poverty profile: technical notes and statistics€¦ · web viewaverage monthly benefit pensions...

Report No. 27192-AM

Armenia: Poverty Assessment(In Three Volumes) Volume III: Technical Notes and Statistics

November, 2003

Human Development Sector UnitEurope and Central Asia Region

Document of the World Bank

1

FISCAL YEARJanuary 1 - December 31

CURRENCY EQUIVALENTSCurrency Unit = Armenian Dram

WEIGHTS AND MEASURESMetric System

ABBREVIATIONS AND ACRONYMS

CIS – Commonwealth of Independent StatesECA – Europe and Central AsiaFPB – Family Poverty BenefitGDP – Gross Domestic ProductILSC – Integrated Living Conditions SurveyPRSP – Poverty Reduction Strategy PaperWB – World Bank

FSU – Former Soviet UnionEPEAS - Education, Poverty, and Economic Activity Survey AHDS – Armenia Health and Demographic SurveyMOH – Ministry of HealthIMR – Infant Mortality RateMMR – Maternal Mortality Rate

Vice President:Country Director:Sector Director:Sector Manager:Team Leader:

Shigeo Katsu, ECAVPDonna Dowsett-Coirolo, ECCU3Annette Dixon , ECSHDMichal Rutkowski, ECSHDAleksandra Posarac, ECSHD

2

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Table of Contents 3

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS 5

Annex I: Poverty profile 7

(i) Household data sources and their comparability 7

(ii) Definition of consumption and poverty lines 8

(iii) Poverty profile – descriptive statistics 11

(iv) Poverty regressions 25

Annex II: Non-Income dimensions of poverty 34

A. Education: technical notes and statistics 34

B. Living conditions: statistics 39

Annex III: Demographics, migration and labor market 41

(i) Labor market indicators between LFS and LSLC 2001 41

(ii) Statistical tables 42

Annex IV: Social protection 44

(i) Proxy-means targeting in Armenia 44

(ii) Statistical information 48

3

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

Armenia Poverty Assessments is a collective effort of a team lead by Aleksandra Posarac (ECSHD) assisted by Edmundo Murrugarra (ECSHD). The multi-sectoral team comprised: Lev Freinkman (macroeconomic developments), Julia Bucknell and Villiam Sutton (rural developments), Hellen Shahriari (subjective aspects of poverty), Dilnara Isamiddinova, and María Eugenia Bonilla Chacín (education), all from the World Bank, and consultants Gorana Krsitc (poverty profile, labor market), Paulette Castel (rural developments, private transfers), Stefania Rodica Cnobloch (health), Artsvi Khachatryan (macroeconomic developments) and Hjalte Sederlof. Following a series of team discussions and consultations with the client, this Report was put together by Aleksandra Posarac and Hjalte Sederlof. A number of people contributed by commenting on various drafts and generously providing information: Mark Lundell, Ellen Hamilton, Julian Lampietti, Susanna Hyrapetyan, Peter Nicholas, Mansoora Rashid, Toomas Palu, Toby Linden, and Jan Rutkowski. The team owes a special gratitude to the National Statistical Service of Armenia, as well as UNICEF and UNDP Offices in Armenia for cooperation and generous sharing of information.

5

ANNEX I: POVERTY PROFILE

(i) Household data sources and their comparability

The poverty profile is based on the latest available data set for Armenia, Integrated Living Conditions Survey (ILCS) conducted throughout year 2001. The sample size included 4,037 households. The questionnaire comprises sections on household composition (including limited information on labor market status), housing conditions, migration and transfers between households, education, health, agriculture, savings and borrowing, and social assistance. It includes also a diary of expenditures and consumption during last 30 days and a section on annual consumption. The survey provides the basis for comparison of poverty measurements with the 1998/99 estimates which were based on ILCS carried out in the period between July 1998 and June 1999. Previous comparisons of poverty indicators between 1996 and 1998/99 were limited due to differences in the welfare measure available for poverty analysis and time period of the survey.1

Table I.A.1 provides information on sample size, period of the survey, sampling frame and design, and questionnaire design of the two latest surveys that are used for poverty comparisons between 1998/99 and 2001. Given that both surveys were carried over a 12-month period, seasonal fluctuations will not affect comparisons of poverty measurement results. The main drawback of both surveys is the sampling frame, which is based on the Armenian households’ addresses data base complied in 1996 by the National Statistical Service. Because of intense internal and external migration, the sample is believed to be outdated.2 The ILSC 2001 sample design was affected by new sampling strategies across urban, rural areas and the capital city of Yerevan. In addition, we found that urban areas were over-represented in the 2001 ILCS data. This conclusion is based on the assumption that the urban/rural structure was not changed significantly in between the two surveys. This is corroborated by the results of the Educational Survey conducted by the UNDP in 2001, which revealed very similar structure of urban and rural areas (Table I.A.2). Therefore, poverty estimates for 2001 used urban/rural structure from 1998/99 ILCS data.

Table I.A.1: Armenia: Integrated Living Conditions Survey ILCS 1998/99 ILCS 2001

Sample size 3,600 households 4,037 householdsSurvey period July 1998 - June 1999 January 2001 – December 2001Sampling frame 1996 data base on households’ addresses 1996 data base on households’ addressesSampling design representative at urban/rural levels representative at Yerevan/other urban/rural levelsQuestionnaire design

- all information for constructing consumption aggregate exist;- a module on employment exists;- a separate module for self-employed.

