This action might not be possible to undo. Are you sure you want to continue?
MDGs, Equity and Children: The way forward for Indonesia
MDGs and Equity for Children in Indonesia: An Overview Attaining the MDGs with Equity: Current Challenges I. Inter-province disparities II. Rural urban disparities III. Wealth disparities IV. Prevailing poverty among children Recommendations
MDGs and Equity for Children in Indonesia: An Overview
he Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) raised the prospect of significantly improving the life and welfare of women and children notably by augmenting chances of survival, reducing poverty, improving health, nutrition and access to education. For children, the MDGs provide a framework for policymakers to ensure that the basic rights of children are met. However, in order to produce this desired effect, equitable outcomes must be realized across the population. Global data trends reveal that while there has been general progress, large portions of population have been left behind, resulting in the widening of socio-economic disparities, and growing numbers of disadvantaged people. If this situation cannot be corrected, the MDG achievements cannot be sustained. The issue of equity is therefore central to the sustainable achievement of the MDGs. Despite having witnessed multiple crises in the last decades, Indonesia has experienced positive economic growth over the past decade, where poverty reduction has been notable and significant progress towards achieving the MDGs has been realised. According to the latest government report, four of the 35 indicators most directly associated with the welfare of women and children have already been achieved, 20 are on track to be achieved, and 11 require special attention or may not be achieved by 2015.i However, overall progress towards meeting the MDG targets is far from universal. This brief draws attention to the wide disparities that lay underneath the surface of Indonesia’s success, identifying those who are being left behind and key areas of concern.
unite for children
Intra-province disparities are also prevalent with marked differences between districts within the same province. health. The 2010 Situation Analysis of Children in Indonesia (SITAN) reveals a consistent pattern of inter-provincial disparities.000 for the national average and 19/1.ISSUE BRIEFS OCTOBER 2012 Attaining the MDGs with Equity: Current Challenges I I.1 on Infant Mortality Rate at 34 per 1.ii The gap between provinces is also vast: West Sulawesi. 2 . education and nutrition indicators. as well as the conflict-affected provinces of Maluku. Figure 1: Infant Mortality Rate (IMR) by province.000 live births compared to 34/1. Indonesia is on track to achieve MDG 4. but 27 our 33 provinces have higher mortality rates than the national average. Inter-province disparities ndonesia is comprised of 33 provinces and 497 districts. Yogyakarta.000 live births. the worst off province has an IMR of 74/1. With the exception of education (see above). and the same can be seen on the service coverage indicators. Provinces located in Eastern Indonesia (in particular Papua. Indonesia 2007 For example. Papua and Central Sulawesi. there is evidence of provincial disparities in most of the MDG indicators that are directly related to child rights (MDG 1 to 4). newly formed provinces such as West Sulawesi.000 in D. whereby a majority of provinces are lagging behind the national average and a small number of provinces have surpassed it (see Table 2). repeatedly feature among the worse off provinces in terms of poverty. NTT and NTB).I. Gorontalo and Jambi.
