migrant workers. These schools are not classified as indigenous schools
because they do not have a bilingual curriculum, but many indigenous chil-
dren attend them. It is important to mention that bilingual education is
offered in 44 indigenous languages, 33 of which are used in textbooks.
Bilingual education is also offered in 15 dialectical variations, but without
specific textbooks. Indigenous children in the remaining 18 small linguistic
groups do not have the option of being taught in their own language and
have to attend a general primary school, an indigenous primary school that
teaches in a different indigenous language, or a rural community school.
Human_06.qxd 25/10/05 6:17 PM Page 180

180 Mexico

Table 6.27 Age–grade distortion (per cent), Mexico, 2003

Primary
Rural
Grade General* Public Indigenous primary community, primary National

First 22.3 22.4 35.2 42.4 22.9

Second 28.6 29.2 46.3 57.5 29.6
Third 32.6 33.4 53.8 60.9 33.8
Fourth 35.4 36.3 57.8 59.1 36.6
Fifth 36.9 37.9 59.1 59.3 38.1
Sixth 38.2 39.1 59.0 51.2 39.2

Note: * Includes private and public schools.

Source: School Census, 2002–3.

Table 6.28 School dropout rates by gender and indigenous concentration, Mexico,
1989–2002 (pupils aged 14 and over, per cent)

1989 2002

Municipality Male Female All Male Female

Less than 10 per cent indigenous 32 36 34 22 25

10–39 per cent indigenous 53 59 56 35 45
More than 40 per cent indigenous 67 75 71 48 57

Sources: Panagides (1994); National Income and Consumption Survey, 2002.

Table 6.28 presents the school drop-out rates for students aged 14 years
and over. As can be seen, the drop-out rate increases as the percentage of
indigenous peoples in a municipality increases. In municipalities where
indigenous peoples account for more than 40 per cent of the population
the drop-out rate is more than twice that in municipalities where fewer than
10 per cent of the population are indigenous.
In both indigenous and non-indigenous municipalities the school dropout
rates fell significantly between 1989 and 2002 for both boys and girls, point-
ing to the effectiveness of Mexico’s conditional cash-transfer programme
(Oportunidades,12 previously Progresa), which is aimed at keeping children in
school. The reach of this programme will be further discussed below.
As can be seen in Table 6.29, there are no major differences between indige-
nous and non-indigenous people’s reasons for dropping out of school. In 2000
the percentage of indigenous peoples who dropped out of school for finan-
cial reasons was slightly higher than for non-indigenous people. Having to
work to make money was the single most important cause of primary school
dropout in both ethnic groups. The percentages of those who dropped out of
school because of travelling distance or household duties were very low in
both populations. This suggests that the difficulty of getting to school is not
Human_06.qxd 25/10/05 6:17 PM Page 181

Alejandro Ramirez 181

Table 6.29 Reasons for dropping out of school, Mexico, 2000 (people
aged 5–29, per cent)

Indigenous Non-indigenous

Need to make money 35.59 32.3

Do not want or like to study 23.65 26.19
Finished studies 5.79 11.48
Marriage 4.95 8.02
Family refused permission to continue
studies or needed help in the household 2.43 2.15
No school or school too far away 1.77 1.79
Other cause 1.35 2.18
Do not know the cause 7.63 9.03
Not specified 4.57 3.37

Source: National Population Census, 2000.

Table 6.30 Determinants of primary school drop-out, Mexico, 2002

Logit coefficient Variable mean Marginal effect

Age 0.07* 41.14 0.01

Male 0.33* 47.00 0.06
Indigenous (per cent) 0.01* 7.158 0.003
Rural 1.49828* 35.28 0.31
Constant 4.40393*
N 40 584
Wald-chi test 1.215e  07
R2 0.2532
Hausman (chi2(5)) 107.51
Mean of dependent
Variable 0.31

Notes: Sample age 20 years and over. Rural  fewer than 15 000 inhabitants.
* Significant at the 99 per cent level.
Source: National Income and Consumption Survey, 2002.

an important factor in why indigenous children abandon school in greater

numbers than non-indigenous children.
Table 6.30 shows the results of a logistic regression of a binary response
variable for primary school completion (that is, not completing primary
school  1; completing primary school  0). The model expresses an individ-
ual’s probability of completing school as a function of age, gender, percent-
age of indigenous peoples in the municipality and living in a rural area.
The coefficients in the last column of the table indicate the change in the
probability of completing primary school relative to a unit change in the
Human_06.qxd 25/10/05 6:17 PM Page 182

182 Mexico

Table 6.31 Estimated probability of primary school

drop-out, Mexico, 2002 (per cent)

Indigenous Non-indigenous All

Male 51.8 25.0 28.2

Female 56.6 29.7 32.9
Rural 61.8 47.5 51.4
Urban 24.4 19.2 19.4

Source: Calculated from Table 6.30.

corresponding independent variable. Each additional 1 percentage point of

indigenous people in a municipality increases the probability that an indi-
vidual will not complete primary school by 0.3 per cent, relative to the aver-
age drop-out rate of 31 per cent. This means that an individual who lives in
a municipality where 50 per cent of the population are indigenous has a
15 per cent greater probability of not completing school than an individual
who lives in a non-indigenous municipality. The coefficient for ‘rural’ is
positive, indicating that living in a rural area increases the probability of not
completing primary school by 31 per cent. The coefficient for ‘male’ is neg-
ative, showing once again that being male reduces the probability of drop-
ping out of primary school. Age is positive, suggesting that older age groups
have a higher primary school drop-out rate.
Table 6.31 shows the probability of dropping out of primary school by
ethnicity, gender and urban/rural residence. As can be seen, an indigenous
female has a 57 per cent probability of dropping out, compared with 30 per
cent for a non-indigenous female. Similarly an indigenous rural resident has
a 62 per cent probability of dropping out of school, compared with 47 per
cent for a non-indigenous rural resident.

School participation
This section explores the determinants of school participation. Table 6.32
presents the results of a logistic regression on a binary response variable for
school participation of children aged 7–14. The model shows that a child’s
probability of being enrolled in school increases with mother’s schooling,
family income, indigenous concentration in the municipality and if the
household is headed by a male. Conversely the probability of school partic-
ipation decreases with age, number of siblings, poverty and rural residence.
It is possible that the coefficient for indigenous concentration in a munici-
pality is positive because the enrolment rate for indigenous children at the
elementary school level are not too different from that of non-indigenous
children, and the small difference that exists may already be captured by the
rural and extreme poverty variables. In other words indigenous children have
a lower probability of being enrolled in elementary school only to the extent
that they live in a rural area and/or an extremely poor household.
Human_06.qxd 25/10/05 6:17 PM Page 183

Alejandro Ramirez 183

Table 6.32 Determinants of school participation, entire youth subsample, Mexico, 2002

Mean Coefficient Marginal effect

Age 10.53 0.45* 0.0118

Male 0.50 0.07* 0.0019
Indigenous (per cent) 9.72 0.01* 0.0002
Rural 0.45 0.07* 0.0017
Mother’s schooling 5.10 0.14* 0.0038
Number of siblings 3.21 0.06* 0.0015
Extreme poverty 0.29 0.22* 0.0060
Household income 6 959.90 0.00005* 0.0000
Male head of household 0.15 0.33* 0.0078
Constant 7.31*
N 13 063
Wald-chi test 696 787.12
R2 0.1478
Mean of dependent variable 0.95

Notes: Sample age 7–14 years. * Significant at the 99 per cent level.
Source: National Income and Consumption Survey, 2002.

Table 6.33 Estimated probability of school participation,

Mexico, 2002 (per cent)

Indigenous Non-indigenous All

Male 95 96 96
Female 95 93 94
Rural 95 93 93
Urban 95 96 96
Extremely poor 94 92 92
Not poor 96 96 96

Source: Calculated from Table 6.32.

As Table 6.33 shows, in 2002 the probability that indigenous and non-
indigenous children aged 7–14 would attend school was basically the same,
regardless of gender, urban/rural residence and poverty. This important
development reflected the achievement of almost universal elementary
school enrolment in Mexico.

Quality of education
At least as important as being enrolled in school is the quality of education
that students receive. There is evidence that indigenous peoples suffer not
only from fewer years of schooling but also from lower-quality schooling.
Tables 6.34 and 6.35 list the reading and mathematics test scores from the
Ministry of Education’s National Standards (Estándares Nacionales) for five
 Human_06.qxd
184
Table 6.34 Reading scores by type of school, Mexico, 1998–2002*

25/10/05
Percentage difference between test results

Private Public Public Community Indigenous National Indigenous/ Indigenous/ Indigenous/ Indigenous/
Grade urban urban rural school education average public rural public urban public urban national avg.

6:17 PM
1998 1 448 411 395 380 370 407 6.8 11.2 21.3 10.1
2 470 428 398 392 362 419 10.0 18.2 29.8 15.8
3 483 423 396 397 371 417 6.8 13.9 30.3 12.5

Page 184
4 516 445 409 386 373 437 9.6 19.3 38.3 17.3
5 531 463 433 413 387 457 11.8 19.5 37.1 18.0
6 490 434 406 394 373 428 9.0 16.5 31.4 14.8
1999 3 493 434 418 416 400 433 4.4 8.6 23.2 8.1
5 533 471 445 434 413 467 7.7 14.1 28.9 13.0
2000 2 460 431 419 412 386 428 8.4 11.7 19.2 10.7
4 549 481 452 439 422 475 6.9 13.8 29.9 12.5
6 555 508 478 459 437 501 9.5 16.3 27.2 14.7
2001 3 493 430 404 411 386 426 4.6 11.4 27.6 10.2
5 554 487 453 440 413 480 9.6 17.7 33.9 16.0
2002 2 438 377 368 363 348 377 5.9 8.4 25.9 8.6
4 509 446 409 399 382 438 6.9 16.6 33.2 14.5
6 559 510 477 443 429 502 11.2 18.9 30.3 16.9

Note: * Test scale: 200–800 (median 500, standard deviation 100).

Source: Estánderes Nacionales, SEP.
 Human_06.qxd
Table 6.35 Test scores in mathematics, by school type, Mexico, 1998–2002

25/10/05
School type Percentage difference between test results

Private Public Public Community Indigenous National Indigenous/ Indigenous/ Indigenous/ Indigenous/
Grade urban urban rural school education average public rural public urban private urban national avg.

6:17 PM
1998 1 451 415 412 410 367 414 12.2 13.2 22.9 12.9
2 480 443 423 434 383 437 10.4 15.6 25.2 14.1
3 483 427 411 423 372 424 10.5 14.8 30.0 14.0
4 490 438 417 401 385 434 8.3 13.7 27.2 12.6

Page 185
5 511 471 449 430 397 465 13.1 18.5 28.8 17.1
6 483 439 422 419 381 435 10.9 15.2 26.8 14.2
1999 3 489 437 413 427 375 432 10.1 16.6 30.5 15.2
5 504 472 453 435 420 467 7.9 12.3 20.0 11.3
2000 2 449 424 420 420 385 423 9.1 9.9 16.4 9.6
4 534 483 447 437 394 473 13.3 22.5 35.5 19.9
6 526 507 484 463 441 500 9.8 15.1 19.3 13.4
2001 3 496 433 398 410 355 424 12.0 21.7 39.6 19.4
5 524 486 463 452 430 481 7.6 13.1 21.9 11.8
2002 2 428 376 375 373 347 378 8.2 8.4 23.5 9.0
4 458 432 418 414 400 428 4.6 7.9 14.5 7.1
6 529 497 482 451 453 493 6.4 9.7 16.8 8.9

Note: Test scale: 200–800 (median 500, standard deviation 100).

Source: Estándares Nacionales, SEP.

185
Human_06.qxd 25/10/05 6:17 PM Page 186

186 Mexico

types of primary school: urban private, urban public, rural public, commu-
nity schools and indigenous schools. The tests have been carried out annually
since 1998. In the first year all six grades at elementary schools were assessed,
but since then all but the first have been evaluated every two years. The tests
are applied to a sample of 50 000 students who are representative at the
national, state and school-type levels. The tests have a minimum value of 200
points, a maximum value of 800 and a standard deviation of 100.
As Tables 6.34 and 6.35 show, indigenous schools have systematically
obtained lower reading and mathematics scores than all other types of
schools, regardless of whether they are situated in an urban or a rural area.
Not only do indigenous schools obtain significantly lower scores than urban
public and private schools, but they also perform worse than rural public
schools and community schools. For example in 2002 an average sixth grader
from an indigenous school had a 14.5 per cent lower reading score and an
8.2 per cent lower maths score than the national average. Compared with stu-
dents from urban public schools, the test results of sixth graders in indige-
nous schools were 15.9 per cent lower in reading and 8.9 per cent lower in
maths. Even compared with students from public rural schools, indigenous
students performed poorly. The average sixth grader in an indigenous school
had a 10.1 per cent lower reading test result and a 6 per cent lower maths
result than the average sixth grader in a public rural school.

Health

In general indigenous peoples have poorer health and less access to social
assistance programmes than non-indigenous people. As Table 6.36 shows,

Table 6.36 Life expectancy and mortality, Mexico, 1990–96

Gender 5% indigenous 75% indigenous

Life expectancy Male 65 62

Female 70 67
All 68 64
Infant mortality (per 1000 Male 27 46
live births) Female 21 36
All 24 41
Probability of dying between Male 30 58
0 and 5 years (per 1000) Female 24 47
All 27 52
Probability of dying between 15 Male 176 218
and 45 years (per 1000)
Female 122 159
All 148 189

Source: Torres et al. (2003).

Human_06.qxd 25/10/05 6:17 PM Page 187

Alejandro Ramirez 187

Table 6.37 Illness, treatment and mortality rates, Mexico,

1998–99 (per cent)

National Indigenous
population population

Illness rate 15 11
Treatment rate 59 59
Mortality by selected causes
Diabetes 36 16
Cancer 53 33
Heart disease 69 46
Cirrhosis 24 23
Pneumonia 22 29
Tuberculosis 4 9
Maternal (birth related) 4 14
Diarrhoea 11 34

Source: World Bank (2003g).

between 1990 and 1996 life expectancy in municipalities where only 5 per
cent of people were indigenous, was several years lower than in municipali-
ties with an indigenous population of more than 75 per cent (Torres et al.,
2003). According to the National Population Council the national average
was 70 years during the same period. Moreover predominantly indigenous
municipalities had markedly higher mortality rates than individuals in non-
indigenous municipalities.
Despite the higher mortality rates, reported illness is lower in the indige-
nous population. According to the World Bank (2003g), this could be related
to the fact that ‘indigenous peoples have a higher threshold level of report-
ing an illness compared to the total population’. The latter may be due to
indigenous peoples’ poorer access to medical services, or they may be less
accustomed to seeking medical treatment when ill. Table 6.37 shows the ill-
ness, treatment and mortality rates by selected causes for the indigenous and
national populations in 1998–99. The indigenous population clearly had a
different disease profile from that of the population as a whole. For some
conditions, such as diabetes, cancer and cirrhosis, the disease rate was lower
for the indigenous than for the national population, while in the case of com-
municable diseases such as respiratory infections and diarrhoea the mortal-
ity rates for the indigenous population were higher than for the population
as a whole.
The latter diseases are likely to be related to indigenous peoples’ poorer
living conditions. Indigenous households often have less access to potable
water, sanitation facilities and sewage connections than non-indigenous
households, and more than 40 per cent have unhygienic earth floors.
Human_06.qxd 25/10/05 6:17 PM Page 188

188 Mexico

Health insurance

According to the 2000 National Health Survey, at that time 41 per cent of the
Mexican population had health insurance, compared with just 17 per cent of
the indigenous population. As Table 6.38 shows, the majority of indigenous
peoples who did have some type of insurance were covered by the Mexican
Institute of Social Security (IMSS), the mandatory social security scheme by
which formal sector employees are covered by law. A small percentage of
indigenous peoples were covered by the ISSSTE, the social security scheme
provided to state workers by the government.
The substantial difference in health insurance between indigenous and
non-indigenous people is largely explained by the fact that insurance cover-
age in Mexico is intrinsically linked to the formal labour market and indige-
nous peoples are predominantly employed in the informal sector.
Table 6.39 shows the institutions to which indigenous and non-indigenous
people turn when they fall ill. In 2000 over half of the indigenous population
used the public clinics maintained by the Ministry of Health (SSA) and an
additional 18 per cent used the services of IMSS-Oportunidades. By contrast
less than a third of the non-indigenous population used SSA public clinics
and only 2 per cent used IMSS-Oportunidades. IMSS-Oportunidades (previously
called IMSS-Solidaridad) was created in 1989 to provide some of the IMSS’s
health services to rural people with no health insurance and little or no access
to health care. In 2003 IMSS-Oportunidades provided services to 3.8 million
indigenous people in 13 states. Both the SSA and the IMSS-Oportunidades
clinics are free of charge; the services provided by them, however, tend to be

Table 6.38 Insurance status by ethnicity, Mexico, 2000 (per cent)

Non-indigenous Indigenous All

No insurance 56.6 82.8 58.9

IMSS 33.6 11.0 31.7
ISSSTE 5.4 3.6 5.2
PEMEX 0.6 0.2 0.6
SEDENA 0.4 0.2 0.4
SEMAR 0.2 0.1 0.2
State governments 0.9 0.5 0.9
Private, paid by employer 0.5 0.1 0.5
Private, paid by individual 0.4 0.1 0.4
Other 0.7 0.7 0.7
Not specified 0.5 0.6 0.5

Notes: IMSS  Mexican Institute of Social Security; ISSSTE  Institute of

Social Security and Services for State Workers; PEMEX  Mexican Petroleum
Company; SEDENA  Ministry of Defence; SEMAR  Marine Ministry.
Source: National Health Survey, 2000.
Human_06.qxd 25/10/05 6:17 PM Page 189

Alejandro Ramirez 189

Table 6.39 Health services utilized, by ethnicity, Mexico, 2000 (per cent)

Non-indigenous Indigenous All

IMSS 25.6 8.6 24.2

ISSSTE 4.0 2.0 3.9
PEMEX 1.1 0.6 1.1
SSA 31.9 54.4 33.8
IMSS-Oportunidades 1.9 18.2 3.3
Private, paid by employer 1.3 0.3 1.2
Private, paid by user 27.7 9.9 26.2
Do not seek health services 2.2 3.0 2.3
Other institution 2.4 1.2 2.3
Not specified 1.86 1.73 1.85

Source: National Health Survey, 2000.

of significantly lower quality than those offered by IMSS or ISSSTE clinics.

Nationwide, in 2000 only 8.6 per cent of the indigenous population used
IMSS clinics, as opposed to 25.6 per cent of the non-indigenous population.
Similarly only 10.2 per cent of the indigenous population used private
services, compared with 27.7 per cent of the non-indigenous population.
Both indigenous and non-indigenous people gave similar reasons for not
seeking medical attention. However a significantly higher proportion of the
non-indigenous people surveyed stated that they did not seek medical treat-
ment for a health problem because it did not merit medical attention (60 per
cent versus 45 per cent for indigenous peoples). Among the other reasons
were not having enough money (20 per cent of indigenous peoples versus
13 per cent of non-indigenous people), there being nowhere to treat the
problem (4 per cent versus 1 per cent), the long distance to the health centre
(2 per cent versus 1 per cent) and attending a health centre but not receiving
treatment (6 per cent versus 1 per cent). A very low percentage of indigenous
peoples did not seek medical treatment because they had been treated badly
in the past (0.1 per cent) or did not trust medical treatment (2 per cent). The
percentages for the non-indigenous population were 0.3 per cent and 2.6 per
cent respectively. The significantly higher proportion of indigenous peoples
who attended a health centre but did not receive medical attention was
likely to be related to their lack of health insurance, which would have
resulted in their being turned away from IMSS and ISSSTE facilities.

Nutrition

Large differences exist between the nutritional status of indigenous and

non-indigenous people, especially in the case of children below five years of
age. This section draws on the results of a study by Rivera et al. (2003), which
Human_06.qxd 25/10/05 6:17 PM Page 190

190 Mexico

Table 6.40 Prevalence of anaemia and undernutrition in children under five years of
age, Mexico, 1998–99 (per cent)

National Urban Rural

Non- Non- Non-

indigenous Indigenous indigenous Indigenous indigenous Indigenous

Anaemia 26.7 35.2 25.4 40.3 29.9 31.6

Underweight
(weight for age) 6.2 18.5 5.0 15.6 9.9 20.6
Stunting
(height for age) 14.5 44.3 10.1 34.8 26.9 51.0
Wasting
(weight for height) 2.0 2.3 2.1 1.7 2.0 2.7

Source: Rivera et al. (2003).

demonstrates that the existence of stunting and underweight is much

greater among indigenous than non-indigenous children. As Table 6.40
shows, in 1998–99 at the national level and in urban areas the prevalence of
underweight and stunted children was three times greater among indige-
nous than among non-indigenous people, and two times greater in rural
areas. Similarly the prevalence of anaemia among indigenous children was
one third greater than among non-indigenous children at the national level
and between 30 per cent and 60 per cent higher in urban areas. As can be
seen in the table, there were also marked differences in the prevalence of
underweight and stunting between urban and rural children. No large
differences were found in the prevalence of wasting.13
The striking differences in the prevalence of malnutrition between indige-
nous and non-indigenous children can be largely explained by socioeco-
nomic factors. Controlling for age, socioeconomic conditions, number of
children in the family, mother’s height, parents’ education, region of resi-
dence and urban or rural residence, Rivera et al. (2003) found that much of
the difference in stunting and underweight between indigenous and non-
indigenous children was the result of the large differences between their
living conditions. Table 6.41 presents the results of adjusted logistic regres-
sions to estimate the probability of underweight, stunting and anaemia in
indigenous and non-indigenous children.14 As the table shows, after adjust-
ing for socioeconomic status the probability ratio for stunting drops from 3.4
to 1.8 and that for underweight drops from 3.0 to 1.5, indicating that a sig-
nificant proportion of the differences can be explained by socioeconomic
conditions. In contrast the ratio for anaemia only drops from 1.3 to 1.2.
When the variables number of children in the family and urban/rural
residence are added to the model the relative risk is reduced only slightly
(from 1.83 to 1.80 in the case of stunting and 1.48 to 1.45 in the case of
Human_06.qxd 25/10/05 6:17 PM Page 191

Alejandro Ramirez 191

Table 6.41 Adjusted and unadjusted probability ratios for anaemia and malnutrition
among indigenous and non-indigenous children under five years of age, Mexico,
1998–99

Adjusted probability
Probability
Dependent variables Non-indigenous Indigenous ratio

Stunting (n  8 688)
Adjusted for age of children1 0.16 0.48 3.40
Adjusted for age and socioeconomic level2 0.15 0.28 1.83
Adjusted for all variables3 0.16 0.29 1.81
Underweight (n  7 079)
Adjusted for age of children1 0.06 0.17 2.98
Adjusted for age1 and socioeconomic level 0.05 0.08 1.48
Adjusted for all variables4 0.05 0.08 1.45
Anaemia (n  5 305)
Adjusted for age of children1 0.26 0.35 1.33
Adjusted for age and socioeconomic level2 0.29 0.37 1.24

Notes
1
Age of children squared.
2
Age of children squared, socioeconomic level squared.
3
Age of children squared, socioeconomic level squared, number of children in the family, and
place of residence (urban or rural and regional).
4
Age of children squared, socioeconomic level, number children in the family.
Source: Rivera et al. (2003).

underweight) and remains statistically significant. This indicates that other

factors not included in the model may play a part in the differences, such
as ‘genetic differences between indigenous and non-indigenous children,
differences in child-rearing practices, including child-feeding behaviors and
hygiene practices, differences in the sanitary conditions and access to health
services’ (Rivera et al., 2003:10).

Fertility

Fertility rates are higher in indigenous than in non-indigenous municipali-

ties. Table 6.42 presents the determinants of fertility for married women. Not
only does being indigenous imply a larger number of childbirths, all other
factors remaining constant, but also monolingual indigenous women have a
higher fertility rate than bilingual indigenous women. Age is also positively
and significantly correlated with fertility, which confirms the declining fer-
tility rate for younger generations. Women’s education and household
income, on the other hand, negatively affect fertility. Holding all other fac-
tors constant, each additional year of female education reduces the fertility
Human_06.qxd 25/10/05 6:17 PM Page 192

192 Mexico

Table 6.42 Determinants of fertility for married women aged 12–50,

Mexico, 2000

Coefficient T-ratio

Women’s education 0.02* 1.99

Husbands’ education 0.03 1.56
Age 0.22* 12.09
Age squared 0.001* 4.69
Indigenous 0.97* 13.66
Bilingual 1.10* 13.83
Monolingual 1.39** 2.10
Household income 0.0001* 6.74
Constant 2.54* 8.90
R2 0.27
N 12 414

Notes: * Significant at the 99 per cent level; ** significant at the 95 per cent
level.
Source: National Health Survey, 2000.

rate by 2 per cent. Husbands’ education, on the other hand, does not appear
to have a significant impact on the determinants of fertility.

Social programmes and household services

There are a number of government social programmes that help indigenous

peoples. Some of these are specifically targeted at indigenous peoples, such
as the Health and Nutrition Programme for Indigenous Peoples (Programa de
Salud y Nutrición de Pueblos Indígenas). Others, for example Procampo and
Oportunidades, benefit a large number of indigenous peoples even though
they are not designed exclusively for them. Procampo is a direct subsidy that
the government gives to poor farmers for each hectare of agricultural land.
Its original purpose was to increase the productivity of Mexican farmers
before the liberalization of trade in agricultural products. Oportunidades pro-
vides monthly cash payments to poor families for every school-age child
they have, on condition that the children remain in school and have regular
health checks. Transfers are given to the woman of the household, who is
also required to attend monthly talks on health. The programme also
includes a nutritional supplement for small children. In 2003, 4.2 million
families benefited from the programme.
A recent addition to the Oportunidades programme is Jovenes con
Oportunidades, under which high school students who are already beneficia-
ries of the programme receive a savings account, into which the government
deposits a sum for each year of high school they complete. The students can
Human_06.qxd 25/10/05 6:17 PM Page 193

Alejandro Ramirez 193

Table 6.43 Coverage of the Oportunidades and Procampo programmes, by type of

municipality and income quintile, Mexico, 2002 (per cent)

Income quintile

1 2 3 4 5

Oportunidades:
All people 42.3 23.1 13.5 4.1 1.1
Indigenous municipalities 68.0 61.4 42.4 22.6 8.0
Non-indigenous municipalities 33.3 19.3 12.2 3.6 1.1
Procampo:
All people 16.9 8.9 5.9 2.4 2.0
Indigenous municipalities 30.1 21.1 20.7 15.2 2.1
Non-indigenous municipalities 12.3 7.7 5.2 2.0 1.7

Source: National Income and Consumption Survey, 2002.

only cash their savings when they graduate from high school, which acts as
a disincentive to drop out of school.
Table 6.43 shows the percentages of those who received support from the
Oportunidades and Procampo programmes in 2002. As can be seen, both pro-
grammes benefited a much larger proportion of the population in indigenous
than in non-indigenous municipalities, which is a reflection of the higher
incidence of poverty in indigenous municipalities. As could be expected,
most of the beneficiaries were concentrated in the bottom two income
quintiles, which illustrates the effective targeting of the programmes.
Access to utilities, however, varies strongly between indigenous and non-
indigenous households, as shown in Table 6.44. For example nearly 86 per
cent of non-indigenous households are supplied with potable water and
almost 96 per cent have electricity, compared with 65 per cent and 83 per
cent, respectively, of indigenous households. Many of the differences shown
in the table are due to the fact that indigenous peoples are predominantly
concentrated in the rural sector, where it is more difficult to provide public
services.
The quality of homes also differs significantly between ethnic groups. For
example 43 per cent of indigenous peoples live in houses with earth floors,
compared with 11 per cent of non-indigenous people. The materials used to
construct non-indigenous homes are also of higher quality than those used
for indigenous homes: 83 per cent of non-indigenous homes are constructed
of concrete or brick and just 4 per cent of wood, while for indigenous homes
the figures are 51 per cent and 25 per cent respectively.
Despite the continuing differences between indigenous and non-
indigenous homes, significant progress has been made. For example between
1989 and 2000 the proportion of indigenous households with electricity
increased from 48 per cent to 83 per cent, those with access to potable water
Human_06.qxd 25/10/05 6:17 PM Page 194

194 Mexico

Table 6.44 Access to utilities and household assets, Mexico, 2000 (population-weighted
averages, per cent)

Indigenous Non-indigenous All Rural Urban

Housing conditions
Potable water 65.0 85.8 83.5 59.7 91.6
Electricity 83.1 95.6 94.2 83.0 98.0
Sanitation facility 75.2 90.5 88.8 69.4 95.0
Sewage 40.3 80.0 75.6 35.2 89.4
Earth floor 43.4 11.2 14.7 37.5 7.0
Refuse collection 30.7 74.1 69.3 15.1 87.8
Three rooms or fewer 71.9 45.0 47.9 68.3 41.0
Telephone 10.2 37.7 52.1 5.0 44.7
Assets
Home ownership 79.4 86.8 80.2 87.8 77.6
Radio 71.4 87.0 85.2 72.9 89.5
Television 55.1 89.4 85.7 62.8 93.4
Video recorder 13.9 41.3 38.3 13.2 46.8
Refrigerator 28.6 71.6 66.9 35.0 77.7
Washing machine 17.9 56.4 34.7 21.0 62.7
Boiler 10.6 42.9 39.4 11.4 48.9
Car 10.7 35.0 32.3 17.7 37.2
Computer 2.4 9.6 8.8 0.7 11.6

Source: National Population Census, 2000.

increased from 16 per cent to 65 per cent, and those with a telephone service
increased from 2.4 per cent to 10.3 per cent (Panagides, 1994; National
Population Census, 2000).
The possession of physical assets has always been a means of mitigating
the effects of crisis, particularly for the poor. Indigenous households possess
fewer assets than non-indigenous households (Table 6.44), although this was
not always the case. For example, in 1989 a larger proportion of indigenous
peoples owned their own home (92 per cent of households versus 79 per
cent of non-indigenous households). By 2002, however, the trend in home
ownership had reversed. This trend was mirrored in the ownership of other
assets, such as cars, radios, refrigerators, televisions, video recorders, washing
machines and computers.

Conclusions

Indigenous peoples in Mexico continue to suffer from severe deprivation.

Even though considerable progress has been made in a number of crucial
areas – such as educational provision, access to public utilities and entitlement
Human_06.qxd 25/10/05 6:17 PM Page 195

Alejandro Ramirez 195

to social programmes – significant gaps remain between indigenous and

non-indigenous people according to most economic and human
development indicators.
Income poverty is one area in which no progress has been made since the
early 1990s. In 2002 the incidence of extreme poverty was 4.5 times higher
in predominantly indigenous than in non-indigenous municipalities, up from
3.7 in 1992. Furthermore an astounding 90 per cent of people in predominantly
indigenous municipalities lived below the moderate poverty line, the same
percentage as a decade earlier and twice that in non-indigenous municipalities.
The depth and severity of poverty in indigenous municipalities were also
significantly higher and increased during the 1992–2002 period.
Indigenous workers have substantially lower earnings than non-indigenous
workers, even those in the same age group, educational group and sector of
employment. A decomposition of the earnings differential shows that for
the whole population sample the assessed characteristics account for 59 per
cent of the disparity between indigenous and non-indigenous workers’ earn-
ings. Unexplained factors such as ability, quality of education, culture and
labour market discrimination account for the remaining 41 per cent. Using
the indigenous pay structure, this unexplained portion of the earnings dif-
ferential decreased somewhat between 1989 and 2002, which could signal to
a slight decrease in the estimate for discrimination.
Despite significant improvements in education over the past decades,
considerable educational differences persist between the indigenous and
non-indigenous populations. The illiteracy and drop-out rates continue to
be substantially higher among indigenous peoples. Although average years
of schooling are much lower for indigenous peoples the educational gap is
closing rapidly in the case of the younger generations. For example the aver-
age non-indigenous individual born before 1939 has 120 per cent more years
of schooling than an indigenous individual in the same age group, while a
non-indigenous individual born between 1979 and 1985 has 26 per cent
more years of schooling than an indigenous individual born in the same
period. Among 7–14-year-olds the indigenous/non-indigenous educational
gap has reduced to 8 per cent.
The narrowing of the indigenous/non-indigenous school enrolment gap is
undeniably an important accomplishment. However, while, indigenous
children aged 6–14 are attending school at almost the same rate as non-
indigenous children, the results of the national tests reveal that the quality
of the education they receive is significantly lower. This may partly explain
the lower returns from education for indigenous men and women. It may
also account for a significant part of the unexplained portion of the earnings
differential between indigenous and non-indigenous people.
Child labour is very common in rural areas, and particularly in indigenous
municipalities. Indigenous children have a greater probability of working
Human_06.qxd 25/10/05 6:17 PM Page 196

196 Mexico

than non-indigenous children, both in household-related activities and in

outside work. However they have a lower probability of receiving a wage for
their work.
Indigenous peoples have poorer health and less access to health care than
the non-indigenous population. Life expectancy at birth is four years lower
in predominantly indigenous municipalities, and the infant morality rate is
significantly higher. Moreover indigenous children are more subject to
malnutrition, as manifest in anaemia, underweight and stunting. Finally,
health insurance coverage is significantly lower among indigenous workers,
mainly due to the fact that indigenous workers are predominantly concen-
trated in the informal sector and health insurance is largely tied to formal
sector jobs.
In order to reduce the significant economic and social disparities between
the indigenous and non-indigenous populations it is essential to take
indigenous identity into account when designing and implementing social
programmes. Given that individuals in predominantly indigenous munici-
palities suffer from so many economic and social disadvantages, a clear aim
of social policy should be to target these areas. Some of the existing pro-
grammes, albeit without stating it explicitly, are already doing this, includ-
ing Oportunidades and to a lesser extent Procampo.
Raising educational standards is the most effective way of combating
poverty and reducing the indigenous/non-indigenous earnings differential,
and to this end retaining indigenous children in school, especially at the
secondary level, is being addressed through targeted social programmes such
as Oportunidades. The latter has helped to reduce the school drop-out rate
and child labour in indigenous areas. However the quality of the education
provided to indigenous children remains significantly lower than that
received by their non-indigenous peers. Hence the principal challenge is to
remedy this situation and, where necessary, adapt education to indigenous
peoples’ reality.
It is important to recognize that cash incentives may not be sufficient to
encourage indigenous children to stay at school if the marginal benefit of
extra years of schooling is low in the local labour market. As indigenous
peoples predominantly live in isolated rural communities with small, frag-
mented and underdeveloped markets, breaking the economic isolation of
these communities is another important area for policy action. That is the
objective of Microregiones, a government programme started in 2001 to tackle
the economic isolation of the least developed municipalities by providing
roads, potable water, electricity, telecommunications and sanitation, mak-
ing housing improvements, building community centres and establishing
micro-credit institutions to encourage entrepreneurial activity. Microregiones
operates in almost all indigenous municipalities.
In short, strengthening the existing mechanisms and devising addi-
tional ones to keep indigenous children in school, improving the quality of
Human_06.qxd 25/10/05 6:17 PM Page 197

Alejandro Ramirez 197

indigenous education and integrating indigenous communities into the

national economy are essential to the alleviation of indigenous peoples’
poverty in Mexico.

Notes
1. I would like to thank Vicente Garcia Moreno for invaluable research assistance.
2. This estimate uses the household as the unit of analysis. Using all individuals over
the age of five who speak an indigenous language, the estimate is lowered to 7 per
cent of the population.
3. The southern region comprises the states of Campeche, Chiapas, Guerrero,
Hidalgo, Oaxaca, Puebla, Quintana Roo, Tabasco, Tlaxcala, Veracruz and Yucatán.
4. The central region comprises the states of Aguascalientes, Colima, Guanajuato,
Jalisco, México, Michoacán, Morelos, Nayarit, Querétaro, San Luis Potosí, Sinaloa
and Zacatecas.
5. The northern region comprises Baja California, Baja California Sur, Coahuila,
Durango, Sonora, Chihuahua, Nuevo León and Tamaulipas.
6. The number of sampled municipalities by indigenous concentration in the 2000
and 2002, surveys was as follows:

Indigenous concentration 2000 2002

Below 10 per cent 318 358

10–40 per cent 38 52
40–70 per cent 10 36
Above 70 per cent 14 49
Total 380 495

7. A regression using heads of households as the unit of analysis yields similar

results.
8. Due to the lack of good information on indigenous identity for individuals in
the ENIGH, a proxy of the concentration of indigenous people in a municipality
is used. As the percentage of indigenous inhabitants from one municipality to
another rises (say from 30 to 70 per cent), the probability of being indigenous for
an individual living in the 70 per cent indigenous municipality increases. See the
Appendix on Data and Methods for more detailed information.
9. The informal sector is defined as that in which workers do not have social protec-
tion and other social benefits such as a retirement fund, housing credit, Christmas
bonus, paid holidays and a share of the company’s profits.
10. The ENEZI was conducted in 1997 in the 13 regions of Mexico with the highest
indigenous concentrations. Because indigenous peoples were highly concentrated
in rural areas, the survey was mainly rural based and was not representative of
urban areas, nor of the country as a whole. The respondents were asked whether
they spoke an indigenous language and whether they identified themselves as
indigenous, which allows us to analyze potential differences between the indige-
nous and non-indigenous respondents.
11. Indigenous schools are bilingual and teach an intercultural curriculum.
12. See www.oportunidades.gob.mx.
13. ‘Length/height and weight data were transformed to z-scores using 1979 World
Health Organization/National Centre for Health Statistics/Centres for Disease
Human_06.qxd 25/10/05 6:17 PM Page 198

198 Mexico

Control and Prevention reference data. Children were classified as underweight,

stunted and wasted when their z-scores were  2 for weight-for-age, length/
height-for-age and weight-for-length/height, respectively. Anaemia was defined as
a concentration of haemoglobin  11.0 g/dl at sea level (WHO, 1992)’ (Rivera
et al., 2003).
14. An indicator of socioeconomic status was obtained by principal components
analysis. The variables included flooring material, availability of piped water, pos-
session of a refrigerator, washing machine and stove, and the number of electric
appliances in the household (Rivera et al., 2003).
Human_07.qxd 25/10/05 6:18 PM Page 199

7
Peru
Carolina Trivelli1

This chapter discusses the principal findings from a review of data on

poverty among indigenous peoples in Peru. The analysis draws on data
collected by the Peruvian National Household Survey in the fourth quarter
of 2001. This relatively new survey is conducted by the National Institute of
Statistics and Informatics (INEI). To analyze historical trends in indigenous
poverty, the chapter also uses data from the Living Standards Measurement
Household Surveys (ENNIV) from the 1990s. The surveys were conducted by
the Instituto Cuánto following World Bank methodology.
The chapter consists of three sections. The first reviews the evolution of
poverty indicators over the last decade among indigenous and non-indigenous
people. It is found that across the survey years that are strictly comparable
(1994–2000) the gap between indigenous and non-indigenous poverty
slowly closed. This was not because the indigenous poverty rate was falling,
however, but because non-indigenous poverty was climbing faster than
indigenous poverty. The second section presents a more detailed assessment
of conditions among indigenous households in 2001. It explores the effect of
being indigenous on the probability of being poor, controlling for relevant
background features. Information is also presented on access to education,
health services, income and discrimination.

The evolution of Peru’s indigenous population

Throughout this chapter a person is defined as indigenous if she or he has a

non-Spanish, non-foreign mother tongue. This definition imposes certain
restrictions, but it is the only one that allows us to carry out comparisons
across countries and time, given that in previous ENNIV surveys, mother
tongue was the only identifier used for indigenous identity.
We classify a household as indigenous if the household head or the head’s
spouse has a non-Spanish, non-foreign mother tongue. It is important to
note that there is a large difference between being a member of an indigenous

199
Human_07.qxd 25/10/05 6:18 PM Page 200

200 Peru

Table 7.1 Percentage of indigenous peoples according to mother

tongue, Peru, 1994–2000

Indigenous Indigenous
Indigenous households household head population

1994 26.1 27.8 17.6

1997 23.2 24.3 15.8
2000 23.1 23.8 15.3

Source: ENNIV (1994, 1997, 2000).

household and merely being indigenous. This difference helps explain

changes in the estimated size of Peru’s indigenous population over time. It
also shows the usefulness of using mother tongue as an identifier of indige-
nous people. (For more information on different estimates of the indigenous
population in Peru, see Chapter 2.)
The percentage of indigenous households corresponds to the households
headed by individuals with a non-Spanish mother tongue – a percentage that
has been relatively constant throughout the last decade. As Table 7.1 shows,
these is a significant difference between the number of people who live in an
indigenous household and the number of people who have a non-Spanish
mother tongue. The difference between the section of the Peruvian popula-
tion that has a Spanish mother tongue and the section that lives in a house-
hold headed by an individual with non-Spanish mother tongue is almost
9 per cent. The explanations of this vary, ranging from migratory phenom-
ena, the unavailability of basic services in indigenous languages and the state
of being a mestizo (an individual of mixed blood), among other things.
According to Valdivia (2002) the indigenous population has been shrink-
ing in recent decades. Based on population censuses, Valdivia calculates that
in 1940, 51 per cent of the population aged five and over had a non-Spanish
mother tongue. This figure fell to 36 per cent in 1961, 28 per cent in 1972,
20 per cent in 1993 and 15 per cent in 2000.