- all information for constructing consumption aggregate exist;- a module on employment does not exist;- a separate module for self-employed does not exist;

The 2001 survey contains all information necessary for constructing consumption aggregate comparable with consumption aggregate used in 1998/99 poverty analysis (World Bank, 2002a). While the questionnaire was kept relatively similar in both surveys, some differences between some modules are observed. In contrast to 1998/99 ILCS, the 2001 round has limited information necessary for imputation of the rental value of housing in constructing the consumption aggregate. Also, information on the employment status of individuals is limited in 2001 round (with no module on self-employment household members), which might affect comparison of poverty by employment categories between the two surveys. Given the fact that the new Labor Force Survey (LFS) in Armenia was conducted in 2001 with the six-month rotation along with the ILCS, further insight into relationship between poverty and labor market can be provided using the latest available LFS data.

1 For further details on comparability between 1996 and 1998/99 see Armenia Poverty Update (World Bank, 2002a). 2 However, it is the only available sampling frame. The SDS is currently developing a new data base of households’ addresses based on the latest 2001 Census.

7

Table I.A.2: Urban-rural structure by data sourceILSC

99/98 2001Education Survey

2001Urban 60.56% 67.90% 58.07%Rural 39.44% 32.10% 41.93%Source: ILCS 1998/99, 2001 and UNDP APEAS 2001.

In order to achieve comparability in income aggregate between 1998/99 and 2001, we re-calculated household income for 1998/99. In the latest survey, data on labor earnings and on income from self-employment were only available from the dairy, because the separate modules on employment and self-employment do not exist like in 1998/99. Therefore, both sources of labor income were re-computed for 1998/99 and were based on the information from the diary. Two other income sources re-estimated for 1998/99 were remittances and government transfers. Although detailed module on transfers between households (internal and external) exists in both surveys, we noticed considerable difference in the reported amount of remittances between the separate module and a diary. Surprisingly, amounts from the diary appeared higher by around a third in 1998/99 and by around a half in 2001 and much closer to the official estimates for remittances. This is the reason why remittances from the 1998/99 survey were re-computed, as they were initially based on the information from the module on transfers between households. Finally, we make government transfers comparable between two surveys using the same reference period for the reported amounts of transfers.3 (ii) Definition of consumption and poverty lines

The consumption aggregate: The consumption aggregate was estimated for the first time in Armenia using the 1998/99 Integrated Living Conditions Survey. This study uses the same definition of welfare measure as adopted for the 1998/99 Armenia Poverty Update (World Bank 2002a). The only difference between consumption aggregate in 1998/99 and in 2001 is dwelling rental value which was not imputed in the 2001 consumption aggregate due to a small number of observations of households who paid rent.4 Thus, for the purpose of comparisons of poverty measures, consumption aggregate for 1998/99 was re-calculated excluding the imputed rental value of dwellings.

The components of the consumption aggregate for 2001 are: (1) value of food and non-food consumption which also includes consumption from home production, aid received from humanitarian organizations and other sources; and (2) rental value of durable goods. The non-food consumption comprises the following categories: clothing and shoes, household goods, transportation, utilities, education, health, and the rental value of durable goods.5

Given the fact that the 2001 ILCS was carried out throughout the year, the value of consumption from different quarters in 2001 was adjusted for inflation over the observed period. This price adjustment which also takes into account urban/rural price differences was applied for food consumption due to different food price changes between rural and urban areas. Since the National Statistical Service of Armenia does not distinguish between urban and rural food prices, the survey data were used for price adjustment over time and across regions for food items. Food consumption is expressed in the 2001 Autumn-urban price levels. Factors for price adjustments of food consumption are reported in Table I.A.3.6 The non-food consumption is adjusted for inflation, however, using the official Consumer 3 Although some reported amounts of transfers (pensions and other transfers) refer to different time period (one day, one week, one month or periodically), we find that all reported figures are actually on monthly basis. 4 In the 2001 ILCS, there is no question on rent payment in advance (before the start of the survey month) like in the 1998/99 Survey, which may extend the size of the sub-sample. The sub-sample of households who paid rent amounted to only 3 percent, which was a very small sample size for estimating hedonistic rental equations. 5 For detailed explanation of consumption aggregate and its components see Armenia Poverty Update (World Bank, 2002a).6Fisher CPI index was used to make consumption comparable at the Autumn-urban price levels. While Fisher index based on survey data on food shows that annual inflation was –6.4% in urban areas and –13.3% in rural areas, the official overall CPI index for the same period amounted to 97 and CPI for food amounted to 94.1.

8

Price Index for appropriate non-food expenditure sub-groups provided by the National Statistical Service.7 Total consumption aggregate was expressed in 2001 autumn price levels.

Table I.A.3: Factors for price adjustment of food consumption(multiplied by 100)

Urban Rural Quarter, 2001 Laspeyres Paasche Fischer Laspeyres Paasche Fischer January-March 94.4 92.7 93.6 97.6 91.0 94.2 April-June 98.0 94.8 96.4 98.0 106.1 102.0 July-September 103.0 102.6 102.8 100.1 101.8 101.0 October – December 100.0 100.0 100.0 108.4 108.8 108.6

Implicit annual inflation(Survey data)

-5.6% -7.3% -6.4% -10.0% -16.4% -13.3%

Source: ILSC 2001.Note: Factors convert food expenditures into amounts comparable with urban areas during the last Survey quarter (October - December 2001). Food consumption values from different households were multiplied by these factors for the corresponding poverty analysis.