80% 3% 75.I Jakarta: Papua: D. Indonesia iii Indonesia 1999-2008 iii 1999-2008 At the national level.20% 22.000 live births. disparities are also prevalent with marked differences between districts within the same Other factors include geographic isolation. health.50% 29.8% Moderate: 18% % Children under five with wasting* Severe 6. 48% the population worse off provinces inrural-urban terms of poverty.40% 87. Provincial disparities with key MDG and human development indicators Indicator National Average Number of provinces below the national average 26 16 20 20 21 19 Provinces/End points of the scale West Sulawesi D.000 in D.I Yogyakarta West Kalimantan D.I.20% 55.10% Rural urban disparities DONESIAII.I Jakarta Under Five Mortality Rate 44/1. Poverty remainsprovinces concentrated inPapua rural areas and is onerepeatedly feature among the conflict-affected of Maluku.2% % infants with low birth weights* % Pregnant women who receive iron tablets (>90) % Households with sustainable access to clean water % Households with sustainable access to adequate sanitation 11. poor quality of services and human resource 2 lower geographic isolation.K. Other factors include transport costs.53% 3.K.1 on Infant Mortality Rate at 34 per 1.80% 97.UNICEF INDONESIA ISSUE PAPERS OCTOBER 2012 For example. poor infrastructure. the rural areas.I Jakarta: Maluku: D.40% 5. Yogakarta Papua D.2% Moderate 7.000 22/1. ISSUE BRIEFS The gap between provinces is also vast: West Sulawesi.50% 15 22 24 20 96/1. Gorontalo and Jambi.40% 24. Rural urban disparities and NTB). Provinces located in Eastern Indonesia (in particular Papua.4% Moderate: 13% % Children under five stunted Severe: 18. high transport costs. Poverty remains concentrated in rural areas and is province. as well as the urban areas.40% 12.90% 2.20% 19. Intra-province and 54% of all children living in urban areas.40% 2.20% 27% 5.000 14. poor infrastructure.70% 12. but 27 our 33 provinces have higher mortality rates than the national average ii. poor quality of services and lower capacity found in thefound rural human resource capacity inareas.K.I Yogyakarta Moderate Papua Bali West Sulawesi D. newly formed provinces such as West Sulawesi.I Yogyakarta Severe: NTT Moderate: D. and the same can be seen on ndonesia is undergoing rapid that urbanization with record of the service coverage indicators. Figure2: 2:Percentage Percentage poor population (based head-count Index) by area.000 live births compared to 34/1. Yogyakarta.I. Indonesia is on track to achieve MDG 4.I Jakarta Papua D. A similar trend is also found for neonatal mortality and 3 . Table 1.20% 9.000 37.30% 34% 98% 9. Provincial disparities with key MDG and human development indicators Table 1.50% % Women receiving one/more skilled antenatal care visit % Births assisted by skilled providers % Post-partum postnatal care % Under five underweight children* N/A 73% 84% Severe: 5. Figure ofof poor population (based on on head-count Index) by area. there is evidence of provincial disparities in most of the I MDG indicators are directly related to a child rights high (MDG 1 toas 4). At the same time. it should be noted that this trend has been mainly due to improvements in rural development. of influencing factors contributing to disparities in Indonesia is undergoing rapid urbanization with a record high of as much asIndonesia. and Central Sulawesi.I Yogyakarta NTT Severe: D.K.I Yogyakarta Severe: D. the worst off province has an IMR of 74/1. as evidenced by the reduction in infant mortality (Figure 3).50% 32.K. high one of influencing factors contributing to rural-urban disparities in Indonesia.000 for the national average and 19/1.I Jakarta NTT D. there has been some closing of the gap between urban and rural populations.ISSUE PAPERS With the exception of education (see above).62% 69% 99. NTT much as 48% of the population and 54% of all children living in II.I Yogyakarta Moderate: 28 NTT Severe: NTT Moderate: Riau Severe Riau Moderate 25 Riau Severe Riau Moderate D.20% 8.80% 17. education andof nutrition indicators.50% 24. whereas the rate of progress in urban areas have been much slower.90% 78.10% 49.50% 13.