Indigenous households and poverty

The comparisons over time presented below require some comment in that
the data used are restricted to those obtained in the 1994, 1997 and 2000
ENNIV surveys. The 1991 survey did not cover all of Peru as there was vio-
lence in several areas. Because the excluded areas – the rural coast, the jungle
and three departments in the mountains, or the Mancha India – have the
greatest concentration of indigenous people the data for that year are partial
and not strictly comparable with other years. However testing for the effect
of this omission by estimating trend data on basic indicators such as poverty
rates while omitting the same sampling areas from the data set for later
Human_07.qxd 25/10/05 6:18 PM Page 201

Carolina Trivelli 201

Table 7.2 Percentage of households living in poverty, Peru,

1994–2000

Total population Indigenous Non-indigenous

1994 45.2 62.3 40.1

1997 41.8 61.4 36.4
2000 46.5 62.8 43.0

Source: ENNIV, 1994, 1997, 2000.

Table 7.3 Percentage of households living in extreme poverty, Peru,

1994–2000

Total population Indigenous Non-indigenous

1994 14.7 28.6 10.9

1997 11.4 24.7 8.6
2000 11.7 22.2 9.5

Source: ENNIV, 1994, 1997, 2000.

survey years produces similar results to later years, drawn from more
complete surveys.
Tables 7.2 and 7.3 show the trends in poverty between 1994 and 2000
using official poverty lines, which in Peru vary by geographic region. As can
be seen, the statistics remained fairly stable over time, but in every survey
year the rates for indigenous poverty and extreme indigenous poverty were
significantly higher than those for the non-indigenous population.
During the period in question the greatest difference between indigenous
and non-indigenous people lay in extreme poverty. On average the propor-
tion of indigenous households that were poor was about 50 per cent larger
than the proportion of non-indigenous households that were poor, but the
proportion of indigenous households that were extremely poor was up to
three times that of non-indigenous households.

Trends in indigenous and non-indigenous

poverty rates: is the gap closing?
To examine the trends in indigenous and non-indigenous poverty more
closely and to determine whether the gap between the two is narrowing, we
present data from the three ENNIV surveys that are strictly comparable –
those conducted in 1994, 1997 and 2000. The results indicate that the gap
between indigenous and non-indigenous poverty is slowly closing, but not
because indigenous poverty is diminishing faster than non-indigenous
poverty. Rather it is because non-indigenous poverty is growing faster than
indigenous poverty.
Human_07.qxd 25/10/05 6:18 PM Page 202

202 Peru

In the case of extreme poverty the trend is towards an overall reduction in

the incidence of extreme poverty and a smaller gap between the number of
indigenous and non-indigenous households living in extreme poverty. As
Figures 7.1 and 7.2 show, during the 1990s extreme poverty among indige-
nous people decreased while non-indigenous extreme poverty remained
more or less constant.
The number of poor indigenous households declined between 1994 and
1997 by 2.5 per cent – this can be largely explained by a 15 per cent reduc-
tion in extreme poverty among indigenous households. Between 1997 and
2000, although total indigenous poverty remained fairly constant, the per-
centage of indigenous households that were extremely poor continued to
fall, although at a lower rate than between 1994 and 1997 (9.7 per cent). By
contrast, between 1994 and 1997, the poverty rate for non-indigenous
households fell more quickly than that for indigenous households. While
the indigenous household poverty headcount remained relatively constant
between 1997 and 2000, the non-indigenous general and extreme poverty
headcounts grew.
The reduction in extreme poverty, considered in light of the upswing in
general poverty in 2001, could perhaps be explained by the implementation
of a number of social policies during the 1990s, including the establishment
of the National Fund for Compensation and Social Development (Fondo
Nacional de Compensación y Desarrollo Social, or Foncodes), Caminos Rurales (a
rural roads programme), public nutrition programmes, agricultural develop-
ment programmes and public infrastructure development programmes that
focused on the poorer regions.2 It is most likely that these policies reached
more indigenous households than non-indigenous ones since most indige-
nous people reside in the poorer rural regions.

Indicators of poverty and differences by geographical area

As noted in the previous section, 63 per cent of indigenous households are
poor and nearly half are extremely poor. As Tables 7.4 and 7.5 show, the
poverty gap index and the severity of poverty are greater for indigenous
households than for non-indigenous ones in all three geographic domains.
Rural indigenous households are the poorest of all.
It is clear that neither poor people nor indigenous people have the same
living conditions in all parts of Peru, which has three geographic domains
with different socioeconomic characteristics. The wealthiest quintile of rural
residents have similar incomes to the poorest quintile of Lima residents.
Thus lower levels of consumption and inferior access to public services pre-
vail in rural areas, while Lima residents have higher incomes and more
extensive access to services. As Table 7.6 shows, the incomes of indigenous
households are lower than those of non-indigenous households in all geo-
graphic domains but Lima, where the incomes of poor and extremely poor
indigenous households are higher than those of their non-indigenous
Human_07.qxd 25/10/05 6:18 PM Page 203

203

Figure 7.1 Poverty trends, Peru, 1994–2000

70 y = 0.25x + 61.667
R2 = 0.1242
60
Percentage of households

50

40
y = 1.45x + 36.933
30 R2 = 0.1921

20

10

0
1994 1997 2000

Indigenous poverty Non-indigenous poverty

Lineal, indigenous poverty Lineal, non-indigenous poverty

Source: ENNIV, 1994, 1997, 2000.

Figure 7.2 Extreme poverty trends, Peru, 1994–2000

35
y = –3.2x + 31.567
Percentage of households

30 R2 = 0.9843
25

20

15

10
y = –0.7x + 11.067
5
R2 = 0.3648
0
1994 1997 2000

Indigenous extreme poverty

Non-indigenous extreme poverty
Lineal, indigenous extreme poverty
Lineal, non-indigenous extreme poverty

Source: ENNIV, 1994, 1997, 2000.

Human_07.qxd 25/10/05 6:18 PM Page 204

204 Peru

Table 7.4 Poverty gap and FGT index, Peru, 2001

Indigenous Non-indigenous All

FGT P1 0.262 0.132 0.174

FGT P2 0.141 0.062 0.087

Source: National Household Survey, 2001.

Table 7.5 Poverty headcount by geographic domain,

Peru, 2001

Indigenous Non-indigenous All

All Peru 0.631 0.396 0.471

Lima 0.372 0.222 0.255
Other urban 0.523 0.380 0.414
Rural 0.786 0.658 0.722

Source: National Household Survey, 2001.

Table 7.6 Mean per capita income, Peru, 2001 (US dollars)

Total population Not poor Moderately poor Extremely poor

Non- Non- Non- Non-

Indigenous indigenous Indigenous indigenous Indigenous indigenous Indigenous indigenous

All Peru 705 1 234 1 324 1 899 629 635 245 295
Lima 1 290 1 989 1 652 2 489 841 737 411 306
Other urban 854 1 104 1 297 1 552 666 677 339 396
Rural 372 492 856 977 443 450 222 241

Source: National Household Survey, 2001.

counterparts. This might reflect the capacity of rural indigenous peoples to

recognize the opportunities to be had by migrating to the city to work in
production or the informal sector (Adams and Golte, 1990; Adams and
Valdivia, 1990; Huber, 1997). In all three geographic domains the mean per
capita income of non-poor indigenous people is markedly lower than that of
non-poor non-indigenous people.

Subjective poverty
The 2001 National Household Survey included questions that sought to
capture households’ perceptions about their living standards. The results,
analyzed by Herrera (2002), show that nearly 70 per cent of respondents felt
Human_07.qxd 25/10/05 6:18 PM Page 205

Carolina Trivelli 205

Table 7.7 Responses to the question of whether, given the

income of their household, the respondents felt that they
lived well, fairly well or poorly, Peru, 2001 (per cent)

Well Fairly well Poorly

Non-indigenous 8.5 69.2 22.3

Indigenous 9.2 67.5 23.2
All 8.7 68.6 22.6

Source: National Household Survey, 2001.

that they lived fairly well given their present income (Table 7.7). Only 22 per
cent of non-indigenous and 23 per cent of indigenous peoples considered
themselves to live poorly given their income. It is interesting to note that
indigenous and non-indigenous households’ perceptions did not differ sig-
nificantly despite the evident differences in their economic circumstances.
One drawback of the question was that it elicited sentiments of well-being
given household income, so some respondents may have interpreted it as
requiring a comparison with individuals with similar incomes, rather than
all individuals.
Indigenous households felt that they needed more resources to escape
poverty than did non-indigenous households. The former considered that
they required, on average, a 35 per cent increase in monthly income in order
not to be poor, while the latter thought that an additional 15 per cent would
be sufficient. Rural households quoted the largest figures, especially indigenous
households. These findings are consistent with the existence of differences
between geographic domains and between indigenous and non-indigenous
people.

Inequality

Inequality between indigenous and non-indigenous peoples is frequently

cited when discussing how social exclusion can harm indigenous people
(Del Álamo, 2003). It seems that there is less income inequality within the
indigenous population than within the non-indigenous population.
Table 7.8 shows the distribution of indigenous people across consumption
deciles. As could be expected, indigenous people are mainly concentrated in
the lower deciles. Over 55 per cent of those in the bottom decile are indige-
nous; only 10 per cent are present in the top decile. However the latter figure
is more encouraging than that offered by MacIsaac (1994), who calculates
that only 2 per cent of those in the top decile in 1991 were indigenous.
Despite this and other slight improvements, 45 per cent of indigenous peoples
remain in the three lowest deciles.
Human_07.qxd 25/10/05 6:18 PM Page 206

206 Peru

Table 7.8 Distribution of indigenous peoples, by consumption decile, Peru, 2001

Percentage Indigenous Percentage Percentage

Mean in in decile/ in in non-
consumption indigenous indigenous in indigenous indigenous
Decile (US$) households population households households

1 173.1 19.3 0.601 55.8 44.2

2 291.7 14.1 0.441 44.9 55.1
3 393.2 12.2 0.382 37.5 62.5
4 503.5 11.3 0.352 36.0 64.0
5 618.5 10.3 0.320 32.1 67.9
6 759.7 8.8 0.274 28.0 72.0
7 939.4 8.5 0.264 26.4 73.6
8 1 173.7 7.3 0.228 24.3 75.7
9 1 568.2 5.3 0.167 19.1 80.9
10 3 286.3 2.9 0.090 10.2 89.8

Source: National Household Survey, 2001.

Table 7.9 Decomposition of total inequality according to

total income distribution, Peru, 2001 (index of generalized
entropy, GE(2))

GE(2) Per cent

Inequality among groups 0.875 86

Inequality between groups 0.143 14
Total income inequality 1.018 100

Source: Naional Household Survey 2001.

Inequality in income nationally can be mainly explained by inequality

within the ethnic groups. A decomposition of generalized entropy inequal-
ity measures shows that about 86 per cent of national income inequality is
due to inequality within each group and just 14 per cent to inequality
between the groups (Table 7.9).

Determinants of poverty

To analyze the relationship between being indigenous and being poor we

have conducted several logit regressions. In each of these the dependent
variable takes the value of one if the household is poor and zero otherwise.
The variables considered are the composition of the household, characteristics
of the household head (age, gender, education, type of employment, employ-
ment sector and health), the educational levels of the household head’s
spouse and the household’s most educated person, social capital (measured
Human_07.qxd 25/10/05 6:18 PM Page 207

Carolina Trivelli 207

as a binomial indicator of whether a person belongs to a non-family network

or association) and formal employment (defined as stable employment that
provides health insurance and/or compensation for length of service).
As Table 7.10 shows, the variables with the largest effect on poverty are the
size and composition of the household (more children implies a greater prob-
ability of poverty), the household head’s occupation (formal sector work
reduces the probability of living in poverty by 16 per cent), the geographic
area of residence, work in agriculture and indigenous identity. The household
head’s gender is not significant in this regression.
Living in Lima reduces the probability of living in poverty by 16 per cent.
Indigenous identity is also quite important: controlling for other factors,
indigenous households are nearly 11 per cent more likely to be poor than

Table 7.10 Determinants of household poverty, Peru, 2001

Marginal
Coefficient Mean t effect

Area (other urban excluded)

Lima 0.6535* 0.28 8.10 0.1615
Rural 0.0797 0.35 0.72 0.0199
Indigenous (ind_1) 0.4570* 0.32 6.66 0.1134
Number of household residents
0–6 years 0.8066* 0.73 19.68 0.2016
7–24 years 0.4304* 1.74 19.19 0.1076
25–59 years 0.1423* 1.70 3.62 0.0356
60 years 0.1687* 0.40 2.46 0.0422
Age 0.0146 47.80 1.20 0.0036
Age squared 0.0000 25.27 0.16 0.0000
Male 0.0564 0.80 0.73 0.0141
Years of schooling, household head 0.0546* 7.12 6.51 0.0136
Years of schooling, household head’s spouse 0.0438* 6.25 6.15 0.011
Maximum years of education, household 0.1299* 9.73 12.41 0.0325
Formal sector employment 0.6710* 0.15 7.21 0.1646
Social capital and organization 0.0762 0.26 1.15 0.0191
Sector
Manufacturing 0.2914* 0.20 3.91 0.0727
Agriculture and livestock 0.5732* 0.34 6.17 0.1418
Good health 0.0906 0.61 1.51 0.0226
Constant 1.0388* 3.33
Mean of dependent variable 0.47
F(21, 2778) 98 050
Prob  F 0.000
N 16 373

Note: * Significant at the 99 per cent level.

Source: National Household Survey, 2001.
Human_07.qxd 25/10/05 6:18 PM Page 208

208 Peru

Table 7.11 Marginal effect of indigenous identity on the probability of a household

being poor, by definition and geographic domain, Peru, 2001

Mother tongue Mother tongue or self-ID Frequently used indigenous

language

Lima 0.0373 0.0239 0.0161

(1.48) (1.14) (0.57)
Other urban 0.0656* 0.0660* 0.1235*
(2.88) (3.21) (4.33)
Rural 0.1059* 0.0987* 0.1209*
(6.17) (5.60) (6.99)
National 0.1134* 0.0975* 0.1518*
(6.66) (6.18) (8.06)

Notes: * Significant at the 99 per cent level; t-statistics in parenthesis.

Source: National Household Survey 2001.

non-indigenous households. The calculated probability of living in poverty,

however, depends on which definition of indigenous is used. Three defining
characteristics were used in the regressions reported here: mother tongue,
mother tongue or self-identification, and frequent use of an indigenous
language. Using self-identification or mother tongue decreases the marginal
effect of being indigenous from 11 per cent to 10 per cent while frequent use
of an indigenous language increases the marginal effect to 15 per cent.
Table 7.11 shows the marginal effects of being indigenous as determinants
of poverty by region. In general the mother tongue definition produces the
most severe estimates of the relationship between being indigenous and
being poor. It is notable that in metropolitan Lima the indigenous variable is
not significant; that is, in Lima, being indigenous regardless of the definition
used, does not increase the probability of being poor.
The effect of education is significant in all three geographic domains. The
educational level of the household member with the most years of education
has the largest effect on poverty (over 3.2 per cent). The household head’s
educational level has a marginal effect of 3.5 per cent, although having an
educated spouse and including the educational level of the most educated
member of the household reduces the marginal effect to 1.3 per cent.
Sector of employment is another important variable. For example if a
household is dependent on agricultural income its probability of being poor
increases by about 14 per cent. By contrast dependence on manufacturing
income decreases the probability by about 7 per cent. This result is robust
for urban and rural areas, though not for Lima. In Lima, where agricultural
employment is uncommon, working in the manufacturing sector has no
statistically significant effect on income.
These results again highlight regional differences, since the areas where
there is greatest dependence on agricultural income, such as the Andes, are
Human_07.qxd 25/10/05 6:18 PM Page 209

Carolina Trivelli 209

exactly the areas where the natural resources required for agricultural cultiva-
tion are limited. The inhabitants of rural areas who work in non-agricultural
activities tend to have higher incomes than their neighbours who work in
farming. It would be interesting to control for the type of land that house-
holds own and for local climate, but such information is not available.

Income and employment

Of the total population aged 13 and over, 66 per cent are engaged in some
form of work. Of that group, 17 per cent are unpaid and 83 per cent are paid.
Among paid workers, 69 per cent are non-indigenous and 31 per cent are
indigenous. On average, wages from the principal employment activity by
household members account for 60 per cent of household income, in both
indigenous and non-indigenous households. Remittances are the second most
important source of income, accounting for 9.4 per cent of the income of non-
indigenous households and 7.3 per cent of that of indigenous households.
Secondary sources of employment account for 3.8 per cent of the income of
non-indigenous households and 5 per cent of that of indigenous households.
Both indigenous and non-indigenous people work mainly in the informal
sector. All definitions of the informal sector are imprecise, but according to
our definition 80 per cent of employed Peruvians work in the informal
sector.3 It is uncommon to have steady work with a single employer, and
working with a single employer significantly affects the probability of a
household being poor. As Table 7.12 shows, mean incomes in the informal
sector are substantially lower than those in the formal sector. On average

Table 7.12 Labour force characteristics, Peru, 2001

Indigenous Non-indigenous Total population

Male Female Male Female Male Female

Mean income of labour

force (US$/yr)
Formal 1 090 574 1 825 1 143 1 574 928
Informal 2 955 2 245 4 609 3 440 1 558 905
All 1 254 594 2 248 1 371 1 919 1 090
Status of employed
individuals (%)
Employees 6.6 1.9 6.9 2.5 6.8 2.3
Self-employed 41.3 33.2 33.9 35.2 36.5 34.5
Employers 10.8 8.4 21.3 22.4 17.8 17.4
Labourers 24.5 7.9 27.5 6.9 26.5 7.3
Unpaid family workers 15.8 43.4 9.6 23.7 11.7 30.8
Household business 0.3 4.7 0.3 8.8 0.3 7.3
Other 0.4 0.4 0.4 0.5 0.4 0.5

Source: National Household Survey, 2001.

Human_07.qxd 25/10/05 6:18 PM Page 210

210 Peru

Table 7.13 Mean incomes, Peru, 2001 (US$)

Indigenous Non-indigenous Total population

Lima
Male 2 399 3 762 3 404
Female 1 317 2 282 2 053
All 1 946 3 092 2 804
Other urban
Male 1 600 2 159 2 023
Female 949 1 228 1 153
All 1 298 1 761 1 643
Rural
Male 614 864 748
Female 179 398 278
All 410 686 548

Source: National Household Survey, 2001.

indigenous peoples earn only half the amount earned by non-indigenous

people (Table 7.13). However it is worth noting that most indigenous peo-
ples live in rural areas, where incomes (and prices) are significantly lower
than in urban areas.
While indigenous peoples receive less pay for formal sector work than
non-indigenous people, the opposite applies in the informal sector. In both
groups women earn less than men, except in the formal sector, where non-
indigenous women on average earn more than indigenous men.
Gender also has an effect on earnings. About 43 per cent of women, espe-
cially indigenous women, work without pay in a family enterprise. When
women are paid, on average they earn only 60 per cent of what men earn.
Other variables that have a significant impact on earnings are education,
work experience, region and indigenous identity (Table 7.14).

Income inequality

The income gap between indigenous and non-indigenous people amounts

to 49 per cent of non-indigenous earnings; that is, on average the members
of non-indigenous households earn almost twice as much as the members of
indigenous households. A decomposition of that gap (Table 7.15) shows that
49 per cent of the income gap is due to differences between indigenous and
non-indigenous peoples’ endowments; the rest is due to differences between
the wages received by the two groups. This result is very similar to that
obtained by MacIsaac (1994), who finds that about half of the earnings gap
is explained by differences in returns from endowments.
Table 7.16 presents the results obtained from four methods of wage
decomposition. While income inequality may be principally attributed to
Human_07.qxd 25/10/05 6:18 PM Page 211

211

Table 7.14 Determinants of earnings, all employed individuals,

Peru, 2001

Coefficient Mean

Male 0.556*** 0.57

Years of schooling 0.103*** 7.19
Work experience 0.054*** 25.2
Work experience squared 0.001*** 947
Log (hours worked) 0.619*** 3.63
Married (incl. common law) 0.052* 0.59
Work
Formal 0.439** 0.15
Informal 0.076* 0.82
Indigenous identity (ind_1) 0.374** 0.34
Constant 2.732*** 1.00
N 26 033
R2 0.289

Notes: * Significant at the 90 per cent level; ** significant at the 95 per cent
level; *** significant at the 99 per cent level.
Source: National Household Survey, 2001.

Table 7.15 Contribution of each variable to the earnings differential, by endowments

and indigenous pay structure, Peru, 2001

Contribution as a percentage
Decomposition of total differential

Endowments Pay structure Endowments Pay structure

Variable bn(Xn – Xi) Xi(bn – bi)

Male 0.017 0.024 2.91 4.10
School 0.187 0.053 31.63 8.89
Work experience 0.193 0.033 32.53 5.52
Work experience squared 0.199 0.015 33.57 2.58
Log of hours 0.015 0.103 2.61 17.47
Formal 0.023 0.023 3.86 3.94
Informal 0.006 0.101 1.02 17.05
Married squared 0.002 0.150 0.39 25.34
Number of persons in
household 0.000 0.405 0.05 68.50
Migrant 0.028 0.193 4.65 32.69
Under age 15 0.019 0.075 3.16 12.65
Land owner 0.022 0.033 3.71 5.62
Constant 0.000 0.847 0.00 143.10
Total 0.257 0.339 43.11 56.91

Continued
Human_07.qxd 25/10/05 6:18 PM Page 212

212 Peru

Table 7.15 Continued

Decomposition of non-indigenous salaries

Amount attributed to
Overall
differential Endowments Pay structure

Salary advantage 218.0 94.0 124.0

As a percentage of
indigenous income 40.5 17.5 23.1
As a percentage of the
total differential – 43.1 56.9

Source: National Household Survey, 2001.

Table 7.16 Wage inequality, all employed individuals, Peru, 2001 (Gap  (US$)
217.52)

Portion of wage inequality

attributable to
differences in

Endowments Pay structure

Amount of total gap (US$)

Evaluated at indigenous means 93.75 123.76
Evaluated at non-indigenous means 107.19 110.33
Cotton 103.13 114.39
Oaxaca–Ransom 106.54 110.98
As a percentage of the total gap
Evaluated at indigenous means 43.10 56.90
Evaluated at non-indigenous means 49.28 50.72
Cotton 47.41 52.59
Oaxaca–Ransom 48.98 51.02

Source: National Household Survey, 2001.

differences between the endowments of indigenous and non-indigenous

people, a good deal is due to differences in the wage structure of indigenous
households – this is most clearly demonstrated by the results of the first and
third methods.
The Oaxaca–Ransom method was used to construct Figure 7.3, which
shows that even if the endowments of indigenous people (both men and
women) rose to match those of non-indigenous people, the income of the
latter would still be higher than that of indigenous peoples.
Using alternative methods of defining indigenous peoples does not signif-
icantly change the results, although one notable change takes place with the
Human_07.qxd 25/10/05 6:18 PM Page 213

Carolina Trivelli 213

Figure 7.3 Earnings differentials between indigenous and non-indigenous peoples,

Peru, 2001 (US dollars)

500.0
450.0
400.0
Amount due to
350.0 discrimination

300.0 Additional
income after
250.0 equalizing
200.0 endowments

150.0
100.0
50.0
0.0
Non-indigenous Indigenous
income income

Source: National Household Survey, 2001.

fourth method when self-identification is used; that is, wage structure

becomes more important in explaining income differences. Defining an
indigenous person as a member of a household where the household head
frequently speaks an indigenous language produces similar results for all
four methods, and indicates that the income gap is due to differences
between the endowments of indigenous and non-indigenous people.

Returns from schooling

Indigenous households have similar returns from schooling to those for

non-indigenous households: 10.8 per cent and 10.6 per cent respectively
(Table 7.17). Indigenous men enjoy markedly higher returns from schooling
than indigenous women (13.5 per cent and 9.9 per cent respectively), but
this gender difference disappears among the non-indigenous (11.9 per cent
for men and 12 per cent for women). Here again, differences based on
indigenous identity combine with differences based on gender. The highest
returns from schooling are obtained by indigenous men, followed by non-
indigenous women, non-indigenous men and indigenous women.
The returns from schooling also vary according to geographic domain
(Table 7.18). The greatest returns are enjoyed in rural areas, where the return
for indigenous peoples is 8.2 per cent and that for non-indigenous house-
holds is 7.5 per cent.4 These results are influenced by the low educational
achievement in rural areas. Controlling for gender again shows that non-
indigenous women have the highest returns from schooling.
Human_07.qxd 25/10/05 6:18 PM Page 214

214 Peru

Table 7.17 Returns from schooling, Peru, 2001

Mean years of Returns from

schooling schooling (%)

Member of indigenous household 6.6 10.8

Member of non-indigenous household 8.0 10.6
Total 7.3 10.7
Men 6.8 12.5
Women 7.9 11.5
Indigenous men 5.4 13.5
Indigenous women 6.4 10.0
Non-indigenous men 7.4 11.9
Non-indigenous women 8.8 12.1

Source: National Household Survey, 2001.

Table 7.18 Returns from schooling, by geographic domain, Peru, 2001

Mean years Returns from

of schooling schooling (%)

Metropolitan Lima
Indigenous men 7.6 5.2
Indigenous women 8.8 2.4
Non-indigenous men 9.5 7.0
Non-indigenous women 10.7 8.1
Other urban areas
Indigenous men 6.6 6.3
Indigenous women 7.9 7.6
Non-indigenous men 8.0 6.9
Non-indigenous women 9.3 9.3
Rural areas
Indigenous men 3.9 10.5
Indigenous women 4.7 6.3
Non-indigenous men 4.4 7.7
Non-indigenous women 5.4 12.2

Source: National Household Survey, 2001.

The returns from schooling and earnings results point to an area in which
policy interventions have the potential to reduce the inequality between
indigenous and non-indigenous people and between men and women.
While there is nearly full enrolment in primary school the quality of the
education provided requires considerable improvement, as evidenced by
poor exam results.
Human_07.qxd 25/10/05 6:18 PM Page 215

Carolina Trivelli 215

Education

The educational achievement of indigenous peoples is lower than that

of non-indigenous people. On average, in 2001 indigenous adults had 6.4
years of schooling and non-indigenous adults had 8.7 years (Table 7.19).
Women’s educational achievement was lower than men’s in both groups.
Strikingly, female indigenous household heads had 4.6 years fewer schooling
than their non-indigenous counterparts.
The results vary according to the method used to define indigenous. For
example individuals in households where the head identifies him- or herself
as indigenous on average, have one more year of schooling than individuals
in households where the head has an indigenous mother tongue.
As Figure 7.4 shows, primary school enrolment has increased considerably
since 1950 for both indigenous and non-indigenous people. Moreover by

Table 7.19 Mean years of schooling, Peru, 2001

Indigenous Non-indigenous

Men Women All Men Women All

Population aged 15  7.6 5.6 6.4 9.2 8.3 8.7

Total 5.9 4.6 5.2 7.2 6.7 6.9
Household heads 6.3 2.7 5.6 8.7 7.3 8.4
Population aged 7–14 3.6 3.5 3.5 3.8 3.8 3.8

Source: National Household Survey, 2001.

Figure 7.4 Primary school enrolment, Peru, 1950–82 (per cent)

100 y = 0.1957x + 91.474

95
90
85 y = 0.6873x + 77.951

80

75

70
1950 1954 1958 1962 1966 1970 1974 1978 1982

Indigenous Non-indigenous
Lineal, indigenous Lineal, non-indigenous

Source: National Household Survey, 2001.

Human_07.qxd 25/10/05 6:18 PM Page 216

216 Peru

1980, the enrolment gap between indigenous and non-indigenous people

had more or less disappeared, thanks to the expansion of primary education
throughout Peru. However, many children still fail to complete primary
school. As noted earlier, another serious problem is the poor quality of the
education provided.
Educational provision in the 1950s was significantly greater for males than
for females in both the indigenous and non-indigenous populations.
Narrowing the gap has been especially important in reducing human capital
differences between men and women, and between indigenous women and
all other Peruvians.
The mean years of schooling among men more or less doubled between
the pre-1930 cohort (three years for indigenous men and five years for non-
indigenous men) and the 1960s cohort (seven and nine years respectively),
but they nearly tripled for women. Indigenous women born before 1930 on
average received 0.7 years of schooling and non-indigenous women received
3.6 years. In contrast women born in the 1960s received 5.8 years of school-
ing if they were indigenous and 9.0 years if they were non-indigenous.
However there is still much to be done to ensure that girls complete their
schooling, especially in rural areas.

Health

While there is only limited data on the use of health services in Peru, it
appears that in general there is little difference between the self-diagnosed
health status of indigenous and non-indigenous people. However the type of
treatment received in rural and urban areas during illness does differ. Rural
people predominantly use home remedies rather than seek treatment in
health centres, which in rural areas are scarce and can take a long time to
reach. Fifty-three per cent of rural indigenous and 44 per cent of non-indige-
nous people prefer home remedies, compared with 39 per cent of indigenous
and 24 per cent of non-indigenous urban residents. On average both
indigenous and non-indigenous people who receive hospital treatment
spend $87. For medical consultations non-indigenous people spend about
25 per cent more than indigenous peoples.
Possession of health insurance is extremely low for both groups, and
55 per cent of Peruvians have no health insurance at all (Table 7.20). Nearly
42 per cent have public health insurance. Just 1.1 per cent and 2.8 per cent
of indigenous and non-indigenous people, respectively, have private health
insurance.

Access to services and social protection

As Tables 7.21 and 7.22 show, indigenous households have less access
than non-indegenous households to public and private services and social
Human_07.qxd 25/10/05 6:18 PM Page 217

217

Table 7.20 Possession of health insurance, Peru, 2001 (per cent)

Indigenous Non-indigenous All

Public insurance 39.7 42.4 41.6

Private insurance 1.1 2.8 2.2
Public and private insurance 0.3 1.4 1.0
No insurance 58.9 53.4 55.1

Source: National Household Survey, 2001.

Table 7.21 Access to public and private services, Peru, 2001 (per cent)

Indigenous Non-indigenous All Rural Urban

Potable water 52.5 66.1 61.8 35.4 75.9

Electricity 60.9 74.3 70.0 27.5 92.7
Telephone 10.5 26.7 21.5 0.3 32.8
Sanitation services
Private 29.6 53.4 45.8 4.1 68.0
Shared 2.9 2.3 2.5 0.5 3.5
Pit 8.6 7.6 7.9 11.3 6.1
Latrine 22.3 19.7 20.5 36.8 11.9
None 36.6 17.0 23.3 47.3 10.4

Source: National Household Survey, 2001.

Table 7.22 Social protection, by consumption quintile, Peru, 2001 (percentage of

households in each quintile that receive each service)

Consumption quintile
Total
1 2 3 4 5 population

Glass of milk 47.2 35.6 28.2 20.4 7.1 26.3

Indigenous 46.6 34.5 30.1 22.8 11.3 32.7
Non-indigenous 48.0 36.2 27.3 19.5 6.4 23.2
School breakfast 36.3 20.2 10.4 4.5 1.6 13.4
Indigenous 46.2 28.1 14.9 6.4 3.2 24.4
Non-indigenous 24.7 14.9 8.3 3.8 1.3 8.2
School insurance 32.3 33.2 29.3 22.1 8.5 24.1
Indigenous 30.0 27.5 26.0 21.7 9.5 25.0
Non-indigenous 35.0 37.0 30.8 22.3 8.3 23.7
Child vaccination 25.6 21.3 20.3 15.6 6.8 17.2
Indigenous 23.7 18.2 18.3 13.0 6.8 17.7
Non-indigenous 27.7 23.4 21.3 16.5 6.8 17.0

Source: National Household Survey, 2001.

Note: School insurance protects students in case of accidents and pays school tuition if the head of
household dies or is disabled.
Human_07.qxd 25/10/05 6:18 PM Page 218

218 Peru

protection programmes. This is mainly due to the fact that indigenous

peoples predominantly live in rural areas, where public services and
programmes are limited.
Electricity is available in most parts of Peru, and 61 per cent of indigenous
and 74 per cent of non-indigenous households now have an electricity sup-
ply. While 66.1 per cent of non-indigenous households have drinking water
and 53 per cent have sewage facilities, the figures for indigenous households
are 53 per cent and 30 per cent respectively. Access to a telephone is low for
both groups. In addition to the differences between ethnic groups there are
large differences between rural and urban areas.
The most important social protection programmes cover a substantial
proportion of poor indigenous peoples, although the aggregate number of
non-indigenous beneficiaries is greater. The programme with greatest cover-
age is Vaso de leche (Glass of milk), under which milk or a milk substitute is
provided to pregnant women and children by the district municipalities.
This is the only decentralized social programme in Peru. The school
breakfast programme (desayuno escolar) delivers food to children who attend
public schools in poor areas. Each of these programmes serves nearly
eight million Peruvians. Unfortunately studies of the effect of the pro-
grammes are not encouraging (for the desayuno escolar see Pollit et al., 1996,
and Pollit and Cueto, 2002; for vaso de leche see Alcázar et al., 2003, and
Gajate and Inurritegui, 2003).
With the exception of the school breakfast programme, on average indige-
nous peoples have slightly less access to social provision programmes than
non-indigenous people (Table 7.22). The school breakfast programme very
effectively reaches indigenous peoples in all consumption quintiles.

Conclusions

Between 25 per cent and 48 per cent of Peruvian households can be consid-
ered indigenous. The lower figure applies to households in which the house-
hold head and/or the head’s spouse speaks an indigenous language
(Quechua, Aymara or a native tongue of the Amazon region) more
frequently than Spanish. The highest figure applies to households in which
the parents or grandparents of the household head and/or the head’s spouse
have an indigenous mother tongue. More households that are classified as
indigenous according to self-identification tend to be more urban than those
which are classified according to use of an indigenous language.
Significant income differences exist between indigenous and non-indigenous
households. Indigenous households have a higher incidence of poverty and
extreme poverty than non-indigenous households. About 64 per cent of
indigenous households were poor in 2001, compared with 42 per cent of non-
indigenous households. Indigenous households are underrepresented in the
richest strata and have inferior access to public and private goods and services.
Human_07.qxd 25/10/05 6:18 PM Page 219

Carolina Trivelli 219

The analysis in this chapter shows that it is essential to study the situation of
indigenous and non-indigenous households according to area of residence,
since national aggregates conceal marked differences between urban and
rural areas, and between Lima and other urban areas.
Extreme poverty reduced slightly between 1994 and 2000, especially
among indigenous peoples. While the poverty gap between indigenous and
non-indigenous households narrowed slightly, this is largely explained
by an increase in the poverty rate for non-indigenous households, rather
than a reduction in poverty among indigenous households. There is less
inequality among indigenous households than among non-indigenous
ones. The richest 10 per cent of indigenous households account for 13 per
cent of the income of the indigenous population, while the richest 10 per
cent of non-indigenous households account for 40 per cent of the income of
non-indigenous households.
Ignoring the differences between geographic areas and between different
definitions of indigenous can produce differing results. For example the
probability of a Peruvian household being poor increases by 10 per cent if
the household is considered indigenous because it uses an indigenous
mother-tongue or self-identifies as indigenous; if we carry out the same exer-
cise but define indigenous households as those in which the household
head’s most frequently used language is an indigenous one, the probability
of the household being poor rises to 15 per cent. On the other hand if we
define indigenous households as those in which the household head identi-
fies him- or herself as indigenous, that percentage drops. Furthermore if we
restrict the region of analysis to Lima we find that the probability of being
poor is similar for indigenous and non-indigenous households; that is, the
effect of being indigenous disappears.
During the past 50 years or so the education gap between indigenous and
non-indigenous people has diminished, and today nearly all Peruvians have
access to education. The greatest improvement has been in women’s access
to education, particularly indigenous women.
Indigenous people who are not classified as poor have a significantly lower
income from labour than their non-indigenous counterparts, mainly because
of their lower human capital endowments and other background differences,
but also because of discrimination. Yet among moderately poor and extremely
poor people the income gap between indigenous and non-indigenous people
is small, and in Lima poor indigenous people (except those who are monolin-
gual) on average receive higher wages than poor non-indigenous people.
Gender is also an important factor in income differentials. Women earn
less than men, be they indigenous or non-indigenous. The earnings differ-
ence between indigenous women and non-indigenous women is smaller
than that between two groups of men.
The returns from schooling in the population as a whole vary little between
indigenous and non-indigenous people (10.5 per cent and 11.4 per cent
Human_07.qxd 25/10/05 6:18 PM Page 220

220 Peru

respectively), although they do vary by geographic area and gender. The

highest returns from schooling are enjoyed in rural areas, where indigenous
people have the best return: 8.2 per cent compared with 7.5 per cent for non-
indigenous people. Overall the highest return goes to indigenous men,
followed by non-indigenous women, non-indigenous men and indigenous
women.
Indigenous households have inferior access to public and private services,
although this is partly due to the fact that indigenous peoples are mainly
concentrated in rural areas, where there is less service provision in general.
Indigenous peoples benefit similarly to or a little less than non-indigenous
people from social protection programmes. However the school breakfast
programme reaches a greater proportion of indigenous than non-indigenous
children across all consumption quintiles.
There is a correlation between being indigenous and working in the informal
sector, particularly in urban areas and among the children of indigenous
peoples who were born in urban areas. It would be useful to study the correla-
tion between working in the informal sector and being indigenous in the case
of distinct indigenous groups, migrants and the children of migrant workers. It
would also be useful to study the attributes of non-poor indigenous people.
Clearly, better education and rural development programmes would have a
positive impact on indigenous people’s living conditions. But this would not
be sufficient, as there is a need to promote the participation of indigenous
peoples in decision making, from which they have historically been absent.

Notes
1. This chapter has been prepared with the assistance of Johanna Yancari. It has also
benefited from the support of León Rivera and Ramón Díaz. Any errors and omis-
sions, however, are the author’s responsibility. All tables and figures based on
household surveys, except where otherwise noted, are the product of calculations
by the Instituto de Estudios Peruanos (IEP). Throughout, ‘Lima’ refers to the Lima
Metropolitan area. Figures in dollars are based on an exchange rate of 3.45 soles
per dollar. ‘Married’ includes individuals in civil unions.
2. Of these programmes, only the second phase of Caminos Rurales has had an impact
evaluation (Escobal and Ponce, 2002). See Alcázar and Wachtenheim (2001) and
Paxson and Schady (2002) for discussions of Foncodes.
3. Here informal sector employment is defined as working for a firm with fewer
than ten employees, work without work insurance, work without compensation
for length of service, or work in an independent business without a unified contri-
bution registry.
4. In metropolitan Lima the returns from education are 2.6 per cent for indigenous
peoples and 6.4 per cent for non-indigenous peoples. In all other urban areas the
returns are 4.9 per cent for indigenous peoples and 6.3 per cent for non-indigenous
peoples.
Human_08.qxd 25/10/05 6:18 PM Page 221

8
Key Messages and an Agenda
for Action
Gillette Hall and Harry Anthony Patrinos

Indigenous peoples make up perhaps the largest disadvantaged group in

Latin America.1 It is estimated that there are 28–34 million indigenous peo-
ples in the region, or roughly 10 per cent of the total population.2 The failure
to implement policies that direct sufficient resources and opportunities to
this group who are among the poorest of the poor goes some way towards
explaining the slow rate of poverty reduction in the region. Even good poli-
cies have not benefited all of the poor equally. Some historically excluded
groups such as indigenous peoples have yet to benefit from the many poverty
reduction initiatives that have been implemented in the region over the past
decade, either because the programmes have failed to reach them, are of poor
quality or inadequately address the composite causes of their poverty.
This book updates the findings presented by George Psacharopoulos and
Harry Patrinos, in their 1994 book, which documented for the first time the
severe poverty and low human capital of indigenous peoples. It considers how
conditions have changed since the early 1990s in the five Latin American
countries with the largest indigenous populations: Bolivia, Ecuador,
Guatemala, Mexico and Peru. This concluding chapter draws together the
findings from the five country studies to examine poverty trends among
indigenous peoples, the main determinants of these trends and how
human capital indicators have changed over time for both indigenous and
non-indigenous groups. It closes by proposing an agenda for human devel-
opment policy based on the findings in this book.