Equivalence scales: The consumption aggregate is standardized by the number of adult equivalent members which are based on equivalence scales and size economies. Total consumption was divided by adjusted per-equivalent consumption suggested by Deaton and Zaidi (1999)8 where typical national household is not affected by changes in and parameters.9 The estimates of equivalence scales (=0.68) and scale economies (=0.75) estimated and applied in 1998/99 poverty assessment were used, hence avoiding changes in poverty indicators due to changes in those parameters. Typical Armenian household is a five-member household with three adults and two children.

Poverty lines: The 2001 poverty lines are based on re-estimated 1998/99 poverty lines. The food poverty line was estimated for the first time using the 1998/99 Survey data and it was based on food-energy intake method. This method finds the level of equivalent household expenditures that is associated with the household attaining the minimum recommended energy intake from food consumption. The cost of 2,100 calories consumption food basket is estimated at 8,730 drams per adult equivalent per month (291 dram per adult equivalent per day), which was used as 1998/99 extreme poverty line. This line is then adjusted for inflation over the period Spring 1999 - Autumn 2001 using the official CPI for food provided by Armenia National Statistical Service and expressed in Autumn 2001 values, thus obtaining 2001 extreme (food) poverty line. The real value of food poverty line for 2001 declined relative to 1998/99 because of the negative food inflation between these two periods. It was estimated at 7,979 drams per adult equivalent per month (table below).

Table I.A.4: Armenia: Poverty lines in 1998/99 and 2001, in dramsOriginal 1998/99

Re-estimated 1998/99

2001

Extreme (food) poverty line 8,730 8,730 7,979Complete poverty line 12,306 12,276 11,221Source: World Bank 2002a; ILCS 1998/99 and 2001.

In order to obtain complete poverty line for 2001, which comprises food poverty line and non-food allowance, first we re-estimated 1998/99 complete poverty line, or more precisely, its non-food component. Non-food allowance for 1998/99 complete poverty line was estimated using the Food Expenditure Method (World Bank, 2002a). According to this method, the non-food share is estimated as the non-food share of those households whose food consumption is around the food line. Namely, non-food share in total consumption in 1998/99 was re-estimated due to the fact that original consumption aggregate for 1998/99 was also re-estimated in order to exclude imputed rental value of

7 For discussion of methodology used see Armenia Poverty Update (World Bank, 2002a).8 They argued that per adult equivalent consumption measure overestimates total consumption in all household types except in single-adult households. 9 For further description of equivalence scales and size economies used see Armenia Poverty Update (World Bank, 2002a).

9

dwelling. These adjustments were necessary for the purpose of comparisons of poverty measures between 1998/99 and 2001. The new share of non-food consumption was estimated at 28.9 percent of the total minimum consumption. Thus, the re-estimated value of complete poverty line for 1998/99 was 12,276 drams per adult equivalent per month. Assuming unchanged structure of poverty line in 1998/99 (non-food share of 28.9 percent), we obtained a complete poverty line for 2001 of 420 drams per adult equivalent per day or 11,221 drams per month.

Comparing poverty between 1998/99 and 2001: Poverty indicators for 2001 cannot be directly compared with the previous 1998/99 poverty estimates. The main reason for this limitation lies in the fact that the original consumption aggregate for 1998/99 reported in Armenia Poverty Update (World Bank, 2002a) included imputed rental value of dwelling in contrast to the consumption aggregate for 2001. The imputation of rental value of housing in the 2001 consumption aggregate was not possible due to a small number of households that paid rent. Therefore, consumption aggregate and complete poverty line for 1998/99 were re-estimated to exclude imputed rental value of dwelling and new poverty estimates for 1998/99 were obtained. There are no significant differences between original and re-estimated 1998/99 poverty indicators.10

(iii) Poverty profile – descriptive statistics

Table I.B.1: Armenia Poverty Indicators 1998/99(standard errors in parenthesis)

10 Table A2.2 in Annex II reports poverty measurements in 2001 using the structure of urban and rural areas from the 2001 ILCS.

10

Extreme (Food) Poverty Line(8,730 drams)

Complete Poverty Line(12,306 drams)

Incidence(P0)

Gap(P1)

Severity(P2)

Incidence(P0)

Gap(P1)

Severity(P2)

Total 25.4% 5.5% 1.8% 53.7% 15.5% 6.1%(0.81) (0.23) (0.10) (0.92) (0.36) (0.19)

Urban 31.2% 7.0% 2.3% 60.4% 18.4% 7.6%(1.11) (0.33) (0.14) (1.14) (0.49) (0.27)

Rural 17.7% 3.4% 1.1% 44.8% 11.6% 4.2% (1.14) (0.30) (0.13) (1.46) (0.51) (0.26)Source: Armenia Poverty Update (World Bank, 2002a).Note: Consumption aggregate includes imputed rental value of dwelling.