334 rich. the only marginal decreases in infant . there been some closing the gap betwee mortality (Figure 3). with a greater rateslower. there has been some closing of the gap between urban and rural populations.ISSUE BRIEFS OCTOBER 2012 At the national level. Based on Inter-census survey (SUPAS). this trend has been mainly due tomortality improvements inof rural development A similar trend is also found for neonatal and deaths children under five years of age. with a greater rate of re and the growth of slum areas are putting significant pressures on the urbanand areas. At the sam whereas the rate of progress in urban areas have been much slower. These findings seem relevant for explaining.364to in 2007. Indonesia 1997-2007 putting significant pressures on the health and other social sector serv iv UNICEF INDONESIA ISSUE PAPERS III. in 1993quintiles to an all-time high 0. Indonesia’s Gini explained to disparities. rapid urbanization an health other social sector services and infrastructure. It is noted that population growth.364maternal in 2007. rapid urbanization deaths of children under five years of age. Figure 3: Infant mortality rate (IMR) by area. At the samehas time. Figure 4 above shows that 83 per cent of women in the top quintile give birth at a health facility but only 14 per cent of women in the lowest quintile do so. Indonesia is not highmaternal levels of wealthwhich and may be Income disparities are reflected on associated indicators of with child and mortality.334 in 1993 to III. as evidenced by the reduction in infant At the national level. sharp contrast other middle income countries in Latin America and Africa. The Investment study vilow found a minimum coverage of 20% between the richest and v child health services. Indonesia’s Coefficient is still relatively low but has been rising steadily. This trend however is1997-2007 changing. of reduction in rural areas in urban areas have been much A similar trend is also fou than in urban areas. Wealth disparities I In sharp contrast to other middle income countries in Latin America and Africa. at least in part. it should be noted thatof this trend has been mainly due to improvements in rural development. Indonesia is not i Figure Infant mortality rate (IMR) by area. as evidenced by the reduction in infant mortality (Figure 3). from 0. a certain extent by the gaps in coverage health services between the poor and the Coefficient is still Case relatively but has been risinggap steadily. It is noted that population growth. income This trend however is of changing. Indonesia associated 3: with high levels of wealth and income disparities. from 0. WealthGini disparities v ann all-time high of 0. poorest across nearly all of essential and Figure coverage––differences differences across wealth groups (IDHS 2007) Figure 4: 4: Intervention Intervention coverage across wealth groups (IDHS 2007) 100% 80% 60% 40% 20% 0% 3 Total_Q1 4 Total_Q2 Total_Q3 Total_Q4 Total_Q5 Data from the National Basic Health Research Survey (Riskesdas 2007) shows that traditional birth attendants remain the main source of assistance to pregnant women for the bottom three quintiles.
Indonesia 2007 vii Indonesia 2007vii NESIA ISSUE PAPERS Data from the National Basic Health Research Survey (Riskesdas 2007) Similar trends are also found on indicators related to children’s education. in the top quintile give a health facility but only 14 per cent of Among womenthe in the lowest quintile dogroup. least in part. the only marginal decreases child health services. Figure 6. Figure 4 above shows the thatgap 83 per cent as children transition to secondary Participation in birth junioratand secondary school is biased toward the wealthier of womenschool. widens on Inter-census survey (SUPAS ). Indonesia has achieved shows that traditional birth attendants remain the main source of universal primary education (MDG 2) the andbottom essentially closed the gap in access to primary education assistance to pregnant women for three quintiles. which explained to ato certain thebottom gaps three in quintiles. the only decreases in households. Prevailing poverty among children Indonesia has achieved the first MDG goal to reduce extreme poverty ahead of 2015. ofof out of school children by age and household Figure 6. Figure 5: Percentage of births by place of delivery and by wealth quintile. times more likely to be out-of-school compared to marginal children from the richest infant and maternal mortality rates in Indonesia over the past decade. 13 to 15 year old age children from seem the poorest households are four relevant for explaining. Based between the poorest and richest However. Percentage Percentage out of school children by age and household socio economic status viii socio economic status 2009 2009 viii 4 IV. so. at least in as part. Extreme 5 . Investment Based on Inter-census survey (SUPAS). top quintile give found birth at a facility coverage but only 14gap per cent of women in the lowest richest and poorest quintiles across at nearly all essential maternal and in infant These findings seem relevant for explaining. attendants remain themay main be source of assistance pregnantextent women by for the coverage of health services between the 4 poor and thethat rich.OCTOBER 2012 Total_Q1 Total_Q2 Total_Q3 Total_Q4 Total_Q5 ISSUE BRIEFS Income are reflected on indicators of child and maternal Data from disparities the National Basic Health Research Survey (Riskesdas 2007) shows that traditional birth mortality. and maternal mortality rates in Indonesia over the past decade. Figure 5: Percentage of births by place of delivery and by wealth quintile. These findings population. population. Figure above shows 83The per cent of women in the vi Case study a health minimum of 20% between the quintile do so.