Poverty reduction

Little progress was made in reducing poverty among indigenous peoples

during the Indigenous Peoples’ Decade (1994–2004). In four of the five
countries studied, virtually no reduction occurred in the proportion of
indigenous peoples living in poverty during the years for which data are
available (Bolivia 1997–2002, Ecuador 1994–2003, Mexico 1992–2002, Peru
1994–2000) (Table 8.1), although in two of these countries (Mexico and

221
Human_08.qxd 25/10/05 6:18 PM Page 222

222 Key Messages and an Agenda for Action

Table 8.1 Poverty rate changes in Latin America percentage change

in the poverty rate between the earliest and latest survey years

Non-indigenous Indigenous

Bolivia (1997–2002) 8 0.1

Ecuador (1994–2003)  14 0.1
Guatemala (1989–2000) 25 15
Mexico (1992–2002) 5 0.1
Peru (1994–2000) 3 0.1

Table 8.2 Percentage change in indigenous poverty rates during

periods of crisis and recovery, Ecuador and Mexico

Non-indigenous Indigenous

Ecuador
Crisis (1998–99) 6 5
Recovery (2000–3) 14 5
Mexico
Crisis (1994–96) 27 8
Recovery (1996–2000) 25 1

Bolivia) the poverty rate did fall for non-indigenous people. In Guatemala
between 1989–2000 the indigenous poverty rate fell, but at a slower pace
than that for non-indigenous people. In Ecuador and Peru the national
poverty rate rose over the period, but indigenous peoples were less affected
than non-indigenous people by that increase. Taken together these findings
indicate that the incomes of indigenous peoples are little affected by poverty
reduction efforts and macroeconomic trends, whether positive or negative.
Indigenous peoples recover more slowly from national economic crises. In
the case of Ecuador and Mexico the data permit close analysis of how the
poverty rates evolved during and after the economic crises in these countries
(Table 8.2). In both cases there was a similar pattern. Indigenous peoples
were less affected than non-indigenous people by the crisis as it unfolded,
but they recovered more slowly from the losses incurred, in fact so slowly
that the net impact of the crisis was actually worse for them. There are two
lessons to be learned from this. First, policies that successfully reduce
poverty for the population as a whole may not equally benefit indigenous
peoples. Second, crises can be particularly harmful to indigenous peoples’
wellbeing. Even though the negative impact of the shock tends to be less
severe, the post-shock recovery of their incomes is severely constrained.
Indigenous poverty is deeper and the indigenous/non-indigenous poverty
gap narrowed only slowly during the 1990s. Not only did a larger proportion
of indigenous peoples begin the decade in poverty but also their poverty was
Human_08.qxd 25/10/05 6:18 PM Page 223

Gillette Hall and Harry Anthony Patrinos 223

Table 8.3 Percentage change in the poverty gap, Bolivia, Guatemala

and Mexico

Non-indigenous Indigenous

Bolivia (1997–2002) 2 8
Guatemala (1989–2000) 29 22
Mexico (1992–2002) 7 6

Table 8.4 Percentage increase in the probability of being poor if

indigenous, Latin America

Early 1990s Latest available year

Bolivia 16 13
Ecuador – 16
Guatemala 11 14
Mexico 25 30
Peru – 11

Notes: Results of a logit regression that estimated the percentage by which an

individual’s likelihood of being poor increases as a result of being indigenous,
controlling for other factors, including age, household composition, region,
employment status and educational level. Estimates were not generated for
Ecuador and Peru in 1994.

deeper; that is, the average income of the indigenous poor was further below
the poverty line than that of the non-indigenous poor (Psacharopoulos and
Patrinos, 1994). It is plausible to ask whether the indigenous poverty rate
reduced more slowly simply because indigenous peoples began the decade
with such low incomes. In other words, in countries where the national
poverty rate was falling, did income gains actually accrue equally for indige-
nous peoples, but because of their initially lower incomes fewer moved across
the poverty line as a result of those gains? If so, this would suggest that the
gains from growth were being shared equally, and it would simply be a matter
of time before these gains moved indigenous households to a high enough
position on the income scale to cross the poverty line. Disappointingly this
was not the case (Table 8.3). In the three countries where the national poverty
rates did decline (Mexico, Guatemala and Bolivia), the poverty gap shrank
more slowly for indigenous peoples relative to the rest of the population. In
fact in Bolivia the indigenous/non-indigenous poverty gap actually increased.
Controlling for the factors that are known to be strongly associated with
poverty, such as age, education, employment status and area of residence,
being indigenous significantly increases the probability of being poor
(Table 8.4). In the five countries considered in this book, in 1994–2004 being
indigenous increased the probability of being poor by 13–30 per cent,
Human_08.qxd 25/10/05 6:18 PM Page 224

224 Key Messages and an Agenda for Action

depending on the country in question. This finding is very similar to that

found earlier by Psacharopoulos and Patrinos (1994), so little changed over
the decade. The important question for policy is, what drives this association
between being indigenous and being poor? Is it discrimination, or perhaps
inadequate education? These questions will be explored below.

Education and labour earnings

Labour earnings disadvantage is strong across the region, but the trend may be
improving. At the end of the decade the proportion of the indigenous/non-
indigenous earnings gap that could be the result of discrimination ranged
from one quarter to over a-half of the total earnings differential (Table 8.5).
While this is discouraging, in Guatemala, Mexico and Bolivia the component
of the earnings differential that could be explained by discrimination had
fallen since 1994.

Table 8.5 Percentage of the labour earnings gap among males that
cannot be explained by productive characteristics, Latin America

Early 1990s Latest available year

Bolivia (urban only) 28 26

Ecuador 33 45
Guatemala 52 42
Mexico 48 42
Peru 50 58

Notes: Data years – Ecuador, 1994 and 1998; Guatemala, 1989 and 2000;
Mexico, 1989 and 2002; Peru, 1991 and 2001. The estimates are for males only
because women may be subject to gender as well as racial discrimination.

There is a sizeable gap between the average years of schooling among

indigenous and non-indigenous people aged 15 and over in all five coun-
tries. This gap ranges from 2.3 years in Peru to 3.7 years in Ecuador. At the
close of the decade Guatemala had the lowest absolute level of indigenous
education, averaging just 2.5 years of schooling; Peru had the highest, at
6.4 years (Table 8.6). In all countries the gap shrank during the 1990s, fol-
lowing the trend established in earlier decades. In Mexico, for example, the
difference between indigenous and non-indigenous education levels had
fallen by two thirds over the past 30 years (Figure 8.1). Why, if the education
gap was closing, was the poverty gap not doing the same? Why had the
educational gains not translated into progress in poverty reduction for
indigenous peoples? Part of the explanation lies in the lower returns from
education for indigenous peoples.
The average rise in earnings that results from each additional year of
schooling is lower for indigenous than non-indigenous people in four of the
five countries studied (Bolivia, Ecuador, Guatemala and Mexico) (Table 8.7).
Human_08.qxd 25/10/05 6:18 PM Page 225

Gillette Hall and Harry Anthony Patrinos 225

Table 8.6 Average years of schooling, individuals aged 15 and over, Latin
America

Non-indigenous Indigenous Gap

Bolivia (2002) 9.6 5.9 3.7

Ecuador (1998) 6.9 4.3 2.6
Guatemala (2000) 5.7 2.5 3.2
Mexico (2002) 7.9 4.6 3.3
Peru (2001) 8.7 6.4 2.3

Figure 8.1 Average years of schooling, by age group, Mexico

10
9 Non-indigenous men
8 Non-indigenous women
7 Indigenous men
6
5 Indigenous women
4
3
2
1
0
Before 1939 1939–48 1949–58 1959–68 1969–78 1979–85
Year of birth

Table 8.7 Average increase in earnings for each additional

year of schooling, Latin America (per cent)

Non-indigenous Indigenous

Bolivia (2002) 9 6
Ecuador (1998) 8 7
Guatemala (2000) 13 12
Mexico (2002) 10 8
Peru (2001) 12 13

While the differences are not huge – the largest is in Bolivia, where each year
of education results in a 9 per cent earnings increase for non-indigenous peo-
ple but only 6 per cent for indigenous peoples – however the returns from
schooling gap widens at the higher education level. In Ecuador, for example,
the gap initially favours indigenous peoples. At about 12 years of schooling
Human_08.qxd 25/10/05 6:18 PM Page 226

226 Key Messages and an Agenda for Action

Figure 8.2 Educational returns, by years of schooling, Ecuador (per cent) 1998

16

14 Non-indigenous

12

10 Indigenous

6 Total population

0
0 3 6 9 12 15 18 21
Years of schooling

Table 8.8 Ratio of indigenous and non-indigenous average monthly

income, by population category, Mexico, 1989 and 2002 (per cent)

1989 2002

20–29-year olds 44 36
Secondary school graduates 56 50
Non-agricultural workers 61 48
Total 36 26

the gap disappears, but thereafter it gradually widens again, this time in
favour of non-indigenous people (Figure 8.2). On average non-indigenous
people receive an earnings gain of 15 per cent from completed higher edu-
cation, versus just 9 per cent for indigenous peoples. In Mexico, despite the
narrowing of the education gap the earnings gap has widened. In 1989
indigenous peoples’ monthly earnings were about one third of those of non-
indigenous people, but by 2002 they had fallen to just one quarter. It is par-
ticularly concerning to note that the widening earnings gap was driven by a
major decline in the relative earnings of the three population groups that
are among the most likely to benefit from the education gains: young work-
ers, those with full secondary education and those employed in the non-
agricultural sector (Table 8.8).
Human_08.qxd 25/10/05 6:18 PM Page 227

Gillette Hall and Harry Anthony Patrinos 227

Table 8.9 National mathematics test scores at the fifth (or nearest) grade, Latin America

Non-indigenous Indigenous Gap (%)

Bolivia (1997, OREALC) 16 14 12

Guatemala (2000, 3rd grade) 48 40 17
Mexico (2001, 5th grade) 463 430 7
Peru (1997, OREALC) 14 10 27

Notes: The data for Mexico compare students’ test scores in indigenous schools and rural schools,
as opposed to indigenous and non-indigenous children nationwide. Scores under 20 (Bolivia and
Peru) are rounded to nearest decile. Data for Ecuador are not presented as the data on school tests
there are based on a limited and therefore unreliable sample. ORLEAC: UNESCO’S Regional
Education Office for Latin America and the Caribbean.

Part of the reason why the narrowing of the education gap is not yielding
higher earnings for indigenous peoples is probably related to the quality of
the education they receive. The participation of countries in standard inter-
national and regional tests and more extensive usage of national school test-
ing during the past decade has brought to light major differences in student
performance (Table 8.9). In each of the five countries, indigenous students
scored significantly lower in reading and maths tests. Indigenous schools
also had higher drop-out, grade-repetition and failure rates.
Extensive child labour may also be limiting the educational attainment of
indigenous children. In all five countries indigenous children work to a far
greater extent than non-indigenous children, despite increases in the total
years of schooling. Not only are there more indigenous children than non-
indigenous children who work and do not attend school, but also more of
the former combine work and school. The trends in child labour vary from
country to country. In Guatemala the proportion of non-indigenous people
who began working before the age of 14 has declined steadily, but the pro-
portion of indigenous peoples who worked before that age has barely
changed (Figure 8.3). In all countries child labour is more prevalent in rural
areas, and its continued prevalence despite rising school enrolment rates
may be due in large part to cultural norms in indigenous communities.
While these norms may have positive consequences in that they instill a
sense of identity and a work ethic in children, for some children having to
work may constrain learning at school. The possible correlation between
high child labour rates and low educational attainment is a matter that
deserves policy attention.

Health care

Indigenous peoples, and especially women and children, continue to have

less access to basic health services, and therefore major differences between
indigenous and non-indigenous health indicators persist. Health indicators,
Human_08.qxd 25/10/05 6:18 PM Page 228

228 Key Messages and an Agenda for Action

Figure 8.3 Percentage of children who begun working at age 14 or earlier, by year of
birth, Guatemala, 1940–80

95

90 Indigenous

85

80

75

70

65

60
Non-indigenous
55

50
1940 1950 1960 1970 1980

Source: ENCOVI (2000).

Table 8.10 Percentage of the population with health insurance

coverage, Latin America (most recent year for which data are available)

Non-indigenous Indigenous

Bolivia (2002) 19 12
Ecuador (1998) 12 12
Guatemala (2000) 18 5
Mexico (2000) 43 17
Peru (2001) 47 41

ranging from maternal mortality to hospital births and vaccination coverage,

are systematically worse for indigenous peoples. Underpinning this is the
fact that basic health insurance coverage remains a problem, particularly for
indigenous peoples. In all five countries health insurance coverage is low –
never exceeding 50 per cent of the population (Table 8.10) – and in Bolivia,
Mexico and Guatemala coverage of indigenous families lags substantially
behind that of the rest of the population. In virtually every basic health indi-
cator indigenous peoples have worse health outcomes. Of these, one of the
most worrisome is the extremely high malnutrition rate among indigenous
children, which is likely to be another major cause of their lower educational
attainment. This problem exists on a large scale even in higher income coun-
tries such as Mexico, where the overall malnutrition rate is low, signalling a
Human_08.qxd 25/10/05 6:18 PM Page 229

Gillette Hall and Harry Anthony Patrinos 229

Figure 8.4 Stunting among children in Ecuador, Guatemala and Mexico, 1998 (per cent)

70

60

50

40

30

20

10

0
Ecuador Guatemala Mexico

Non-indigenous Indigenous

particular failure to address indigenous peoples’ most basic need for suste-
nance. Figure 8.4 shows the incidence of stunting among children as a
consequence of malnutrition.

Reach of programmes to combat poverty

and malnutrition

Household surveys in three of the five countries (Mexico, Peru and

Guatemala) now include questions on receipt of poverty-reduction assistance,
thus allowing the effectiveness of programme targeting to be assessed. Since
indigenous peoples are overrepresented among the poor well-targeted pro-
grammes should reach more indigenous than non-indigenous people. Here
the evidence is mixed. In Guatemala, four of the five major school supply
and school-based nutrition programmes only slightly favour indigenous
children and the fifth favours the non-indigenous. None of these pro-
grammes is strongly progressive, and in some cases there is a high incidence
of receipt by better-off people. In Peru only one major school programme
reaches more indigenous than non-indigenous children (Figure 8.5), the rest
favour the non-indigenous (Figure 8.6). In Mexico, two major rural poverty-
reduction programmes (Oportunidades and Procampo) strongly favour
indigenous households.

An agenda for action

Significant political and policy changes have occurred since the early 1990s
with the potential to impact on poverty and human development outcomes
among indigenous peoples. These changes range from constitutional mandates
Human_08.qxd 25/10/05 6:18 PM Page 230

230 Key Messages and an Agenda for Action

Figure 8.5 Distribution of school breakfasts, by income quintile, Peru, 2001 (per cent)

50

40
Indigenous
30

20

10 Non-indigenous

0
1 2 3 4 5
Income quintile

Figure 8.6 Distribution of school insurance, by income quintile, Peru, 2001 (per cent)

40
35
30 Non-indigenous

25
Indigenous
20
15
10
5
0
1 2 3 4 5
Income quintile

and greater political representation to increased social spending and the prolif-
eration of targeted programmes such as bilingual education. However as docu-
mented in this book, while some outcomes have improved in areas such as
access to education there has yet to be a substantial reduction in indigenous
poverty. Why is it that increased schooling for indigenous peoples has not
translated into significantly increased earnings and a marked reduction of the
earnings gap between indigenous and non-indigenous people?
First, there is still a gap in attainment and, more significantly, important dif-
ferences between the quality of education received by the two groups. Second,
improved education levels take time to translate into earnings gains, and
even more time for these gains to lead to a significant reduction of poverty
(de Ferranti et al., 2003). Finally, one of the main reasons why improved
human development indicators have yet to translate into poverty reduction
may be that possession of several assets at once (human capital, land, credit) is
necessary for poverty reduction to take place (World Bank, 2003e).
Human_08.qxd 25/10/05 6:18 PM Page 231

Gillette Hall and Harry Anthony Patrinos 231

This book has focused on how improvements in human development can

help reduce the earnings gap and contribute to poverty reduction in the
medium to long term. The results show that education is perhaps the most
important driver of income: of the portion of the income differential
between indigenous and non-indigenous people that can be explained in
econometric models, education is the single largest factor. Therefore in terms
of designing a human development policy to underpin poverty reduction,
our first major recommendation is that greater emphasis be placed on
providing more and better-quality education for indigenous peoples.
Second, this book has provided evidence of persistent health gaps between
indigenous and non-indigenous people, including significantly higher mal-
nutrition rates among young indigenous children, poor indicators of mater-
nal health and limited access to health insurance. While some of these
problems affect all age groups, such as health insurance access, others, such
as child malnutrition have a particular bearing on the possibility of breaking
the intergenerational transmission of poverty. Malnutrition among indige-
nous children also constrains their ability to learn. Therefore our second rec-
ommendation is to introduce health, initiatives targeted at indigenous
children, and in particular on ‘head start’ initiatives designed to tackle mal-
nutrition and associated education gaps.
The lack of progress in poverty reduction among indigenous peoples is
striking when viewed in light of the changes in political representation and
public policy documented in Chapter 1. More clearly needs to be done, par-
ticularly in terms of increasing poor people’s choice of and participation in
service delivery, and rewarding the effective (and penalizing the ineffective)
delivery of services to poor people. Thus, our third recommendation is to
improve accountability in social services in order to improve the quality and
quantity of the services received by indigenous peoples, by to give them a
greater say in the types of service provided to them.
The fourth, more technical but nevertheless crucial area for action is
related to data collection. At present there is no systematic way of accurately
identifying indigenous peoples in census or household surveys. It is there-
fore recommended that standardized questions for use across countries and
over time be developed and applied.
These four recommendations and associated measures are summarized in
Table 8.11 and discussed in more detail in the following subsections.

More and better education

In all the countries studied in this book evidence that has become available
over the past decade highlights problems in education quality – indigenous
children have considerably lower scores for maths and reading. This could be
the reason for the lower returns from schooling for indigenous people – in all
countries but Peru, indigenous workers receive less pay than non-indigenous
workers for each additional year of schooling law quality returns to
 Human_08.qxd
232
Table 8.11 Agenda for action

Issue Action Time frame

25/10/05
Gap in education ● Provide quality bilingual education ● Short term – research, plan, pilot (all countries
levels persists, ● Step up efforts to get all children in to have bilingual programmes, but some need research
along with low- school on effectiveness (Mexico, Peru and Ecuador)
quality education ● Increase focus on quality of teaching and materials ● Short to medium term (especially Guatemala

6:18 PM
for indigenous ● Improve secondary school access and and Bolivia)
children options for distance learning ● Medium to long term (all countries)
● Short to medium term (all countries)
Malnutrition is ● Expand the existing nutritional programmes and ● Short to medium term (all countries)

Page 232
constraining the improve targeting of indigenous children ● Medium-term research projects (all countries)
educational ● Investigate effectiveness of using ● Medium to long term (all countries)
achievement indigenous practices in the health-care system ● Short term (all countries)
of indigenous ● Train special health-care providers for indigenous
children people (language/cultural sensitivity)
● Develop outreach programmes
Political and policy ● Develop and utilize reliable and consistent ● Short term (all countries)
changes – indigenous information on the indigenous population ● Short to medium term (all countries)
influence increasing ● Strengthen accountability of service
but indigenous providers to clients
poverty slow to
change
Difficulty with ● Improve data collection instruments and ● Short to medium term (all countries)
accurately use multiple questions on indigenous
identifying identity
indigenous people ● Develop standardized regional survey questions
Human_08.qxd 25/10/05 6:18 PM Page 233

Gillette Hall and Harry Anthony Patrinos 233

schooling in turn create a divincative to further schooling. To remedy these

problems the following recommendations are made.
First bilingual and multicultural educational provision should be improved.
At bilingual schools the teachers should speak the mother tongue of the
students, teachers must be prepared to teach in a bilingual classroom envi-
ronment, and parents and the community should participate in the design
of curricular materials and activities. Gathering more information on indige-
nous populations would help to determine where to locate new schools and
identity the existing ones that are performing poorly.
Too often bilingual education programmes are not properly designed. In
some cases the teachers do not speak the language spoken by the children
(see for example World Bank, forthcoming) and sometimes the children do
not speak an indigenous language yet the class is conducted in an indige-
nous language. Bilingual education should start with tuition in the mother
tongue only, and during the next four to five years Spanish should be phased
in, so that in the end children are fluent in both Spanish and their own lan-
guage. Bilingual schools should teach the national curriculum, but using
materials developed by the local community. The teaching of indigenous
history as part of the national curriculum would also be welcome. In some
countries, for example New Zealand, indigenous culture (Maori) is also
taught to non-indigenous students (www.minedu.govt.nz).
The contribution of bilingual education to the development of human
capital can be significant. Well-designed and well-implemented programmes
can produce significant returns. For example students at bilingual schools in
Guatemala have better attendance and grade-promotion rates (Patrinos and
Velez, 1996) and receive higher scores for all subjects, including Spanish. It
is estimated that bilingual schooling results in considerable cost savings due
to reduced grade repetition, as well as substantially increased school com-
pletion rates. The estimated savings by bilingual education in Guatemala
amounted to $5 million in 1996, equal to the cost of primary education for
100 000 students (ibid.).
Such programmes need to be rigorously evaluated, which rarely happens
in Latin America. Even in the United States, decades of research have failed
to produce conclusive findings (Greene, 1998). However an evaluation of
intercultural bilingual education in Bolivia has found that bilingual educa-
tion plays a significant part in improving educational outcomes for indige-
nous children (Soares, 2004). Bilingual education appears to be an important
factor in keeping children at school and their progression from grade to
grade.
Second, more effort should be put into ensuring that all children attend
school – through the provision of incentives if necessary. Although there has
been a large increase in school enrolment and near universal enrolment in
middle-income countries, children from the most disadvantaged families,
including indigenous families, in both rural and urban areas are not receiving
Human_08.qxd 25/10/05 6:18 PM Page 234

234 Key Messages and an Agenda for Action

the education they need. In some countries an indigenous child is nearly 30

per cent less likely to attend school than children from other backgrounds.
Furthermore children from such backgrounds often attend the worst schools,
are served by the least educated teachers and have the poorest supply of edu-
cational materials. As a consequence they have less opportunity to learn than
their better-off peers, have lower attendance rates, and are less likely to be pro-
moted to the next grade level and complete primary school. To make matters
worse, because poor children are more likely to arrive at school hungry, dirty,
ill and with lower learning levels than their better-off peers, teachers have
lower expectations of their educational success. Finally, out-of-pocket expen-
diture on transportation, uniforms, shoes and school materials is often impos-
sible for the poor. Poor parents also incur high opportunity costs for their
children’s attendance at school in the that they depend on child labour to
help make ends meet.
Therefore the designers of programmes to boost enrolment should consider
cash incentives to help offset the burdens of poverty and reduced opportu-
nity costs. One national programme that has done this and reached indige-
nous peoples in significant numbers is Oportunidades (formerly Progresa) in
Mexico. This programme has been extensively studied and is credited with
producing significant increases in educational attainment, health and nutri-
tion, and short-term poverty reduction (see for example, Behrman et al.,
2001; Skoufias and Parker, 2001; Schultz, 2004), as well as reducing the edu-
cational gap between indigenous and non-indigenous children and the like-
lihood of indigenous child labour (Bando et al., 2004). There is also evidence
that the programme enabled monolingual indigenous children to narrow the
education gap between them and their bilingual peers. The success of this
programme, through the provision of cash transfers to poor people in
exchange for school attendance by their children, makes it worthy of con-
sideration by other countries.
Third, more attention should be paid to the quality of the education pro-
vided. Because of low-quality education indigenous children learn less than
their non-indigenous counterparts and perform worse in tests. However it
has to be said that all children in Latin America, regardless of ethnic group,
perform relatively poorly in international achievement tests, so the national
education systems as a whole are in great need of improvement.
Fourth, it is necessary to boost enrolment in secondary schools, especially
in countries with near or complete universal access to primary schooling,
with appropriate options for distance learning. Latin American and
Caribbean countries perform poorly at the secondary level in terms of net
enrolment and school completion, and overall the region has a sizeable
deficit in net secondary enrolment relative to its income level (de Ferranti
et al., 2003). Secondary school expansion is necessary given the high primary
school enrolment rate in the region, and because the availability of nearby
secondary schools will provide an incentive for children to complete primary
Human_08.qxd 25/10/05 6:18 PM Page 235

Gillette Hall and Harry Anthony Patrinos 235

school. Given the high cost of schooling in remote areas, distance learning
alternatives along the lines of Mexico’s telesecundarias (Calderoni, 1998) and
other schooling methods using new technology should be made available.

Promoting equal opportunities for indigenous children

through improved health
There are major differences in health-care provision and outcomes between
indigenous and non-indigenous people. Of particular relevance to human
capital development are the persistently high malnutrition rates among
indigenous women and children, which can result in high infant and child
mortality rates, vulnerability to disease and poor educational achievement.
Development goals in both health and education hinge crucially on tackling
malnutrition and other basic health issues.
Better health-care provision is required in the region to address these
problems. For example medical care for pregnant women is essential to the
preservation of the mother’s life and the healthy development of the infant.
For indigenous women, however, such medical care is lacking and, coupled
with malnutrition, is a major factor in the high female and infant mortality
rates. There is evidence of a link between fertility and child mortality and
the education received by mothers and fathers. This implies that fertility is
not a given, but is subject to change by policy-based interventions such as
increased access to education. To address these issues measures should be
implemented to promote equal opportunities for indigenous peoples, and
particularly mothers and children. These should include programmes
directed at maternal and child health, family planning, malnutrition, and
education. Specific recommendations are outlined below.
First, of crucial importance is expansion of the provision of health care to
indigenous peoples. To this end the existing programmes should be properly
evaluated for their effectiveness. These evaluations should include not only cal-
culations of measurable outcomes, but also take account of qualitative factors
such as beneficiary input and feedback. There are many targeted and untar-
geted programmes that reach or affect indigenous peoples, and only by means
of impact evaluations can the effective ones be identified and expanded.
Second, it is not enough simply to ensure that indigenous peoples have
access to health-care facilities. Rather it is also necessary for effective
indigenous health-care practices to be made available in the national health
system. Some countries, such as Ecuador, are experimenting with services
that offer a choice between modern and traditional medicine, and further
experimentation with and evaluation of such initiatives is recommended.
Third, to target, treat and care for indigenous peoples effectively it is
necessary to train health-care providers to interact properly with indigenous
peoples. This should include instruction on cultural factors and, when
necessary, the teaching of indigenous languages. In addition steps should
be taken to recruit indigenous health-care practitioners to ensure that the
Human_08.qxd 25/10/05 6:18 PM Page 236

236 Key Messages and an Agenda for Action

health-care system is adequately incorporating as well as serving indigenous

peoples.
Fourth, many of the poorest indigenous people reside in very remote areas
that are not served or are poorly served by the national health system. Such
communities are likely to have a high proportion of people who do not
speak Spanish, and this should be borne in mind when setting up a health-
care system for them. This system should include indigenous health-
care providers, paramedics and facilitators to deliver health care (for example
by mobile units) and provide advice on health matters. Several countries
in the region, including Argentina, Bolivia and Peru have already set up
maternal child health insurance programmes and outreach programmes for
indigenous areas.
Fifth, the prevalence of malnutrition among Latin America’s indigenous peo-
ples, particularly children, is a principal factor in the poor human devel-
opment outcomes in Latin America. Guatemala has the third highest
malnutrition rate in the world, after Yemen and Bangladesh. The overall rate
of stunting in Guatemala is 44 per cent, but for indigenous children it is
58 per cent, higher than in Yemen and Bangladesh and almost twice the rate
for non-indigenous children. In Ecuador an estimated 59 per cent of indige-
nous children are stunted, and chronic malnutrition is more than twice as
prevalent in indigenous than in non-indigenous communities. Therefore
drastic action is needed.
The provision of nutritional supplements, child growth monitoring
programmes, and education on nutrition to parents (particularly mothers)
has proved to be a cost-effective means of fighting malnutrition in many
regions of the world (Marini and Gragnolati, 2003). In Latin America an
extra effort should be made to reach isolated indigenous communities where
malnutrition rates are highest. This should be accompanied by measures to
involve members of the community in the planning and implementation of
the programme, the provision of materials in the local language and the
incorporation of traditional foods into the programme, all of which should
increase the effectiveness of the intervention.

Improved accountability in the delivery of educational

and social services to indigenous people
During the 1990s there was a marked increase in the provision of educa-
tional and social services to indigenous peoples, but the beneficiaries had
little say in the actual services provided, and therefore the services were
of lower quality and were not tailored to indigenous peoples’ needs.
Indigenous children may be receiving more schooling, but it is not necessar-
ily relevant to their needs. They may be staying at school for more years, but
they are not necessarily learning effectively. Hence indigenous peoples
receive significantly lower returns from their schooling, thus explaining the
significant earnings gap between indigenous and non-indigenous workers.
Human_08.qxd 25/10/05 6:18 PM Page 237

Gillette Hall and Harry Anthony Patrinos 237

Figure 8.7 Accountability relationships

POLITICIANS AND
POLICY MAKERS

Voice/politics Compact/policies

PUBLIC, PRIVATE,
CITIZENS, RICH Client power CIVIC PROVIDERS;
AND POOR, POWERFUL
FRONT-LINE WORKERS
AND WEAK

Source: World Bank (2003h).

Increased representation in the legislature would significantly increase

indigenous peoples’ say in the delivery of services. However that could take
time, and it would therefore be the long route to ensuring the accountabil-
ity of service providers (Figure 8.7). The short route to accountability would
be for beneficiaries/clients to have direct influence on service providers. This
could include parents exercising choice or voice at school, free choice of
school and health service provider, and demand-side financing of health
care and education. With the latter the funds should follow the patient or
student, which would increase market competition and therefore providers
would have strong a incentive to improve the quality of their services.
Putting indigenous peoples at the centre of service provision would enable
them to monitor and discipline service providers and have a say in policy
making. It would also give an incentive to providers to serve indigenous peo-
ples properly. There are three key relationships in the service delivery chain:
that between indigenous peoples and providers, that between indigenous
peoples and policy makers, and that between policy makers and providers.
In the case of the countries studied here there are often third parties acting
on behalf of indigenous peoples, such as collective organizations and indige-
nous leaders or representatives. These must be taken into account when
redesigning accountability relationships.
Increased participation is not only possible in theory, there are already a
few examples in practice. Mexico’s compensatory education programmes
and the new Programa Escuelas de Calidad (Quality Schools Programme) give
indigenous peoples a limited role in the management of schools and the
learning process (see for example Shapiro and Moreno Trevino, 2004). In
health care accountability can be strengthened by disseminating informa-
tion on best practices through NGOs and other groups; services such as
Human_08.qxd 25/10/05 6:18 PM Page 238

238 Key Messages and an Agenda for Action

immunization can be contracted out (but publicly financed), and clinical

care can be funded by subsidies based on per capita demand. Through a for-
mal competitive process, in Nicaragua, Honduras, El Salvador and Panama
contracts are awarded to NGOs to provide coverage in remote (often indige-
nous) areas where people have little or no access to health care, in return for
a fixed annual per capita payment (Fiszbein et al., 2004).

Improved gathering of information on the

indigenous population
Many sources of data had to be used to compile the indigenous population
estimates presented in this book, and more accurate data are required to
establish the true socioeconomic circumstances of indigenous peoples. In
order to identify accurately all indigenous peoples and population trends in
censuses and surveys it is necessary to develop a set of standardized survey
questions for use in different countries and over time.
That set could include questions on self-identification, language (mother
tongue, most commonly used language, language used at home, secondary
language), dominant ethnic group in the local community, parents’ mother
tongue, and ancestry. Ideally each question should allow respondents to
name a specific indigenous group (for example Quechua or Aymara) rather
than merely selecting ‘indigenous’. Statistics agencies could add to the ques-
tionnaire a special section on indigenous peoples that included questions on
traditional medicine practices, religious/community activities, land owner-
ship, bilingual schooling, intermarriage and so on. Some countries have used
separate surveys for indigenous peoples, such as Mexico’s 1997 National
Survey of Employment in Indigenous Areas and Venezuela’s indigenous cen-
sus. It is unclear whether separate surveys are more useful to researchers than
national surveys that include both indigenous and non-indigenous people.
More useful from a research and policy perspective are supplements to
national censuses, such as Canada’s Aboriginal Peoples Survey (designed and
implemented in partnership with national aboriginal organizations and
conducted in 1991 and 2001) and Venezuela’s 2001 census.
Better data with consistent identification of indigenous peoples would
facilitate longitudinal research, particularly if there were panel data (follow-
ing the same individuals and/or households over time) against which to test
hypotheses.

Topics for future research

One topic that requires investigation is whether differentiated programmes for

indigenous peoples produce better results than general or non-differentiated
programmes (Psacharopoulos and Patrinos, 1994). The findings presented in
this book suggest that differentiated programmes may be useful in some
cases (for example bilingual education) but not in others (for example
conditional cash payments). An important question for future research is
Human_08.qxd 25/10/05 6:18 PM Page 239

Gillette Hall and Harry Anthony Patrinos 239

whether education, health and social assistance measures tailored to indige-

nous peoples can increase earnings and ultimately reduce poverty. For exam-
ple do special schools for indigenous children improve their educational
attainment and reduce ethnic-specific disparities in school attendance,
performance, learning and earnings? If so, which aspects of indigenous
schooling – bilingual education, intercultural content, community involve-
ment in schools and so on – are most effective in improving educational out-
comes? Is differentiation cost-effective? Similar questions can be asked with
respect to health care and social assistance. In the case of social assistance, are
universal (that is, non-differentiated) safety net policies such as conditional
cash payments as effective in improving socioeconomic outcomes for indige-
nous peoples as they are for non-indigenous people? The success of Mexico’s
Oportunidades programme suggests that targeting by ethnic identity is not
necessary. However the Mexican National Population Council (CONAPO)
uses a targeting mechanism that considers community income, service pro-
vision and isolation, and not just poverty, which may be why Oportunidades
reaches indigenous peoples so well. Nonetheless questions remain as to the
appropriateness of Oportunidades for indigenous peoples, or whether some
other form of intervention would work better given the existence of com-
munity organizations (some researchers consider that individually targeted
benefits serve to break down the social fabric of indigenous communities).
There is very little beyond anecdotal evidence on this question.
The second topic for future research is the precise role of discrimination in
poverty. This study has established that (1) human capital development has
improved particularly with regard to educational attainment and the gap
between indigenous and non-indigenous people has narrowed in this regard
(2) the earnings of indigenous peoples have improved only slightly and (3)
there has been little or no reduction of the indigenous/non-indigenous
poverty gap. Therefore it is necessary to test the hypothesis that there is
missing link between human capital accumulation and income (poverty) in
the case of indigenous peoples and to identify the barriers to income-gener-
ating opportunities for them. In particular, since it has been established that
discrimination – estimated by means of a series of Oaxaca decompositions for
five of the countries studied in this book – may account for 30–50 per cent of
the earnings differential, then the question is how does discrimination work
in practice? What is needed is a series of experiments to reveal why indige-
nous workers are denied access to good jobs even when they have appropri-
ate qualifications.
An experiment to ascertain discrimination in the labour market has been
conducted in the United States (Bertrand and Mullainathan, 2004). The
researchers drew up fictitious curricula vitae and then responded to job adver-
tisements in Boston and Chicago newspapers. To draw out attitudes towards
race, each curriculum vitae was assigned either a very African-American
sounding name or a very white sounding name. The results revealed significant
discrimination against African-Americans in that the applicants with white
Human_08.qxd 25/10/05 6:18 PM Page 240

240 Key Messages and an Agenda for Action

names received 50 per cent more invitations for interviews. In the case
of higher-quality curricula vitae, white names elicited 30 per cent more
invitations. Applicants living in better neighbourhoods received more invi-
tations, but interestingly this did not differ by race. The degree of discrimi-
nation was uniform across occupations and industries. Similar studies could
be conducted in Latin America to test for overt evidence of discrimination
against indigenous peoples not only in the labour market but also with
respect to access to the capital needed to generate income, with indigenous
and non-indigenous researchers approaching financial institutions for loans.
Another area for research is market analysis of the barriers to and opportuni-
ties for indigenous firms and cultural products.
The final research topic concerns ways to provide income-generating oppor-
tunities for indigenous peoples. As in developed countries, indigenous peoples
in Latin America possess a great number of assets, including land and cultural
traditions that could possibly be capitalized on more effectively under differ-
ent policy or regulatory frameworks. By combining human capital gains with
the optimal use of assets, considerable progress could be made in poverty
reduction. International measures to generate economic opportunities for
indigenous peoples (for example Canada’s indigenous initiatives) would be
useful to draw on here, with a focus on the appropriate use of subsidies, the
provision of incentives, the introduction of regulatory changes and legal
action. The lessons learned from initiatives that have worked or failed in other
countries would assist the design of more appropriate public policies and
programmes for improving indigenous peoples’ economic opportunities.
It is our hope that this book will stimulate attention to and interest in the
concerns of indigenous peoples in Latin America, and indeed worldwide.
While the findings on poverty reduction over the decade are sobering, there
are reasons for hope. Some human development indicators are improving,
and there has been a marked increase in political participation by indigenous
peoples. In his book Development as Freedom (1999), Amartya Sen states that
‘Development can be seen … as a process of expanding the real freedoms that
people enjoy’. These freedoms include access to education and health care,
plus political participation; they are inter-related, and together can con-
tribute to economic and social progress. It is our hope that, building on the
changes brought about during the first Indigenous Peoples’ Decade, the next
decade will bring greater gains in terms of human development, material
income and freedom for indigenous peoples.

Note
1. Afro-descendents make-up another important disadvantaged group in the region,
though to date no similar comprehensive work exists among the poverty human
development conditions of this population.
2. Because of the varying definitions of ‘indigenous’ and their inconsistent applica-
tion across countries and over time, it is not possible to arrive at a definitive
estimate of the size of the indigenous population (see Chapter 2).
Human_09App.qxd 25/10/05 6:19 PM Page 241

Appendix: Methods and Data

When conducting research on identity and socioeconomic development the problems

that must be addressed at the outset include defining the target population, deciding
which research methodologies to use and working around the scarcity of data. The
analysis presented in this book is empirical and uses micro-level data from household
surveys conducted in five Latin American countries. The following sections discuss the
data and methodology used to analyze trends in poverty and the development of
human capital, plus operational definitions and statistical models.

Areas of analysis
As discussed in Chapter 2, there are a number of definitions of indigenous, and in this
book different definitions are used for different countries, depending on the predom-
inant definition used in those countries. For example the chapter on Peru uses the
language spoken by the household head while the chapter on Guatemala uses self-
identification. While indigenous peoples in the countries concerned are heterogeneous,
most of the disaggregations compare indigenous and non-indigenous people. The
poverty analyses include profiles of the poor, with overall estimates of the poverty
rates for the indigenous and non-indigenous populations. Poverty rates by selected
characteristics are presented in an attempt to identify the correlates of poverty. The
headcount indices of poverty,1 using dollar per day and national poverty lines, are also
estimated.
The chapters also examine educational attainment and earnings differentials
between indigenous and non-indigenous workers, as well as the differential returns
from investment in human capital. The components of the gross wage differential
that can be explained by productivity-enhancing attributes and those which are due
to labour market discrimination are empirically determined using established theoret-
ical and applied techniques.
The dual effects of gender and being indigenous are also taken into account. For
example in the case of educational attainment and earnings, comparisons between
indigenous males and females and between indigenous and non-indigenous females
are conducted.
The effects of language, identity and geographic concentration on indigenous
peoples, and the social prejudices against them, are thought to be reflected in children’s
experiences. For this reason an examination of children’s activities is included. The
analyses look at educational attainment and performance, plus the incidence and
determinants of child labour.

Methodology
This section discusses the methodology chosen to identify the indigenous population
in each of the countries in question, and the methodologies used to compare the
poverty and labour outcomes of indigenous and non-indigenous people.

241
Human_09App.qxd 25/10/05 6:19 PM Page 242

242 Appendix

Identifying indigenous peoples

While many of the countries in Latin America have sizeable indigenous populations,
few household and labour force surveys include questions that would help to identify
the ethnolinguistic characteristics of the individual surveyed. In some countries such
information is captured in censuses but no information is collected on income. Other
countries undertake a separate indigenous censuses, but it is often difficult to make
comparisons with the non-indigenous population.
Bolivia, Guatemala, Ecuador, Mexico and Peru have been chosen for this study
because, in addition to having the largest indigenous populations in absolute or pro-
portional terms, thier household surveys gather information on the ethnolinguistic
characteristics of the population, thus facilitating a comparison of indigenous and
non-indigenous groups.
The estimated size of the indigenous population of a country can vary widely
depending on the definition used (see Chapter 2 for more details). While we believe
that indigenous peoples have the right to identify themselves as such, it has been nec-
essary to adopt operational definitions to carry out the study. Therefore three factors
have been used to identify the reference population, given the nature of the data avail-
able: the principal language spoken, self-perception/identification2 and geographic
concentration/language spoken (Table A1).
The surveys and censuses differ in their coverage and their means of identifying
indigenous peoples. Moreover in some countries only individuals over a certain age
are asked to identify themselves as belonging to an ethnic group while language ques-
tions are asked of everyone. In general the use of only one question on identity yields
lower-bound estimates, while combining two or more questions (such as mother
tongue and self-identification) yields upper-bound estimates.3
As its name indicates, the Programme for the Improvement of the Surveys and
Measurement of Life Conditions in Latin America and the Caribbean (MECOVI), a
joint initiative by the Inter-American Development Bank (IDB), the World Bank and
the United Nations Economic Commission for Latin America and the Caribbean
(ECLAC), is aimed at improving the quality and coverage of household surveys in
Latin America. It has enabled household surveys to acquire more complete informa-
tion on poverty and living conditions, and thereby facilitated the formulation of policies
to reduce poverty and social inequity.
The following subsections look at data gathering in each of the countries in
question.