Table I.B.2: Armenia Poverty Indicators in 98/99 and 2001(standard errors in parenthesis)

Extreme (Food) Poverty Line(8,730 drams in 98/99)(7,979 drams in 2001)

Complete Poverty Line(12,276 drams in 98/99)(11,221 drams in 2001)

Incidence(P0)

Gap(P1)

Severity(P2)

Incidence(P0)

Gap(P1)

Severity(P2)

Total 98/99 26.8% 6.0% 2.0% 54.8% 16.2% 6.5%

(1.94) (0.53) (0.21) (2.26) (0.96) (0.48) 2001 20.3% 4.7% 1.6% 48.3% 13.2% 5.2%

(1.42) (0.38) (0.16) (2.38) (0.74) (0.35)Urban 98/99 32.9% 7.8% 2.6% 61.4% 19.3% 8.1%

(2.25) (0.66) (0.28) (2.55) (1.13) (0.59) 2001 21.9% 5.0% 1.7% 48.5% 13.7% 5.5%

(1.60) (0.36) (0.15) (2.90) (0.82) (0.35)Rural 98/99 18.7% 3.7% 1.2% 46.1% 12.1% 4.5% (2.45) (0.54) (0.21) (3.08) (1.18) (0.54)2001 17.0% 4.0% 1.5% 47.9% 12.1% 4.6%

(3.04) (0.83) (0.34) (4.29) (1.61) (0.77)Note: Consumption aggregate does not include imputed rental value of dwelling. Poverty indicators for 2001 are based on 2001 urban/rural structure. Standard errors computed with PSU adjustments.Source: ILCS 1998/99 and 2001.

11

Figure I.B.1. Rural and Urban Cumulative Consumption Distribution in Armenia, 2001

Log per adult equivalent consumption

Note: The higher line refers to rural and lower to urban cumulative consumption distribution.Source: ILCS 2001.

12

Table I.B.3: Poverty and extreme poverty incidence by regions in 98/99 and 2001 (standard errors in parenthesis)

Extreme povertyincidence, % Poverty incidence, %

98/99 2001 98/99 2001Aragatzotn 27.0 23.0 57.5 60.5

(3.50) (2.32) (3.72) (2.06)Ararat 17.8 9.2 51.3 39.1

(2.31) (2.00) (3.05) (4.18)Armavir 13.7 22.2 37.3 52.9

(1.89) (4.92) (2.76) (5.21)Gegharkunik 14.6 25.3 45.7 57.9

(2.41) (9.79) (3.31) (14.5)Lori 35.9 22.8 62.6 55.3

(2.95) (3.41) (2.93) (3.17)Kotayk 32.1 17.9 60.8 40.7

(2.94) (5.22) (3.06) (10.50)Shirak 43.0 20.6 78.2 52.9

(2.91) (5.40) (2.33) (12.31)Syunik 27.3 2.3 51.6 16.5

(3.78) (1.19) (4.09) (4.66)Vayots Dzor 16.0 21.6 34.7 52.7

(4.78) (10.4) (5.90) (9.55)Tavush 14.9 43.9 28.0 70.5

(3.79) (1.30) (4.58) (1.27)Yerevan 30.7 20.2 57.7 44.7

(1.60) (0.00) (1.66) (0.00)Other urban 34.9 23.4 64.8 52.0

(1.58) (2.58) (1.55) (4.07)Rural 18.7% 17.0 46.1% 47.9

(1.16) (3.04) (1.46) (4.29)Total 26.8 20.3 54.8 48.3

(0.82) (1.42) (0.92) (2.38)Source: ILSC 1998/99 and 2001.Note: Consumption aggregate does not include imputed rental value of dwelling. Poverty indicators for 2001 are based on 2001 urban/rural structure. Standard errors computed with PSU adjustments.

Table I.B.4: Age Groups by Quintiles in 2001, in %Poorest 2 3 4 5 Total

Composition of quintiles by age groupsChildren 0-5 7.5 6.6 7.2 6.5 5.9 6.7Aged 6-14 14.3 17.0 16.2 16.9 18.0 16.5Aged 15-18 8.8 8.2 7.8 8.1 8.7 8.3Aged 19-25 14.4 11.8 11.9 12.0 10.6 12.1Aged 26-45 27.7 28.6 28.8 28.5 29.4 28.6Aged 46-60 12.7 11.8 13.4 14.1 15.3 13.5Aged 61+ 14.6 16.0 14.6 13.8 12.2 14.2Total 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0

Composition of age groups by quintilesChildren 0-5 22.6 19.4 21.2 19.4 17.5 100.0Aged 6-14 17.7 20.4 19.5 20.5 21.9 100.0Aged 15-18 21.5 19.4 18.7 19.4 20.9 100.0Aged 19-25 24.2 19.2 19.4 19.6 17.5 100.0Aged 26-45 19.7 19.8 20.0 19.9 20.7 100.0Aged 46-60 19.2 17.4 19.7 20.9 22.8 100.0Aged 61+ 20.9 22.2 20.3 19.4 17.2 100.0Total 20.3 19.8 19.8 20.0 20.1 100.0

Source: ILCS 2001.

Table I.B.5: Household size by quintiles in 2001, in %

13

Poorest 2 3 4 5 TotalComposition of quintiles by household size

Number of household members1 10.1 6.5 8.3 12.4 11.7 9.92 11.2 13.5 13.9 13.2 12.7 12.93 13.3 12.6 13.1 13.5 14.4 13.44 20.0 22.7 23.2 21.6 25.0 22.55 21.2 20.7 20.7 20.5 19.1 20.46 11.4 15.1 11.9 11.7 10.7 12.1

7 or more 12.8 8.9 9.0 7.0 6.5 8.8Total 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0

Composition of household size by quintilesNumber of household members

1 20.1 12.5 16.5 26.1 24.8 100.02 16.9 20.0 21.1 21.3 20.7 100.03 19.4 17.9 19.2 20.9 22.6 100.04 17.4 19.1 20.2 19.9 23.3 100.05 20.3 19.3 19.9 20.9 19.7 100.06 18.4 23.7 19.2 20.0 18.6 100.0

7 or more 28.5 19.2 20.1 16.7 15.5 100.0Total 19.5 19.0 19.6 20.8 21.0 100.0

Source: ILCS 2001.

