Strengthening and sustaining social protection systems

1. Second Meeting of Ministers of Social Development Pablino Cáceres Paredes Minister Ministry of Social Action, Paraguay 2nd Plenary Session Fiscal Sustainability Strengthening and sustaining social protection systems Cali, Colombia July 8 – 9, 2010

2. Paraguay is a country of contrasts, rich in resources, but with large sectors of the population in poverty Poverty, the country’s most serious problem Total population Poor population Poor 37.9% 2,324,556 In food poverty + ability poverty: 1,165,384 persons or 208,104 families Extreme poor 50.1% Not poor 62.1% Families under Social Protection July 2010: 116,000 families protected December 2010: 150,000 families protected December 2010: 200,000 families identified

3. CCTs in Paraguay OBJECTIVE STRATEGY COMPONENTS Contribute to poverty reduction and breaking the inter-generational cycle of extreme poverty Generate human capital in homes in extreme poverty through incentives for access to and use of health, nutrition, and education services and to improve consumption capacity.. PUBLIC OFFER Guarantee the offer and the access of a package of services including health, nutrition and education according the life cycle of the beneficiaries, in co responsibility with the respective sectors of the national, regional and local government. CASH TRANSFERS Deliver cash transfers to participating households that fulfill their co responsibilities Tekoporâ: “Live well”, Conditional (Co responsible) Cash Transfer Program (CCT)

4. The reality faced by the beneficiaries of the Tekoporâ Program Poverty is not neutral About the family members of Tekoporâ beneficiary families: • 54% are children and adolescents under 18 years of age; • 40% are not in the civil registry and thus do not have an identity card. • 95% have no medical insurance. • Beneficiary households: • 60% families live in overcrowded conditions (3 or more persons per room); • 85% live inhomes with walls made of wood; • 74% live in homes with dirt floors; • 96% of the households use firewood to cook food; • Around 40% do not have a designated area in which to bathe; • Only 1% have an electric shower; • 92% use a common latrine; • 18% have no access to electricity; • 72% do not have a refrigerator; • 90% speak only guaraní.

5. The poorest families suffer from: TEKOPORÂ Lack of identity + Nutrition deficiency and lack access to adequate food Require a multidimensional approach + Low health standards + • Lack of income • Basic needs unsatisfied • Lack of social and economic opportunities High drop out rates and low matriculation rates in schools + Scarce capacity of mothers in nutritional and hygiene practices + Difficult access to financial services + Unstable living conditions/infrastructure + Low income

6. Risks faced by the beneficiaries of the Tekoporă Program Child labor Crime and Violence Illiteracy, low levels of education Household Poverty Trap Lack of business/job capital Malnutrition and Illness Lack of Identity

7. Breaking the vicious cycle of poverty through a coordinated strategy It is an integral intervention strategy and coordinated by the different entities and levels of state to improve the living conditions of families in situations of extreme poverty. Consolidate all social programs in the selected families in order to reach a series of basic achievements. SOCIAL PROTECTION NETWORK FOR OVERCOMING EXTREME POVERTY

8. Make the offer of public services compatible with the demand created by CCT programs Preferential access to state social programs. Education sessions on nutrition, adequate family hygiene, social development. Family Dynamic SAS – Ministry of Social Action (Ministries of the Presidency of the Republic) BNF – Financing Agency for Development Banking services and saving Savings account and access to credit Improvements to the kitchen, dining room, and bathroom infrastructure. Sanitary infrastructure CONAVI - SAS Living conditions Vocational Training; starting productive projects; temporary work MAG – MOPC – MIC - MJT Income and Work

9. Positive impacts in the quantitative and qualitative indicators of social programs • Reduction of extreme poverty. • Reduction of malnutrition. • Reduction of morbidity. • Reduction of maternal and infant mortality. • Rise in school matriculation. • Rise in retention and reentrance in school. • Rise in documented persons. • Rise in number of community organizations. • Women participating in families and communities. • Families know of the existing resources and community programs. • Improvement in individual and community self-esteem and confidence level. • Change of attitude in the beneficiaries.

10. “Social Protection”, under permanent risk!

11. Transfer program with co responsibility Preferential Access to Social Programs Universal policies and programs Economic and Social Inclusion Social Promotion Social Protection Criticism of traditional CCTs • They do not encompass the situation of structural poverty in the short-medium term • Little emphasis on the accumulation of human or physical capital or in the productive capacity of adults. Address the Problem of Poverty in three areas:

12. Pasan de ser programas de Estado y no de Gobierno. • The IRP as a income generation strategy. • Strengthen networks, to overcome prejudices and stereotypes that hinder protection. • Arrange the dissemination of successful experiences of all the countries that make up the CIDES. • Prioritize the communication of best practices. The need to reinforce social protection programs:

13. The need to reinforce social protection programs: • Stimulate private companies through a tax resolution; tax breaks for companies that donate annually of periodically to a social program. • Designate a percentage of the royalties from binationals such as Yacyretâ and Itaipú to state social programs. • Generate taxes on certain imported goods; as well as court fees and agribusiness. • Create a law for protection and food security that deems a percentage of the general national budget must go to social protection and food security programs.