Bolivia
The data utilized in the chapter on Bolivia come mainly from household surveys
conducted between 1989 and 2002. The most recent survey (MECOVI) survey took
place in November and December 2002 and covered 5746 households throughout the
country. Data collected in the surveys conducted between 1989 and 1995 (Integrated
Household Survey) are used to evaluate social and demographic changes in Bolivia.
The surveys covered departmental capitals4 and the city of El Alto. They were multithe-
matic and investigated ethnolinguistic characteristics, enabling analysis of employment,
education and access to basic social services.
In June 1996, driven by the need to disaggregate additional information by geograph-
ical area, the National Institute of Statistics undertook a national survey of employ-
ment. The nationally representative data collected enabled evaluation of the use and
availability of workers, characterized according to education, migration, housing,
income and access to basic services. The survey was carried out in the departmental
Human_09App.qxd 25/10/05 6:19 PM Page 243

243

Table A1 Household surveys and definitions of ethnicity

Bolivia Source: Integrated Household Survey (Encuesta Integrada de Hogares),

1989 and 2002
Individuals’ ethnicity determined from the questions:
● Which language(s) do you speak most often (1989)
● What languages do you speak? (2002)*
● Which language did you first learn to speak as a child? (2002)
● Do you consider yourself to belong to one of the following
indigenous/original peoples …? (2002)

Ecuador Source: Living Conditions Survey (Encuesta de Condiciones de Vida), 1994, 1995,
1998 and 1999
Individuals’ ethnicity determined from the question:
● What languages do you speak? (All years)*

Guatemala Sources: National Sociodemographic Survey (Encuesta Nacional

Socio-Demográfica), 1989; Living Standards Measurement Survey
(Encuesta Nacional sobre Condiciones de Vida), 2000
Individuals’ ethnicity determined from the questions:
● Are you indigenous? (1989)*
● To which of the following groups do you belong …? (2000)
● What is your mother tongue? (2000)

Mexico Sources: National Income and Consumption Survey

(Encuesta Nacional de Ingresos y Gastos de los Hogares, ENIGH),
1989, 1992, 1994, 1996, 1998, 2000 and 2002;
National Population Census, 2000
In 2000, individuals’ ethnicity determined by the questions:
● Do you speak an indigenous dialect or language?*
● Which indigenous dialect or language do you speak?
● Do you also speak Spanish?
● Are you Nahuatl, Maya, Zapoteco, Mixteco or a member of another
indigenous group?
Based on the 2000 census, the ENIGH survey provides information on the
percentage of indigenous language speakers in all of the Mexican municipalities.

Peru Sources: National Living Standards Survey (Encuesta Nacional de Niveles de Vida),
1991; National Household Survey (Encuesta Nacional de Hogares), 2001
Individuals’ ethnicity determined from the questions:
● What is your mother tongue? (1991)*
● What language do you speak? (1991)
● Which language did you learn as a child? (2001)
● With whom did you learn to speak a language as a child? (2001)
● What other languages do you speak? (2001)
● What language do you speak most frequently? (2001)
● Considering your ancestors and your customs, do you consider yourself to
be …? (2001)
● What was the mother tongue of your father, mother, maternal grandparents,
paternal grandparents and community? (2001)

* Denotes the main definition used in each country chapter to identify indigenous people.
Human_09App.qxd 25/10/05 6:19 PM Page 244

244 Appendix

capitals, the city of El Alto, other urban areas (towns with a population of 2000 or
more) and rural areas (small towns with fewer than 2000 inhabitants and scattered
settlements). The sample comprised nearly 6000 households.
Since 1999 Bolivia has conducted four national surveys under the MECOVI
programme. The indigenous identity of individuals aged six and over was established
by the following questions:

● What languages do you speak? (This question allows for differing combinations of
languages and has been asked in almost all the household surveys, thus enabling
comparisons over time of individuals aged 6 and over.)
● What language did you first learn to speak as a child? (This question is asked of
people aged four and over; the options are Quechua, Aymara, Castellano, Guaraní,
other indigenous and foreign.)
● Do you consider yourself to belong to one of the following original/indigenous
groups … ? (This question was also used in the population and housing census of
2001. The objective of introducing self-identification was to reveal a different
dimension from that obtained from language questions.)

In order to make comparisons over time, the Bolivian chapter primarily defines
indigenous peoples as those who speak a native language (Quechua, Aymara and so
on), are monolingual (indigenous) or bilingual (Spanish and indigenous). To compare
trends in human development indicators, human capital and job market indicators
for 1989 were calculated.5

Ecuador
The analysis of ethnicity and social conditions in Ecuador is based mainly on data
from the Living Standard Measurement Surveys (LSMS) and the National Survey of
Living Conditions. Additional data comes from the 1950, 1990 and 2001 national
censuses and other household surveys.
The LSMS surveys of 1994, 1995, 1998 and 1999 each covered about 5000 house-
holds and were nationally representative in that they included the coastal, highland
(or sierra) and Amazon regions. There was no question on self-identification, rather
the respondents were asked what language they spoke at home. Thus the definition of
indigenous used throughout the chapter is based on mother tongue. A household is
categorized as indigenous if at least one person – excluding domestic employees –
reported speaking an indigenous language alone (monolingual) or both an indigenous
language and Spanish (bilingual).
Data from the national censuses of 1950 and 2001 are used to estimate trends in
the size of the indigenous population. The 2001 census included questions on the lan-
guage spoken at home, plus one on self-identification. Additional data have been
obtained from the Measurement of Childhood and Household Indicators Survey and
the National Survey of Employment, Unemployment and Underemployment, which
have national coverage and similar sample sizes to the LSMS. The surveys include
questions on self-identification and the language spoken by the parents of the respon-
dents, which permits analysis of alternative definitions of ethnicity.

Guatemala
The data used in the Guatemalan chapter come from the 1989 and 2000 Living
Standards Measurement Surveys and the 1989 National Sociodemographic Survey.
Human_09App.qxd 25/10/05 6:19 PM Page 245

Appendix 245

The latter covered 9270 households, or 33262 people aged 10 and over. The indigenous
identification question was ‘Are you indigenous?’
The Living Standards Measurement Survey of 2000 included 37771 individuals of all
ages from 7276 households. There were several questions on indigenous identity (see
Table A1), but the Guatemalan chapter principally draws on responses to the question
‘To which of the following groups do you belong?’ – the options for this were K’iche,
Q’eqchi’, Kaqchikel, Mam, other Maya, Garifuna, Xinka, non-indigenous or foreign.
This survey was unique in that it was statistically representative of Guatemala as
a whole, covering urban and rural areas, the various departments of Guatemala,
indigenous and non-indigenous people, and the four largest indigenous groups in the
country.
Since the two surveys were based on different censuses (The National Population
Census of 1981 and the Household and Population Census of 1994) it might be
thought that they are not comparable. However, the use of population expansion fac-
tors by department helps to ensure that national aggregated data give comparable
results between 1989 and 2000. Also, since there were clear shifts in population loca-
tion between 1989 and 2000, using a single census frame for both surveys would give
less accurate results.

Mexico
Most of the data used in the analysis are drawn from the 2000 National Population
Census and National Income and Consumption Surveys (Encuesta Nacional de Ingresos y
Gastos de los Hogares, ENIGH) conducted between 1989 and 2002. The 2000 census
included questions on indigenous language spoken and self-identity, so it is the pri-
mary source for the demographic, education and housing data. However the informa-
tion it provides on income is too limited to be of use in making poverty estimates.
Conversely the ENIGH surveys provide detailed information on income, education
and employment but lack information on indigenous identity. This limitation has
been circumvented by using a technique used in earlier studies of the Mexican indige-
nous population (Patrinos, 1994; Panagides, 1994), which combine census data on the
percentage of each municipality that is indigenous with household data from the
ENIGH surveys. Thus whenever ENIGH data is used, as in the analysis of income,
poverty and earnings, all that is shown is the proportion of the respondents’ munici-
pality that is indigenous.
For simplicity, in the Mexican chapter the terms indigenous and non-indigenous
refer to municipalities where the indigenous population is above or below a specific
percentage of the total population, respectively. In most of the chapter the level is set
at 30 per cent, but where another percentage is used this is explicitly stated in the text
or under a table or figure.
The 2000 National Population Census covered 10.1 million individuals and
included all municipalities and all localities with more than 2000 inhabitants. While
the (ENIGH) surveys do not gather information on indigenous identity, all surveys
since 1992 have sampled municipalities with high concentrations of indigenous
peoples. According to the 2000 National Population Census, 3.6 per cent of the
Mexican population live in municipalities with 70 per cent or more indigenous lan-
guage speakers. All the ENIGH surveys since 1992 have surveyed municipalities with
an indigenous population of close to or above that percentage. In 1992, for example,
3.4 per cent of the respondents lived in municipalities with an indigenous population
of more than 70 per cent. Similarly 4.1 per cent and 6.8 per cent of the individuals sur-
veyed in 1998 and 2002 lived in predominantly indigenous municipalities. Therefore
Human_09App.qxd 25/10/05 6:19 PM Page 246

246 Appendix

the risk of indigenous peoples being underrepresented in the ENIGH data is negligible.
Further evidence of this is shown in Table A2, which compares socioeconomic indica-
tors calculated from the 2000 census and the 2002 ENIGH survey. As can be seen, the
results are very similar and in some cases identical. With regard to poverty, as noted
above the income data from the census are too limited to allow calculations of poverty
but they can be used to produce estimates for comparative purposes.6 According to the
census, 90.2 per cent of the people in predominantly indigenous municipalities are
moderately poor, and according to the 2002 ENIGH survey the figure is 89.7 per cent.
The socioeconomic indicators where the census and ENIGH estimates diverge most
are those for housing conditions and access to public services. For examples, accord-
ing to the census 77 per cent of households in predominantly indigenous municipal-
ities have electricity, while the ENIGH survey puts the figure at 86 per cent. Similarly
the census figure for households in predominantly indigenous municipalities with
earth floors is 66 per cent, but according to the ENIGH it is 58 per cent. These differ-
ences can be explained by the fact that the census surveyed a much larger sample of
the population and reached the most remote areas, which generally have worse living

Table A2 Comparison of census and ENIGH socioeconomic indicators in

municipalities with an indigenous population of 70 per cent or more
(per cent unless otherwise stated)

Census 2000 ENIGH 2002

Men 49.0 49.0

(0.50) (0.50)
Age (years) 23.7 24.5
(19.83) (20.47)
Years of schooling 4.0 3.99
(3.66) (3.99)
Literacy rate 63.0 62.0
(0.48) (0.49)
Primary school completion rate 38.0 39.0
(0.48) (0.48)
Households with electricity 77.0 86.0
(0.41) (0.35)
Households with earth floor 66.0 54.0
(0.47) (0.49)
Ownership of housing 94.0 93.0
(0.24) (0.26)
Incidence of extreme poverty 76.5 68.0
(0.42) (0.46)
Incidence of moderate poverty 90.2 89.7
(0.30) (0.30)
Speakers of indigenous language 88.0
(0.32)
Self-identified as indigenous 83.0
(0.37)

Note: Standard errors in parenthesis.

Sources: National Population Census, 2000; ENIGH, 2002.
Human_09App.qxd 25/10/05 6:19 PM Page 247

Appendix 247

conditions and less access to public services. This may also explain why the extreme
poverty estimate is larger when using census data than when using ENIGH data. If
this is correct, there could be a slight risk of overestimating the socioeconomic condi-
tions of the population in predominantly indigenous municipalities and of underesti-
mating the magnitude of indigenous/non-indigenous differentials. Thus when ENIGH
data is used to make inferences about the circumstances of indigenous peoples there
may be a slight underestimation of the magnitude of the development shortfalls
indigenous peoples face in most areas.

Peru
Data from the Peruvian National Household Survey (ENAHO) of 2001 is used in the
chapter on Peru to identify the indigenous population and estimate poverty levels.
This survey covered nearly 19000 households – 11000 in urban areas and nearly 7000
in rural areas – although complete information is only available for 17000 of them.
The sample is representative up to the departmental level (24 departments).
The survey included six questions on the identity of the head of household and
the head’s spouse: mother tongue, most-used language, language used by parents and
grandparents, knowledge of other languages, and self-identification of the household
head as Quechua, Aymara, Amazonian indigenous or other. Unfortunately these
questions are not included in all the ENAHO surveys.

Measuring poverty
There are numerous definitions of poverty and resultant poverty indicators, and there
is substantial disagreement about which are more relevant. In some ways the various
education, health and family indicators discussed in this book represent the compre-
hensive, human development-centred concept of poverty advanced by some economists
(for example Sen, 1999). This study, however, because of its focus on the indigenous
dimension, uses a standard methodology and avoids the methodological and theoret-
ical issues associated with setting a poverty line. When analyzing the existence and
correlates of absolute poverty, those whose income falls below the line are classified as
poor, and those whose income is above the line are classified as not poor. Following
convention a second poverty line is used to separate the poor and the very poor. This
lower poverty line is referred to as the extreme poverty line.
Absolute poverty refers to the position of an individual or household in relation to
a poverty line whose real value is fixed over time. The absolute poverty line is based
on the cost or consumption of a basket of the minimum amount of food necessary to
ensure a recommended calorie intake. The general poverty line is the extreme poverty
line divided by the proportion of total income that families near the extreme poverty line
actually spend on food – generally about 50 per cent. Therefore general poverty relates
to the minimum income necessary to acquire adequate food and non-food items.
The country analyses use either a consumption-based (Guatemala, Ecuador, and Peru)
or an income-based (Guatemala, Bolivia, Ecuador and Mexico) definition of poverty,
whereby individuals living in a household with per capita income or consumption
that is less than a given standard are classified as poor.
Most household surveys in developing countries are affected to some degree by
underreporting of income. This tends to lower incomes across the distribution, but
not necessarily in a uniform manner. Unfortunately it is difficult to assess and correct
this underreporting; furthermore the income adjustment process itself may introduce
new biases into the analysis. Thus consumption data is generally preferred to income
data. Absolute poverty statistics reflect the intersection of the income distribution line
Human_09App.qxd 25/10/05 6:19 PM Page 248

248 Appendix

with an exogenous standard, such as a poverty line. Because the value of the poverty
line is determined independently from the income level of a country, the underre-
porting of income can cause the poverty line to intersect the income distribution line
at a much higher point than if there were no underreporting. The result is a poverty
estimate that is highly biased in an upward direction. Therefore the income data used
in the poverty analyses in this book have been adjusted to match corresponding
national account figures. National accounts are usually subject to a system of cross-
checking in order to achieve the most accurate figures possible. Although these figures
may be flawed, they are usually the most accurate available.
While a profile of the poor is useful and informative, it is based on only a few of the
independent variables used to explain poverty. For a more thorough investigation
of the determinants of poverty, in this book a multivariate model is used to standard-
ize the many factors that simultaneously affect the probability of an individual being
poor. Since poverty incidence is a dichotomous variable a logit model is used to cap-
ture the major determinants of poverty at the individual level. The model expresses
the probability (P) of being poor as a function of various characteristics (X), such as
education, employment and being indigenous.

1
P (A1)
1  e iXi

The reported coefficients i are partial derivatives indicating the change in the
probability of being poor, relative to a single unit change in one of the independent
variables, where i is the logit coefficient:

P
 i P (1  P) (A2)
Xi

Similar logit models are used in various chapter to assess the determinants of such
variables as educational participation and child labour. A model for estimating the
determinants of child labour is also used (Grootaert and Patrinos, 1999); this will be
discussed later.

Bolivia
Table A3 shows the poverty and extreme poverty lines for Bolivia, in 1999–2002.

Table A3 Poverty lines and extreme poverty lines, Bolivia, 1999–2002

Poverty line Extreme poverty line

1999 2000 2001 2002 1999 2000 2001 2002

Bolivia 294.29 293.74 290.58 289.25 159.72 158.42 157.31 157.38

Urban 328.04 329.61 326.44 323.54 174.45 173.89 172.96 172.33
Rural 237.10 231.60 231.47 233.39 134.74 131.61 131.53 133.03

Notes: The exchange rates for each year were taken for the month in which each survey was carried
out and are 5.9 bolivianos per dollar for 1999, 6.3 for 2000, 6.8 for 2001, and 7.4 for 2002.
Source: Calculated by the Bolivia chapter authors.
Human_09App.qxd 25/10/05 6:19 PM Page 249

Appendix 249

Ecuador
In the chapter on Ecuador the poverty trends are estimated from aggregates of per
capita consumption, using a poverty line of $1.83 per day and an extreme poverty line
of $0.93 per day in 1994, consistent with the poverty lines used by the World Bank
(1996) and official government figures (ODEPLAN, Oficina de Planificación de la
Presidencia (President’s Office of Planning), 1999). References to more recent official
poverty lines are also included. The extreme poverty line relates to the cost of a basket
of food to satisfy the caloric requirements of the household. The poverty line is based
on the cost of a basic needs basket and is roughly twice the cost of that used to estab-
lish the extreme poverty line.
The value of 61466 sucres per month estimated for 1994 has been adjusted for infla-
tion and to account for the new items added to the basic consumption basket in the
questionnaires from 1995 onwards. This increased the value of the food products in
the basket by 8 per cent. In order to compare estimates of the consumption baskets
across years the cost of common food products has been calculated at constant prices
using the national price index as a deflator. The poverty lines are shown in Table A4.
The calculation of the poverty line is based on an Engel coefficient (the proportion
of total household consumption accounted for by food) of 0.506 (World Bank, 1996).
This value is consistent with poverty estimates calculated by the UN Economic
Commission for Latin America and the Caribbean (ECLAC) since 1971 for Latin
America. According to these estimates, households whose income or consumption is
close to the poverty line spend about half of their income on food. The Engel coefficient
for Ecuador is 0.543 for 1995 (World Bank, 1999) and 0.55 for 1998.
The poverty lines in Table A4 have been used in several governmental and non-
governmental studies (Larrea et al., 1996a, 1996b, 1999a, 1999b; PNUD, 1999, 2001,
2002) and their values are similar to those adopted by ECLAC (Table A5).
In 2000 the World Bank set a considerably lower extreme poverty line, based on a
new food consumption basket developed under the Intergrated System of Economic
Indicators (Sistema Integrado de Indicadores Sociales del Ecuador, SIISE) and later used
in official poverty estimates. Its value in 1995–70, 104 sucres (US$26) per capita
per month – was 24 per cent lower than the figure adopted for this study and the
lowest estimate adopted in Ecuador.
Several estimates have been made of the cost of a basic food basket that can satisfy
nutritional requirements according to the food types commonly eaten by the
Ecuadorian population. In 1988 the ILO estimated the value of the food basket and in

Table A4 Poverty lines, Ecuador, 1994–2003 (current sucres and US dollars per month)

Poverty Extreme poverty Poverty Extreme poverty

(sucres) (sucres) (US$) (US$)

1994 (July–August) 121 462 61 466 54.87 27.77

1995 (August–November) 181 400 91 800 68.16 34.49
1998 (February–May) 345 700 173 050 72.21 36.15
1999 (All year) 558 762 279 704 57.63 28.85
2000 (November)1 – – 44.20 22.37
2001 (November) – – 55.39 28.03
2003 (December) – – 65.47 33.27

1
Note: Dollar adopted as currency from onwards 2000.
Human_09App.qxd 25/10/05 6:19 PM Page 250

250 Appendix

Table A5 ECLAC’s estimates of urban poverty, Ecuador, 1990–99

Extreme
Extreme Poverty Extreme poverty Poverty
poverty line line poverty line Poverty headcount headcount
(sucres) (sucres) (US$) line (US$) (%) (%)

1990 (November) 18 465 36 930 21.6 43.2 26.2 62.1

1994 (November) 69 364 138 729 30.1 60.3 25.5 57.9
1997 (October) 142 233 284 465 33.9 67.8 22.2 56.2
1999 (October) 301 716 603 432 19.3 38.5 31.3 63.6

Source: CEPAL (2002).

1993 new values were estimated based on a caloric requirement of 2237 calories per
person per day, complemented by 50 grams of protein and other nutritional necessi-
ties, using linear programming methods (Larrea, 1990; Cabrera et al., 1993).
In 1994 the World Bank composed a new food basket based on the same caloric
requirement (World Bank, 1996). Instead of applying mathematical optimization to
determine the composition of the food basket, a method based on actual food practices
was used. The food basket composition was obtained from averages of the 73 main
food items eaten by the second and third consumption quintiles of the population.
This consumption pattern was rescaled to obtain 2237 calories per person. Its cost was
estimated as the weighted average of the costs in all the municipalities included in the
1994 Living Standards Measurement Survey.
The extreme poverty line adopted in the Ecuador chapter is based on the 1994
World Bank food basket. Its 1998 value was obtained by adjusting its value for inflation,
in line with the consumer price index. As new food items were added to the consump-
tion questionnaire from 1995 onwards the extreme poverty line has been adjusted
accordingly.
The SIISE basic food basket is based on a similar method to that used to obtain the
1994 World Bank estimate, but using a different table for the caloric content of food
items and assuming an average 96 per cent ratio between the calories eaten and those
contained in the raw food items (SIISE, 2001).
Although no comprehensive information exists on the SIISE caloric tables and their
assumptions, it is important to point out that SIISE poverty lines are considerably
lower than other extreme poverty lines used by the World Bank in previous years and
by other international and multilateral institutions such as ECLAC and the ILO.

Guatemala
In order to compare the poverty rates in Guatemala 1989 and 2000 three differences
between the data in those year has to be addressed. First, in the 1989 National
Sociodemographic Survey the respondents were aged 10 and over, while in the 2000
survey the respondents were of all ages. While we could have imputed data for respon-
dents under the age of 10 in 1989, doing so would have introduced a comparison bias,
since we would have had to decide whether to compare all people under 10 with
people over 10, or indigenous and non-indigenous Guatemalans separately. To avoid
this we have only included respondents aged 10 and over in the analysis of the 2000
survey.
Human_09App.qxd 25/10/05 6:19 PM Page 251

Appendix 251

Second, the 2000 survey included questions on consumption and income, whereas
the 1989 survey only had questions on income. Consumption and income do not
perfectly correspond for any individual, perhaps because household surveys often
underestimate income (Deaton, 1997). While one could impute consumption rates for
each group in 1989, doing so would again introduce a comparison bias in respect of
whether incomes should be compared with the consumption of all people, or whether
each indigenous group’s income should be compared with its consumption, or
whether another method should be used.
Third, the 1989 survey included only five questions on income, whereas the 2000
survey had 30 questions that covered other sources of income not considered in
the 1989 survey. Imputing expanded income levels in 1989 based on the ratio of
incomes from five questions to incomes from 30 questions in 2000 would introduce
comparison bias.
The data on income poverty of people aged 10 and over are based only on the five
income questions that appeared in both the 1989 and the 2000 surveys. We have used
16 different methods of estimating poverty rates and rates of change using different
combinations of solutions to the problems outlined above. With all but one of those
methods the indigenous and non-indigenous poverty levels showed a decrease between
1989 and 2000, and the rate of decrease of non-indigenous poverty exceeded that of
indigenous poverty. That is, nearly all the methods of measuring poverty show that
indigenous poverty declined at a slower rate than non-indigenous poverty.
It should also be noted that in 2000 the poverty lines were designed to measure con-
sumption using a detailed set of questions, so that a person was defined as poor if she
or he consumed insufficient food (extreme poverty) or food and other goods (general
poverty). Using the responses to five rather than 30 income questions, as the analysis
mainly does, may overstate the level of poverty by underestimating incomes. However
since the concern of the study is the change in poverty between 1989 and 2000 more
than the level of poverty in either year, we have used the 2000 national poverty lines.
To address this concern we also provide consumption poverty data.

Mexico
Two national poverty lines are used to examine the incidence, depth and severity of
income poverty in Mexico: one for extreme poverty and one for moderate poverty.
These lines have been developed by the Technical Committee on Poverty Measurement
(see Comité Técnico para la Medición de la Pobreza, 2002) which was set up by the
Ministry of Social Development.7 The extreme poverty line is set at the per capita
household income needed to purchase a basic basket of food as defined by the National
Institute of Statistics, Geography and Information and the UN Economic Commission
for Latin America and the Caribbean.8 The moderate poverty line is based on the
income required to purchase the basic food basket and to cover basic education, health,
housing, clothing and public transport costs. In 2002 the extreme poverty line was set
at 16.5 pesos (US$2.4 at purchasing power parity, ppp) per person per day for rural areas
and 22.4 pesos ($3.2) per person per day for urban areas. The moderate poverty line was
set at 31.5 pesos ($4.5) per person per day for rural areas and 45.6 pesos ($6.5) per per-
son per day for urban areas. These poverty lines are higher in dollar terms than the
national poverty lines of many other Latin American countries, and this partly explains
why the estimated incidence of poverty in Mexico is higher than in countries with
lower national poverty lines. In order to make international poverty comparisons a
common poverty line is needed. To this end the chapter also uses the PPP $1 per day
and PPP $2 per day poverty lines to estimate the incidence of poverty in Mexico.
Human_09App.qxd 25/10/05 6:19 PM Page 252

252 Appendix

Peru
The poverty lines used in the chapter on Peru shown in Table A6. These lines are based
on the cost of a basic basket of food for extreme poverty, and this basket plus some
expenditure on transportation, health care, education and so on for general poverty,
by geographical region. The poverty lines have been converted to dollars using the
average exchange rate at the times the surveys were conducted.
As can be seen in the table, in 1994–2000 the poverty lines varied from region to
region and from one year to the next, with significant differences between Lima and
the other regions. The poverty lines for rural areas were much lower than those for
Lima. According to the internationally accepted poverty line of US$2 per day, urban
poverty decreased, between 1994 and 2000, especially in Metropolitan Lima, but rural
areas remained considerably poorer.

Table A6 Poverty lines, Peru, 1994–2000 (US$2 per day)

1994 1997 2000

Extreme Extreme Extreme

poverty Poverty poverty Poverty poverty Poverty

Lima 1.13 2.29 1.22 2.60 0.96 2.22

Urban coast 0.98 2.00 1.06 2.40 0.85 1.84
Rural coast 0.87 1.62 0.94 1.44 0.75 1.25
Urban sierra 0.83 1.79 0.89 1.94 0.71 1.58
Rural sierra 0.73 1.14 0.82 1.31 0.61 1.03
Urban jungle 0.88 1.70 0.95 1.81 0.74 1.53
Rural jungle 0.81 1.34 0.91 1.37 0.66 1.06

Sources: National Living Standards Survey, 1991, 1994, 1997, 2000; National Household
Survey, 2001.

Measuring labour market outcomes

Child labour is analyzed as a sequential decision-making process, using three binary
probit models. In the sequential probit model the probabilities for the four choices are
determined as follows:

P1  F (b X) (A3)

P2  [1  F(b1 X )] F(b2 X ) (A4)

P3  [1  F (b1 X )][1  F (b2 X )] F (b3 X ) (A5)

P4  [1  F (b1 X )][1  F (b2 X )][1  F (b3 X )] (A6)

where F is the standard normal distribution function, and b1, b2 and b3 are vectors of
the model parameters. The vector X contains the explanatory variables. Parameters b1
are estimated for the entire sample, parameters b2 are estimated for the sample of
children, excluding those who go to school, and parameters b3 are estimated for
the sample of children who do not go to school or work for wages. Figure A1 portrays
Human_09App.qxd 25/10/05 6:19 PM Page 253

Appendix 253

Figure A1 Decision-making process for child labour

Schooling only
(P1)
Work and school
All other (P2) Waged work
options (P3)
All other
options
Work in household
(P4)

Sample: All active Children working Children not in school

children and working

the sequential decision-making process and the samples used in the estimation of
each step.
Differential outcomes indicate the level of inequality and poverty associated with
being indigenous. In a way the higher incidence of poverty, fewer years of schooling and
lower earnings are costs of being indigenous. It is necessary to control for the many fac-
tors that influence the various indicators of well-being before estimating how much of
the difference between indigenous and non-indigenous people is due to characteristics
that are affected by public policy and individual characteristics that cannot be changed.
In other words the point is to calculate how much of the difference in outcomes can be
exlained by objective factors and how much is due to discrimination in society.
In the case of earnings differentials, multivariate regression analysis allows for the
simulation of alternative outcomes and the decomposition of gross differentials. The
decomposition method, the technique for analyzing earnings differentials, was popu-
larized in the economics literature (Oaxaca, 1973; Blinder, 1973). It was first used to ana-
lyze the determinants of male–female earnings differentials, and has since been used to
analyze ethnic earnings differentials, public–private sector earnings differentials and
earnings differentials by socioeconomic background, and to test the screening hypoth-
esis and the effectiveness of job training programmes. Most analyses have focused on
developed countries, although there have been some studies an developing countries
(Birdsall and Sabot, 1991; Psacharopoulos and Tzannatos, 1992; World Bank, 2004b).
The methods used by Psacharopoulos and Patrinos (1994) will be used here to
measure and compare labour market outcomes. Earnings functions for indigenous and
non-indigenous workers will also be estimated. The standard procedure for analyzing
the determinants of earnings differentials between two groups is to fit, or estimate,
the following two equations, or earnings functions, for employed members of the
economically dominant group and employed members of the marginal group:

lnYn  bn Xn  un (A7)
lnYi  bi Xi  ui (A8)

where the subscripts n and i are non-indigenous (majority) and indigenous (minority)
workers, Y is labour market earnings and X is a vector of measured productivity-
determining characteristics of workers, such as education, experience and other control
Human_09App.qxd 25/10/05 6:19 PM Page 254

254 Appendix

variables. The regression coefficients, b, reflect the returns that the market yields to a
unit change in variables such as education and experience. The error term, u, reflects
measurement error, as well as the effect of factors unmeasured or unobserved by the
researcher.
It is known that the regression lines pass through the mean values of the variables
so that

lnYn  b̂ i Xn1 (A9)

lnYi  b̂ i Xi (A10)

where circumflexes (ˆ) denote estimated values and macrons () represent mean values.
If indigenous (minority) workers were to receive the same returns as non-indigenous
(majority) workers for their wage-determining endowments, then their average earnings
would be:

lnY*i  b̂ n Xi (A11)

which are the average earnings of indigenous (minority) workers that would prevail in
the absence of wage discrimination. Subtracting Equation A11 from A9 gives the dif-
ference between average non-indigenous (majority) earnings and the average hypo-
thetical indigenous (minority) earnings that would prevail if indigenous (minority)
workers were paid according to the same pay structure as non-indigenous (majority)
workers. This difference reflects their unequal endowments of income-generating
characteristics, so that

lnYn  ln Y*i  b̂ n Xn  b̂ n Xi  b̂ n (Xn  Xi ) (A12)

Subtracting Equation A19 from A11 yields the difference between the hypothetical
non-discriminatory earnings of indigenous (minority) workers and their actual earn-
ings. This difference reflects the different returns from the same income-generating
characteristics:

ln Y*i  lnYi  b̂ n Xi  b̂ i Xi  Xi (b̂ n  b̂ i ) (A13)

Adding Equations A12 and A13 yields

lnYn  lnYi  b̂ n (X n  Xi)  Xi (b̂ n  b̂ i ) (A14)

This can be rewritten as

lnYn  ln Yi  b̂ i (Xn  Xi)  Xn (b̂ n  b̂ i ) (A15)

Thus according to Equation A14, the overall earnings gap can be decomposed into two
components: that attributable to differences in endowments of income-generating
characteristics (Xn  Xi) evaluated according to the non-indigenous pay structure
(bn); and that attributable to the different returns (bn  bi) that non-indigenous and
indigenous workers receive for the same income-generating endowments (Xi). The lat-
ter component is often taken as reflecting wage discrimination. This is known as the
Oaxaca decomposition, which enables estimation of discrimination from earnings
functions estimated at the indigenous means (or non-indigenous wage structure)
Human_09App.qxd 25/10/05 6:19 PM Page 255

Appendix 255

(Oaxaca, 1973; see also Blinder 1973). According to Equation A15 the components are
attributable to differences in endowments of income-generating characteristics
(Xn  Xi) evaluated according to the indigenous worker pay structure (bi), and to
differences in the returns (bn  bi) that non-indigenous and indigenous workers
receive for the same income-generating endowments (Xn). Similar to Equation A14,
this latter component is often taken as reflecting wage discrimination. Equation A15
is an Oaxaca decomposition evaluated at non-indigenous means (or indigenous wage
structure).
The wage structure that would prevail in the absence of discrimination is not
known. This is referred to as the ‘index number problem’ (see for example Cotton,
1988; Neumark, 1988; Gunderson, 1989). One solution to this problem is to obtain
estimates from both formulations and thus report a range.
Also unknown is the wage that would prevail in the absence of discrimination. In
other words the level of the ‘non-discriminatory wage’ is not known. Nevertheless it is
fairly certain that the non-discriminatory wage will not be the current minority wage,
since that would mean that this group would have no particular financial reason for
desiring an end to discrimination since their wages would be unaffected by the
change. Similarly if it is assumed that the majority wage is the equilibrium level, then
the majority group would not object to an end to discrimination since their own
wages would not be affected. But as Cotton (1988) argues, neither the majority nor the
minority wage structure would prevail in the absence of discrimination because
both wage structures are a function of discrimination. The non-discriminatory wage
lies somewhere between that of the majority and that of the minority (see also
Reimers, 1983). Cotton therefore proposes the following formula for decomposing the
differential:

lnYn  lnYi  b*(Xn  Xi )  Xn(b̂ n  b*)  Xi(b*  b̂ i ) (A16)

The decomposition component is made up of two elements, one representing the

amount by which the majority productivity characteristics are overvalued [Xn (bn  b*)]
and the other the amount by which minority productivity characteristics are under-
valued [Xi(b*  bi )]. The coefficient b* is the non-discriminatory wage structure. This
method will give estimates that lie between those derived from Equations A14 and
A15; in other words the Oaxaca method either overestimates productivity differences
and underestimates discrimination (Equation A14), or it underestimates productivity
differences and overestimates discrimination (Equation A15).
The non-discriminatory wage structure, b*, however, is unobserved and its estimate
is based on three assumptions about its nature: (1) in the absence of discrimination
the majority group will receive a lower wage than at present and the minority group
will receive a higher wage; (2) b* is a linear combination of bn and bi; and (3) the non-
discriminatory wage structure will be closer to the majority wage structure than to the
minority wage structure. The non-discriminatory wage structure, then, is operationalized
in the following manner:

b*  fn b̂ n  fi b̂ i (A17)

where fn and fi are the proportions of the employed population from the majority and
minority groups.
Oaxaca and Ransom (1989, 1994) also examine the index number problem and the
caveats applied to the determinants of gender wage rates in the absence of discrimination
Human_09App.qxd 25/10/05 6:19 PM Page 256

256 Appendix

and propose a decomposition method similar to that used by Cotton (1988), but
with one very important difference. The Oaxaca–Ransom non-discriminatory wage
structure is a blend of the current wage structures for the majority and minority
groups, and the corresponding coefficient, b*, is an estimate of the common wage
structure derived from a wage equation (estimated by OLS) using a pooled sample of
the majority and minority groups.
All four decomposition methods and the corresponding estimates of discrimination
are reported and commented upon in this book. But it should be noted that in eco-
nomic terms, discrimination refers to differences in economic outcomes between
groups that cannot be accounted for by the skills and productive characteristics of
these groups (Schultz, 1991). While this method enables determination of the extent
of discrimination in the labour market, it does not enable determination of the origins
of discrimination. Discrimination in the labour market can directly affect earnings,
occupational attainment and training access; or it can be indirect, through discrimi-
nation in the acquisition of skills prior to entering the labour market (Chiswick, 1987).
The use of earnings functions to estimate discrimination means that there will
always be a problem with omitted variables. This means that the unexplained
component is not only a measure of discrimination but also of an observer’s lack of
information. Other omitted variables that can be expected to account for some of the
discrimination component include quality of labour, attachment to (or regular attach-
ment to) the labour force, lack of specific training, interrupted work careers, and tastes
and personality.
There is also evidence that much of the discrimination against a minority group is
due to occupational segregation; that is, the channelling of the minority group into
certain occupations where pay and the chance of promotion are low. This of course
suggests that prior discrimination has taken place, such as restricted access to jobs,
training and schooling. A number of studies have shown that the greater the number
of variables used to control for differences in productivity-related factors, the smaller
the productivity-adjusted earnings gap (discrimination component) relative to the
unadjusted gap. Even when an extensive number of control variables is used, however,
most studies find some residual gap that they attribute to discrimination. When the
gap is close to zero, this is usually the result of including control variables whose
values may themselves reflect prior discrimination (Gunderson, 1989).
This problem has plagued researchers for many years. In terms of skills (school
quality), most of the household surveys used for the decomposition analyses in this
book do not produce information on the quality of education. This makes it difficult
to estimate the impact of human capital (proxied by years of schooling, not quality)
on earnings differentials. Fortunately a growing number of education quality assess-
ments are being undertaken. Some of these (for example in Bolivia and Guatemala)
collect information on students’ ethnicity, and international student assessments such
as UNESCO’s Latin American student assessment control for language. The findings are
worrisome. For example learning outcomes for indigenous people in Guatemala are con-
siderably worse than for non-indigenous people (World Bank, 2003f; McEwan, 2004).

Notes
1. The headcount index of poverty is the proportion of the population with an
income below the poverty line.
2. This method can lead to under- or overestimation if social prejudices in a society
cause individuals to deny their native origins, or some individuals believe they will
receive special social benefits by declaring themselves indigenous.
Human_09App.qxd 25/10/05 6:19 PM Page 257

Appendix 257

3. Cultural and sociopolitical forces also affect estimates of the size of the indigenous
population, in that social stigma associated with being indigenous can cause an
individual to identify him- or herself as non-indigenous when in fact he or she is
indigenous. For more details see Chapter 2.
4. The cities of Sucre, La Paz, Cochabamba, Oruro, Potosí, Tarija, Santa Cruz de la
Sierra, Trinidad, Cobija and El Alto. The combined populations of these cities
account for 48 per cent of the national population.
5. The data in this chapter differ from those presented in the forerunner to this study
(Psacharopoulos and Patrinos, 1994) because different rounds of the 1989 survey
have been used. Furthermore in 1995 the National Statistics Institute (INE)
recalculated expansion factors for the 1989 sample. The poverty lines used in the
present study correspond to Bolivia’s national lines.
6. The poverty lines used to produce the ENIGH estimates are explained in the next
section. These poverty lines were adjusted for the census estimates in order to
capture the amount of underreporting in the census income data.
7. The Technical Committee consists of researchers from various Mexican universities,
including the College of Mexico, the Centre for Economic Investigation and
Teaching, the Iberoamerican University, the Autonomous Metropolitan University,
public institutions such as the National Population Council, the National Institute
of Statistics, Geography and Information, the Secretariat of Social Development and
the Executive Office.
8. For urban areas a 2220 daily caloric intake was set, plus 40 grams pf protein. For
rural areas it was 2180 daily calories and 37grams of protein. Urban areas were
defind as municipalities with more than 15 000 inhabitants.
Human_10Bib.qxd 25/10/05 6:19 PM Page 258

Bibliography

Abram, M. (1989) ‘El papel de las organizaciones indígenas en la educación’, Ponencia

RAE, 6825, pp. 411–23.
Adams, Norma and Jürgen Golte (1990) Los caballos de troya de los invasores: estrategias
campesinas en la conquista de la gran Lima, 2nd edn (Lima: IEP).
Adams, Norma and Néstor Valdivia (1990) Los otros empresarios: cultura andina y
economía informal en Lima (Lima: IEP).
Adams, Richard H. (2004) Remittances and Poverty in Guatemala (Washington, DC:
World Bank).
Albó, Xavier (2000) ‘Iguales aunque diferentes’, Cuadernos de Investigación, 52.
Albó, Xavier and Lucía D’Emilio (1990) ‘Indigenous Languages and Intercultural
Bilingual Education in Bolivia’, Prospects, 20 (3), pp. 321–9.
Alcázar, Lorena, José Roberto López-Calix and Erik Wachtenheim (2003) Las Pérdidas
en el Camino. Fugas en el gasto público: transferencias municipales, vaso de leche y educación
(Lima: Apoyo).
Alcázar, Lorena and Erik Wachtenheim (2001) Determinantes del financiamiento de los
proyectos de FONCODES, Documento de Trabajo (Lima: Apoyo).
Alchon, S. A. (1991) Native Society and Disease in Colonial Ecuador (New York:
Cambridge University Press).
Alverson, H. (1979) ‘The Roots of Time: A Comment on Utilitarian and Primordial
Sentiments in Ethnic Identification’, in R. Hall (ed.), Ethnic Autonomy-Comparative
Dynamics: The Americas, Europe and the Developing World (New York: Pergamon Press).
Avirama, Jesús and Rayda Márquez (1994) ‘The indigenous movement in Colombia’,
in Donna Lee Van Cott (ed.), Indigenous People and Democracy in Latin America (New
York, NY: St Martin’s Press).
Baessa, Yetilu (2000–2001) Informe Nacional de Resultados del Program Nacional de
Evaluacion del Rendimiento Escolar – PRONERE (Guatemala City, Guatemala:
Guatemala Ministry of Education).
Banco Central del Ecuador (2004) Información Estadística Mensual, n. 1833, noviembre
(Quito: Banco Central del Ecuador).
Bando, G. R., L. F. Lopez-Calva and H. A. Patrinos (2004) Child Labor, School Attendance,
and Indigenous Households: Evidence from Mexico (Puebla: Universidad de las
Américas, and World Bank).
Barié, Cletus Gregor (2003) Pueblos Indígenas y derechos constituticionales en América
Latina: un panorama, 2nd edn (La Paz, Bolivia: Comisión Nacional para el Desarrollo
de los Pueblos Indígenas, Abya Yala and World Bank).
Barrera, A. (2001a) ‘Nada solo para los indios: A propósito del último levantamiento
indígena’, Revista del Observatorio Social de América Latina, 2 ( June) pp. 85–92.
Barrera, A. (2001b) Acción Colectiva y Crisis Política: El movimiento indígena ecuatoriana
en la década de los noventa (Quito, Ecuador: Observatorio Social de América Latina,
AbYA YaLA Centro de Investigaciones Urbanas).
Beck, S. and K. Mijeski (2001) ‘Barricades and Ballots: Ecuador’s Indians and the
Pachakutik Political Movement’, Ecuadorian Studies, 1 (September), pp. 1–23.
Becker, G. S. (1957) The Economics of Discrimination (Chicago, IL: University of Chicago
Press).