Table I.B.6: Poverty by education of the household head in 98/99 and 2001Extreme poverty incidence, % Poverty incidence, %

98/99 2001 98/99 2001Primary 32.6 29.3 61.1 60.4Incomplete Secondary 33.2 25.3 62.1 59.6Complete Secondary 28.6 22.8 57.0 53.6Technical 23.6 17.1 52.4 43.0Higher Education 17.0 10.9 41.9 32.8Total 26.8 20.0 54.8 48.3Source: ICLS 98/99 and 2001.

Table I.B.7: Education of the household head by quintiles in 2001, in %Poorest 2 3 4 5 Total

Composition of quintiles by education of the household headPrimary 12.5 8.6 9.7 8.8 5.2 8.9Incomplete Secondary 16.5 16.4 13.2 9.9 8.7 12.8Complete Secondary 35.4 34.9 30.6 30.3 24.3 31.0Technical 24.0 24.7 27.9 28.2 26.9 26.4Higher Education 11.7 15.4 18.5 22.8 35.0 20.9Total 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0

Composition of education of the household head by quintilesPrimary 27.5 18.3 21.4 20.6 12.2 100.0Incomplete Secondary 25.1 24.3 20.3 16.0 14.3 100.0Complete Secondary 22.3 21.4 19.4 20.3 16.5 100.0Technical 17.8 17.9 20.8 22.2 21.4 100.0Higher Education 10.9 14.0 17.4 22.6 35.1 100.0Total 19.5 19.0 19.6 20.8 21.0 100.0

Source: ILCS 2001.

14

Table I.B.8: Poverty by labor force participation of the household head; 1998/99 and 2001Extreme poverty incidence, % Poverty incidence, %

98/99 2001 98/99 2001Non-participants 34.8 24.3 63.8 54.2Seasonally unemployed 10.1 … 39.1 …Unemployed 39.2 32.1 66.2 62.9Salaried worker 19.6 14.0 46.6 37.1Self-employed 19.1 12.3 47.1 43.2Other employment 19.8 15.5 48.1 38.3Total 26.8 20.0 54.8 48.3Source: ICLS 98/99 and 2001.

Table I.B.9: Composition of Quintiles by Labor Force Participation in Armenia, in % (population over 16)Poorest 2 3 4 5 Total

AllParticipants 53.7 57.0 57.1 58.1 59.3 57.1 Unemployed 28.2 20.9 19.0 13.6 10.8 18.4 Salaried worker 16.5 20.8 21.1 28.2 34.2 24.2 Self-employed 8.5 15.1 16.7 15.7 13.4 13.9 Other employment 0.5 0.4 0.3 0.5 0.9 0.5Non-participants 46.3 43.0 42.9 41.9 40.7 42.9 Pensioners 23.2 22.1 21.4 19.2 15.2 20.2 Students 5.0 5.4 6.0 7.2 11.2 7.0 Other non-part. 18.1 15.5 15.4 15.5 14.4 15.8Total 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0

YerevanParticipants 57.9 56.4 57.6 59.0 60.5 58.5 Unemployed 32.2 25.2 22.8 19.9 13.2 21.9 Salaried worker 20.0 25.2 26.2 31.0 38.5 29.0 Self-employed 5.2 5.9 8.4 7.9 7.7 7.0 Other employment 0.5 0.2 0.2 0.3 1.2 0.5Non-participants 42.1 43.6 42.4 41.0 39.5 41.5 Pensioners 23.3 25.5 23.9 20.6 13.5 20.6 Students 4.1 5.3 5.8 8.1 11.8 7.4 Other non-part. 14.7 12.7 12.8 12.3 14.2 13.5Total 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0Other urbanParticipants 54.3 57.6 56.2 55.7 58.8 56.3 Unemployed 33.3 28.3 22.8 14.2 12.5 22.9 Salaried worker 15.4 21.8 23.9 31.9 38.6 25.4 Self-employed 5.2 7.2 9.4 8.7 7.2 7.6 Other employment 0.4 0.4 0.1 0.8 0.5 0.4Non-participants 45.7 42.4 43.8 44.3 41.2 43.7 Pensioners 24.0 21.8 21.1 19.7 15.6 20.8 Students 5.2 6.7 6.6 8.1 13.0 7.6 Other non-part. 16.5 14.0 16.1 16.6 12.5 15.4Total 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0

RuralParticipants 47.4 57.0 57.8 60.1 57.7 56.4 Unemployed 15.4 9.5 11.7 7.0 5.8 9.7 Salaried worker 13.7 16.0 13.9 21.2 24.5 17.9 Self-employed 17.8 30.9 31.6 31.5 26.6 28.2 Other employment 0.5 0.5 0.6 0.4 0.8 0.6Non-participants 52.6 43.0 42.2 39.9 42.3 43.6 Pensioners 21.7 19.5 19.8 17.4 17.2 19.0 Students 5.9 4.3 5.7 5.3 8.7 5.9 Other non-part. 25.0 19.3 16.7 17.1 16.3 18.7 Total 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0

Notes: Quintiles defined as per adult equivalent consumption quintiles. Source: ILCS 2001.