Prevailing poverty among children the poverty rate (as per national poverty line equivalent to $1. However. 2009 Indonesia has achieved universal primary education (MDG 2) and essentially closed the gap in access to primary education between the poorest and richest population. the numberSMERU of children who that are still affected by poverty Indonesian children lived on lessresearch than $2 PPP per day. Participation in junior and secondary school is biased toward the wealthier population. Among the 13 to 15 year old age group. Extreme poverty fell from 20. Research conducted by the Indonesian research institute shows in 2009 around 44. Percentage of out of school children by age and household socio economic status viii Similar trends are also found on indicators related to children’s education. Prevailing poverty among children ndonesia has achieved the first MDG goal to reduce extreme poverty ahead of 2015. lags behind that ofgeneral the general population. x based poverty reduction programmes. The research by SMERU shows that the highest poverty rates are to be found in the eastern provinces with over 20% of children growing up in extreme poverty in six provinces: NTT (36.63% Total population living on less that $2 PPP/capita/day 50.21%).4 PPP per day) poverty and 8. 4 million children lived in extreme (less than $1lived PPPin extreme poverty (less than $1 PPP per day). the gap widens as children transition to secondary school. children from the poorest households are four times more likely to be out-of-school as compared to children from the richest households. 4 PPP/day) has declined consistently over the years to a historical low of 13. However. the number of childrenpoverty who are still affected by poverty social assistance and community-based reduction programmes. 5 Children as a group suffer disproportionately from poverty when compared to the rest of the population.67%).xii However.55% Proportion of Children living on less that $1 PPP/capita/day 10. However. Figure 6. South Sulawesi (23.x Indonesia has 2010:17). West Sulawesi (21. Among the 13 to 15 year old age group.9% in 2008 (BAPPENAS 2010:17)ix and IV. and NTB (20. the gap widens as children transition to secondary school. the rate of reduction in poverty among children lags behind that of the population.shows of which Research conducted by the Indonesian institute SMERU that in13. In addition.65% Proportion of Children living on less that $2 PPP/capita/day 55. 4 PPP per million Indonesian children lived on less than $2 PPP per day. Gorontalo (32.30% in 2010.30% in 2010. In addition.2%). Southeast Sulawesi (24. Indonesia’s success is attributed to a strong economic recovery accompanied by a series of social protection interventions including health insurance for the poor.6% of Indonesians living on less than $1 PPP/day in 1990 to 5. 4 million of children living in extreme poverty (living under $1PPP/day).4 including health insurance for the poor. 77%). and this situation is made worse by existing inequities.78% . Extreme (BAPPENAS Indonesia’s success is attributed to a strong poverty fell from 20.17%). the highest numbers of poor children are concentrated in East. (BAPPENAS 2010:17). I IV.ISSUE BRIEFS universal primary education (MDG 2) and essentially closed the gap in access to primary education between the poorest and richest population.3 remains million worryingly high. achieved the first MDG goal to reduce extreme poverty aheadeconomic of 2015. Participation in junior and secondary school is biased toward the wealthier population. social assistance and communityPPP/day) has declined consistently over the years to a historical low of 13.4 million children day) and 8.19%). remains worryingly high. However. of which 13.3 million lived below the national poverty line (approximately $1.9% in 2008 recovery accompanied by a series of social protection interventions (BAPPENAS 2010:17) ix and the poverty rate (as per national poverty line equivalent to $1.6% of Indonesians living on less than $1 PPP/day in 1990 to 5.8 2009 around 44. children from the poorest households OCTOBER 2012 are four times more likely to be out-of-school as compared to children from the richest households.8 million lived below the national poverty line (approximately $1. the rate of reduction in poverty among children per day). Central and West Java which account for 48% of the 8. 6 Total population xi living on less that $1 PPP/capita/day 8.