258
Human_10Bib.qxd 25/10/05 6:19 PM Page 259

Bibliography 259

Becker, Gary (1971) The Economics of Discrimination, 2nd edn (Chicago, IL: University
of Chicago Press).
Behrman, J., P. Segupta and P. Todd (2001) Progressing Through Progresa: An Impact
Assessment of a School Subsidy Experiment, 01–033 (Philadelphia, PA: Penn Institute of
Economic Research).
Bertrand, J. T., M. A. Pienda and R. Santiso (1979) ‘Ethnic Differences in Family
Planning Acceptance in Rural Guatemala’, Studies in Family Planning, 10 (8/9),
pp. 238–45.
Bertrand, M. and S. Mullainathan (2004) ‘Are Emily and Greg More Employable than
Lakisha and Jamal? A Field Experiment on Labor Market Discrimination’, American
Economic Review, 94 (4), pp. 991–1013.
Biesenbach, D. and J. Joswiak (2002) Gesellshaftliche Einbindung andiner Indigenas
(Hamburg: Deutsches Uebersee Institute).
Birdsall, N. and R. Sabot (eds) (1991) Unfair Advantage: Labor Market Discrimination in
Developing Countries (Washington, DC: World Bank).
Blinder, A. S. (1973) ‘Wage discrimination: Reduced form and structural estimates’,
Journal of Human Resources, 8 (4), pp. 436–65.
Blum, V. (2001) ‘Indigene Organisationen als politische Akteure in Ekuador’,
Lateinamerika: Analysen, Daten, Dokumentation, 17 (September), pp. 45–57.
Borah, Woodrow W. (1989) Essays in Population History: Mexico and the Caribbean
(Berkeley, CA: University of California Press).
Boulding, Elise (1997) ‘Foreword’, in J. Smith, C. Chatfield and R. Pagnineco (eds),
Transnational Social Movements and Global Politics: Solidarity beyond the State
(Syracuse, NY: Syracuse University Press).
Bound, J. and R. B. Freeman (1989) ‘Black Economic Progress: Erosion of Post-1965
Gains in the 1980s?’, in Steven Shulmand and William Darity Jr (eds), Question of
Discrimination: Racial Inequality in the U.S. Labor Market (Middletown, YCT: Wesleyan
University Press).
Brisset Martín, D. (1992) ‘Autoorganización de los indígenas del Ecuador’, Gazeta de
Antropología, 9, pp. 9–15.
Bruhn, Kathleen (1999) ‘Antonio Gramsci and the Palabra Verdadera: The Political
Discourse of Mexico’s Guerrilla Forces’, Journal of Interamerican Studies and World
Affairs, 41 (2), pp. 29–55.
Brush, S. B. (1977) ‘The Myth of the Idle Peasant: Employment in a Subsistence
Economy’, in R. Halperin and J. Dow (eds), Peasant Livelihood: Studies in Economic
Anthropology and Cultural Ecology (New York, NY: St. Martin’s Press).
Burns, A. F. (1993) Maya in Exile: Guatemalans in Florida (Philadelphia, PA: Temple
University Press).
Caballero, B. (2001) ‘School health and community nutrition: Early nutrition and risk
of disease in the adult’, Public Health Nutrition, 4 (6a), pp. 1335–6.
Cabrera, Yoyanda, Judith Martínez and Rolando Morales (1993) Medición de la Pobreza
en las Areas Urbana y Rural del Ecuador (Quito, Equador: INE and UNICEF).
Calderoni, J. (1998) Telesecundaria: Using TV to Bring Education to Rural Mexico,
Education and Technology Technical Notes Series 3 (2) (Washington, DC: World
Bank Human Development Network).
Card, D. and A. Krueger (1992) ‘School Quality and Black–White Relative Earnings: A
Direct Assessment’, Quarterly Journal of Economics, 107 (1), pp. 151–200.
Cárdenas, Victor Hugo (1997) ‘Indigenous Peoples, Development and Democracy in
Latin America’, address given to Inter-American Development Bank, Washington,
DC, 4 February.
Human_10Bib.qxd 25/10/05 6:19 PM Page 260

260 Bibliography

Carnoy, M. (1979) Can Educational Policy Equalise Income Distribution in Latin America?
(Farnborough: Saxon House).
Carter, Bentley (1987) ‘Ethnicity and practice’, Comparative Studies of Society and
History, 29 (1), pp. 24–55.
Cartwright, K. and H. A. Patrinos (1999) ‘Child Labor in Urban Bolivia’, in
C. Grootaert and H. A. Patrinos (eds), The Policy Analysis of Child Labor:
A Comparative Study (New York, NY: St Martin’s Press).
Castaneda, Tarcisio (2002) Tendencias de Largo Plazo en Tamano, Eficiencia y Focalización
del Gasto Social en América Latina y el Caribe (Washington, DC: Inter-American
Development Bank).
CELADE (1992) Boletín Demográfico.
CELADE (2002) ‘Estimaciones y Proyecciones de Población 1950–2050’, Boletín
Demográfico, 69, pp. 85–90.
Center for Applied Linguistics and World Bank (1975) Peru: A Profile of Languages and
Their Use (Washington, DC: Center for Applied Linguistics).
Centro para la Acción Legal en Derechos Humanos (CALDH) (1999) ‘Consulta piloto
sobre niñez trabajadora’, mimeo (Guatemala City: CALDH).
CEPAL (1999) Efectos macroeconómicos del fenómeno El Niño de 1997–1998: su impacto
en las economías andinas (Santiago; CEPAL).
CEPAL (2002) Panorama Social de América Latina (Santiago, Chile: CEPAL).
CEPAR (1999) El Peso de la Enfermedad en Ecuador (Quito, Ecuador: CEPAR).
CEPLAES (2000) Educación y poblaciones indígenas y afroecuatoriana en el Ecuador (Quito,
Ecuador: Centro de Planificación para los Estudios Sociales).
Chapin, Mac (1989) ‘The 500,000 Invisible Indians of El Salvador’, Cultural Survival
Quarterly, 13(3).
Chávez, Ana María (2002) ‘La definición de la población indígena en México en el
Censo de Población del Año 2000’, paper presented at the Workshop on
Methodologies to Estimate the Indigenous Population of Mexico, 7 November.
Chen, C. H., R. Santiso and L. Morris (1983) ‘Impact of Accessibility of Contraceptives
on Contraceptive Prevalence in Guatemala’, Studies in Family Planning, 14 (11),
pp. 275–83.
Chesterfield, R. and F. E. Rubio (1997) ‘Incentives for the participation of Guatemalan
indigenous girls in primary education: Final evaluation of the Eduque a la Niña pilot
project’, mimeo (Guatemala City: Academy for Educational Development).
Chiswick, B. R. (1987) ‘Race Earnings Differentials’, in G. Psacharopoulos (ed.),
Economics of Education: Research and Studies (Oxford: Pergamon Press).
Chiswick, Barry R., Harry A. Patrinos and Michael E. Hurst (2000) ‘Indigenous
Language Skills and the Labor Market in a Developing Economy: Bolivia’, Economic
Development and Cultural Change, 48 (2), pp. 349–67.
Choque, Celestino (1993) ‘Bolivia: El Proyecto de Educación Intercultural Bilingüe’, in
proceedings of the ETARE/UNICEF Conference, La Paz, Bolivia, 6–9 July 1992.
Comisión de la Verdad y Reconciliación (CVR) (2003) Resumen del Informe Final de la
Comisión de la Verdad y Reconciliación (www.cverdad.org.pe).
Comité Técnico para la Medición de la Pobreza (2002) Medición de la pobreza en México:
Variantes Metodológicas y Estimación Preliminar (Mexico: SEDESOL).
Commander, Simon and Peek, Peter (1986) ‘Oil Exports, Agrarian Change and the
Rural Labor Procces: The Ecuadorian Sierra in the 1970s’, World Development, 14 (1),
pp. 79–96.
CONAIE (2004) The Confederation of Indigenous Nationalities of Ecuador: Representing the
Indigenous Voice in a Modern World (http://conaie.nativeweb.org/brochure.html).
Human_10Bib.qxd 25/10/05 6:19 PM Page 261

Bibliography 261

Conejo, M. (1998) Población Indígena y Reforma del Sector Salud: El caso de Ecuador. Fondo
Indígena para el Desarrollo de los Pueblos Indígenas de América Latina y el Caribe:
Programa de Entrenamiento para Técnicos y Profesionales Indígenas (Washington, DC:
Pan American Health Organization).
Consejo Nacional de Población (2002) La población de México en el nuevo siglo (Mexico:
Consejo Nacional de Poblacíon).
Contreras, Dante G. and Marco Galván (2003) Ha disminuido la discriminación salarial
por género y etnia en Bolivia/ Evidencia del período 1994–1999, working paper
(Santiago, Chile: University of Chile).
Contreras, M. (2000) ‘Reformas y desafios de la educación en Bolivia en el siglo XX La
formación de la Bolivia Contemporánea’ in Fernando Campero (ed.), Bolivia en el
siglo XX. La formación de la Bolivia contemporánea (La Paz, Bolivia: Harvard Club of
Bolivia).
Cook, Sherburne F. and Leslie Byrd Simpson (1948) The Population of Central Mexico in
the Sixteenth Century (Berkeley and Los Angeles, CA: University of California Press).
Costales, A. and P. Peñaherrera (1970) ‘Resultados del Primer Censo Indígena de la
Provincia de Pichincha’, América Indígena, 4, pp. 1039–96.
Cotton, J. (1988) ‘On the Decomposition of Wage Differentials’, The Review of
Economics and Statistics, 70 (2), pp. 236–43.
Cruz, M. (1997) ‘Pacha and verticality: Reasserting ethnic identity, community and
place in the Ecuadorean Andes’, paper presented at the Latin American Studies
Association Meeting, Guadalajara, Mexico, 23–26 April.
Cummings, S. M. and Stella Tamayo (1994) Language and Education in Latin America:
An Overview, World Bank Human Resources Development and Operations Working
Paper 13068 (Washington, DC: World Bank).
Cunningham, W. and J. Jacobsen, with L. Siga and A. Risi (2003) ‘Between-Group,
Within-Group, and National Inequality: The Role of Race, Ethnicity, and Gender’,
in Inequality and the State in Latin America and the Caribbean (Washington, DC:
World Bank).
Darity, W. A., and P. L. Mason (1998) ‘Evidence on Discrimination in Employment:
Codes of Color, Codes of Gender’, Journal of Economic Perspectives, 12 (2), pp. 63–90.
Davis, S. H., and Julie Hodson (1982) Witness to Political Violence in Guatemala: The
Suppression of a Rural Development Movement (Boston, MA: Oxfam America).
Davis, Shelton and Enrique Sanchez (2003) ‘Indigenous Peoples and Afro-Colombian
Communities’, in Marcelo M Giugale, Olivier Lafourcade and Connie Luff (eds),
Colombia: The Economic Foundation of Peace (Washington, DC: The World Bank).
Deaton, Angus (1997) The Analysis of Household Surveys: A Microeconometric Approach to
Development Policy (Baltimore, MD: The Johns Hopkins University Press and The
World Bank).
de Ferranti, D., G. Perry, I. Gill, J. Guasch, W. Maloney, C. Sanchez-Paramo and N.
Schady (2003) Closing the Gap in Education and Technology (Washington, DC: World
Bank).
Degregori, Carlos Iván (2000) ‘El estudio del otro: cambios en el análisis sobre etnicidad
en el Perú’ in Julio Cotler (ed.), Perú 1964–1994. Economía, Sociedad y Política
(Lima: IEP).
Degregori, Carlos Iván (1993) ‘Identidad étnica, movimientos sociales y participación
política en el Perú’, in Democracia, etnicidad y violencia política en los países andinos
(Lima: IFEA/IEP).
De la Cadena, Marisol (1991) ‘Las mujeres son más indias. Etnicidad y género en una
comunidad del Cusco’, Revista Andina, 17, pp. 7–29.
Human_10Bib.qxd 25/10/05 6:19 PM Page 262

262 Bibliography

Del Álamo, Oscar (2003) ‘El lado indígena de la desigualdad’, paper presented at the
conference on Democracia, Gobernanza y Bienestar en las Sociedades Globales,
Barcelona, 27–29 November.
Deler, J. P., N. Gómez and Michael Portais (1983) El Manejo del espacio en el Ecuador:
Etapas Claves (Quito, Ecuador: CEDIG).
D’Emilio, Lucia (1996) Voices and Progresses Toward Pluralism: Indigenous Education in
Bolivia, New Education Division Documents No. 9 (Stockholm, Sweden: Swedish
International Development Cooperation Agency).
Deruyttere, Anne (1997) ‘Indigenous Peoples and Sustainable Development: The Role
of the Inter-American Development Bank’, paper presented at the IDB Forum of the
Americas, Washington, DC, 8 April.
Dewey, M. and C. Parker (2000) ‘Survey into health problems of elderly people:
Multivariate analysis of concordance between self-report and proxy information’,
International Journal of Epidemiology, 29 (4), pp. 698–703.
Dirección General de Educación Indígena (DGEI) (1993) Información de Alumnos,
Maestros, y Escuelas de Educación Inicial, Preescolar y Primaria Indígena por Entidad y
Grupo Étnico (Mexico City: DGEI).
Dirección Nacional de Educación Intercultural Bilingüe de Ecuador (DINEIB) (2003)
Educación Indígena en el Ecuador (www.hoy.net/dineib and www.dineib.edu.edu/).
Dirección General de Estadística, Encuestas y Censos (DGEEC) (2002) Pueblos indígenas
del Paraguay. Resultados finales (Asunción, Paraguay: DGEEC.
DNE (1942) Ecuador en Cifras (Quito, Ecuador: Dirección Nacional de Estadísticas).
Doctor, H. V. (2001) Determinants of Self-Reported Health Status in Rural Malawi
(Philadelphia, PA: Population Studies Center, University of Pennsylvania).
Donohue, J., and J. Heckman (1991) ‘Continuous vs. Episodic Change: The Impact of
Civil Rights Policy on the Economic Status of Blacks’, Journal of Economic Literature,
29 (4), pp. 1603–43.
Dutcher, N. (1982) The Use of First and Second Languages in Primary Education: Selected
Case Studies, World Bank Staff Working Paper 504 (Washington, DC: World Bank).
Dutcher, Nadine and G. Richard Tucker (1997) The Use of First and Second Languages in
Education: A Review of International Experience (Washington, DC: World Bank).
Ecociencia (2001) Sistema de Monitoreo Socioambiental del Ecuador (Quito: Ecociencia)
CD-ROM.
Edwards, J. (2002) ‘Education and Poverty in Guatemala’, mimeo (New Orleans, LA:
Tulane University.)
Encalada, E., F. Garcia and Kristine Ivarsdotter (1999) La participación de los pueblos
indígenas y negros en el desarrollo del Ecuador (Washington, DC: Inter American
Development Bank).
Encuesta Nacional sobre Condiciones de Vida (ENCOVI) (2000) Instituto Nacional de
Estadística (Guatemala: ENCOVI).
Encuesta Nacional Sociodemográfico (1989) (Guatemala: National Institute of Statistics).
Escobal, J. and C. Ponce (2002) El beneficio de los Caminos Rurales, documento de
Trabajo, 40 (Lima: GRADE).
Feiring, B. (2003) Indigenous Peoples and Poverty: The Cases of Bolivia, Guatemala,
Honduras and Nicaragua (London: Minority Rights Group International).
Flores, Alexandra Martínez (1999) Consultation with the Poor in Ecuador: Final Report
(Washington, DC: World Bank).
Fogel, Robert W. (1998) ‘Have the Extent and the Impact of Chronic Malnutrition
Been Underestimated? A Theory of Technophysio Evolution and Its Implications for
Nutritional Standards’, Contemporary Economic Issues: Proceedings of the Eleventh World
Human_10Bib.qxd 25/10/05 6:19 PM Page 263

Bibliography 263

Congress of the International Economic Association, Tunis, IEA Conference, 122 (New
York, NY: St. Martin’s Press; London: Palgrave Macmillan) pp. 103–31.
Forero, Juan, with Larry Rohter (2003) ‘Native Latins are Astir and Thirsty for Power’,
The New York Times, 22 March, p. A3.
Fraser, Barbara and Paul Jeffrey (2004) ‘Fighting for Rights After Centuries of
Discrimination’, National Catholic Reporter, 24 September.
Fretes-Cibils, V., M. Giugale and Jose Roberto López-Cálix (eds) (2003) Ecuador: An
Economic and Social Agenda in the New Millennium (Washington, DC: World Bank).
Funkhouser, E. (1996) ‘The Urban Informal Sector in Central America: Household
Survey Evidence’, World Development, 24 (11), pp. 1727–51.
Gajate, Giselle and Marisol Inurritegui (2003) ‘El impacto del Vaso de Leche sobre el
nivel de nutrición infantil’, Economía y Sociedad, 50 (November), pp. 63–70.
Galor, O. and D. Mayer (2002) ‘Food for Thought: Basic Needs and Persistent
Educational Inequality’, in Health, Human Capital and Economic Growth (Washington,
DC: Pan American Health Organization).
Gerlach, A. (2003) Indians, Oil and Politics: A Recent History of Ecuador (Wilmington, DE:
Scholarly Resources).
Gilbreth, Chris and Gerardo Otero (2001) ‘Democratization in Mexico: The Zapatista
Uprising and Civil Society’, Latin American Perspectives, 28 (4), pp. 7–29.
Glei, D. A. (1999) Understanding Ethnic Variation in Pregnancy-Related Health Care in
Rural Guatemala (Princeton, NJ: Princeton Office of Population Research).
Gnerre, M. (1990) Indigenous Peoples in Latin America, Working Paper, 30 (Rome, Italy:
International Fund for Agricultural Development).
Godoy, Ricardo, Dean Karlan, Shanti Rabindran and Tomas Huanca (2005) ‘Do
Modern Forms of Human Capital Matter in Primitive Economies? Comparative
Evidence from Bolivia’, Economics of Education Review, 24 (1), pp. 45–53.
Gólcher B., Raquel (2004) ‘Educación de indígenas termina en la primaria’, La Nación,
15 August, pp. 4–5.
Gonzalez, Mary Lisbeth (1994) ‘How Many Indigenous People?’, in George
Psacharopoulos and Harry Anthony Patrinos (eds), Indigenous People and Poverty in
Latin America: An Empirical Analysis (Washington, DC: World Bank).
Gottschalk, P. (1997) ‘Inequality, Income Growth, and Mobility: The Basic Facts’,
Journal of Economic Perspectives, 11 (2), pp. 21–40.
Government of Guatemala and the Unidad Revolucionaria Nacional Guatemalteca
(1995) ‘Acuerdo de Identidad y Derechos de los Pueblos Indígenas’, signed in
Mexico City, Mexico, 31 March.
Gragnolati, M. (1999) Children’s Growth and Poverty in Rural Guatemala, World Bank
Policy Research Working Paper 2193 (Washington, DC: World Bank).
Greene, J. P. (1998) A Meta-Analysis of the Effectiveness of Bilingual Education (http://
ourworld.compuserve.com/homepages/JWCRAWFORD/greene.htm).
Grootaert, C. and H. Patrinos (1999) Policy Analysis of Child Labor: A Comparative Study
(New York, NY: St. Martin’s Press).
Gunderson, M. (1989) ‘Male–Female Wage Differentials and Policy Responses’, Journal
of Economic Literature, 27 (1), pp. 46–72.
Hahn, D. R. (1991) The Divided World of the Bolivian Andes: A Structural View of
Domination and Resistance (New York, NY: Crane Russak).
Hawkins, J. (1984) Inverse Images: The Meaning of Culture, Ethnicity, and Family in
Postcolonial Guatemala (Albuquerque, NM: University of New Mexico Press).
Heckman, J. J. (1990) ‘The Central Role of the South in Accounting for the Economic
Progress of Black Americans’, American Economic Review, 80 (2), pp. 242–6.
Human_10Bib.qxd 25/10/05 6:19 PM Page 264

264 Bibliography

Heckt, M. (1999) ‘Mayan Education in Guatemala: A Pedagogical Model and its

Political Context’, International Review of Education, 45 (3/4), pp. 321–37.
Hernandez, I. (1988) ‘Identidad Indigena y Educacion’, Desarrollo Economico, 28 (109),
pp. 121–37.
Herrera, Javier (2002) La Pobreza en el Perú 2001: Una Visión Departamental (Lima:
INEI/IRD).
Herrera, Javier (2003) La Pobreza en el Perú 2002: Una Visión Departamental (Lima:
INEI/IRD).
Heyneman, Stephen (1979) Primary Education in Bolivia: What’s Wrong? (Washington,
DC: World Bank, Education Department).
Hornberger, Nancy (1987) ‘Bilingual Education Success, but Policy Failure’, Language
in Society, 16 (2), pp. 205–26.
Hornberger, Nancy (2000) ‘Bilingual Education Policy and Practice in the Andes:
Ideological Paradox and Intercultural Possibility’, Anthropology & Education
Quarterly, 31 (2), pp. 173–201.
Huber, Ludwig (1997) Etnicidad y economía en el Perú, Working Paper 83, Anthropology
Series 11 (Lima: IEP).
Hurtado, Osvaldo (2000) ‘Visión optimista del Ecuador’, Criterios, 27 ( July), pp. 6–8.
Instituto Centro Americano de Población y Familia (ICAPF) (1972) Fecundidad en
Guatemala (Guatemala: ICAPF).
Instituto Nacional de Antropología e Historia (INAH) (1987) Dinámica de la Poblacion
de Habla Indígena (1900–1980) (Mexico, DF: INAH).
Instituto Nacional de Estadística (INE) (2003) Bolivia: Características Sociodemográficas
de la Población Indígena (La Paz Bolivia: INE).
Instituto Nacional de Estadística and Organización Internacional del Trabajo (INE
and OIT) (2003) Estudio cualitativo sobre el trabajo infantil en Guatemala
(Guatemala: OIT).
Instituto Nacional Indigenista (INI) (2000) Estado del Desarrollo económico y social de los
Indígenas en México, 1996–1997 (Mexico City, Mexico: PNUD-INI).
Instituto Nacional Indigenista (INI) (2002) Indicadores socioeconómicos de los pueblos
indígenas de México, 2002 (Mexico City, Mexico: INI, PNUD and CONAPO).
Instituto Nacional Indigenista (INI) (n.d.) ‘Perfil Indígena de México’, mimeo (Mexico
City: INIM).
Instituto Nacional Indigenista (INI) (2003) Indicadores socioeconómicos de los pueblos
indígenas de México, 2002 (Mexico City, Mexico: INI).
Inter-American Development Bank (IDB) (2001) Remittances to Latin America and the
Caribbean: Comparative Statistics (Washington, DC: IDB).
Inter-American Development Bank (2003) ‘Making Indigenous Rights the Law’, paper
presented at the Seminar on Indigenous Rights and Legislation in Latin America:
Advances and Challenges, Washington, DC, 5 March.
International Labour Organisation (1991) Conventions and Recommendations 1919–1991,
vol. 2 (Geneva: ILO).
International Monetary Fund (IMF) (2003) International Financial Statistics (Washington,
DC: IMF, December).
International Work Group for Indigenous Affairs (IWGIA) (1994) The Indigenous World
1993–94 (Copenhagen: Nordisk Bogproduktion).
International Work Group for Indigenous Affairs (IWGIA) (1995) The Indigenous
World 1994–1995 (Copenhagen: Nordisk Bogproduktion).
International Work Group for Indigenous Affairs (IWGIA) (1996) The Indigenous World
1995–1996 (Copenhagen: Eks-Skolens Trykkeri).
International Work Group for Indigenous Affairs (IWGIA) (1998) The Indigenous World
1997–1998 (Copenhagen: Eks-Skolens Trykkeri).
Human_10Bib.qxd 25/10/05 6:19 PM Page 265

Bibliography 265

International Work Group for Indigenous Affairs (IWGIA) (2000) The Indigenous World
1999–2000 (Copenhagen: Eks-Skolens Trykkeri).
Jiménez Sanchez, Ajb’ee Odilio (1998) ‘Mayan Languages and the Mayan Movement
in Guatemala’, paper presented to Latin American Studies Association, Chicago, IL,
24–26 September.
Johnston, F. E., M. Borden and R. B. MacVean (1973) ‘Height, Weight and Their
Growth Velocities in Guatemalan Private School Children of High Socioeconomic
Class’, Human Biology, 45, pp. 627–41.
Josse, C. (2001) La biodiversidad en el Ecuador: Informe 2000 (Quito, Ecuador: Ministry
of Environment, The World Conservation Union and Ecociencia).
Klein, H. (1982) Bolivia, the Evolution of a Multi-Ethnic Society (New York, NY: Oxford
University Press).
Kueper, W. and T. Valiente (1999) Lengua, Cultura y Educación en el Ecuador 1990–1993
(Quito, Ecuador: Abya-Yala).
Landa, Fernando (2003) ‘Pobreza y Distribución del Ingreso En Bolivia entre 1999 y
2002’, mimeo (La Paz, Bolivia: UDAPE).
Larrea, Carlos (1990) Pobreza, Necesidades Básicas y Desempleo: Area Urbana del Ecuador
(Quito, Ecuador: National Institute of Statistics and Latin American Institute of
Social Research).
Larrea, C. (1993) ‘The Mirage of Development: Oil, Employment and Poverty in
Ecuador’, unpublished PhD dissertation, York University, Toronto.
Larrea, C. (2003) Impacto de la Nutrición sobre el Nivel de Vida y los Retornos Educativos:
Análisis de las Encuestas DHS Informe de Avance (Quito: PAHO).
Larrea, C. (2004) Pobreza Dolarización y Crisis en el Ecuador (Quito, Ecuador: Abya-Yala).
Larrea, Carlos, Jaime Andrade, Wladymir Brborich, Diego Jarrín, and Carolina Reed
(1996a) La Geografía de la Pobreza en el Ecuador (Quito: PNUD).
Larrea, Carlos, Susana Balarezo, Boris Cornejo, Mauricio García, Luciano Martínez,
Fernando Sánchez, Rafael Quintero, Galo Ramón, Renán Tadeo, Margarita Velasco
and Gaitán Villavicencio (1996b) Una Agenda para Combatir la Pobreza (Quito:
Fundación Esquel).
Larrea, Carlos, Fernando Carrasco, Javier Cervantes and Noemí Viedma (1999a)
Desarrollo Social y Gestión Municipal en el Ecuador: Jeraquización y Tipología (Quito:
ODEPLAN-MOSTA).
Larrea, Carlos, Fernando Carrasco, Javier Cervantes and Noemí Viedma (1999b)
INFOPLAN. Atlas para el Desarrollo Social (Quito: ODEPLAN); CD-ROM.
Larrea, C., P. Montalvo, and A. M. Ricaurte (2004) Child Malnutrition, Social Development
and Health Services in the Andean Region (Quito, Ecuador: Facultad Latinoamericana de
Ciencias Sociales).
Lein, L. (1952) ‘The disappearance of Cocaism in Ecuador’, América Indígena – 12 (1),
pp. 21–25.
Leon Guzman, M.(2003) ‘Etnicidad y exclusión en el Ecuador: una mirada a partir del
Censo de Población de 2001’, Íconos, 17, pp. 116–132.
Licón, Sandra (2002) Has the Ley Estatal de Educación Improved the Quality of
Bilingual–Bicultural Education Programs in Oaxaca, Mexico?, Working Paper,
(Cambridge, MA: Harvard Graduate School of Education).
Lloréns, José (2002) ‘Etnicidad y censos: Los conceptos básicos y sus aplicaciones’, in
Boletín del Instituto Francés de Estudios Andinos (Lima: IFEA) 31.
Londoño, J. L. (1996) Poverty, Inequality and Human Capital Development in Latin
America, 1950–2025 (Washington, DC: World Bank).
Lopez, Luis Enrique (2000) ‘The question of interculturality and education in Latin
America’, paper presented at the Seminar on the Prospects for Education in Latin
America and the Caribbean, Santiago, Chile, 23–25 August.
Human_10Bib.qxd 25/10/05 6:19 PM Page 266

266 Bibliography

López, L. and W. Kueper (1999) ‘La educación intercultural bilingüe en América

Latina: balance y perspectivas’, Revista Iberoamericana de Educación, 20, pp. 17–85.
López-Cárdeña, David, and Rubén Viveros Álvarez (2003) ‘Educación Intercultural y
Pueblos Indígenas en México. Elementos para Analizar Nuevas Metáforas del Sigo
XXI’, mimeo (Mexico City: Dirección General de Educación Indígena).
Lux de Cotí, Otilia (1991) ‘Espectativas del pueblo maya hacia una organización
política,’ paper presented to the American Anthropological Association, Washington,
DC, 22 November.
MacIsaac, Donna (1994) ‘Peru’, in George Psacharopoulos and Harry Patrinos (eds),
Indigenous People and Poverty in Latin America: An Empirical Analysis (Washington,
DC: World Bank).
MacIsaac, Donna J. and Harry A. Patrinos (1995) ‘Labour Market Discrimination
Against Indigenous People in Peru’, Journal of Development Studies, 32, pp. 218–33.
MACPIO (2000) Pueblos indígenas y originarios de Bolivia. Diagnóstico Nacional. La
Paz: Ministerio de Asuntos campesinos, pueblos indígenas y originarios.
Madrid, Raúl (2003) ‘Indigenous voters and party system fragmentation in Latin
America’, paper presented at the annual meeting of Latin American Studies Texas
Association, Dallas, 27–30 March.
Marini, A. and M. Gragnolati (2003) Malnutrition and Poverty in Guatemala, World Bank
Policy Research Working Paper 2193 (Washington, DC: World Bank).
Matos Mar, J. (1993) ‘Población y Grupos Étnicos de América. 1994’, América Indígena –
Instituto Indigenista Interamericano, 53 (4), pp. 155–234.
Mayer, D. (2003) Market Failures in Health and Education for the Young Mexico 2000,
PAHO Health and Economic Growth Phase II: Case Studies. (Mexico: PAHO).
Mayer, Enrique (1996) ‘Reflexiones sobre los derechos individuales y colectivos: Los
derechos étnicos’, in Eric Hershberg and Elizabeth Jelin (eds), Construir la democracia:
Derechos humanos, ciudadanía y sociedad en América Latina (Caracas: Nueva Sociedad).
McEwan, Patrick J. (2004) ‘The Indigenous Test Store Gap in Bolivia and Chile’,
Economic Development and Cultural Change (U.S.), 53 (1), pp. 157–90.
MECOVI (2002) Encuesta de Mejoramiento de las Condiciones de Vida (www.ine.gov.bo/
mecovi/index.htm).
Meisch, L. A. (2002) Andean Entrepreneurs: Otavalo Merchants and Musicians in the Global
Arena (Austin, TX: University of Texas Press).
Mendieta, Claudia (2003) ‘Etnia, educación y pobreza: un análisis con énfasis en la
actitud de las poblaciones indígenas hacia su desarrollo’, in Enrique Vásquez and
Diego Winkelried (eds), Buscando el bienestar de los pobres ¿Cuán lejos estamos? (Lima:
Universidad del Pacífico).
Ministry of Education, Bolivia (2004) La educación en Bolivia: Indicadores, cifras y
resultados (La Paz, Bolivia: Ministry of Education).
Ministry of Education of Guatemala (2000) ‘Educación para todos en el año 2000:
Informe de evaluación 1990–1998’, mimeo (Guatemala City: Ministry of Education).
Misión de Verificación de las Naciones Unidas en Guatemala (MINUGUA) (2001) ‘The
Indigenous Peoples of Guatemala: Overcoming Discrimination in the Framework of
the Peace Agreements’, mimeo (Guatemala City: MINUGUA).
Molnar, Augusta and Tania Carrasco (2001) ‘Indigenous Peoples and Poverty’, in
Marcelo M. Giugale, Olivier Lafourcade and Vinh H. Nguyen (eds), Mexico: A
Comprehensive Development Agenda for the New Era (Washington, DC: The World Bank).
Momer, M. (ed.) (1970) Race and Class in Latin America (New York, NY: Columbia
University Press).
Montaluisa Chasiquiza, Luis Octavio (2003) ‘Participación comunitaria en la
educación intercultural bilingüe del Ecuador’, La Educación Indígena en las
Human_10Bib.qxd 25/10/05 6:19 PM Page 267

Bibliography 267

Américas, School for International Training, occasional papers, issue 4 (Brattleboro,

VT: SIT).
Monteith, Richard S., John E. Anderson, Maria Antonieta Pineda, Roberto Santiso, and
Mark Oberle (1985) ‘Contraceptive Use and Fertility in Guatemala’, Studies in Family
Planning, 16 (5), pp. 279–88.
Montenegro Torres, F. (2004) ‘Human Capital Investment: Nutrition and Household
Decisions on Schooling – Evidence from a Developing Country’, in Health Policy and
Management (Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins Press).
Morren, R. C. (1988) ‘Bilingual Education Curriculum in Guatemala’, Journal of
Multilingual and Multicultural Development, 9 (4), pp. 353–70.
Moya, A. (1997) Atlas etnográfico del Ecuador (Quito, Ecuador: Proyecto de Educación
Bilingüe Intercultural).
Moya, Ruth (1998) ‘Reformas educativas e interculturalidad en América Latina’,
Revista Iberoamericana de Educación, 17, pp. 105–87.
Narayan, Deepa, with Raj Patel, Kai Schafft, Anne Rademacher and Sarah Koch-Schulte
(2000) Voices of the Poor: Can Anyone Hear Us? (New York, NY: World Bank and
Oxford University Press).
Neumark, D. (1988) ‘Employer’s Discriminatory Behavior and the Estimation of Wage
Discrimination’. Journal of Human Resources, 23 (3), pp. 279–95.
Newson, L. (1995), Life and Death in Early Colonial Ecuador (Norman, OK: University of
Oklahoma Press).
Nigenda, Gustavo, Gerardo Moa-Flores, Salvador Aldama-López and Amanuel Orozco-
Núñez (2001) ‘La práctica de la medicina tradicional en América Latina y el Caribe:
el dilema entre regulación y tolerancia’, Salud Publica Mex, 43, pp. 41–51.
Ñopo, Hugo, Jaime Saavedra and Méximo Torero (2004) ‘Ethnicity and Earnings in
Urban Peru’, Middlebury College (VT) Working Paper Series 0405 Middlebury
College Department of Economics.
Oaxaca, R. (1973) ‘Male–Female Wage Differentials in Urban Labour Markets’,
International Economic Review, 14 (1), pp. 693–709.
Oaxaca, R. L. and M. R. Ransom (1989) ‘Overpaid Men and Underpaid Women:
A Tale of the Gender Specific Wage Effects of Labor Market Discrimination’, paper
presented at the International Economic Association World Congress, Athens,
28 August–1 September.
Oaxaca, R. L. and M. R. Ransom (1994) ‘On discrimination and the decomposition of
wage differentials’, Journal of Econometrics, 61, pp. 5–21.
ODEPLAN (1999) Desarrollo social y gestión municipal en el Ecuador: Jerarquización y
tipología (Quito: Editorial Abya Yala).
Organization of American States (1997) ‘Human Rights Issues of Special Relevance to
the Indigenous Inhabitants of the Country’, report on the situation with human
rights in Ecuador (Washington, DC: OAS).
Organization of American States (2000) ‘The Rights of Indigenous Communities’,
second report on the situation with human rights in Peru (Washington, DC: OAS).
Panagides, Alexis (1994) ‘Mexico’, in George Psacharopoulos and Harry A. Patrinos,
Indigenous People and Poverty in Latin America: An Empirical Analysis (Washington,
DC: World Bank).
Pan American Health Organization (1998a) Health in the Americas (Washington, DC:
PAHO).
Pan American Health Organization (PAHO) (1998b) ‘Situación de salud de los pueblos
indígenas de Perú’ (Washington, DC: PAHO).
Pan American Health Organization (PAHO) (1998c). Situación de salud de los pueblos
indígenas de México (Washington, DC: PAHO).
Human_10Bib.qxd 25/10/05 6:19 PM Page 268

268 Bibliography

Paqueo, Vicente and Christian Y. Gonzalez (2003), ‘Economic Analysis of Health Care
Utilization and Perceived Illness: Ethnicity and Other Factors’, Policy Research
Working Paper 3125 (Washington, DC: World Bank).
Patrinos, H. A. (1994) ‘Methods and Data’, in George Psacharopoulos and Harry
A. Patrinos, Indigenous People and Poverty in Latin America: An Empirical Analysis
(Washington, DC: World Bank).
Patrinos, H. A. (1996) Educational Outcomes and Policy Priorities, Ecuador Education
Finance Study (Washington, DC: World Bank).
Patrinos, H. A. (1997) ‘Differences in Education and Earnings across Ethnic Groups in
Guatemala’, Quarterly Review of Economics and Finance, 37 (4), pp. 809–21.
Patrinos, H. A. (1998) ‘Indigenous Peoples in the Urban Labor Market: Bolivia’,
paper presented at the American Economic Association meeting, Chicago, IL, 3–5
January.
Patrinos, H. A. (2002) ‘Indigenous Peoples in the Urban Labor Market: Bolivia’, American
Economic Association, annual meeting, Chicago, IL, 3–5 January.
Patrinos, H. A. and G. Psachoropoulos (1992) ‘Socioeconomic and Ethnic Determinants
of Grade Repetition in Bolivia and Guatemala’, World Bank Country Economics
Department Paper 1028 (Washington, DC: The World Bank).
Patrinos, H. A. and E. Velez (1996) Costs and Benefits of Bilingual Education in
Guatemala: A Partial Analysis, Human Capital Development Working Paper 74
(Washington, DC: World Bank).
Paxson, Christina and Norbert Schady (2002) ‘The Allocation and Impact of Social
Funds: Spending on School Infrastructure in Peru’, The World Bank Review, 16 (2),
pp. 297–319.
Paz y Miño, L. (1942) La población del Ecuador (Quito, Ecuador: Publicaciones del
Ministerio de Previsión Social).
Peyser, A and J. Chackiel (1999) ‘La identificación de poblaciones indígenas en los censos
de América Latina: aspectos conceptuales de los censos del 2000’. (Santiago de Chile:
CEPAL/CELADE).
Piñeros, Marión and Magda Ruiz (1998) ‘Estudios Demográficos en comunidades
indígenas de tres regiones de Colombia’, Salud Pública de Mexico, 40 (4), pp. 324–9.
Plant, R. (1998) ‘Indigenous Peoples and Poverty Reduction: A Case Study of
Guatemala’, mimeo (Washington, DC: Inter-American Development Bank).
Plant, Roger and Soren Hvalkof (2001) ‘Land Titling and Indigenous Peoples’, mimeo
(Washington, DC: Inter-American Development Bank).
Pollitt, Ernesto and Santiago Cueto (2002) ‘Desayuno Escolar y Rendimiento’, in
Consecuencias de la desnutrición en el escolar peruano (Lima: Fondo Editorial de la
Pontificia Universidad Católica del Perú).
Pollitt, Ernesto, Enrique Jacoby and Santiago Cueto (1996) Desayuno escolar y rendimiento:
a propósito del programa de desayunos escolares de Foncodes en el Perú (Lima: Apoyo).
Ponce, J. (2000a) La educación básica en el Ecuador: Problemas y propuestas de solución
(Quito, Ecuador: SIISE).
Ponce, J. (2000b) La eficiencia interna del sistema educativo ecuatoriano, Documentos de
Trabajo del SIISE (Quito, Ecuador: Sistema Integrado de Indicadores Sociales del
Ecuador Frente Social).
Popkin, E. (1999) ‘Guatemalan Mayan migration to Los Angeles: Constructing
transnational linkages in the context of the settlement process’, Ethnic and Racial
Studies, 22 (2), pp. 267–89.
Prieto, M. (2004) Liberalismo y temor: Imaginando a los sujetos indígenas en Ecuador
postcolonial, 1895–1950 (Quito, Ecuador: Abya-Yala).
Human_10Bib.qxd 25/10/05 6:19 PM Page 269