15

Table I.B.10: Labor Force Participation in Armenia by Quintiles, in %(population over 16)

Poorest 2 3 4 5 TotalAllParticipants 18.7 19.6 20.1 20.5 21.2 100.0 Unemployed 30.4 22.1 20.7 14.9 11.9 100.0 Salaried worker 13.5 16.8 17.5 23.5 28.8 100.0 Self-employed 12.2 21.3 24.1 22.8 19.6 100.0 Other employment 18.6 13.6 11.9 20.3 35.6 100.0Non-participants 21.4 19.6 20.0 19.7 19.3 100.0 Pensioners 22.8 21.4 21.3 19.2 15.3 100.0 Students 14.3 15.2 17.3 20.8 32.5 100.0 Other non-part. 22.8 19.2 19.5 19.8 18.6 100.0Total 19.9 19.6 20.0 20.2 20.4 100.0

YerevanParticipants 19.9 16.9 16.8 18.1 28.3 100.0 Unemployed 29.5 20.1 17.7 16.2 16.5 100.0 Salaried worker 13.9 15.2 15.4 19.2 36.3 100.0 Self-employed 14.8 14.8 20.5 20.1 29.9 100.0 Other employment 20.0 5.0 5.0 10.0 60.0 100.0Non-participants 20.4 18.4 17.4 17.8 26.0 100.0 Pensioners 22.7 21.7 19.7 17.9 17.9 100.0 Students 11.1 12.5 13.3 19.7 43.4 100.0 Other non-part. 21.9 16.6 16.2 16.4 28.9 100.0Total 20.1 17.5 17.1 18.0 27.4 100.0Other urbanParticipants 21.8 20.1 21.3 21.8 15.0 100.0 Unemployed 32.9 24.3 21.3 13.7 7.9 100.0 Salaried worker 13.7 16.8 20.0 27.7 21.8 100.0 Self-employed 15.7 18.6 26.5 25.5 13.7 100.0 Other employment 22.2 16.7 5.6 38.9 16.7 100.0Non-participants 23.7 19.0 21.4 22.4 13.6 100.0 Pensioners 26.1 20.5 21.6 20.9 10.8 100.0 Students 15.7 17.3 18.6 23.5 24.8 100.0 Other non-part. 24.3 17.8 22.3 23.8 11.7 100.0Total 22.6 19.6 21.3 22.0 14.4 100.0

RuralParticipants 13.9 21.9 22.3 21.7 20.3 100.0 Unemployed 26.1 21.3 26.1 14.7 11.8 100.0 Salaried worker 12.6 19.3 16.8 24.1 27.1 100.0 Self-employed 10.4 23.8 24.4 22.8 18.7 100.0 Other employment 14.3 19.0 23.8 14.3 28.6 100.0Non-participants 19.9 21.4 21.0 18.6 19.2 100.0 Pensioners 18.8 22.1 22.6 18.6 17.9 100.0 Students 16.4 15.5 20.7 18.3 29.1 100.0 Other non-part. 22.1 22.4 19.4 18.7 17.3 100.0Total 16.5 21.6 21.7 20.4 19.8 100.0

Notes: Quintiles defined as per adult equivalent consumption quintiles. Source: ILCS 2001.

Table I.B.11: Consumption Components in Armenia by Quintiles in 98/99(drams per month, Spring 1999 prices)

16

Poorest 2 3 4 5 TotalAll HouseholdsFood 4,428 6,408 8,112 10,169 14,318 8,726 Clothing and shoes 46 69 245 554 2,064 603 Household goods 133 200 289 388 1,075 421 Transportation 63 145 187 308 1,323 410 Utilities 203 346 420 557 1,174 544 Health 80 144 211 457 3,108 811 Education 244 403 641 902 1,848 814 Rental value of durables 1,086 1,395 1,571 1,778 2,147 1,600 Average 6,282 9,112 11,677 15,114 27,058 13,928 Yerevan HouseholdsFood 4,135 5,878 7,339 9,141 12,661 7,855 Clothing and shoes 41 67 222 447 2,194 627 Household goods 120 190 277 482 1,497 532 Transportation 170 341 419 633 2,066 753 Utilities 379 633 848 990 1,807 942 Health 67 166 223 454 3,192 876 Education 253 320 569 812 1,599 721 Rental value of durables 1,135 1,513 1,788 1,945 2,422 1,763 Average 6,300 9,108 11,683 14,904 27,439 14,069 Other Urban HouseholdsFood 4,364 6,227 7,959 9,714 12,792 7,542 Clothing and shoes 54 101 318 802 2,672 592 Household goods 155 245 353 461 1,359 427 Transportation 15 76 93 154 1,059 206 Utilities 155 337 395 594 1,183 454 Health 91 155 230 415 3,076 583 Education 245 473 701 1,096 2,763 867 Rental value of durables 1,144 1,490 1,656 1,837 2,246 1,589 Average 6,223 9,104 11,704 15,073 27,150 12,260 Rural HouseholdsFood 4,906 7,018 8,796 10,951 16,071 10,309 Clothing and shoes 40 42 199 474 1,721 594 Household goods 112 169 245 300 673 334 Transportation 11 41 99 225 938 315 Utilities 66 113 136 311 747 317 Health 76 116 187 481 3,065 943 Education 231 412 642 844 1,628 842 Rental value of durables 922 1,209 1,345 1,660 1,921 1,486 Average 6,364 9,120 11,650 15,245 26,764 15,140

Notes: Consumption measured per adult equivalent. Quintiles defined as per adult equivalent consumption quintiles. Source: ILCS 1998/99.