OCTOBER 2012 ISSUE BRIEFS Poverty alleviation has been at the centre of Indonesian national development planning over the past decade and some measures have been put in place to protect children. level of education. rural/urban disparities and wealth disparities are prominent against all MDGs. The evidence shows that children in the Eastern region of Indonesia are proportionately at a disadvantage when compared to children from the Western region of Indonesia. Central government should improve the capacity to monitor child rights and equity dimensions of the MDGs. the central and local governments should examine inter-district and group disparities. Central government together with local governments should scale up social protection efforts to address the vulnerabilities of the poor. programmes and resources. 3. inter-provincial disparities. rural/urban. Some of the recommendations that can enhance the progress on attaining the MDGs with equity for children in Indonesia are being outlined below. with the exception of education. This requires the systematic disaggregation of key indicators with respective to at least these dimensions: province/district/sub-district/village. 7 . The MDGs in Indonesia have been a key priority and in the latest National Medium-Term Development Plan (RPJMN) 2010-2014 of the Government of Indonesia (GoI) and the corresponding sectoral Strategic Plans (Renstra. However the concentration of population means that highest numbers of poor and vulnerable children are found in Java. the emerging evidence on child poverty in Indonesia indicates that children do not receive an equitable share of the benefits of poverty alleviation. 2. household size. conditional and other cash transfers. In poor performing areas. There are key dilemmas and contradictions attached to tackling disparities in Indonesia. Rencana Strategis). identify pockets of vulnerable households and children and develop targeted policies. particularly in terms of basic education and health. the central and local governments should aim for broader universal programmes in combination with some approaches. The general shape and distribution of disparities indicates that inter-district and inter-group disparities are still likely to be present within disadvantaged provinces. However. In high performing areas. age and gender. equity measures have become more prominent. 1. household expenditure. I Recommendations n Indonesia. through social safety net programmes. Both groups of vulnerable children need to be targeted but through different approaches and formulas. 4.
Child Poverty and Disparity Report. education and transportation.or.id . The SITAN 2010 considered only those MDGs most closely or directly associated with the welfare of women and children such as health.id/pubs/docs/MDG%202010%20Report%20Final%20Full%20LR. such as housing.org or go to www. Note: The figures presented here are for the ten-year period preceding the survey iii Source: Welfare Indicators. health. Ministry of National Education and Culture. nutrition.100 kilocalories (kcal). 1996. Welfare Indicators. plus non-food minimum needs. The national poverty line was calculated at 211. 6. The Government with support of academia and child-focused NGOs should investigate other factors of social exclusion that contribute to vulnerabilities but have not received adequate attention. 2012 vii Source: IDHS 2007 viii Source: Out-of-school children study.726 IRr in 2010 by the national bureau of statistics (BPS). 2005 and 2007 vi UNICEF-MoH ‘Indonesia Investment Case’ study. SMERU (forthcoming).or. based on National Socio-Economic Surveys 1993. poverty.php?tabel=1&daftar=1&id_subyek=23¬ab=4 last accessed 16 November 2011. Report on the Achievement of The Millennium Development Goals. x The national poverty line is the rupiah value an individual needs to fulfill his or her daily minimum requirement for food of 2.go. SMERU:Jakarta xi Source: SMERU 2011 xii ibid 8 This is one of a series of Issue Briefs developed by UNICEF Indonesia.Statistics Indonesia. ensuring adequate infrastructure and services to support social welfare improvement in urban areas. Central and local governments should set up urgent measures to respond to the rapid urbanization. http://www. clothing.Statistics Indonesia. Income and Consumption Indicators. MDG 8 on building global partnership for instance was not included in the analysis.pdf. ii Source: IDHS 2007. last accessed 15 November 2011. 2002.undp. mortality.id/eng/tab_sub/view.unicef.ISSUE BRIEFS OCTOBER 2012 5. Jakarta. BPS and UNICEF (analysis of Susenas 2009 data) ix Ministry of National Development Planning/National Development Planning (BAPPENAS) (2010). based on National Socio-Economic Surveys 1999-2008 iv Source: IDHS 1997. coupled with community empowerment efforts to increase their demand for services. education and water and sanitation. contact jakarta@unicef. 1999. improve access and quality of services for the poor. 2002-2003 and 2007 v SITAN 2010 based on BPS . processed by BPS . For more information.bps. http://dds. including: • Disability • Living situation (children living in and outside parental care) • Religion and ethnicity i There are 8 broad categories of MDGs that incorporate over 70 related sub-targets.
This action might not be possible to undo. Are you sure you want to continue?
We've moved you to where you read on your other device.
Get the full title to continue reading from where you left off, or restart the preview.