Bibliography 269

Programa de las Naciones Unidas para el Desarrollo (PNUD) (1999) Informe sobre
Desarrollo Humano (Quito, Ecuador: PNUD).
Programa de las Naciones Unidas para el Desarrollo – Guatemala (PNUD) (2000)
Guatemala: la fuerza incluyente del desarrollo humano (Guatemala City: PNUD).
Programa de las Naciones Unidas para el Desarrollo (PNUD) (2001) Informe sobre
Desarrollo Humano (Quito, Ecuador: PNUD).
Programa de las Naciones Unidas para el Desarrollo (PNUD) (2002) Pobreza, Empleo y
Equidad en el Ecuador: Perspectivas para el Desarrollo Humano (Quito, Ecuador:
PNUD).
Psacharopoulos, George (1993) ‘Ethnicity, Education, and Earnings in Bolivia and
Guatemala’, Comparative Education Review, 71 (1), pp. 9–20.
Psacharopoulos, G. and H. A. Patrinos (1994) Indigenous People and Poverty in Latin
America: An Empirical Analysis. (Washington, DC: World Bank).
Psacharopoulos, George and Harry Anthony Patrinos (1997) ‘Family Size, Schooling,
and Child Labor in Peru: An Empirical Analysis’, Journal of Population Economics, 10
(4), pp. 387–405.
Psacharopoulos, G. and H. Patrinos (2002) ‘Returns to investment in education: A fur-
ther update’, World Bank Policy Research Working Paper 2881 (Washington, DC:
World Bank, September).
Psacharopoulos, G. and Z. Tzannatos, (1992) Women’s Employment and Pay in Latin
America: Overview and Methodology (Washington, DC: World Bank).
Radcliffe, Sarah, Nina Laurie and Robert Andolina (2002) ‘Indigenous people and
political transnationalism: Globalization from below meets globalization from
above?’ paper presented at the Transnational Communities Programme seminar,
University of Oxford, 28 February.
Ramón, G. (1987) La Resistencia Andina, Cayambe: 1500–1800 (Quito, Ecuador: Centro
Andino de Artes Populares).
Rao, D. H. and J. G. Sastry (1977) ‘Growth Pattern of Well-to-Do Indian Adolescents
and Young Children’, Indian Journal of Medical Research, 66, pp. 950–6.
Reimers, C. W. (1983) ‘Labor Market Discrimination against Hispanic and Black Men’,
Review of Economics and Statistics, 65 (4), pp. 570–9.
Remy, María Isabel (1994) ‘The Indigenous Population and the Construction of
Democracy in Peru’, in Donna Lee Van Cott (ed.), Indigenous People and Democracy in
Latin America (New York, NY: St Martin’s Press).
Renshaw, Jonathan (2001) ‘Social Investment Funds and Indigenous Peoples’, mimeo
(Washington, DC: Inter-American Development Bank).
Renshaw, J. and N. Wray (2004) Indicadores Socio-culturalmente Pertinentes, Working
Paper (Washington, DC: Inter-American Development Bank).
Repetto Vargas, Andrea (2003) ‘Access Barriers for Poor and Indigenous People in Chilean
Higher Education’, LCHSD Paper Series 81 (Washington, DC: The World Bank).
Rivera, Juan A., E. A. Monterrubio, T. Gonzalez-Cossio, R. Feregrino-Garcia, A. Garcia-
Guerra and J. Sepulveda-Amor (2003) ‘Nutritional status of indigenous children
younger than five years of age in Mexico: Results of a Nacional Probabilistic Survey’,
Salud Pública de México, 45 (4), pp. 5466–76.
Rodas, M. R. (1998) Dolores Cacuango (Quito, Ecuador: Abya-Yala).
Rojas, E. (1991) Factores que Explican los Niveles de Escolaridad Media de los Hijos en
Guatemala (Santiago, Chile: UNESCO-ORLEAC).
Rojas Lima, F. (1995) Los indios de Guatemala (Quito, Ecuador: Abya-Yala).
Romaine, S. (2002) ‘The Impact of Language Policy on Endangered Languages’,
International Journal on Multicultural Societies, 4 (2), pp. 1–28.
Human_10Bib.qxd 25/10/05 6:19 PM Page 270

270 Bibliography

Roper, J. Montgomery, John Frechione and Billie R. DeWalt (1997) Indigenous People
and Development in Latin America, Latin American Monograph and Document Series
12 (Pittsburgh, PA: Center for Latin American Studies, University of Pittsburgh, and
World Bank).
Sadana, R., C. D. Mathers, A. D. Lopez, C. J. L. Murray and K. Iburg (2000) Comparative
analyses of more than 50 household surveys on health status, WHO Global Program of
Evidence, Discussion Paper No. 15 (Geneva, Switzerland: WHO).
Saenz, A. and D. Palacios (1983) ‘La dimensión demográfica de la historia ecuatoriana’,
Nueva Historia del Ecuador, 12, p. 365.
Sagarin, E. and J. Moneymaker (1979) ‘Language Nationalist, Separatist, Secessionist
Movement’, in R. Hall (ed.), Ethnic Autonomy – Comparative Dynamics: The Americas,
Europe and the Developing World (New York, NY: Pergamon Press).
Sakellariou, C. (2004) The Indigenous/Non-Indigenous Early Test Score Gap in Bolivia, Peru
and Mexico (Washington, DC: World Bank).
Salomon, F. (1987) The Ethnic Lords of Quito (New York, NY: Cambridge University Press).
Salomon, F. and S. Schwartz (1999) Cambridge History of the Native Peoples of the
Americas: Volume III South (New York, NY: Cambridge University Press).
Saunders, J. (1959) La población del Ecuador: Un análisis del censo de 1950 (Quito,
Ecuador: Casa de la Cultura del Ecuador ).
Schlam, Deborah (2003) Salud de Pueblos Indígenas, World Bank Working Paper
(Mexico City: World Bank).
Schlam, Deborah (2004) ‘Salud Pueblos Indigenas’, mimeo (Mexico City, Mexico:
Ministerio de Hacienda).
Schmelkes, Sylvia (2000) ‘Education and Indian Peoples in Mexico: An Example of
Policy Failure’, in Fernando Reimers (ed.), Unequal Schools, Unequal Chances
(Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press).
Schultz, T. P. (1991) ‘Labor Market Discrimination: Measurement and Interpretation’,
in N. Birdsall and R. Sabot (eds), Unfair Advantage: Labor Market Discrimination in
Developing Countries (Washington, DC: World Bank).
Schultz, T. P. (2004) ‘School Subsidies for the Poor: Evaluating the Mexican Progresa
Poverty Program’, Journal of Development Economics, 74 (1), pp. 199–250.
Scott, P. B., and R. E. Simón Chuta (1987) ‘Rendimiento en Segundo Grade de las
Escuelas del Programa Nacional de Educación Bilingüe (PRONEBI) que estan
Implantado Bien el Programa Bilingüe’, internal USAID memo.
Secretaría de Educación Pública de México (SEP) (2003) ‘Educación Indigenista’,
mimeo (www.sep.gob.mx).
Seiber, E. E., and J. T. Bertrand (2002) ‘Access as a factor in differential contraceptive
use between Mayans and Ladinos in Guatemala’, Health Policy and Planning, 17 (2),
pp. 167–77.
Selverston, Melina H. (1994) ‘The Politics of Culture: Indigenous Peoples and the State
in Ecuador’, in Donna Van Cott (ed.), Indigenous People and Democracy in Latin
America (New York, NY: St Martin’s Press).
Selverston-Scher, M. (2001) Ethnopolitics in Ecuador: Indigenous Rights and the
Strengthening of Democracy (Miami, FL: University of Miami North South Center Press).
Sen, A. (1999) Development as Freedom (New York, NY: Anchor Books).
Serrano Carreto, Enrique (2004) La población indígena a través de los censos mexicanos,
paper presented at the Workshop on Data Collection and Disaggregation for
Indigenous Peoples, New York, 19–21 January.
Shapiro, J., and J. Moreno Trevino (2004) Compensatory Education for Disadvantaged
Mexican Students: An Impact Evaluation Using Propensity Score Matching, World Bank
Policy Research Working Paper No. 3334 (Washington, DC: World Bank).
Human_10Bib.qxd 25/10/05 6:19 PM Page 271

Bibliography 271

Sherburne, F. Cook and Lesley Burd Simpson (1948) The Population of Central Mexico in
the Sixteenth Century (Berkeley, CA: University of California Press).
Shifter, Michael (2004) ‘Breakdown in the Andes’, Foreign Affairs, 83 (5), pp. 126–39.
Shorrocks, A. (1984) ‘Inequality Decomposition by Population Subgroups’, Econometrica,
52 (6), pp. 1369–86.
SIDENPE (2004) ‘System of Indicators for Nationalities and Peoples, of Ecuador’, paper
presented at the Workshop on Data Collection and Disaggregation for Indigenous
Peoples, New York, 19–21 January.
SIISE (2001) Sistema Integrado de Indicadores Sociales del Ecuador (Quito: Secretaría
Técnica del Frente Social).
Skoufias, Emmanuel, Jere Behrman, Paul Gertler and T. Paul Schultz (2000) Is Progresa
Working? Summary of the Results of an Evaluation by IFPRI (Washington, DC:
International Food Policy Research Institute).
Skoufias, Emmanuel and Susan W. Parker (2001) ‘Conditional Cash Transfers and
Their Impact on Child Work and Schooling: Evidence from the PROGRESA Program
in Mexico’, Economia, 2 (1), pp. 45–96.
Smith, C. (1992) Guatemala Indians and the State: 1540 to 1998 (Austin, TX: University
of Texas).
Smith, J. P. and F. R. Welch (1989) ‘Black Economic Progress After Myrdal’, Journal of
Economic Literature, 27 (2), pp. 519–64.
Soares, S. (2004) Impact Evaluation of Intercultural Bilingual Education (Washington, DC:
World Bank).
Stavenhagen, Rodolfo (2002) The Return of the Native: The Indigenous Challenge in Latin
America, Occasional Paper No. 27 (London: University of London, Institute of Latin
American Studies).
Steele, D. (1994) ‘Guatemala’, in G. Psacharopoulos and H. A. Patrinos, Indigenous
People and Poverty in Latin America: An Empirical Analysis (Washington, DC: World
Bank).
Swartz, K. J. and Jorge E. Uquillas (1998) Aplicación de la Política del Banco Mundial Sobre
las Poblaciones Indígenas (od 4.20) en América Latina (1992–97) (Washington, DC:
World Bank).
Swetnam, J. (1989) ‘What Else Did Indians Have to Do with Their Time? Alternatives
to Labor Migration in Prerevolutionary Guatemala’, Economic Development and
Cultural Change, 39 (1), pp. 89–112.
Toledo, Alejandro (2003) ‘Join this collective effort of poverty fighting’, speech pre-
sented at Palo Alto, CA, Standford University’s 112th Commencement, 15 June.
Tomei, Manuela and Lee Swepston (1996) ‘Indigenous and Tribal Peoples: A Guide to
ILO Convention No. 169’, mimeo (Geneva: International Labor Organization).
Torres, José Luis, Renato Villoro, Teresita Ramírez, Beatriz Zurita, Patricia Hernández,
Rafael Lozano and Francisco Franco (2003) ‘La salud de la población indígena en
México’, in Caleidoscopio de la salud (Mexico City, Mexico: Mexican Foundation
for Health).
Trivelli, Carolina (2002) ‘Características de los hogares pobres y no pobres en base a
su origen étnico: ¿el origen étnico se relaciona con la pobreza?’, unpublished
manuscript.
Tyrer, R. B. (1988) Historia demográfica y económica de la Audiencia de Quito (Quito,
Ecuador: Banco Central del Ecuador).
Understanding Children’s Work (UCW). (2003) ‘Understanding Children’s Work in
Guatemala’, mimeo, March (Florence, Italy: UCW).
United Nations (1993) General Assembly Resolution 48/163. December 21 (New York,
NY: UN).
Human_10Bib.qxd 25/10/05 6:19 PM Page 272

272 Bibliography

United Nations Children’s Fund (UNICEF) (2003) ‘Ensuring the rights of indigenous
children’, Innocenti Digest, 11 (Florence, Italy: UNICEF).
United Nations Development Programme (UNDP) (2001) UNDP and Indigenous
Peoples: A Policy of Engagement (New York, NY: UNDP).
United Nations Development Programme (UNDP) (2003) Human Development Report:
2003 (New York, NY: Oxford University Press).
United Nations Economic and Social Council (UN-Ecosoc) (2003) ‘Report of the
Special Rapporteur on the situation of human rights and fundamental freedoms of
indigenous people, Rodolfo Stavenhagen submitted in accordance with
Commission resolution 2001/57’ (New York, NY: UN ECOSOC).
United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) (1953)
The Use of Vernacular Languages in Education, Monographs on Fundamental
Education (Paris, France: UNESCO).
UN Permanent Forum on Indigenous Issues (2003) ‘Indigenous Issues and the Inter-
American Development Bank: A Summary Report’, paper presented at the
Permanent Forum Second Session, New York, 12–23 May.
United States Agency for International Development (USAID) (1979) ‘Tierra y Trabajo en
Guatemala, Una Evaluación’, mimeo (Washington, DC: Washington Development
Associates).
United States Department of State (2003) Human Rights Report: Peru (Washington, DC:
US Department of State.
Urquiola, Miguel (2000) Bolivia. Educación primaria universal, en Naciones Unidas.
¿Donde estamos en 2000? Remontando ocho cimas a la vez (La Paz, Bolivia: United
Nations).
Uquillas, J. and M. van Nieuwkoop (2003) Social Capital as a Factor in Indigenous
People’s Development in Ecuador, Sustainable Development Working Paper No.15
(Washington, DC: World Bank).
Uquillas, Jorge, Tania Carrasco and Martha Rees (eds) (2003) Exclusión Socialy
Estrategias de Vida de los Indígenas Urbanos en Peru, Mexico y Ecuador (Quito, Ecuador:
World Bank).
Vakis, Renos and Kathy Lindert (1999) ‘Poverty in Indigenous Populations in Panama:
A Study Using LSMS Data’, LCSHD Paper, 55 (Washington, DC: The World Bank).
Valdés, Luz María (1995) ‘Los indios en los censos de población en México’ (Mexico
City, Mexico: Universidad Nacional Autonoma de Mexico).
Valdés, Luz María (2001) ‘Los indios en el tercer milenio’, Ciencias, 60–61, pp. 128–32.
Valdivia, Néstor (2002) ‘Etnicidad, pobreza y exclusión social: la situación de la población
indígena urbana en Perú’, unpublished manuscript.
Van Cott, Donna Lee’ (ed.) (1994) Indigenous People and Democracy in Latin America
(New York, NY: St Martin’s Press).
Van Cott, Donna Lee (2003) ‘From Exclusion to Inclusion: Bolivia’s 2002 Elections’,
Journal of Latin American Studies, 35, pp. 751–75.
van Nieuwkoop, M. and J. Uquillas (2000) Defining Ethnodevelopment in Operational
Terms: Lessons from the Ecuador Indigenous and Afro-Ecuadorian Peoples Development
Project, Sustainable Development Working Paper No. 6. (Washington, DC: World
Bank).
Veran, Christina (2003) ‘Born Puerto Rican, Born (Again) Taino? A Resurgence of
Indigenous Identity among Puerto Ricans Has Sparked Debates over the Nation’s Tri-
Racial History’, Colorlines Magazine.
Villarán, Fernando (1998) Riqueza popular: pasión y gloria de la pequeña empresa (Lima:
Del Congreso del Perú).
Human_10Bib.qxd 25/10/05 6:19 PM Page 273

Bibliography 273

Wearne, P. (1994) ‘The Maya of Guatemala’, mimeo (United Kingdom: Minority Rights
Group International).
Wellmeier, Nancy J. (1998) Ritual, Identity and the Mayan Diaspora (New York, NY:
Garland)
Wood, Bill and Harry Anthony Patrinos (1994) ‘Urban Bolivia’, in George
Psacharopoulos and Harry Anthony Patrinos, Indigenous People and Poverty in Latin
America: An Empirical Analysis (Washington, DC: World Bank).
World Bank (1995) ‘Guatemala: An Assessment of Poverty’, Report No. 12313-GU
(Washington, DC: World Bank).
World Bank (1996) ‘Ecuador Poverty Report’, in World Bank Country Study (Washington,
DC: World Bank).
World Bank (1997) ‘Ecuador: Indigenous and Afro-Ecuadorian Peoples Development
Project’, Project Appraisal Document (Washington, DC: World Bank).
World Bank (1999) Educator: Crisis, Pobreza y Servicios Sociales (Washington, DC:
World Bank).
World Bank (2001) ‘Guatemala: Universalization of Basic Education Project Appraisal
Document’, Report No. 21846 (Washington, DC: World Bank).
World Bank (2002) ‘Project Appraisal Document on a Proposed Loan in the Amount of
US$300.0 Million to the United Mexican States for Basic Education Development
Phase II’, Report 23295-ME (Washington, DC: World Bank).
World Bank (2003a) Indigenous Peoples and Afro-Colombian Communities (Washington,
DC: World Bank).
World Bank (2003b) ‘Indigenous Peoples Strategy: Ecuador First Programmatic Human
Development Reform Loan’, Report IPP40 (Washington, DC: World Bank).
World Bank (2003c) ‘Guatemala: Equity and Student Achievement in Primary
Education’, Report No. 26691 (Washington, DC: World Bank).
World Bank (2003d) ‘Poverty in Guatemala’, Report No. 24221-GU (Washington, DC:
World Bank).
World Bank (2003e) Reaching the Rural Poor: A Renewed Strategy for Rural Development
(Washington, DC: World Bank).
World Bank (2003f) Guatemala: A Study on Student Achievement in Primary Education
(Washington, DC: World Bank).
World Bank (2003g) World Development Indicators (Washington, DC: World Bank).
World Bank (2003g) ‘Universal Health Insurance Coverage in Mexico: In Search for
Alternatives’, Human and Social Development Group, Mexico-Colombia Country
Management Unit, Latin America and the Caribbean Region.
World Bank (2003h) Making Services Work for Poor People World Development Report 2004
(Washington, DC: World Bank).
World Bank (2004a) Ecuador Poverty Assessment (Washington, DC: World Bank).
World Bank (2004b) Inequality in Latin America: Breaking with History (Washington, DC:
World Bank).
World Bank (2004c) Citizens, Politicians and Providers: The Latin American Experience
with Service Delivery Reform (Washington, DC: World Bank).
World Bank (forthcoming) Mexico Programmatic Quality of Education Study:
Determinants of Learning Policy Note (Washington, DC: World Bank).
Yashar, Deborah (1997) Indigenous politics and democracy: contesting citizenship in Latin
America, Working Paper 238 (Notre Dame, IN: Notre Dame Kellogg Institute for
International Studies).
Yashar, Deborah J. (1998) ‘Contesting Citizenship: Indigenous Movements and
Democracy in Latin America’, Comparative Politics, 31 (1), pp. 23–42.
Human_10Bib.qxd 25/10/05 6:19 PM Page 274

274 Bibliography

Yashar, Deborah (1999) ‘Democracy, Indigenous Movements, and the Postliberal

Challenge in Latin America’, World Politics, 52 (1), pp. 76–104.
Zehr, Mary Ann (2002) ‘The Mexican Connection’, Education Week, 21 (27), pp. 29–31.
Zolezzi, G. and J. Riester (1987) ‘Lenguas Indígenas de Oriente Boliviano. Clasificacion
Preliminar’, América Indígena, 3, pp. 425–435.
Human_Index.qxd 25/10/05 6:19 PM Page 275

Index

Notes: bbox; ffigure; nnote; ttable; boldextended discussion or heading

emphasized in main text. Sub-entries are arranged first by country and then by topic.

Abdalá Bucaram government agrarian reform (Ecuador) 68

(Ecuador) 6 agrarian unions 40
ability 52, 167, 195 agriculture/farming
Aboriginal Peoples Survey (Canada, Bolivia 46t, 48, 49
1991, 2001) 39, 238 Ecuador 76, 79t, 80, 80t, 81
accidents 62, 94–7, 217n Guatemala 106, 114, 115t,
accountability 231, 232t, 236–8 145, 146
Adams, R. H. 116 Mexico 160t, 161, 163t, 170, 192
Advisory Committee of Indigenous Peru 202, 207t
Peoples (Bolivia) 40 Albó, X. 15
African-Americans 239–40 Alcázar, L. 220(n2)
age Alcázar, L., et al. (2003) 218, 258
Bolivia 45, 46t, 50, 51n, 54t, 54, 55t, López-Calix, J. R. 258
57t, 57, 59, 60t, 61t, 65, 66, 244 Wachtenheim, E. 258
Ecuador 69, 76, 77t, 78t, 82, 85t, Aldama-López, S. 267
85, 86t, 91t, 91, 92t, 93t, 94t, Amazon area/region
96t, 99t, 100t Ecuador 6, 7b, 35, 67, 71, 71t, 73,
Guatemala 112t, 123–33, 138, 74t, 79t, 80, 80t, 91t, 92t, 94t, 96t,
139t-141t, 145, 147, 149(n4), 99t, 100t, 244
250, 251 Peru 218, 247
Mexico 150–3, 154t, 160t, 161, anaemia
162, 170–83, 183t, 190, 191, Guatemala 141
192t, 195, 246t Mexico 190t, 190, 191t, 196,
Peru 206, 207t, 209, 211t, 215t 198(n13)
child labour 54t, 54 ancestors/ancestry 238, 243t
miscellaneous 223n, 223, 242 Andes 11, 15, 16, 67, 208–9
see also children Andrade, J. 265
agenda for action 229–40 anthropological sources 27, 39(n2)
accountability 231, 232t, 236–8 apprentices/apprenticeships 125, 126
data collection (improvement) 231, Argentina 6, 13, 16, 26t, 236
232t, 238 Arriagada, A-M. xvi
education (more and better) 231–5 Asia 28
education and social services assets 2, 194t, 194, 230, 240
(improved accountability) 232t, atol (cornmeal beverage, Guatemala)
236–8 142, 142t, 148
further research required 238–40 Autonomous Metropolitan University
health (indigenous children) 231, (Mexico) 257(n7)
232t, 235–6 Avila Argueta, I. Y. 149(n1)
indigenous children (equal Aymara language 15, 32, 39, 61,
opportunities) 235–6 218, 244
see also key messages Aymara people 3, 233, 238, 247
Human_Index.qxd 25/10/05 6:19 PM Page 276

276 Index

Baessa, Y. 134n constitution 10, 40

Balarezo, S. 265 constitutional amendments
Bando, G. R., et al. (2004) 234, 258 (1994) 9
López-Calva, L. F. 258 definitions of ethnicity (changes over
Patrinos, H. A. 258 time) 31t
Bando, R. xvi earnings gap 224t, 225t
Bangladesh 141, 236 education (more and better) 231–5
bankruptcy 70 education returns 225t, 225
banks 70 ‘effective overthrow of president’ 53
Basic Health Insurance scheme (Bolivia) health insurance 228t
63–4, 66 highland versus lowland groups 28
basic needs (Guatemala) 126 indigenous political representation
Beals, C. 23 3–4
Becker, G. S. 30 indigenous population (estimates
Behrman, J., et al. (2001) 234, 259 of changes in size over time)
Segupta, P. 259 31–2, 33f
Todd, P. 259 indigenous population (percentage of
Belize 13, 22, 26t total population) 26, 26t, 41
Beni department (Bolivia) 66(n4) job market indicators 244
Bertrand, J. T., et al. (1979) 140, 259 key messages and agenda for action
Pienda, M. A. 259 221–40
Santiso, R. 259 legislature 41
bias 247–8, 250 majority of population indigenous 3,
bilingual education 6, 13–17, 22, 30, 23(n2)
39, 230, 232t, 238, 239 mathematics test scores 227t, 227
Bolivia 40, 42, 42t, 61–2 multiethnic, multicultural 40
Ecuador 68, 94, 95b poverty gap 223t
Guatemala 132, 133t, 135, 145, 148 poverty trend 222t
Mexico 179, 197(n11) probability of poverty 45, 46t, 223t
broadcast 15 social spending (1990–9) 12t
design 233 special laws (1994) 9
effectiveness 16–17 teacher-training (bilingual) 16
further research 94 traditional medicine (1984 law) 10
see also ‘language-speakers/bilingual’; universal suffrage (1953– ) 41
teachers years of schooling 225t
bilingual intercultural education Bolivia: case study 40–66, 242–4, 248,
(BIE) 10 257(n4–5)
bilingual intercultural training child labour 53–7
institutes 16 conclusions 65–6
binary probit models 252 demographic characteristics of
binary response variables 181t, indigenous population 41–2,
181, 182 66(n3)
birth cohorts 89f, 89, 90f education 57–62, 65
birth rate 17, 108 employment and income 46–57,
blacks (USA) 121 66(n5–9)
Blinder, A. S. 253 health care 62–5, 66
body-mass index 149(n5) household surveys and definitions of
Bolivia xvi, xvii, 1, 2, 6, 8, 13, 21–2, 27, ethnicity 243t
28, 68, 103, 256 identifying indigenous peoples
agenda for action 232t 242–4, 257(n4)
bilingual education 15, 16–17 income distribution 45
Human_Index.qxd 25/10/05 6:19 PM Page 277

Index 277

Bolivia – continued Cárdenas, V. H. 3

indigenous population (growth, Caribbean countries xviii, xix, 39(n2),
1950–2001) 40 127, 141, 149(n1), 234
indigenous population (proportion of Carrasco, F. 265
total population) 40 Carrasco, T. 18
measuring poverty 247, 248 cars 194t, 194
poverty and demographic Cartwright, K. 54
determinants 45, 46t, 66(n4) case studies
poverty and living conditions 42–5, Bolivia 40–66, 242–4, 248,
46t, 47t, 65 257(n4–5)
Bolivia: Department of Public Health, Ecuador 67–105, 243t, 244, 249–50
Ethnic Affairs Division 18 Guatemala 106–49, 243t, 244–5,
Bolivia: Law 1615 (6 February 1995) 250–1
66(n2) Mexico 150–98, 243t, 245–7, 251,
Bolivia: Ministry of Education 15 257(n6)
Bolivia: Supreme Resolution 198771 Peru 199–220, 243t, 247, 252–6
(1984) 18 Castaneda, T. 24(n9)
Bolivian Educational Broadcast Cayambe 15
Network 15 census data 26–7, 31t
Bolivian lowlands 13 Bolivia (1992, 2001) 41
boliviano 66(n7), 248n Mexico 245, 247, 257(n6)
Bolsa Escola programme (Brazil) 20 problems 27
Borah, W. W. 36 censuses
Borden, M. 265 Bolivia 32, 244
Boricua (natives of Boriken) 27 Ecuador 33, 34t, 35, 69, 69t, 77n, 81,
Boriken (indigenous name for ‘Puerto 82t, 83f, 84f, 99, 100t, 244
Rico’) 27 Guatemala 108, 245
Boston 239 Mexico 36, 152t, 176n, 178n, 181n,
Boulding, E. 5 194t, 243t, 245–6, 246t
boys Peru 29, 37–8, 38t, 200
Bolivia 56, 57, 58t United States 39
Ecuador 82–7, 90f, 90t, 104 Venezuela 39, 238
Guatemala 125, 126, 127b questions 39, 231, 242, 243t
Mexico 170, 171t, 172t, 172, Central America 26t, 126, 141
173t, 180 central government 102
Brazil 6, 13, 16, 20, 26, 26t central region (Mexico) 151,
Brborich, W. 265 197(n4)
Brush, S. B. 20 Centre for Economic Investigation and
Teaching (Mexico) 257(n7)
cabinet positions 68 Cervantes, J. 265
Cacuango, D. 95b Chesterfield, R. 134
caloric intake 247 Chiapas province/state (Mexico) 19,
Ecuador 249, 250 36, 197(n3)
Mexico 257(n8) bilingual education 14
see also malnutrition Zapatista uprising (1994– ) 1, 5
Cambridge University xviii Chicago 239
Caminos Rurales (rural roads programme, child labour 228f, 234, 241, 252
Peru) 202, 220(n2) Bolivia 53–7
Canada 28, 39(n4–5), 240 Ecuador 77n, 81–7, 103
cancer 187t, 187 Guatemala 121–6, 127b, 146, 148t,
capital 70, 240 149(n4)
Human_Index.qxd 25/10/05 6:19 PM Page 278
278 Index
child labour – continued
Mexico 170–3, 174t, 195–6,
197(n10)
characteristics 55t
characteristics of children involved
(Guatemala, 1989–2000) 123t
comments by Guatemalan Mayas
127b
contribution to family income 54,
170, 209
determinants 248
earnings 85–7
ethnicity 81
incidence 54t, 83f
logit estimations 170–1, 172t
multinomial logit estimations 124,
125t, 171–2, 173t
percentage of family income 86t, 87
prevalence over time 125, 126f
probit models 82, 85
sense of identity (Guatemala)
125–6, 227
sequential decision model 54t
sequential probit analysis 123, 124t,
171–2, 174t
simultaneous decision model 56t
UN special rapporteur 123
child mortality 235
Ecuador 100t, 104
Mexico 186t
child-feeding 191
child-rearing practices 191
childbirth 191
Bolivia 62, 63t
Ecuador 98–9, 100t, 102, 104
Guatemala 135–6, 136t, 138t, 138,
146–7
check-ups 98
health centre 98t, 104
home 62, 63t, 98, 98t, 104, 136,
136t, 138t
hospital 98, 98t, 104, 136, 138t, 138
knowledge/use of contraceptive
methods 99t, 99, 100t
location 228
prenatal care 135–6, 137t
services 19
childhood malnutrition
Ecuador 99–101, 103, 104
impact on health during adult
life 101
children
Ecuador 76, 77n, 81–7, 91, 93t, 103
Guatemala 107b, 114
Mexico 151
Peru 220
attending school and not working
54, 76, 77n, 81, 82t, 83f, 124t,
124–5, 253f
attending school and working 54,
56, 56t, 57, 82t, 82, 84f, 85t, 103,
123, 124t, 124–5, 125t, 146,
171–2, 173t, 174t, 227, 253f
growth-monitoring 236
home care 56, 56t
miscellaneous 18, 227, 231, 241
neither working nor attending school
54, 55, 82t, 123, 124t, 252
poor 234
probability of working 55t, 55, 56,
57t, 65, 85t, 91, 93t, 124t, 124,
170, 172, 195–6
probability of working (unpaid) in
family enterprise 55t, 56, 82, 85,
85t, 91, 93t, 124t, 124, 125t, 131t,
171, 172, 174t, 196, 209t, 210,
253f
probability of working for wages 55t,
55–6, 124t, 146, 172, 174t, 196
working and not attending school
55t, 56, 56t, 57, 81, 82t, 84f, 123,
124t, 125t, 131t, 132, 171–2, 173t,
174t, 227
working (paid) 76, 82, 85t, 85, 146,
170, 209, 209t, 210
working (unpaid) 76, 82, 85t, 123t,
123, 170, 209, 253f
children underweight
Guatemala 141t, 141
Mexico 190t, 190, 191t, 191, 196,
197–8(n13)
Chile 13, 16, 26t
Chiswick, B. xvi
Chiswick, B. R., et al. (2000) 21, 260
Hurst, M. E. 260
Patrinos, H. A. 260
cholos (Peru) 27
Chuquisaca 51n
cities 21, 48, 51n, 58t
civil conflict 39
Civil Rights Act (USA, 1964) 121
civil unions 220(n1)
Human_Index.qxd 25/10/05 6:19 PM Page 279

Index 279

climate 209 public facilities 144t, 144

clinics 18 wages (Mexico, 2002) 163t
Guatemala 135, 136t, 138t, 140 consumer price data/index 109, 250
IGSS 136t consumption
private 63t, 135, 136t, 138t Bolivia 45
public 140 Ecuador 71–5, 85t, 103, 249
see also health centres Guatemala 109, 111, 251
Coast (Ecuador) 35, 67, 71t, 74t, 78t, Peru 202
79t, 80, 80t, 85t, 104, 244 consumption data 247
Coast (Peru) 252t Guatemala 110n, 110, 251
Cobija (Bolivia) 257(n4) consumption deciles
coca growers 4 Bolivia (2002) 47t
Cochabamba (Bolivia) 51n, 257(n4) Peru 205, 206t
cocoa 70 consumption quintiles
coffee 70 Guatemala 142, 142t, 143f, 143
cognitive development 141 Peru 217t, 218, 220
College of Mexico 257(n7) contraception
Colombia xix, 8–10, 13, 16, 17, 23, 26t, Ecuador 99t, 99, 100t
30, 31t Guatemala 138–40, 141, 147
colonial era/tradition 10, 32 contracting-out 238
comadrona 137t Contreras, D. G. 52
Comité Técnico para la Medición de la cooperatives (Mexico) 166t, 169t
Pobreza (Technical Committee on corn (Guatemala) 106, 127b
Poverty Measurement, Mexico) Cornejo, B. 265
251, 257(n7) Costa Rica 8, 13, 26t
commerce 45, 46t, 115t, 163t cotton 67
community 106, 233, 243t Cotton, J. 255–6
community activities 238 Cotton decompositions 21, 53, 81t,
community centres 136t, 196 119t, 168, 169t, 212t
community infrastructure Council of Guatemalan Mayan
(Guatemala) 141 Organizations (COMG) 5
community organizations 144t, credit 2, 105, 230
144–5 ‘loans’ 240
Community Radio Education Criales, S. 66(n1)
(Bolivia) 15 cubic parabolic function 80, 105(n1)
Community-Managed Programme for Cueto, S. 218, 268
Educational Development culture 27, 28, 227, 236, 240, 257(n3)
(PRONADE, Guatemala) 142 Bolivia 52
computers 143, 144t, 194t, 194 Guatemala 68, 107, 135
Confederation of Indigenous Mexico 167, 195
Nationalities of Ecuador indigenous (Guatemala) 107
(Confederación de Nacionalidades mainstream 35
Indígenas de Ecuador, CONAIE) 4, curandero 137t
5–6, 27, 33, 68 customary law (indigenous) 10
Constituent Assembly (Ecuador) 19
Constitution Act (Canada, 1982) 28 D’Emilio, L. 15
constitutional revisions 7, 9–11, 21, 22 Dahik 7b
construction data/information 8, 233
Bolivia 46t compatibility 66(n5)
Guatemala 115t consumption (Guatemala, 2000) 109
Mexico 160t, 161, 163t historical 34t
Human_Index.qxd 25/10/05 6:19 PM Page 280
280 Index
data/information – continued
income-based 74
micro-level 241
data collection
challenges 31, 39
improvement 25, 231, 232t, 238
standardization 23, 147, 231, 238
data deficiency 2, 17, 20, 23, 26, 28,
29, 33, 39, 39(n2), 231, 239, 241,
242, 256
Ecuador 73, 96, 227n, 250
Guatemala 108 109, 116, 118, 121,
123, 129, 133, 145, 149(n3)
Mexico 197(n8), 245–6
Peru 200, 205, 209, 216, 247
lack of standard statistical
classification system 31, 39
data and methods 241–57
areas of analysis 241, 256(n1)
household surveys and definitions of
ethnicity 243t
identifying indigenous peoples
242–7, 256–7(n2–6)
measuring labour market outcomes
252–6
measuring poverty 247–52, 257(7–8)
methodology 241–56
Davis, S. H. xvi, 149(n1)
decision-making 220, 252–3, 253f
degrees 16, 24(n10)
democratization 21, 23
demographics/demography 27
Bolivia 41–2, 66(n3)
Ecuador 67, 69, 95–6
Guatemala 108, 139
Mexico 150–2, 197(n2–5), 245
Peru 199–200
demonstrations/protest 7b, 40, 68
departmental capitals (Bolivia) 41, 42,
43t, 50–1, 53, 242, 244
Deruyttere, A. 9, 34t
developed countries 143, 240, 253
developing countries 143, 253
‘low-income countries’ 121
development 23(n1), 107
rural programmes (Peru) 202, 220
World Bank projects 8–9
Development as Freedom (Sen) 240
‘Development with Identity’
(Bolivia) 40
diabetes 187t, 187
dialect 179, 243t
diarrhoea 17, 99, 101t, 187t, 187
Díaz, R. 220(n1)
DIGEBI (Dirección General de
Educación Bilingüe Intercultural,
Office of Intercultural Bilingual
Education) 17
digital divide (Guatemala) 143, 144t
disability/disabling illnesses 96, 217n
discrimination 3, 6, 20–1, 22, 24(n11),
30, 33, 36, 224
Bolivia 52, 53, 66(n9)
Canada 39(n5)
Ecuador 79–81, 103
Guatemala 106, 118, 119, 120–1,
145, 146, 148t
Mexico 150, 162–70, 195
Peru 213f, 219
earnings 162, 163t, 164, 166–8, 169t,
170, 213f
gender and ethnic 120–1, 146, 168,
224n
labour market 150, 239–40, 253
prior 256
role in poverty 239
sensitivity tests 66(n9)
upper-bound estimates 165, 167, 168
wage 254, 255, 256
see also indigenous/non-indigenous
gap
disease see illness
distance 97t, 180, 181t
distance learning 135, 232t, 234, 235
doctors 126, 136
domestic service 79t, 79n, 80, 80t
domestic violence 107b
dress/clothing 27, 53, 238, 251
dropping out see schools
earnings 20–1, 24(n11), 239, 253
Bolivia 51t, 54t
Ecuador 77–88, 105(n1–2)
Guatemala 117–21, 146, 149(n2–3)
Mexico 162–70, 197(n9), 211t
Peru 211t, 219
child labour 54t, 81–7
decomposition models 77–81,
105(n1)
determinants 51t, 78t, 78, 117, 118t,
162–70, 197(n9), 211t
discrimination 79–81
Human_Index.qxd 25/10/05 6:19 PM Page 281
earnings – continued
logit regression 78t
Oaxaca-Blinder decomposition
method 79t, 81t
returns from schooling 87–8,
105(n2)
see also wages
earnings differentials/earnings gap
225t, 225–6, 237, 241, 253–6
Bolivia 65
Mexico 162–4, 166–8, 169t, 169,
170, 195
Peru 213f
agenda for action 230–1
determinants 253
ethnic 253–4
male-female 253
public-private sector 253
socioeconomic background 253
unexplained component
224, 224t
unexplained factors (Mexico)
166–8, 195
see also discrimination
ECLAC see United Nations: Economic
Commission for Latin America and
Caribbean
econometric models 231
economic growth 70, 91, 111
economic liberalization 5, 192
economic stagnation (Ecuador) 70
economies of scale 102
Economist 24(n6)
Ecuador xvi, xviii, 1, 2, 8, 22, 23,
221, 242
agenda for action 232t
agrarian law 6
bilingual education 15–16
communal land (barriers to
gaining title) 11
constitution 10, 95b
cultural diversity 67
dollarization 70
earnings gap 224t, 225t
economic crisis (1998– ) 70, 73–6
economic crisis and recovery
(poverty effects) 222t, 222
economy 70
education (more and better) 231–5
education returns 225t, 225–6, 226f
financial system breakdown 104
Index 281
general elections (1996, 1998,
2000) 4
health insurance 228t
household surveys and definitions of
ethnicity 243t
human development 70
income per capita 69–70
indigenous political representation
4–5, 5–6
indigenous population (numerical
estimates) 27
indigenous population (percentage of
total population) 26t
indigenous population (size) 23(n2),
68, 103
indigenous population (size: changes
over time) 32–5
indigenous provincial governments
68
indigenous uprising (1990) 103
key messages and agenda for action
221–40
mathematics test scores 227t, 227
pluricultural heritage recognized 9,
10, 95b
poverty 222
poverty trend 222t
social spending 11, 12t
Spanish conquest 67
teacher-training (bilingual) 16
years of schooling 225t
Ecuador: case study 67–105, 243t, 244,
249–50
consumption (average per capita,
1994–2003) 75t
demographics 69
educational attainment 88–94, 95b,
104, 105
ethnicity, poverty, and crisis 73–6
health care 94–103, 104, 105
household surveys and definitions of
ethnicity 243t
identifying indigenous peoples 244
labour earnings 77–88, 103,
105(n1–2)
measuring poverty 247, 249–50
poverty by area and region
(1995–2003) 74t
poverty determinants (1998) 78t
poverty by ethnicity (1994–2003) 75t
poverty headcount 70–1
Human_Index.qxd 25/10/05 6:19 PM Page 282
282 Index
Ecuador: case study – continued
poverty, identity, and human capital
76–7, 78t
poverty incidence (by region, 1998)
71, 71t
poverty among indigenous peoples
69–77, 78t
probability of being poor 78t, 223t
recommendations 105
Ecuador: Department of Health 19
Ecuador: Executive Decree 203
(1988) 16
Ecuador: Ministry of Education 95b
Ecuador: Ministry of Education and
Culture 16
Ecuador: Model of Intercultural Bilingual
Education (1993– ) 16
Ecuador: Tribunal of Constitutional
Guarantees 6
Educación Bilingüe Intercultural (EBI)
programme 95b
education
Bolivia 40, 41, 44t, 45, 46t, 52–6,
57–62, 66, 242
Ecuador 68, 77t, 77, 89, 95,
101 103
Guatemala 106, 107b, 113–14,
126–35, 141
Mexico 150, 173, 175–86, 191, 196,
197(n11–12), 245, 251
Peru 206, 215–16, 220, 252
and earnings 224–7
‘highly effective means of helping
indigenous peoples to escape
poverty’ 113–14
improved accountability 232t, 236–8
inadequate 141
intercultural content 239
miscellaneous 1–3, 7b, 8–9, 23(n1),
240, 247–8, 253–4
more and better 231–5
multicultural 233
national expenditure policy 11,
12–17, 21
policy recommendation 231
probability of completion 181–2
‘should be basic right’ 106
women 191
see also bilingual education;
schooling
educational attainment (‘educational
achievement’/’educational level’)
Bolivia 44t, 45, 54–9, 61t, 62, 66
Ecuador 79, 82, 86t, 87f, 88–94, 95b,
103, 104
Guatemala 113, 113t, 114, 123t,
123, 126, 127–32, 132–4, 145,
146, 148
Mexico 153, 154t, 159t, 159, 170,
173, 175–82, 183t, 190, 192, 195,
197(n11–12), 246t
Peru 210, 213–14, 216
age-grade distortion 59t, 59, 62,
89–90, 93t, 93, 94t, 104, 132–3,
145, 148, 179–82, 197(n11–12),
227, 233
determinants 62
high school 176t, 192
higher 13, 87f, 88, 103
malnutrition impact 228–9
maternal 61t, 182, 183t
miscellaneous 223, 227, 232t, 234,
235, 239, 241
multivariate regression analysis
178, 179t
none 44t, 57, 58, 86t, 89, 90t, 123t,
123, 129, 130f, 153, 159t, 175f,
176t
parental 59, 62, 82, 190
post-secondary 173
post-tertiary 173, 175f, 175
and poverty incidence (Mexico)
159t, 159
primary 44t, 45, 86t, 87f, 88, 92t,
103, 104, 113, 113t, 114, 135,
154t, 175f, 233, 246t
primary (incomplete) 55t, 58t, 90t,
159t, 176t, 216
probability of being poor 45, 46t
secondary 44t, 66, 77, 90t, 92t, 113,
113t, 135, 154t, 175f, 176t, 196,
226t, 226
secondary (incomplete) 55t, 58t, 86t,
87, 87f, 90t, 159t
tertiary 175f, 176t
university 44t, 45, 58t, 58, 66, 90t,
159t, 159
see also years of schooling
education budget (Guatemala)
134–5, 148
Human_Index.qxd 25/10/05 6:19 PM Page 283