17

Table I.B.12: Consumption Components in Armenia by Quintiles in 2001(drams per month, Spring 1999 prices)

Poorest 2 3 4 5 TotalAll HouseholdsFood 4,064 5,575 6,551 8,021 11,531 7,231 Clothing and shoes 84 158 396 584 2,017 668 Household goods 142 227 305 439 1,163 466 Transportation 86 118 191 318 1,280 411 Utilities 298 458 591 761 1,463 727 Health 81 142 255 350 1,833 549 Education 214 408 500 807 2,160 838 Rental value of durables 1,192 2,159 2,755 3,246 3,596 2,618 Average 6,162 9,246 11,543 14,525 25,042 13,506 Yerevan HouseholdsFood 3,458 4,633 5,667 6,909 10,877 6,785 Clothing and shoes 42 81 180 356 2,134 730 Household goods 172 256 329 505 1,333 606 Transportation 190 256 437 736 2,000 861 Utilities 447 732 800 1,036 1,896 1,078 Health 107 229 459 484 2,195 856 Education 253 535 653 1,305 2,727 1,268 Rental value of durables 1,372 2,479 3,006 3,216 3,589 2,809 Average 6,040 9,202 11,533 14,547 26,750 14,993 Other Urban HouseholdsFood 4,164 5,584 6,563 7,947 10,984 6,852 Clothing and shoes 86 156 384 608 2,051 588 Household goods 119 210 302 401 1,004 377 Transportation 44 70 111 220 880 235 Utilities 240 383 612 749 1,126 597 Health 66 131 176 305 1,288 348 Education 248 462 523 771 1,890 722 Rental value of durables 1,304 2,277 2,862 3,443 3,921 2,702 Average 6,271 9,274 11,535 14,445 23,144 12,422 Rural HouseholdsFood 4,428 6,119 7,058 8,701 12,571 7,860 Clothing and shoes 113 204 531 690 1,874 691 Household goods 145 224 293 435 1,096 442 Transportation 51 74 112 169 814 244 Utilities 245 358 450 618 1,249 590 Health 76 99 201 314 1,830 503 Education 148 292 392 560 1,762 635 Rental value of durables 931 1,880 2,520 3,095 3,384 2,414 Average 6,137 9,250 11,557 14,580 24,581 13,379

Notes: Consumption measured per adult equivalent. Consumption values expressed in Fall 2001 prices were divided by CPI between Spring 1999 and Fall 2001 (99.2) in order to obtain consumption in Spring 1999 prices. Quintiles defined as per adult equivalent consumption quintiles. Source: ILCS 2001.

18

Table I.B.13: Composition of Quintiles by Consumption Components in Armenia in 2001(drams per month, Spring 1999 prices)

Poorest 2 3 4 5 TotalAll HouseholdsFood 66.0 60.3 56.7 55.2 46.0 53.5Clothing and shoes 1.4 1.7 3.4 4.0 8.1 4.9Household goods 2.3 2.5 2.6 3.0 4.6 3.4Transportation 1.4 1.3 1.7 2.2 5.1 3.0Utilities 4.8 5.0 5.1 5.2 5.8 5.4Health 1.3 1.5 2.2 2.4 7.3 4.1Education 3.5 4.4 4.3 5.6 8.6 6.2Rental value of durables 19.4 23.4 23.9 22.3 14.4 19.4Average 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0Yerevan HouseholdsFood 57.2 50.3 49.1 47.5 40.7 45.3Clothing and shoes 0.7 0.9 1.6 2.4 8.0 4.9Household goods 2.8 2.8 2.9 3.5 5.0 4.0Transportation 3.1 2.8 3.8 5.1 7.5 5.7Utilities 7.4 8.0 6.9 7.1 7.1 7.2Health 1.8 2.5 4.0 3.3 8.2 5.7Education 4.2 5.8 5.7 9.0 10.2 8.5Rental value of durables 22.7 26.9 26.1 22.1 13.4 18.7Average 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0Other Urban HouseholdsFood 66.4 60.2 56.9 55.0 47.5 55.2Clothing and shoes 1.4 1.7 3.3 4.2 8.9 4.7Household goods 1.9 2.3 2.6 2.8 4.3 3.0Transportation 0.7 0.8 1.0 1.5 3.8 1.9Utilities 3.8 4.1 5.3 5.2 4.9 4.8Health 1.1 1.4 1.5 2.1 5.6 2.8Education 4.0 5.0 4.5 5.3 8.2 5.8Rental value of durables 20.8 24.6 24.8 23.8 16.9 21.8Average 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0Rural HouseholdsFood 72.1 66.2 61.1 59.7 51.1 58.7Clothing and shoes 1.8 2.2 4.6 4.7 7.6 5.2Household goods 2.4 2.4 2.5 3.0 4.5 3.3Transportation 0.8 0.8 1.0 1.2 3.3 1.8Utilities 4.0 3.9 3.9 4.2 5.1 4.4Health 1.2 1.1 1.7 2.2 7.4 3.8Education 2.4 3.2 3.4 3.8 7.2 4.7Rental value of durables 15.2 20.3 21.8 21.2 13.8 18.0Average 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0

Notes: Consumption measured per adult equivalent. Quintiles defined as per adult equivalent consumption quintiles. Source: ILCS 2001.

