The
spread of benefits
Alleviating poverty in Brazil
By:
Helmut
Schwarzer and Guilherme Delgado
Insights 42, June 2002
Social security coverage of the
Brazilian elderly has never been better than at the end of the 1990s.
According to a household survey by Pesquisa Nacional por Amostra de
Domicilios (PNAD), 77.3% of people aged 60 or over were receiving a
regular benefit from a social security scheme (see Graph 1). In the early
1970s, social security coverage in the country was close to 30%. What
explains the rise in coverage?

New measures
In the 1970s unconventional measures to expand coverage were introduced in
Brazil. The most notable of these was the creation of a non-contributory
rural scheme (1971) followed by social assistance pensions (1974), all
providing flat-rate benefits. The new constitution in 1988 improved the
coverage and generosity of these schemes. As traditional urban
contributory pensions introduced in the 1920s reached maturity,
non-contributory schemes became responsible for extended coverage and the
breaking of the barriers of informal labour and poverty, which are common
in developing countries. By December 2001 the Brazilian Social Security
Institution INSS paid out 20 million benefits, 6.3 million of these in the
rural scheme and 2.1 million in assistance pensions.
The rural scheme provides benefits
covering old age, disability, sickness/maternity, labour-related accidents
and for widows or orphans of rural workers. Old age pensions are granted
at age 60 for men and age 55 for women, five years below the retirement
ages of urban dwellers. The insured are not required to meet contribution
requirements, but to document previous periods of rural work. Benefits are
equal to one minimum wage (US$87 in April 2002).
Cost and benefits
The scheme is financed partly through a contribution of 2.2% of the value
of the agricultural product sales. However, this revenue barely covers
one-tenth of the total cost of rural benefits. Thus the deficit requires
annual transfers from the urban workers scheme and the Treasury of about
1% of the GDP.
Yet such a deficit is justified by
the enormously positive socio-economic impact of the programme. Recent
research by IPEA showed that the rural pensions
significantly
reduce poverty among the elderly. In the north-east and south regions,
85.3% and 90.8% respectively of the beneficiaries' households were above
the household income threshold of US$1 per person per day
facilitate
household investment in agricultural production and improve living
standards within the household
enabled
the survival of the rural small scale and household economy in the 1990s
reduce
rural-urban migration
strengthen
family ties as the elderly share their pension income within the household
ensure
significant income redistribution from the rich urban south-southwest to
poorer areas in Brazil
improve
the wellbeing of women who are entitled to an independent pension.
The main lessons to be learned are:
Relying
on contributory pensions alone cannot extend social security coverage
beyond formal employment in developing countries. A non-contributory
scheme is required to cover the excluded population.
Flat-rate
benefits proved to be efficient in extending coverage. Despite complaints
about the low unitary value of the pensions, they induce significant
income redistribution and poverty alleviation.
Sustaining
non-contributory pensions is costly, but these have a large and positive
social impact.
A
universal social rights approach allows a targeting of the poorer segments
of the population without stigmatising beneficiaries.
Studies should be carried
out to evaluate the potential for extending the principles of rural social
security to the urban household economy in Brazil.
FAIR USE NOTICE: This
page contains copyrighted material the use of which has not been
specifically authorized by the copyright owner. Global Action on Aging
distributes this material without profit to those who have expressed a
prior interest in receiving the included information for research and
educational purposes. We believe this constitutes a fair use of any such
copyrighted material as provided for in 17 U.S.C § 107. If you wish to
use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go
beyond fair use, you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.
|