Index 283

education gap 219 Emiliana Zapatista Liberation Front

closure (but poverty gap persists) 224 (EZLN) 1, 5
education quality 3, 216, 227, 230, empiricism 241, 242
232t, 234, 256 economic crisis (Ecuador, 1998– ) 73
Bolivia 52 health care (quality of service)
Ecuador 81–2, 94, 104 97t, 97
Guatemala 119, 132–4, 148 poverty 107
Mexico xviii, 161, 167, 175, 183–6, employees
195, 196–7 Bolivia 51t, 52t
Peru 214, 216 Ecuador 79t, 80, 80t, 87n, 102
educational materials 148, 234 Guatemala 127b
Eduque a la Niña programme (USAID) Mexico 188
134, 148 Peru (2001) 209t
Edwards, J. 133n employers 21
ejidal lands (Mexico) 11 Bolivia 50, 51n, 52
El Alto (Bolivia) 41, 51n, 242, 244, Ecuador 102
257(n4) Guatemala 127b
El Niño 70 Mexico 164t, 164, 165, 166t, 169t,
El Salvador 13, 22, 26t, 238 188t, 189t
elections 3–6 Peru 209, 209t
congressional (Bolivia, 1997, employment 20–1, 24(n11), 248
2002) 4 Bolivia 45, 46–57, 65, 66(n5–9), 242
general (Bolivia, 2002) 41, 65 Ecuador 79t, 80, 80t, 81, 87n,
general (Ecuador, 1996, 1998, 103, 105
2000) 4 Guatemala 112t, 113–17, 118t, 120t,
legislative (Bolivia) 53 120, 123t, 123, 145–6, 148t
legislative (Guatemala, 1995) 5 Mexico 153, 154t, 161–5, 166t, 169t,
local council (Bolivia, 1995) 3 169, 170, 180, 181t, 188, 197(n9),
mayoral 4, 22 226t, 226, 245
municipal 5, 22 Peru 204, 207–8, 209–10, 211t, 220,
municipal (Guatemala, 1995) 5 220(n3)
presidential (Ecuador, 2002) 4 agricultural 45, 153, 154t, 162, 164t,
presidential (Peru, 2001) 3 164, 165, 166t, 207, 208–9
referendum (Guatemala, 1999) 4 formal sector 12, 20, 65, 87n, 115,
vice-presidential (Bolivia, 1993) 3 117, 118t, 120t, 120, 188, 207,
electric appliances 198(n14) 207t, 209–10, 211t
electricity and income (Peru) 209–10, 211t,
Bolivia 45, 46t 220(n3)
Guatemala 115n, 143, 144t, informal sector 48, 49t, 49, 65,
147, 148t 79t, 80, 80t, 81, 114–17, 123t,
Mexico 160t, 163t, 193, 194t, 196, 123, 145, 146, 148t, 164t, 164,
246, 246t 165, 204, 209, 209t, 211t, 220,
Peru 217t, 218 220(n3)
embezzlement 7b interviews 240
EMEDINHO (Encuesta de Medición de non-agricultural 45, 153, 154t, 161,
Indicadores de la Niñez y los Hogares, 164t, 164, 165, 166t, 169t, 169,
Measurement of Childhood and 170, 209, 226t, 226
Household Indicators Survey, off-farm 104
Ecuador, 2000) 34, 34t, 244 quality 48
emigration 69 secondary sources 209
Human_Index.qxd 25/10/05 6:19 PM Page 284
284 Index
employment – continued
training programmes 253
unpaid/unremunerated 20, 47,
48t, 48, 114, 115t, 123t, 123,
145–6, 148t
employment and income (Bolivia)
46–57, 66(n5–9)
child labour 53–7
data compatibility 66(n5)
differences in labour earnings 50–3,
66(n8–9)
employment sector
Bolivia 45, 46t
Mexico 161, 162, 164t, 195
Peru 206, 207t, 208
probability of being poor 45, 46t
employment status 85t, 113, 113t,
223n, 223
employment surveys
Bolivia 242
Mexico 39
employment type
Guatemala 146
Mexico 165, 169t, 170
Peru 206
Encuesta de Condiciones de Vida
(Living Conditions Survey, Ecuador)
71n–75n, 77n–81n, 85n–102n, 243t,
244, 250
Encuesta Integrada de Hogares (Integrated
Household Survey, Bolivia, 1989,
2002), 242, 243t, 257(n5)
Encuesta Nacional sobre Condiciones de
Vida (ENCOVI) (Living Standards
Measurement Survey, Guatemala,
2000) 108, 110n–112n, 115n,
117n–120n, 122n–126n, 128n–133n,
136n–140n, 142n–144n, 228n, 243t,
251, 262
Encuesta Nacional de Hogares
(ENAHO; National Household
Survey, Peru, 2001) 199, 204n,
204, 205n–215n, 217n, 243t,
247, 252n
Encuesta Nacional de Ingresos y Gastos de
los Hogares (ENIGH) (National
Income and Consumption Survey,
Mexico) 175n, 197(n8), 245–6,
246t, 247, 257(n6)
questions 243t
Encuesta Nacional de Niveles de Vida
(ENNIV, National Living Standards
Survey, Peru) 199, 200n, 200,
201n, 201, 203n, 243t, 252n, 252
Encuesta Nacional Socio-Demográfica
(ENSD) (National Sociodemographic
Survey, Guatemala, 1989) 109,
110n, 111n, 115n, 116n, 119n,
122n, 243t, 244–5, 250, 251
ENEMDUR (Encuesta de Empleo,
Decempleo,y Subempleo,
Emoployment, unemployment and
under employment Survey) 34t
ENEZI (National Employment Survey in
Indigenous Areas, Mexico, 1997)
170, 171n–174n, 197(n10), 238
Engel coefficient 249
ENIGH see Encuesta Nacional de Ingresos y
Gastos de los Hogares
ENNIV see Encuesta Nacional de Niveles de
Vida (Peru)
entrepreneurial activity 196
environment 23(n1), 67
epidemics 36
equal opportunities
indigenous children (improved
health) 235–6
ethnicity 5, 28, 29, 33, 38t, 207, 223n,
238, 256
Bolivia 40–66
Ecuador 72–3, 73–6, 77t-79t, 81, 85t,
85, 89, 91t, 92t, 94t, 95t, 95, 96t,
99, 104, 244
Guatemala 112t, 112–13, 137t, 139t,
140t, 149(n5), 245
Mexico 150, 170, 173t, 174t, 177,
179t, 181t, 181, 182t, 182, 183t,
186t, 187t, 187, 188, 189t,
189, 192t
Peru 207, 210, 211t
definitions 243t, 244
design of reproductive health
measures 99
effect on schooling 177
indigenous (poverty-determinant) 45
likelihood of seeking medical care
95t, 95
see also indigenous/non-indigenous gap
ethnicity, poverty, and crisis (Ecuador)
73–6
Human_Index.qxd 25/10/05 6:19 PM Page 285

Index 285

Europe 71 Fiszbein, A. xvi

exchange rates 157n, 220(n1), floods 70, 104
248n, 252 Flores, A. M. 7
extreme poverty 247 Florida 108
Bolivia 42, 43t, 44t, 48, 54 Fondo Nacional de Compensación y
Ecuador 71t, 72f, 72, 74, 74t, 75t, Desarrollo Social (Foncodes) (National
99, 101t Fund for Compensation and Social
Guatemala 109, 110t, 110, 111, Development, Peru) 202, 220(n2)
148t, 251 food 75n, 247
Mexico 150, 153, 155–62, 163t, 177, Ecuador 249–50
178t, 182, 183t, 183, 195, 246t Guatemala 106, 109, 251
Peru 201t, 201, 202, 203f, 204t, 218, Mexico 251
219, 252t, 252 traditional 236
extreme poverty line foreign exchange 70
Bolivia (1999–2002) 248, 248t forestry 163t
Ecuador 249, 249t, 250t, 250 Foster-Greer-Thorbecke index (FGT P1)
Mexico 251 Peru 204t
EZLN see Emiliana Zapatista Liberation Foster-Greer-Thorbecke index (FGT P2)
Front 44t
Bolivia 43, 44t
families 247 Guatemala 110, 111t
Guatemala 125–6, 127b, 134, 135 Mexico 157–8, 159t
disadvantaged 234 Peru 204t
Mayan (Guatemala) 125–6 see also poverty gap
poor 12, 134, 192 Franco, F. 271
see also households freedom 240
family businesses 48 French Guyana 13
family/household income funding xvi
Bolivia 56, 57, 60, 61t
Ecuador 74, 75 Gajate, G. 218
Mexico 171, 172t, 173t, 174t, 182, Galván, M. 52
183t, 191, 192t, 251 García, M. 265
family size/household size García Moreno, V. 197(n1)
Ecuador 78t, 82, 85t, 85, 91t, 92t, 94t García-Guerra, A. 269
Guatemala 124t, 125t, 137t Garifuna group (Guatemala) 245
Mexico 151, 152t, 160t, 161, 162, gas 163t
171, 172t, 172, 173t, 174t, 190 gender 224n, 241
Peru 207, 207t Bolivia 46t–50t, 54t–61t
Federal Law on Prevention and Ecuador 78t, 82t, 82, 83f–84f,
Elimination of Discrimination 85t–86t, 89, 90f, 90t, 91t, 92t,
(Mexico, 2003) 21 94t, 96t
Feregrino-Garcia, R. 269 Guatemala 112t, 113, 113t, 115t,
Ferranti, D. de xvi 116t, 116–23, 124t, 125t, 127b,
fertility 191–2 128t, 129, 130t, 130, 137t
FGT see Foster-Greer-Thorbecke Mexico 151t, 160t, 165, 170, 171,
finance (sector) 45, 46t, 115n 173t, 174t, 176, 177f, 177, 178,
Fire on Andes (Beals, 1934) 23 179t, 181t, 182t, 182, 183t, 183
firm size 114, 115–16, 116n, 146, Peru 206, 209t, 210t, 210, 211t, 212,
220(n3) 213, 214t, 216, 219, 220
fishing (Guatemala) 114, 115t, 146 illiteracy rates (Mexico, 2000) 176
Human_Index.qxd 25/10/05 6:19 PM
286 Index
General Directorate of Indigenous
Education (DGEI, Mexico) 14
General Health Act (Mexico) 19
generalized entropy inequality measures
(Peru) 206t, 206
genetics 191
geographical concentration method
25, 28, 31t, 35, 36, 38, 241
indigenous peoples (operational
definition) 30
geographical isolation 39, 236,
238, 246
Guatemala 112, 126, 138, 145
Mexico 196
geographical regions 223n, 223
Ecuador 93, 95
Mexico 151, 190, 197(n10)
Peru 200, 201, 202, 207–9, 210, 213,
214t, 220, 252
indicators of poverty and differences
(Peru) 202, 204
poorer 202
Georgetown University xvi, xvii
girls
Bolivia 57, 58t
Ecuador 82, 83f, 84, 85, 86t, 90f, 90t,
90, 91t, 104
Guatemala 125, 127b, 134
Mexico 172t, 173t, 180
Peru 216
Glei, D. A. 136
globalization 1, 21, 23
God 107b
Godoy, R., et al. (2004) 13, 263
Huanca, T. 263
Karlan, D. 263
Rabindran, S. 263
Gonzalez, C. Y. 17
Gonzalez, M. L. 30
Gonzalez-Cossio, T. 269
government budgets 25
public expenditure 2
see also national expenditure policy
governments 6, 22, 23(n1)
Guatemala 126, 134,
Mexico 188
Gragnolati, M. 140, 141n, 149(n5)
grandparents 218, 243t, 247
Grootaert, C. ii, 248
Guaraní language 15, 61, 244
Page 286
Guatemala xvi, 2, 8, 9, 13, 21–2, 23,
27–8, 30, 68, 103, 241, 242, 256
agenda for action 232t
agreement on indigenous rights
(1995) 4
bilingual education 14, 15t, 16–17
civil war (1961–96) 5, 106, 108
constitution 4, 10–11
definitions of ethnicity (changes over
time) 31t
determinants of outpatient visits
(2000) 137t
earnings gap 224t, 225t
education (more and better) 231–5
education policy 134–5
health insurance 228t
indigenous concepts of well-being
107b
indigenous political representation
4t, 4
indigenous population (estimates
of changes in size over time)
35, 36f
indigenous population (percentage of
total population) 26t
indigenous population (size) 4
informal movements 5
key messages and agenda for action
221–40
mathematics test scores 227t, 227
participation in communal activities
(2000) 144t, 144–5
peace accords (1996) 5, 19, 28, 106
poverty gap 223t
poverty trend 222t
probability of poverty 223t
public expenditure (education) 127
referendum (1999) 4
regions 112n, 112, 137n, 139n, 140n
social spending 11, 12t
teacher-training (bilingual) 16
years of schooling 225t
Guatemala: Agreement on Identity and
Rights of Indigenous Peoples (1995)
4, 5, 28, 106, 121
Guatemala: case study 106–49, 243t,
244–5, 250–1
change in circumstances of indigenous
peoples (1989–2000) 148t
child labour 121–6, 127b, 149(n4)
Human_Index.qxd 25/10/05 6:19 PM
Guatemala: case study – continued
demographics 108
education 126–35
health care 135–42, 149(n5)
household surveys and definitions of
ethnicity 243t
identifying indigenous peoples
244–5
labour markets 114–26, 149(n2–4)
measuring poverty 108–14, 247,
250–1
policy recommendations 147–9
poverty determinants (1989–2000)
112t
purpose 107–8
social assistance, public services, social
capital 142–5, 149(n6)
Guatemala: Civil Society Assembly
(ASC) 5
Guatemala: Department of Public
Health 19
Guatemala: Health Code (approved
1997) 10
Guatemala: Ministry of Education
(MINEDUC) 142, 148
Guatemala: Ministry of Labour 122
Guatemala City 109, 112n, 117, 137n,
139n, 140n
Guatemalan constitution (1986) 107
Guayaquil (Ecuador) 71t, 74t
Gunderson, M. 255
Gutierrez, L. 4–5
Guyana 13, 19, 22, 26t
gynaecologists 137t
hacienda 68
haemoglobin 198(n13)
Haiti 126, 145
Hall, G. xvii, 149(n1)
Harvard University xviii
Hausman test (Mexico) 181t
health 2, 3, 7b, 9, 10, 23(n1), 234, 247
Bolivia 47t, 51t, 52t, 52, 62–5, 66
Ecuador 68, 78t, 94–103, 104–5
Guatemala 135–42, 146, 149(n5)
Mexico 186–92, 197–8(n13–14), 251
Peru 206, 207t, 216, 217t, 252
indigenous children 231, 232t,
235–6
policy recommendation 231
Page 287
Index 287
reproductive (Guatemala) 135–8
self-diagnosis 216
Health in Americas (PAHO, 1998) 17
health care 104–5, 227–9, 239, 240
access 63t, 63, 64t
accountability 238
consultations (Peru) 216
demand-side financing 237
‘differentiated provision’ suggested
142, 148
further research 141, 148
indigenous practices 232t
individual expenditure (2002) 64t
likelihood of seeking (Ecuador, 1998)
94–7
national expenditure policy 11, 12,
17–19, 21, 22
patients’ travelling and waiting times
96, 97t
private practice 63t, 63, 64t, 97t, 98t,
135, 136t, 138t, 188t, 189t, 216
probability of receiving 141
reasons for not seeking 97t, 189
self-reported data 96
service quality 96, 97t
health centres
Bolivia 63t, 63, 64t
Ecuador 96, 97t, 97, 104
Guatemala 136t, 138t
Mexico 189
Peru 216
distance 189
primary 96
public 104
see also clinics
Health Code (Guatemala) 19
health insurance/medical insurance 11,
17, 20, 228t, 231, 236
Bolivia 63, 64t
Ecuador 96t, 101–3, 104
Guatemala 135, 136t, 137t, 146
Mexico 188–9, 196
Peru 207, 216, 217t
coverage 63, 64t
lacking 188t, 189
private 188t, 189t, 189
Health and Nutrition Programme for
Indigenous Peoples (Programa de
Salud y Nutrición de Pueblos Indígenas,
Mexico) 18, 192
Human_Index.qxd 25/10/05 6:19 PM Page 288
288 Index
health policies (Guatemala) 141–2
health services 1
access 191
employment (Guatemala) 114
utilization (determinants) 17
under-utilization (Guatemala)
141–2, 148
heart disease (Mexico) 187t
Heckt, M. 125–6
height, maternal (Mexico) 190
Hernández, I. 12
Hernández, P. 271
Herrera, J. 204–5
hierbero 137t
Highlands see Sierra
home remedies (Peru) 216
home-ownership (Mexico) 194t,
194, 246t
Honduras 8, 13, 26t, 31t, 238
Honduras Social Investment Fund (Fondo
Hondureno de Inversion Social) 19
hospital treatment (Peru) 216
hospitality (sector) (Guatemala) 115n
hospitals
Bolivia 62, 63t, 64t
Ecuador 97t, 97, 98
Guatemala 136t, 138t, 146–7
childbirth 62, 63t, 98
IGSS 136t, 138t
private 63, 64t, 97t, 97, 98,
136t, 138t
public 63t, 64t, 97t, 98, 136t, 138t
hours worked
Bolivia 47–8, 50, 51t, 52t
Ecuador 79, 87n
Guatemala 114, 115t, 117, 118t,
120t, 122t
Mexico 164t, 165, 166t, 169t, 170
Peru 211t
household and Population Census
(Guatemala, 1994) 245
household business (Peru, 2001) 209t
household chores (Guatemala)
125, 126
household composition 206, 223n
household duties (Mexico) 180, 181t
household head
Bolivia 46t, 55t, 60t, 61t, 66(n6)
Ecuador 69, 76, 78t, 79t, 80t, 81, 82,
85t, 91t, 92t, 94t
Guatemala 112t, 116t, 123t,
124t, 125t
Mexico 151, 152t, 160t, 161, 163t,
171, 172t, 173t, 174t, 178t, 178,
182, 183t, 197(n7)
Peru 199, 200t, 206–8, 215, 215t,
217n, 218, 219, 247
age 78t, 160t, 171, 172t, 173t, 174t
characteristics 206
educational level 124t, 125t, 171,
172t, 173t, 174t, 207t, 208
employed in agriculture 124t, 125t
female 55t, 76, 78t, 82, 85t, 91t,
92t, 94t, 152t, 160t, 161, 163t,
171, 215
gender 207, 207t
identity 247
male 123t, 124t, 125t, 152t,
182, 183t
married indigenous 69
occupation 207
poverty degree 178t
spouse 206, 207t, 208, 218, 247
unemployed 160t, 161, 163t
household services (Mexico) 192–4
household size see family size
household surveys 2, 21, 29, 35, 229,
231, 241, 242, 243t, 247
Bolivia 42, 43–4, 53–4, 66(n3), 244
Ecuador 69, 244
Guatemala 107, 108, 117, 118, 123,
125, 127, 128t, 149(n3), 251
Peru 199, 220(n1), 247
see also ENCOVI; National Household
Survey (Peru)
households 238
Bolivia 45, 51, 60, 61t, 62, 69, 244
Ecuador 72, 76, 77, 78t, 85, 103
Guatemala 116, 143, 245
Mexico 151, 161, 187, 197(n2)
Peru 199, 200–5, 206t, 206, 207t,
209, 220(n2)
access to public services 143
indigenous 72, 76, 187, 199
indigenous (and poverty) 200–5,
220(n2)
most educated person 206, 207t
number of children 60, 61t
number of residents 78t
poor 20, 85, 202
Human_Index.qxd 25/10/05 6:19 PM
households – continued
socioeconomic characteristics 62
subjective poverty (Peru) 204–5
two resident spouses 69
unit of analysis 151, 197(n2)
working age people 161
see also family income
housing
Bolivia 56t, 60, 61t, 242, 244
Guatemala 91t, 92t, 94t, 107b
Mexico 187, 193, 194t, 196, 197(n9),
198(n14), 245, 246, 246t, 251
bedrooms 56t
flooring material 187, 193, 194t,
198(n14), 246, 246t
kitchens 91t, 92t, 94t
number of rooms 91t, 92t, 94t, 194t
running water 91t, 92t, 94t
Huanca, T. 263
human capital/labour market
endowments 216, 221, 230, 233,
235, 239–41, 253–6
Bolivia 244
Ecuador 76–7, 79–81, 82, 91, 94, 103
Guatemala 118–19, 120t, 121
Mexico 165–9
Peru 210, 211t, 212t, 212, 213f,
216, 219
differential effects on living
standards 76
returns 2, 118–19, 119t, 120
trends 2
human development 2, 230–1,
236, 247
Bolivia 244
Guatemala 147
Mexico 150
human rights 8, 23(n1)
hunger 106
hunter-gatherers 13
Hurst, M. E. 260
Hurtado, O. 70
Hvalkof, S. 9
Iberoamerican University (Mexico)
257(n7)
ICAPF (Instituto Centro Americano de
Población y Familia) 139, 264
identity 76–7, 227, 241, 248
Guatemala 107, 245
Page 289
Index 289
Mexico 245
cultural 68
land 106
multicultural 40, 107
national 10, 40, 107
see also indigenous identity
IEP (Instituto de Estudios Peruanos)
220(n1)
IGSS (Social Security Institute,
Guatemala) 115, 136t, 138t
illiteracy/literacy 17, 107b
Bolivia 59, 60t
Guatemala 130–1, 131t
Mexico 175, 176t, 176, 195, 246t
illness and disease
Bolivia 62, 63t
Ecuador 70, 93t, 94–7
Guatemala 131t, 135, 141, 146
Mexico 187t, 187
Peru 216
infectious 70
reason for non-enrolment in school
(Guatemala, 2000) 131t
reported 187
respiratory 18, 187
self-diagnosis 135
severity 95t, 95, 96t, 96
vulnerability 235
see also morbidity
IMSS-Oportunidades (Mexico, 1989–)
188, 189t
IMSS-Solidaridad (Mexico) 188
Incas 68
income 7b, 222–3, 234, 240, 256(n1)
Bolivia 45, 46–57, 62, 66(n5–9), 242
Ecuador 68, 75n, 75, 91, 104
Guatemala 109, 111, 116, 137t, 138,
139t, 140t, 251
Mexico 153, 154t, 157t, 157, 173,
245, 257(n6)
Peru 204t, 204, 205–6, 210–13
adjustment process 247
determinants 2
limited 62
monthly (Mexico) 157t, 157
per capita 68, 104, 204t, 204
under-estimation 247, 248, 251
income distribution 247–8
Bolivia 45
Guatemala 109, 111f
Human_Index.qxd 25/10/05 6:19 PM Page 290
290 Index
income and employment (Peru)
209–10, 211t, 220(n3)
income quintiles 230f
Ecuador 77t
Mexico 193t
Peru 202
‘index number problem’ 255–6
Indian Act (Canada, 1876) 28, 39(n5)
Indians (Canada) 28
indigena (‘once social term rather than
ethnic concept’) 28
indigenous censuses 31t, 39
indigenous identity: definitions 69,
147, 240(n1)
changes over time 27, 30
meaning of being indigenous 27–8
operational definitions 28–30, 31t,
39(n4–5), 241
indigenous leaders 23(n4), 102
indigenous/non-indigenous gap
child labour 53–7, 65–6, 77n, 81–7,
103, 121–6, 127b, 146, 148t,
149(n4), 170–3, 174t, 195–6,
197(n10), 227, 228f, 252
consumption ratio (Ecuador) 75t, 75
contraception 99t, 99, 100t,
138–9, 147
earnings 20–1, 22, 50–3, 65,
66(n8–9), 77–88, 105(n1–2),
117–21, 149(n2–3), 162–70,
197(n9), 224–7, 230–1, 237, 241,
253–6
education 44t, 44–5, 57–62, 126–35,
173, 175–86, 197(n11–12),
215–16, 219, 224–7, 231–5,
236–8
educational achievement 62, 88–94,
95b, 104, 105, 145, 175–9
fertility 191–2
financial 25
employment 20–1, 22, 145–6
employment (informal sector) 48–9,
145–6, 148t
health 17–19, 62–5, 66, 94–103,
135–42, 146, 149(n5), 186–92,
196, 197–8(n13–14), 216, 217t,
227–9, 231, 232t, 235–6
health insurance 63, 64t, 96t,
101–3, 104, 135, 136t, 137t, 146,
188–9, 196, 216, 217t, 228t, 228,
231, 236
human capital 76–7, 78t
illiteracy 175, 176t
illness and accidents 62, 94–7
income and consumption 45, 46, 47t
income and employment 209–10,
211t, 220(n3)
income inequality 205–6, 210–13
income and poverty 153–62, 163t,
164t, 197(n6–8)
infant mortality, childhood
malnutrition, vaccination
99–101, 102t, 147
labour force participation 46, 47, 48t,
114–17
labour market outcomes 252–6
malnutrition/nutrition 77t, 90–1,
99–101, 140–1, 189–91, 228–9,
230f, 231, 232t, 235, 236
migration (internal) 48
morbidity 18
number of children 85
occupational characteristics 46
poverty 42–5, 46t, 47t, 69–77, 78t,
108–14, 145, 147, 148t, 153–62,
163t, 164t, 197(n6–8), 200–5,
218–19, 220(n2), 221–4, 232t,
239, 241, 247–52, 257(7–8)
poverty determinants 206–9
prenatal care and childbirth 62, 63t,
98–9, 100t, 104, 135–8, 146–7
primary school completion and age-
grade distortion 179–82,
197(n11–12)
school participation 182–3
schooling 12–17, 50, 52, 121,
122t, 148t
schooling returns 213–14, 219–20,
220(n4)
self-employment 49
social 25
social assistance 19–20, 142–5
social capital 147
social programmes and household
services 192–4, 216–18, 220
test scores (education) 13, 17
unobservable factors 21, 52
unremunerated work 48t, 48, 148t
women 45–9, 50t, 62, 63t, 65
see also case studies
indigenous organizations/associations
40, 94, 95b, 102
Human_Index.qxd 25/10/05 6:19 PM Page 291
Indigenous People and Poverty in Latin
America (Psacharopoulos and
Patrinos, 1994) 1, 2, 221, 223, 224,
238, 253, 257(n5)
indigenous peoples/population 237,
243t, 256
Amazonian (Peru) 247
Caribbean countries 39(n2)
Guatemala 106, 147
Mexico 247
Peru 199–200
better served in inverse proportion to
total population 9, 23
history 233
identification 3, 25–39, 242–7,
256–7(n2–6)
lower-bound estimates 242
official versus unofficial statistics 25
political activity/muscle 1, 53, 106
population size 26–7, 39(n2–3)
poverty trend 222t
problem of definition 25, 27–31,
39(n4–5)
re-examination of attitudes by wider
population 3
right to protection of cultural
identity 8
rights 6, 9
single accepted definition lacking 31
size 147, 221, 240(n1), 242
upper-bound estimates 242
varying definitions of ‘indigenous’,
therefore varying estimates of
numbers 25
wealth (cultural and spiritual) 3,
23(n4)
see also political participation
indigenous peoples: numerical
estimation 25–39
census data 26–7, 29, 31t, 32–9, 69
conclusion 38–9
changes over time 31–8
data collection challenges 31, 232t
definitional problems 29t
geographic concentration method
25, 28, 30, 31t, 35, 36, 38, 153,
242, 243t, 245
historical projections 34t, 35, 36f,
36, 37t, 37
household surveys 29, 69, 197(n2)
internal differences 38
Index 291
language method 25–8, 29–30, 31–9,
65, 69, 197(n2, n10), 199, 208t,
208, 213, 215, 218, 219, 238,
241–5, 246t, 247
self-identification method 25, 26t,
27–8, 30, 31t, 32t, 32, 33, 34, 34t,
35, 37, 38f, 39, 69, 108, 151,
197(n10), 208t, 208, 213, 215,
218, 219, 238, 241–7, 256(n2),
257(n3)
underestimation 38, 39
indigenous social movements 40
indio (social term/ethnic concept) 28
indios (Guatemala/Peru) 27
individuals 10, 76, 103, 188t, 189t, 238
unit of analysis (Mexico) 151,
197(n2)
INE see National Institute of Statistics
INEC (National Institute for Statistical
Studies and Censuses, Ecuador)
34, 34t
inequality 253
income (Peru) 205–6, 210–13
poverty and (Guatemala) 108–14
social 76
within-group (Guatemala) 148t
infant mortality 18, 235
Ecuador 96, 99–101
Mexico 186t
infants 35, 102, 235
inflation (Ecuador) 249, 250
informal movements 5–6, 7b, 24(n6)
informal sector 79t, 80, 80t, 81
definition (Mexico) 197(n9)
see also employment
informal services 49
infrastructure 70, 202
Institute of Social Security and Services
for State Workers (ISSSTE, Mexico)
188–9
institutions
governmental (Guatemala) 126
indigenous 8
public (Mexico) 257(n7)
weak structures 8
Instituto Ecuadoriano de Seguridad Social
(IESS) / Ecuadorian Institute of
Social Security 101–3
Instituto de Estudios Peruanos (IEP)
220(n1)
Instituto Indigenista Interamericano 34t
Human_Index.qxd 25/10/05 6:19 PM Page 292

292 Index

Instituto Indigenista Latinoamericano 37 Kaqchikel group 21, 107b, 132, 141t,

Integrated Household Survey (Encuesta 145, 245
Integrada de Hogares, Bolivia, 1989, Karlan, D. 263
2002), 242, 257(n5) key messages 221–9, 230f
questions 243t education and labour earnings 224–7
Integrated System of Economic health care 227–9
Indicators (Sistema Integrado de poverty and malnutrition 229, 230f
Indicadores Sociales del Ecuador, poverty-reduction 221–4
SIISE) 249 questions for policy 224, 227
integration 29 see also agenda for action
Inter-American Commission on Human Klein, H. 28
Rights 11 Koch-Schulte, S. 267
Inter-American Development Bank (IDB)
xviii, 2, 7, 9, 242 La Mancha India (‘Indian strip’,
interaction terms 89 Peru) 37
intercultural education 13 La Paz (Bolivia) xvii, 15, 51n, 257(n4)
Intercultural Bilingual Education Project labour force 256
(IBEP) Guatemala 114–17
Bolivia 15 Mexico 162
Ecuador (1986–) 16 Peru 20, 209t
intermarriage 39, 238 characteristics 209t
International Labour Organization participation 77n, 114–17, 162
(ILO/OIT) xviii, 127b, 249, surveys 242
250, 264 labour markets xvii, xix, 65, 75,
Convention 169 on Indigenous and 103, 256
Tribal Peoples in Independent Bolivia 65
Countries (1991) 2, 8, 28 Guatemala 114–26, 149(n2–4)
Worst Forms of Child Labour Mexico 150, 168, 196
Convention 121–3 discrimination 1, 150, 239–40, 241
International Monetary Fund (IMF) 109 outcome measurement 252–6
international pressure 21 labour rights 8
interviews 6, 7b, 127b, 140, 240 labourers 51t, 52t, 76, 79t, 80,
Inurritegui, M. 218 80t, 209t
Italy 76 ladinos (Guatemala) 27
land 6, 8, 9, 10–11, 40, 230, 240
Jacoby, E. 268 Guatemala 106, 127b
Jamil Mahuad 6 Peru 209
Jarrín, D 265 agricultural 11, 192
Jiménez, E. xvi ‘central to indigenous identity’ 106
Jiménez Pozo, W. xvi, xvii maize-producing 67
Johnston, F. E., et al. (1973) 149(n5), ownership-fragmentation 76
265 Landa Casazola, F. xvi, xvii
Borden, M. 265 landowners/landownership 39,
MacVean, R. B. 265 211t, 238
Jovenes con Oportunidades (Mexico) 192 language barriers 62
jungle (Peru) 200, 252t language examinations 62
language-speakers
K’iche people 4, 106, 107b, 132, 134, bilingual 21, 29, 101t, 151, 234, 244
140, 141t, 141, 145, 245 monolingual 29, 36, 38, 42, 101t,
kallaway 18 133t, 151, 234, 244
Human_Index.qxd 25/10/05 6:19 PM Page 293
language-speakers – continued
multilingual 29
see also bilingual education
languages 27, 238, 241, 242, 256
countries: Bolivia 244; Ecuador 94,
244; Guatemala 107, 133t, 134,
141, 148; Mexico 150, 151, 179,
197(n10), 245, 246t; Peru 247
specific: Aymara 15, 32, 39, 61, 218,
244; Guaraní 15, 61, 244; K’iche’
14; Kaqchikel 14; Mam 14;
Maya/Mayan 14, 133t; Q’eqchi’
14; Quechua 12, 15, 32, 35, 39,
61, 218
general: ability to speak an indigenous
language 26t, 29, 29t, 31t, 32t,
33–9; determinant of school
enrolment 59; geographical
correlation 42; household-level
data 33, 34t, 37; indigenous
14, 16, 20, 21, 40, 41, 42, 53,
107, 151, 179, 197(n2, n10),
208t, 208, 232t, 236, 243t, 246t;
indigenous mother tongue 26t,
29, 29t, 30, 31t, 32t, 32, 35, 37,
38f, 39, 199; indigenous mother
tongue (Peru) 199–200, 208t,
208; indigenous peoples
(operational definition) 29–30;
individual-level data 33, 34t, 35;
mother tongue 61, 233, 238,
243t, 244, 247; parental 34, 247;
schools with indigenous children
(Guatemala, 2000) 133t see also
Spanish language
Larrea, C. xvi, xviii, 34t
Larrea, C. et al. (1996a) 249, 265
Andrade, J. 265
Brborich, W. 265
Jarrín, D. 265
Reed, C. 265
Larrea, C., et al. (1996b) 249, 265
Balarezo, S. 265
Cornejo, B. 265
García, M. 265
Martínez, L. 265
Sánchez, F. 265
Quintero, R. 265
Ramón, G. 265
Tadeo, R. 265
Index 293
Velasco, M. 265
Villavicencio, G. 265
Larrea, C., et al. (1999a, 1999b)
249, 265
Carrasco, F. 265
Cervantes, J. 265
Viedma, N. 265
Latin America xvii
ethnic spectrum (two broad groups)
28–9
Latin America: indigenous peoples,
poverty, and human development
agenda for future action/policy
recommendations 3, 39, 105,
141–2, 147–9, 196–7, 220, 229–40
companion report (in preparation) 2
conclusions 3, 21–3, 38–9, 65–6,
103–5, 145–7, 194–7, 218–20,
221–40
country case studies 3, 40–220
cross-country comparison 199
data and methodology 23(n3), 232t,
241–57
editorial hope 240
four main questions 2
further research 94, 141, 148, 238–40
key messages 221–9
‘magnitude of task ahead’ 23
purpose of volume 2, 221
Latin America: Indigenous Peoples’
Decade (1994–2004) 1–24
employment, earnings, and
discrimination 20–1, 24(n11)
informal movements 5–6, 7b, 24(n6)
national expenditure policy 11–20,
24(n9–10)
policy changes 6–11, (24(n7–8)
policy setting 3–5, 24(n5)
Latin America and Caribbean xviii, xix,
127, 141, 234
Latin American and Caribbean Human
Development seminars (2004)
149(n1)
law (Mexico) 188
Law of Agrarian Reform (Bolivia) 40
Law of Popular Participation (Bolivia,
1994) 40
lawyers 4
Layton, H. M. xvi, xviii, 149(n1)
learning ability (Guatemala) 141
Human_Index.qxd 25/10/05 6:19 PM Page 294

294 Index

legislation 22 Peru (ENNIV) 199, 200n, 200,

domestic 6–8 201n, 201, 203n, 243t,
international 7, 8–9, 24(n7–8) 252n, 252
rights of indigenous peoples 1–2 local councils 3
legislatures/parliaments 4, 22, 237 logistic models/regressions 103, 182
Bolivia 41, 65 logit models/regressions 76, 77, 78t,
Peru 21 223n, 248
indigenous representation Guatemala 137n, 139n, 140n
(Bolivia) 65 Mexico 160n, 161, 170–1, 172t,
indigenous representation 197(n7)
(Guatemala) 106 Peru 206
national congress (Ecuador) 68 López-Calix, J. R. 258
length of service, compensation for, López-Calva, L. F. xvi, 258
220(n3) Los Angeles 108
licences 10 Lozano, R. 271
traditional medicine 18–19
life expectancy 17 McEwan, P. J. 13
Guatemala 141 MacIsaac, D. J. 21, 205, 210
Mexico 184, 186t, 187 macroeconomic trends 222
Lima xix, 30, 202, 204t, 207–8, 214t, MacVean, R. B. 265
219, 252t, 252 Madrid, R. 24(n5)
definition (Lima Metropolitan Area) Majawil Q’ij (Guatemalan ‘group’) 5
220(n1) malaria 17
mean income (2001) 210t malnutrition 3, 228–9, 231, 232t,
Lindert, K. 21, 149(n1) 235, 236
livestock rearing Ecuador 76, 77n, 90–1, 99–101,
Bolivia 49 103, 104
Guatemala 114, 115t, 146 Guatemala 140, 141t, 142, 145,
Peru 207t 149(n5)
living conditions 23, 242 Mexico 189–91, 196, 197–8(n13–14)
Bolivia 42–5 programmes 229, 230f
Guatemala 111, 126 see also childhood malnutrition;
Mexico 187, 190, 246–7 school breakfast
Peru 220 Mam people 21, 107b, 134, 141t,
Living Conditions Survey (Encuesta de 145, 245
Condiciones de Vida, Ecuador) Mancha India (Peru) 200
71n–75n, 77n–81n, 85n–102n, mano de obra (exchange of labour)
244, 250 144t, 145
question 243t manufacturing
living standards Bolivia 46t
Peru 202 Mexico 160t, 161, 163t
self-perception (Peru) 204–5 Peru 207t, 208
Living Standards Measurement Surveys Maori culture 233
(LSMS) Mapuche people 13
Ecuador 69, 71, 73, 82 Marini, A. 140, 141n
Guatemala (ENCOVI, 2000) 108, marital status
110n–112n, 115n, 117n–120n, Bolivia 50, 51t, 52t
122n–126n, 128n–133n, Ecuador 99t, 100t
136n–140n, 142n–144n, 228n, Guatemala 118t, 120t, 138,
243t, 244, 245, 251, 262 139t, 140t
Human_Index.qxd 25/10/05 6:19 PM Page 295

Index 295

marital status – continued Mexico xvi, xviii, xix, 2, 8, 13, 22, 39,
Mexico 151t, 152t, 164t, 165, 166t, 108, 242
166, 169t, 170 agenda for action 232t
Peru 211t, 220(n1) bilingual education 14t, 14, 16–17
markets 76, 104, 147 constitution 10, 11
marriage 181t definitions of ethnicity (changes over
Martínez, L. 265 time) 31t
Maryknoll missionaries 15 earnings gap 224t, 225t
maternal mortality 187t, 228, 235 economic crisis and recovery (poverty
mathematics 13, 17, 61, 62, 133–4, effects) 222t, 222
145, 185t, 186, 227, 231 education (more and better) 231–5
Mayan people 5, 35 education gap and earnings gap
Guatemala 106, 108, 125–6, 245 226t, 226
Mexico 243t health care 17–18
Mayor Universidad de San Simón de health insurance 228t
Cochabamba 16 income (monthly, 1989, 2002) 226t
Measurement of Childhood and indigenous land rights 11
Household Indicators Survey indigenous population (estimates of
(Encuesta de Medición de Indicadores de changes in size over time) 35–7
la Niñez y los Hogares, EMEDINHO, key messages and agenda for action
Ecuador, 2000) 34, 34t, 244 221–40
MECOVI (Programme for Improvement ‘largest indigenous population
of Surveys and Measurement of Life numerically’ 23(n2)
Conditions in Latin America and mathematics test scores 227t, 227
Caribbean) 48, 242, 244 population 151
medicine poverty gap 223t
public 10 poverty trend 222t
traditional 10, 18–19, 39, 235–6, 238 probability of poverty 223t
men social spending (1990–9) 12t, 12
Bolivia 47t, 48t, 60t teacher-training (bilingual) 16
Ecuador 78t, 81, 87n, 89 years of schooling 225t, 225f
Guatemala 121, 129, 131, 131t Mexico: case study 150–98, 243t,
Mexico 163t, 165, 166t, 167t, 167–8, 245–7, 251, 257(n6)
175, 192t, 192, 195 child labour 170–3, 174t, 195–6,
education 192t, 192 197(n10)
fathers 235 demographics 150–2, 197(n2–5)
illiteracy 175 earnings (determinants) 162–70,
Menchú, R. 106 197(n9)
mental health 96 education 173, 175–86, 197(n11–12)
mestizo educational achievement 175–9
Peru 200 education quality 183–6
‘once social term rather than ethnic fertility 191–2
concept’ 28 health 186–92, 196, 197–8(n13–14)
meteorology 57 health insurance 188–9, 196
Mexican Institute of Social Security historical trends 150–1
(IMSS) 188–9 household surveys and definitions of
IMSS-Oportunidades (1989– ) 188, 189t ethnicity 243t
IMSS-Solidaridad 188 illiteracy 175, 176t
Mexican Petroleum Company (PEMEX) income and poverty 153–62, 163t,
188t, 188n 164t, 197(n6–8)
Human_Index.qxd 25/10/05 6:19 PM Page 296

296 Index

Mexico: case study – continued Mixteco people 243t

malnutrition 189–91, 196, Moa-Flores, G. 267
197–8(n13–14) Molnar, A. 18
measuring poverty 247 money
primary school completion and Guatemala 107b, 114
age-grade distortion 179–82, Mexico 180, 181t
197(n11–12) lack of 7
school participation 182–3 monitoring 237
social programmes and household Montenegro 34t
services 192–4 Montenegro Torres, F. xvi, xviii
Mexico: General Directorate of Monterrubio, E. A. 269
Indigenous Education 16 morbidity 18, 66, 96
Mexico: Ley Estatal de la Educación/State see also illness and disease
Education Law (1992) 14 Morelos state (Mexico) 19, 197(n4)
Mexico: Marine Ministry (SEMAR) Moreno Trevino, J. 238
188t, 188n mortality 18, 35
Mexico: Ministry of Defence (SEDENA) Ecuador 96
188t, 188n Mexico 186t, 187t, 187
Mexico: Ministry of Education 183 death (Peru) 217n
Mexico: Ministry of Health 188 death rates 18
Mexico: Ministry of Social see also infant mortality; maternal
Development 251 mortality
Mexico: National Indigenist Institute Movement for Pachakutik-New Country
(NII) 18 (MUPP-NP, Ecuador) 4–5
Mexico City xviii, 5, 30, 151 Movement for Socialism (MAS,
micro-credit institutions (Mexico) 196 Bolivia) 4
Microregiones programme (Mexico, Moya, A. 34t
2001– ) 196 multivariate regression analysis
middle-income countries 234 178, 179t
midwives/midwifery 18, 98t municipalities 10
modern 136, 137t, 146 Bolivia 64, 65
traditional 19, 136, 137t, 138t, Ecuador 68, 250
141, 146 Mexico 18, 36, 153–71, 175–82,
migration 186t, 187, 188t, 193t, 193, 195,
Bolivia 41, 43, 53, 242 196, 197(n6, n8), 243t, 245–6,
Ecuador 69, 71, 76 247, 257(n8)
Guatemala 108
Peru 200, 204, 211t, 220 Nahuatl people 243t
internal 48 Narayan, D., et al. (2000) 6, 267
international 104 Koch-Schulte, S. 267
regional 35 Patel, R. 267
rural-urban 41, 43, 108, 204 Rademacher, A. 267
milk, glass of (vaso de leche, Peru) Schafft, K. 267
217t, 218 national accounts 248
milpa (corn) 107b National Coordinating Committee of
Mincerian earnings functions Indigenous People and Campesinos
121, 122t (CONIC, Guatemala) 5
mining 45, 46t National Council for Educational
Guatemala 115n Development (CONAFE, Mexico)
Mexico 160t, 161, 163t 14, 179
wages (Mexico, 2002) 163t national curriculum 233
Human_Index.qxd 25/10/05 6:19 PM Page 297
National Dialogue (Bolivia, 2000-) 40
National Directorate of Intercultural
Bilingual Education (Ecuador) 16
National Employment Survey in
Indigenous Areas (ENEZI, Mexico,
1997) 170, 171n–174n, 197(n10),
238
national expenditure policy 11–20,
24(n9–10)
education 12–17
health care 17–19
social assistance 19–20
National Health Survey (Mexico, 2000)
188, 192n
National Household Survey (Encuesta
Nacional de Hogares, ENAHO, Peru,
2001) 199, 204n, 204, 205n–215n,
217n, 247, 252n
questions 243t
National Income and Consumption
Survey, Mexico (Encuesta Nacional de
Ingresos y Gastos de los Hogares,
ENIGH) 154n–155n, 156,
157n–160n, 163n–164n,
166n–167n, 169n, 178n–181n,
183n, 197(n6), 243t, 245
National Institute of Anthropology and
History (Mexico) 35–6
National Institute for Statistical Studies
and Censuses (INEC, Ecuador) 34,
34t, 74
National Institute of Statistics/National
Statistical Institute (INE)
Bolivia 242, 257(n5)
Guatemala 109, 127b
Mexico 251
National Institute of Statistics,
Geography and Information
(Mexico) 257(n7)
National Institute of Statistics and
Information (INEI, Peru) 199
National Institute for Traditional
Medicine (Peru) 10, 19
National Living Standards Survey
(Encuesta Nacional de Niveles de
Vida, ENNIV, Peru) 243t,
252n, 252
National Pedagogic University (Mexico)
16, 24(n10)
national planning agency (SEGEPLAN,
Guatemala) 109
Index 297
National Population Census
Guatemala (2000) 245
Mexico (2000) 245–6, 246t
see also censuses
National Population Council (CONAPO,
Mexico) 187, 239, 257(n7)
national price index (Ecuador) 249
National Sociodemographic Survey
(Encuesta Nacional Socio-Demográfica,
ENSD, Guatemala, 1989) 109,
110n, 111n, 115n, 116n, 119n,
122n, 244–5, 250, 251
questions 243t
National Sociodemographic Survey
(Guatemala, 2000) 251
National Standards (Estándares
Nacionales)
education (Mexico) 183
mathematics scores 185t, 186
reading scores 184t, 186
National Survey of Employment,
Unemployment and
Underemployment (Ecuador) 244
National Survey of Living Conditions
(Ecuador) 244
National University of Altiplano (Puno,
Peru) 16
natural resources 8, 66(n4), 209
naturistas (traditional medical
practitioners) 18, 137t
Neumark, D. 255
New York 108
New Zealand 233
Nicaragua 13, 26t, 238
Nigenda, G., et al. (2001) 18–19, 267
Aldama-López, S. 267
Moa-Flores, G. 267
Orozco-Núñez, A. 267
Nobel Peace Prize
Menchú, R. (1992) 106
non-family network (Peru) 207
non-governmental organizations 4, 5,
6, 7, 18, 19, 22, 27, 238
Ecuador 95b
Guatemala 109, 126
Ñopo, H., et al. (2004) 20–1, 267
Saavedra, J. 267
Torero, M. 267
North America 71
northern region (Mexico) 151,
197(n5)
Human_Index.qxd 25/10/05 6:19 PM Page 298

298 Index

Nukuj Ajpop (organization, Pacific Ocean 67, 70

Guatemala) 5 Pan-American Health Organization
nutrition 234 (PAHO) xviii, 17, 34t
Ecuador 77t, 91, 103, 105, 249–50 Panagides, A. 154n, 157n, 167,
Guatemala 106, 109, 140–1, 142, 175, 180n
148, 149(n5) Panama 13, 21, 26t, 31t, 238
Peru 202 Pando department (Bolivia) 66(n4)
nutritional programmes 142, 232t panel data 238
nutritional supplements 192, 236 Paqueo, V. 17
Paraguay 8, 10, 13, 30, 31t
Oaxaca, R. L. xvi, 253, 255–6 páramos (high-altitude moors) 67
Oaxaca Campus (National Pedagogic parents 233, 237, 243t
University) 16 Guatemala 114, 137t
Oaxaca decompositions 239, 254–5 Peru 218, 247
Oaxaca province (Mexico) 36, 197(n3) child-nutrition education 236
Oaxaca-Blinder decompositions 21, 52, Parker, S. W. 234
79t, 166–8, 253, 255 parliaments see legislatures
Oaxaca-Ransom decompositions 21, Paruro province (Peru) 19
53, 81t, 119t, 119, 168, 212t, 212 Patel, R. 267
occupational segregation 256 Patrinos, H. A. ii, xvii, 1, 2, 12, 13, 21,
occupational structure 46 50, 52, 54, 121, 149(n1), 221, 223,
occupations 224, 238, 248, 253, 257(n5), 258,
Guatemala 127b 260, 268
Mexico 160t, 162, 163t Patriotic Society Party (PSP, Ecuador) 4
ODEPLAN (Ecuador) 249 Paxson, C. 220(n2)
oil 70, 104 pay structure/wage structure 254,
OIT (Organización Internacional del Trabajo) 255, 256
(ILO) xviii, 127b, 249, 250, 264 Ecuador 80t, 81t
old age (Mexico) 151, 161 Bolivia 52t
Oportunidades programme (Mexico) Peru 211t, 212t, 212–13
12, 20, 180, 192, 193t, 193, 196, Paz y Miño, L. 34t
234, 239 pensions 11
website 197(n12) Perry, G. xvi
opportunity costs 54, 65, 234 Peru xvi, xvii, xix, 2, 5, 8–13, 17, 23,
oral rehydration therapy 99 27–30, 68, 103
ordinary least squares (OLS) 256 agenda for action 232t
Ecuador 89 bilingual education 14–15
Guatemala 118n, 130n constitution 10, 11
Mexico 165, 166t, 178 definitions of ethnicity (changes over
Oregon 108 time) 31t
organizations earnings gap 224t, 225t
aboriginal 238 education (more and better) 231–5
international 22, 126 health insurance 228t
medical (indigenous) 18 indigenous political representation 3
Orozco-Núñez, A. 267 indigenous population (estimates of
Oruro (Bolivia) 51n, 257(n4) changes in size over time) 37–8
Oxford University xviii indigenous population (percentage of
total population) 26t
Pacari, N. 4 key messages and agenda for action
Pachakuti Indigenous Movement (MIP, 221–40
Bolivia) 4 mathematics test scores 227t, 227
Human_Index.qxd 25/10/05 6:19 PM
Peru – continued
poverty 222
poverty trend 222t
probability of poverty 223t
social spending 11, 12t
teacher-training (bilingual) 16
years of schooling 225t
Peru: case study 199–220, 243t,
247, 252
access to services and social provisions
216–18
education 215–16
evolution of indigenous population
199–200
health 216, 217t
household surveys and definitions of
ethnicity 243t
identifying indigenous groups, 243t,
247, 252
income and employment 209–10,
211t, 220(n3)
income inequality 205–6, 210–13
indigenous households and poverty
200–5, 220(n2)
measuring poverty 247
policy recommendations 220
poverty (determinants) 206–9
schooling returns 213–14, 220(n4)
Peru: Congress 21
Peruvian Summer Institute of
Linguistics 14
peso crisis (Mexico, 1994–5) 156, 158
Petén (Guatemala) 113n, 137n,
139n, 140n
pharmacists/pharmacies (Guatemala)
136t, 137t
physical capital 68
physiognomy 27, 28
Pienda, M. A. 259
Plains (Bolivia) 45, 46t, 56t, 61,
66(n4)
Plant, R. 9
policy changes 6–11, 24(n7–8)
constitutional revisions 7, 9–11
legislation (domestic) 6–8
legislation (international) 7, 8–9,
24(n7–8)
policy setting 3–5, 24(n5)
policy-makers 3, 237f, 237
policy-making (impact of indigenous
mobilization) 68
Page 299
Index 299
political participation 3–6, 8, 21,
24(n5), 237, 240
primary goal 6–7
political parties
Bolivia 41
Ecuador 68
indigenous 22, 41
political representation 4t, 229,
231, 237
Pollit, E. 218
Pollit, E., et al. (1996) 218, 268
Cueto, S. 268
Jacoby, E. 268
Ponce, J. 89–90
Popol Vuh (Mayan sacred text) 106
population 76, 238, 245
see also demographics
Population and Housing Census
(Ecuador, 2001) 33
Potosí (Bolivia) 51n, 257(n4)
poverty xvii–xix, 1, 22, 232t, 239, 241,
242, 253
Bolivia 42–5, 46t, 53, 66(n4)
Ecuador 68, 69–77, 78t, 81–2, 88, 91,
96–7, 99t-101t, 103, 104
Guatemala 106, 109–11, 141, 145,
147–9, 251
Mexico 150, 153, 155–62, 163t,
164t, 177, 178t, 182, 195,
197(n6–8), 245, 246, 246t, 251
Peru 200–9, 218, 220(n2),
252t, 252
absolute 247–8
‘affects mostly rural areas and
indigenous households’ 72
consumption-based definition 247
definition 6
degree/severity (Ecuador) 72, 73t
demographic determinants (Bolivia)
45, 46t, 66(n4)
determinants 2, 160t, 161, 206–9,
248
effect on schooling 177
escape route 145, 205
escape route via education
reduced 88
evolution and dynamics 150
general 251, 252
income-based definition 247
indigenous households (Peru) 200–5,
220(n2)
Human_Index.qxd 25/10/05 6:19 PM Page 300
300 Index
poverty xvii–xix, 1, 22, 232t, 239, 241,
242, 253
inter-generational transmission 53,
76, 81, 82, 91, 103, 231
international comparison 251
measurement 247–52, 257(7–8)
moderate 155–62, 163t, 177, 178t,
204t, 246, 246t
non-indigenous (Peru) 201–2
probability (Ecuador) 78t
qualitative definition 3
quantitative definition 3
reason medical treatment not sought
97t, 97
rural residence not the cause
(Mexico) 155
subjective 204–5
see also extreme poverty
poverty depth (P1) (Mexico) 158, 159,
195, 251
poverty gap 222–3, 223t, 239
Ecuador 72, 73t
Guatemala 110, 111t, 147, 148t
Peru 201–2, 203f, 219, 220(n2)
Mexico 157–8, 158t
poverty headcount 241, 256(n1)
Ecuador 250t
Guatemala 109, 110t, 116
Mexico 155, 158
poverty incidence (P0), by educational
level
Mexico 159t, 159, 193
poverty indicators xvii
Peru 202, 204
poverty and inequality (Guatemala)
108–14
poverty lines 223, 247, 256(n1),
257(n5)
Bolivia (1999–2002) 248, 248t
Ecuador 249–50
Guatemala 108–9, 110
Mexico 153, 156, 157t, 195, 251,
257(n6)
Peru 201, 252t, 252
international 252
international comparison (using PPP)
156, 157t
moderate 195, 251
SIISE 250
see also extreme poverty lines
poverty maps 143
poverty measures (Guatemala) 108–14
poverty rates 2, 250, 251
poverty severity (P2)
Guatemala 110, 111t, 116
Mexico 158, 159t, 159, 195, 251
poverty trends 222t, 241, 249
Mexico (1992–2002) 155–6
Peru (1994–2000) 201t, 201–2, 203f
poverty-alleviation
Ecuador 103
Mexico 197
poverty-probability 223–4, 248
Bolivia 45, 46t, 223t
Ecuador 76, 103, 223t
Guatemala 112–13, 223t
Mexico 150, 159, 160t, 161–2,
173, 223t
Peru 207, 208t, 223t
ethnicity (being indigenous) 76
marginal effect of indigenous identity
(Peru) 208t
poverty-reduction 2, 6, 221–4, 229,
234, 240
agenda for action 230–1
pregnancy 218, 235
Ecuador 98, 102
Guatemala 135, 136, 146
prenatal care
Ecuador 98–9, 100t, 104
Guatemala 146–7
see also childbirth
press 7b
prices 210
primary schools 233, 246t
Bolivia 40, 44t, 45, 55t, 58t, 59t, 59
Ecuador 86t, 87f, 88, 90t, 92t,
103, 104
Guatemala 113, 113t, 114, 135
Mexico 154t, 159t, 175f, 176t
Peru 215–16
completion and age-grade distortion
(Mexico) 179–82, 197(n11–12)
enrolment 16, 215–16
rural 16
see also education
probit regressions (sequential) 171–2
Procampo programme (Mexico) 192,
193t, 193, 196
production sector (Peru) 204
Human_Index.qxd 25/10/05 6:19 PM Page 301

Index 301

productivity 49, 66(n4), 85, 192, 241, questionnaires 238, 249, 250
255, 256 Quetzaltenango 4
profit-sharing (Mexico) 197(n9) Quintero, R. 265
Programa Escuelas de Calidad (Quality Quito 71t, 74t
Schools Programme, Mexico) Qume Chay, R. 4
237–8
Programa de las Naciones Unidas para el Rabindran, S. 263
Desarrollo (PNUD) 249, 269 race 28, 36, 224n, 239–40
Programme for Improvement of Surveys Rademacher, A. 267
and Measurement of Life radio 194t, 194
Conditions in Latin America and Rafael Landívar University
Caribbean (MECOVI) 48, 242, 244 (Guatemala) 16
programmes, differentiated 238–9 Rai, N. xvi
see also bilingual education Ramírez, A. xvi, xviii
Progresa programme (Mexico), 20, Ramírez, T. 271
180, 234 Ramón, G. 265
Project of Bilingual Education (PBE, Ransom, M. R. 255–6
Peru) 15 Rao, D. H. 149(n5)
promotion 256 reading 134, 184t, 186, 227, 231
PRONADE (Community-Managed Reed, C. 265
Programme for Educational refrigerators (Mexico) 194t, 194,
Development, Guatemala) 142 198(n14)
PRONEBI (Programa Nacional de Reimers, C. W. 255
Educación Bilingüe, National religion 27, 39, 238
Programme of Bilingual Guatemala 106, 144t, 144, 147
Education) 17 remittances
protein 250, 257(n8) Ecuador 76, 104
Psacharopoulos, G. ii, xvi, xvii, 1, 2, Guatemala 108, 116, 117t
12, 13, 121, 149(n1), 221, 223, 224, Peru 209
238, 253, 257(n5) Renshaw, J. 9
public policy 25, 231, 240, 253 research (longitudinal) 238
public sector 70 retirement benefits 20
public services retirement funds (Mexico) 197(n9)
Guatemala 107b, 142–5, 149(n6) risk-pooling 102
Mexico 246, 247 Rivera, J. A., et al. (2003) 189, 190,
Peru 202 191n, 269
public transport 251 Feregrino-Garcia, R. 269
Puebla province/state (Mexico) 36, Garcia-Guerra, A. 269
197(n3) Gonzalez-Cossio, T. 269
Puerto Rico (Boriken) 27 Monterrubio, E. A. 269
purchasing power parity (PPP) 156, Sepulveda-Amor, J. 269
157t, 251 Rivera, L. 220(n1)
roads 70, 202, 220(n2)
Q’eqchi’, people (Guatemala) 21, 107b, Guatemala 144, 147
132, 134, 140, 141t, 145, Mexico 196
quadratic parabolic functions 80, Rojas, E. 13
105(n1) Rubio, F. E. 134
Quechua language 12, 15, 32, 35, 39, rural areas 16, 20, 37, 38t, 38, 227
61, 218 Bolivia 40–3, 47, 48, 51, 55t, 56,
Quechua people 3, 233, 238, 244, 247 61–2, 63–5, 244, 248t
Human_Index.qxd 25/10/05 6:19 PM Page 302
302 Index
rural areas – continued
Ecuador 69, 69t, 71–2, 74, 74t, 80–1,
90–6, 99t-101t, 101, 102, 104
Guatemala 109–10, 111t, 114,
116–17, 118t, 120t, 120, 123t,
123, 125, 131t, 133t, 134–5, 138t,
138, 139t, 143–6, 148, 245
Mexico 151t, 151, 152t, 155, 155t,
158–62, 163t, 165–6, 169t, 170,
175, 176t, 178t, 178, 179t, 179,
181–3, 188, 190t, 190, 193, 194t,
197(n10), 251, 257(n8)
Peru 200, 202, 204t, 204, 205, 207t,
208–10, 214t, 216, 218–20, 247,
252t, 252
Saavedra, J. 267
Sakellariou, C. xvi
Salinas Gotari, C. 11
sample surveys 39
sample size 42t, 66(n3), 71t
Sánchez, F. 265
Sánchez, J. xviii
Sánchez de Lozada, President 1
sanitation 18, 191
Guatemala 143, 144t, 147, 148t,
149(n6)
Mexico 187, 194t, 196
Peru 217t
Santa Cruz department (Bolivia) 51n,
66(n4)
Santa Cruz de la Sierra (city, Bolivia)
257(n4)
Santiso, R. 259
Sastry, J. G. 149(n5)
Saunders, J. 34t
Schady, N. 220(n2)
Schafft, K. 267
scholarships 16, 134, 148
school attendance/enrolment 22, 232t,
233–4, 239
Bolivia 53–4, 57, 59–60, 61t, 61, 66
Ecuador 76, 81–2, 91, 92t, 95, 103
Guatemala 129, 131t, 132–5, 145,
146, 148
Mexico 20, 183, 192, 195, 196
by age and grade (Ecuador, 1998)
91, 92t
cash subsidies (Guatemala)
134, 148
cash subsidies (Mexico) 20, 192
determinants 59–60, 61t, 91, 92t
girls 134, 148
no interest 131t, 132
primary school 82, 132–3, 145
probability 61t
rates 227
school breakfast (desayuno escolar)
217t, 218
Guatemala 142, 142t, 148
Peru 217t, 220, 230f
school census (Mexico, 2002–3) 180n
school construction: ‘not a solution’
131–2
school insurance (Peru) 217t, 230f
school marginality index 143
school materials pack (Guatemala) 142,
142t, 143, 148
school nutrition (Guatemala) 142,
142t, 143
school participation (Mexico)
182–3
school snack (Guatemala) 142,
142t, 148
school tests/examinations
Guatemala 133, 145
Mexico 183, 184t, 185t, 186, 195
Peru 214
international 234
mathematics 13, 17, 145, 185t, 186,
227t, 227, 231
reading 184t, 186, 227, 231
science 17
Spanish 13, 130–1, 133, 134t, 145
school tuition fees (Peru) 217n
schooling
Bolivia 50, 51t, 52
Ecuador 77, 81, 87–8, 101, 103,
105(n2)
Guatemala 121, 122t, 123t, 123, 129,
130f, 145, 147, 148t
Mexico 165, 173
Peru 213–14, 219–20, 220(n4)
cost (reason for non-enrolment)
131t, 132
determinants (Guatemala, 1989–2000)
130t
quality 145
reasons for non-enrolment
(Guatemala, 2000) 131t, 131–2
Human_Index.qxd 25/10/05 6:19 PM Page 303

Index 303

schooling – continued Segupta, P. 259

returns 50, 52, 77, 87–8, 101 103, Seguro Social Campesino (SSC, Ecuador)
105(n2), 121, 122t, 123t, 123, 102t, 102
129, 130f, 148t, 165, 173, 213–14, self-determination 8
219–20, 220(n4), 224, 237 self-employment 20–1
returns diminished by Bolivia 49, 50, 51t, 52t
malnutrition 101 Ecuador 79t, 80, 80t, 82
see also education schools Guatemala 117, 118t, 120t, 149(n3)
Guatemala 132, 142, 144, 145, 148 Mexico 165
Mexico 171, 172t–174t, 179–82, Peru (2001) 209t
184t, 185t, 186, 193, 195, 196, self-esteem 17, 126
197(n11) self-governing structures 10
Peru 214 self-identification 25–8, 30, 32t, 32–5,
class size 62 37–9, 238, 241–7, 256(n2), 257(n3)
CONAFE community 184t, 185t, 186 Bolivia 26t, 31t
distance from home 13 Ecuador 26t, 34t, 69
dropping out 53, 54, 61–2, 66, 90, Guatemala 26t, 31t, 35, 108
133t, 133, 145, 148, 195, 196, 227 Mexico 37, 151, 197(n10), 245, 246t
dropping out (disincentives) 193 Peru 31t, 37, 208t, 208, 213, 215,
dropping out (rates/determinants) 218, 219, 247
180t, 180, 181t, 181t Sen, A. 240, 247
equipment (lacking) 62 Sepulveda-Amor, J. 269
indigenous 180t, 184t, 185t, 186, service delivery 231, 237
197(n11) service-providers 237
intercultural curriculum 197(n11) services 46n
location 233 Peru 200
logistic regression 181t, 181 Mexico 160t, 161, 163t
Maya-only (Guatemala) 132 sewage
poorly-performing 62 Mexico 187, 194t
primary 142, 179, 180t, 182, 214, Peru 218
234–5 Shapiro, J. xvi, xviii–xix, 238
private 60, 61t, 184t, 185t, 186 Shifter, M. 23
public 180t, 184t, 185t, 186 shocks 68, 70, 104, 222
reasons for non-enrolment (Ecuador, economic crisis 222t
1998) 93t economic recovery (Mexico) 156
rural 179, 180t, 184t, 185t, siblings 56, 56t, 57, 61t, 85t
186, 227n Mexico 171, 172t, 173t, 174t,
in same municipality 171, 172t, 182, 183t
173t, 174t female 173t, 174t
secondary 232t, 234–5 male 171, 173t, 174t
special (for indigenous children) 239 number 182, 183t
type (Mexico) 184t SIDENPE (Sistema de Indicadores de las
urban 184t, 185t, 186 Nacionalidades y Pueblos del Ecuador)
worst 234 33, 271
Schultz, T. P. 234 Sierra (Highlands)
science 17, 61 Bolivia 42, 46t, 56t, 61t
Secretariat of Public Education (SEP, Ecuador 6, 7b, 35, 67, 71, 71t, 74,
Mexico) 14 74t, 78t, 85t, 91t, 92t, 94t, 96t,
Secretariat of Social Development 99t, 100t, 244
(Mexico) 257(n7) Peru 37, 200, 252t
Human_Index.qxd 25/10/05 6:19 PM Page 304

304 Index

SIISE (Sistema Integrado de Indicadores Social Security Institute (IGSS,

Sociales del Ecuador) (Integrated Guatemala) 115, 136t, 138t
System of Economic Indicators) social security scheme, mandatory
249, 250 (Mexico) 188
SIMAP Amerindian programme social services
(Guyana) 19 Bolivia 242
sin 140 Guatemala 114
Sirur, N. G. 149(n1) access 227, 242
Sistema Integrado de Indicadores Sociales agenda for action 231
del Ecuador, SIISE) (Integrated improved accountability 232t, 236–8
System of Economic Indicators, social spending 229
Ecuador) 249, 250 social stigma 257(n3)
skills 79, 256 social unrest 70
Skoufias, E. 234 socioeconomic
Smith, C. 35 conditions/circumstances 13, 238
Sobrado, C. 149(n1) Ecuador 93, 95–6
social assistance 142–5, 239 Mexico 190, 198(n14), 246, 247
means-tested benefits 12 Peru 202
national expenditure policy 11, 12, sociopolitical factors 257(n3)
19–20, 22–3 soil 67, 76
universal subsidies 12 sol (Peruvian currency) 220(n1)
social benefits 197(n9), 256(n2) South America
social capital xix ‘duality’ 23
Guatemala 142–5, 147 indigenous people (percentage of total
Peru 206–7, 207t population) 26t
social class 28, 42 South-East Asia
social cohesion (Guatemala) 107 financial crisis (1997): effect on
social conditions (Ecuador) 244 Ecuador 70
social conflict (Bolivia, 2000) 63 southern region (Mexico) 151, 197(n3)
social exclusion 1 Spain xix, 76
Guatemala 145 Spanish language 14, 16, 21, 29, 32,
Peru 205 33, 35, 36, 38, 233, 236, 243t, 244
social health fund (caja, Bolivia) Bolivia 41, 42, 61, 62, 244
63, 64t Guatemala 130–1, 133t, 133, 134t
social mobility Peru 218
Bolivia 42, 65 ‘Castellano’ 244
Guatemala 114 speculation 70
social policy sport 144
Mexico 196 SSA (Mexico) (Seguro de Salud, Health
Peru 202 Insurance) 188, 189t
social prejudice 30, 241, 256(n2) standard deviation 134t
social programmes 2, 3 Standard of Living Survey (ECV, Ecuador,
Mexico 192–4, 196 2000) 33
social protection (Mexico) 197(n9) State, the 7b
social provisions, access to (Peru) state governments (Mexico) 188
216–18 statistics agencies 39, 238
social security benefits (Guatemala) statistical models 241
114 Stavenhagen, R. 9–10, 24(n6)
social security contributions Steele, D. 115n, 119n, 120, 128n, 144n
(Guatemala) 114–16 student-teacher ratio 14
Human_Index.qxd 25/10/05 6:19 PM Page 305

Index 305

students (school pupils) 14t, 14, 15t, tianguez (markets) 67

17, 227, 233, 256 time 27, 30, 31t, 39, 230, 231, 232t,
Guatemala 132, 142, 143f 238, 240(n1)
Mexico 186, 192 Bolivia 58
Peru 217n Ecuador 91, 97t
stunting 77n, 229f, 229, 236 Guatemala 107, 125, 129, 137t, 146
Guatemala 141t, 141 Mexico 151
Mexico 190t, 190, 191t, 191, 196, Peru 199–200
198(n13) inter-temporal comparison 151
subsidies/cash transfer programmes Todd, P. 259
238, 239, 240 Toledo 20
school attendance xviii, 20, 22, Toledo Manrique, A. 3
180, 192 Torero, M. 267
subsistence strategies 85, 87 Torres, J. L., et al. (2004) 186n, 271
Sucre (Bolivia) 257(n4) Franco, F. 271
sucres (Ecuadorian currency) 249t Hernández, P. 271
Suriname 13 Lozano, R. 271
survival 8 Ramírez, T. 271
Swetnam, J. 20 Villoro, R. 271
Zurita, B. 271
t-statistics 46t, 51n, 112t, 118n, 122n, trade 49, 192
130n, 137n, 139n, 140n, 208n trade routes 67
taboo 140 trade union membership 80t,
Tadeo, R. 265 81, 85t, 117, 149(n2),
Taino peoples 27 164–6, 169t
target population (definition) 241 tradition 53, 106
targeting 12, 20, 22, 230, 232t, 239 training 232t, 235–6, 253, 256
Ecuador 104–5 Ecuador 105
Guatemala 143, 148–9 Guatemala 114, 127b
Mexico 193, 196 transparency 6
Tarija (Bolivia) 51n, 257(n4) transport/transportation 93t
taxation: impact on identification as Bolivia 45, 46t
‘indigenous’ (Ecuador) 32–3 Guatemala 115n, 147
teacher-training (Mexico) 179 Mexico 160t, 161, 163t
teachers 93t, 234 Peru 252
bilingual 14t, 14, 15t, 15, 16, 62, 233 travelling (Guatemala) 146
technical assistance 105 Trinidad (Beni) (Bolivia) 51n, 257(n4)
Technical Committee on Poverty Trivelli, C. xvi, xix
Measurement (Comité Técnico para la tuberculosis 187t
Medición de la Pobreza, Mexico) Tzannatos, Z. xvi
251, 257(n7)
telecommunications (Mexico) 196 underemployment (Guatemala) 114,
telephones 115t
Guatemala 144t, 147 unemployment 3, 20
Mexico 194t, 194 Bolivia 45, 46, 46t, 47t, 48t
Peru 217t, 218 Ecuador 70–1, 104
telesecundarias (distance learning by Guatemala 106, 119
television) 135, 235 United Nations 123
television sets (Mexico) 194t, 194 appointment of special rapporteur 8
textbooks 179 author 23(n1), 29
Human_Index.qxd 25/10/05 6:19 PM Page 306
306 Index
United Nations: Economic Commission
for Latin America and Caribbean
(ECLAC) 242, 249–51
United Nations: General Assembly 1
United Nations: International Decade of
World’s Indigenous Peoples
(1994–2004) 1, 23(n1), 221, 240
United Nations: International Year for
World’s Indigenous People/s (1993)
8, 24(n7)
United Nations: Permanent Forum on
Indigenous Peoples (2000– ) 8, 9,
23(n4)
United Nations Children’s Fund
(UNICEF) 19
United Nations Development
Programme (UNDP): Human
Development Index (HDI)
Bolivia 70
Ecuador 70
United Nations Educational, Scientific
and Cultural Organization
(UNESCO) 256
Regional Education Office for Latin
America and Caribbean (OREALC)
134, 227t, 227n
United States of America 28, 39, 76,
117t, 233, 239–40
‘new Indian nation’ (Mayans) 108
Universal Health Care Programme
(Mexico) 18
universal suffrage 41
Universidad de las Americas (Puebla,
Mexico) xvi
Universidad Rafael Landivar
(Guatemala) 109
universities xvi–xix, 16, 18, 257(n7)
uprisings 6
urban areas 16, 32, 37, 38t, 38
Bolivia 41–3, 46, 48, 51, 56, 56t, 57,
65, 244, 248t
Ecuador 69–71, 73, 74, 74t, 95t, 95,
96, 101t, 101, 250t
Guatemala 108–12, 114, 116, 117t,
117, 124t, 125t, 125, 131t, 132,
133t, 136–8, 139t, 140t, 143–6, 245
Mexico 151t, 152t, 155, 155t, 158t,
158, 159t, 159, 164, 175, 176t,
178t, 178, 182t, 182, 183t, 183,
190t, 190, 194t, 197(n10), 251,
257(n8)
Peru 204t, 208t, 208, 210t, 210, 214t,
216, 218–20, 247, 252t, 252
urbanization 35
Uruguay 13, 22, 26t
US Agency for International
Development (USAID) 14, 134
US dollar 206t, 220(n1), 248n, 249t,
252
dollarization 70, 249n
utilities (Peru) 216–18
vaccination/immunization 238
Ecuador 98, 101, 102t
Guatemala 138t, 138, 147
Peru 217t
hepatitis 138t, 138, 147
tetanus 98, 138t, 138, 147
Vakis, R. 21
Valdivia, N. 200
valleys (Bolivia) 42, 56
Van Cott, D. L. 24(n5–6)
Vargas, A. 6
Velasco, M. 265
Velez, E. xvi
Venezuela 10, 13, 26t, 30, 31t,
39, 238
Veracruz province/state (Mexico) 36,
197(n3)
Verduga 7b
video recorders (Mexico) 194t, 194
Viedma, N. 265
Vienna 24(n7)
Villavicencio, G. 265
Villoro, R. 271
violence 107b, 200
voice 6, 7b, 23, 65, 237
Voices of Poor (World Bank) 7b
voluntary work 48, 144t, 145
Wachtenheim, E. 220(n2), 258
wage decomposition (four methods,
Peru) 210, 212t
wages 254, 255
Bolivia 46
Ecuador 76, 103
Guatemala 120, 121, 123, 147
child labour (Mexico) 170
‘non-discriminatory’ 255–6
see also earnings; ‘employment and
income’; inequality
Wald-chi test 181t, 183t
Human_Index.qxd 25/10/05 6:19 PM
war 67–8
washing machines 194t, 194,
198(n14)
waste removal/refuse disposal
Guatemala 144t, 147, 149(n6)
Mexico 194t
wasting (malnutrition)
Guatemala 141t, 141
Mexico 190t, 190, 198(n13)
water
Bolivia 56t
Ecuador 91t, 92t, 94t
Mexico 163t, 187, 193–4, 194t, 196,
198(n14)
Peru 217t, 218
websites 24(n10), 39(n4)
Ministry of Education (NZ) 233
Oportunidades programme (Mexico)
197(n12)
well-being 107b, 222
whites (USA) 121, 240
Wodon, Q. xvi
women 6, 21, 227, 235
Bolivia 45–9, 50t, 58–9, 60t, 62,
63t, 65
Canada 39(n5)
Ecuador 78t, 81, 89, 102
Guatemala 107b, 114, 119, 120t,
120–1, 129, 131, 131t, 141, 144t,
144, 146–7
Mexico 163t, 165, 167t, 167–8, 175,
191–2, 195
Peru 215, 218, 219
bilingual 191, 192t
childbirth 62, 63t
‘double disadvantage’ (gender and
ethnic) 146, 168, 224n
education 191–2, 192t
educational achievement 215
fertility 191–2
gap in educational achievement
58–9
illiteracy 175
monolingual 191, 192t
pregnancy 19, 65
probability of being poor 45, 46t
Wood, B. 50, 52
work contracts (formal) 114–16
work experience 253–4
Bolivia 50–2
Ecuador 79t, 79, 80, 80t, 105(n1)
Page 307
Index 307
Guatemala 117, 118t, 120t, 120, 121,
122t
Mexico 164t, 164, 165, 166t,
169t, 170
Peru 210, 211t
work insurance 220(n3)
work permits 122–3
workers
Bolivia 242
Ecuador 88
Mexico 164t, 169t, 169, 170,
179, 188
Peru 211t
agricultural 78t, 169t, 170
men (statistics, Mexico 2002) 164t
migrant 179, 211t
non-agricultural 169t, 169
productivity characteristics 253–4
skilled (indigenous) 88
state (Mexico) 188
unskilled 78t
young 226
World Bank xvi–xix, 2, 6, 7, 109
author/data source 7b, 71, 110n,
126, 133n, 134n, 134, 168, 187n,
233, 237f, 249, 250
development projects 8–9
methodology 199
World Bank: Grants Facility for
Indigenous Peoples (2004– ) 9
World Bank: Operational Directive 4.20
for indigenous peoples (1991) 8,
24(n8)
World Bank Indicators’ conversion
factor 157n
World Conference on Human
Rights 1
World Health Organization (WHO)
77n, 197–8(n13)
WHO/NCHS (National centre for
Health Statistics)/CDC (Centres
for Disease Control and
Prevention) reference data
197(n13)
Xinka group (Guatemala) 245
Yancari, J. 220(n1)
Yañez Aguilar, E. xvi, xix
Yashar, D. 5, 24(n5–6)
yatiris 18
Human_Index.qxd 25/10/05 6:19 PM Page 308

308 Index

years of schooling 224, 225t, 225f, reduction of poverty-probability 76,

226f, 231, 253, 256 77, 78t
Bolivia 45, 46t, 47t, 52t, 55t, 56t, 57, by year of birth (Guatemala) 129f
58t, 59t see also educational attainment
Ecuador 76–81, 85t, 87–9, 90f, 91t, Yemen 141, 236
92t, 94t, 96t, 99t, 100t, 103, 104 young people 84f, 147, 191, 192
Guatemala 112–14, 117, 118t, ‘adolescents’ 54, 65
120t, 120, 121, 122t, 123t, ‘younger generations’ (Mexico) 195
126–9, 137t, 148t Yucatán province/state (Mexico) 36,
Mexico 160t, 161–5, 166t, 169t, 169, 197(n3)
173, 175–9, 195, 196, 246t
Peru 207t, 208, 211t, 215, 215t, 216 Z-ratio 172t
birth cohorts 58–9 z-scores 197–8(n13)
determinants (Ecuador, 1998) 91t Zapatista movement (EZLN) 1, 5
maternal 56t, 91t, 92t, 94t Zapoteco people 243t
parental 55t, 85t Zurita, B. 271