19

Table I.B.14: Consumption Components in Armenia by Quintiles in 2001(drams per month, Spring 1999 prices)

Poorest 2 3 4 5 TotalAll HouseholdsFood 11.4 15.6 18.3 22.4 32.3 100.0Clothing and shoes 2.6 4.9 12.2 18.0 62.3 100.0Household goods 6.2 10.0 13.4 19.3 51.1 100.0Transportation 4.3 5.9 9.6 16.0 64.2 100.0Utilities 8.4 12.8 16.5 21.3 41.0 100.0Health 3.0 5.3 9.6 13.2 68.9 100.0Education 5.2 10.0 12.2 19.7 52.8 100.0Rental value of durables 9.2 16.7 21.3 25.1 27.8 100.0Average 9.3 13.9 17.4 21.8 37.6 100.0Yerevan HouseholdsFood 11.0 14.7 18.0 21.9 34.5 100.0Clothing and shoes 1.5 2.9 6.5 12.7 76.4 100.0Household goods 6.6 9.9 12.7 19.5 51.4 100.0Transportation 5.2 7.1 12.1 20.3 55.3 100.0Utilities 9.1 14.9 16.3 21.1 38.6 100.0Health 3.1 6.6 13.2 13.9 63.2 100.0Education 4.6 9.8 11.9 23.8 49.8 100.0Rental value of durables 10.0 18.1 22.0 23.5 26.3 100.0Average 8.9 13.5 16.9 21.4 39.3 100.0Other Urban HouseholdsFood 11.8 15.8 18.6 22.6 31.2 100.0Clothing and shoes 2.6 4.7 11.7 18.5 62.4 100.0Household goods 5.8 10.3 14.8 19.7 49.3 100.0Transportation 3.3 5.3 8.4 16.6 66.4 100.0Utilities 7.7 12.3 19.7 24.1 36.2 100.0Health 3.4 6.7 9.0 15.5 65.5 100.0Education 6.4 11.9 13.4 19.8 48.5 100.0Rental value of durables 9.4 16.5 20.7 24.9 28.4 100.0Average 9.7 14.3 17.8 22.3 35.8 100.0Rural HouseholdsFood 11.4 15.7 18.2 22.4 32.3 100.0Clothing and shoes 3.3 6.0 15.6 20.2 54.9 100.0Household goods 6.6 10.2 13.4 19.8 50.0 100.0Transportation 4.2 6.1 9.2 13.8 66.7 100.0Utilities 8.4 12.3 15.4 21.2 42.8 100.0Health 3.0 3.9 8.0 12.4 72.7 100.0Education 4.7 9.3 12.4 17.7 55.9 100.0Rental value of durables 7.9 15.9 21.3 26.2 28.7 100.0Average 9.3 14.0 17.5 22.1 37.2 100.0

Notes: Consumption measured per adult equivalent. Quintiles defined as per adult equivalent consumption quintiles. Source: ILCS 2001.

20

Table I.B.15: Average Household Income Sources in Armenia by Quintiles in 98/99(drams per month, Spring 1999 prices)

Sources 1 2 3 4 5 TotalAll HouseholdsLabor earnings 5,695 10,751 12,079 17,688 20,558 13,408 Self-employment 1,201 2,546 9,213 5,491 17,500 7,271 Farm Income 3,868 7,483 10,936 13,548 20,011 11,235 Remittances 3,081 4,393 6,771 6,228 12,596 6,657 Transfers 3,698 4,068 3,082 2,981 2,504 3,262 Pensions 2,312 2,954 2,335 2,205 1,725 2,305 Other transfers 1,386 1,113 747 776 778 957 Assets sold 180 262 98 392 203 226 Total 18,441 30,682 42,523 47,454 74,051 42,866 YerevanLabor earnings 11,007 18,263 22,581 32,732 38,745 24,583 Self-employment 1,898 6,063 7,511 4,802 33,335 11,316 Farm Income 155 259 329 562 426 339 Remittances 3,933 6,573 9,706 12,176 18,709 10,270 Transfers 4,305 3,669 3,674 4,098 2,944 3,713 Pensions 3,186 2,743 2,962 3,171 2,094 2,805 Other transfers 1,119 926 713 927 850 908 Assets sold 145 101 103 1,439 448 413 Total 22,027 35,272 44,217 59,917 96,225 51,940 Other Urban HouseholdsLabor earnings 4,844 11,773 13,211 28,649 21,698 14,327 Self-employment 920 1,458 15,648 3,540 14,470 6,433 Farm Income 567 1,055 2,610 4,281 4,266 2,222 Remittances 3,429 5,917 8,579 9,455 22,407 8,581 Transfers 3,838 5,353 3,379 2,859 2,731 3,748 Pensions 2,178 3,550 2,170 1,835 1,325 2,295 Other transfers 1,660 1,803 1,208 1,024 1,406 1,453 Assets sold 303 683 135 90 244 303 Total 15,105 29,452 44,132 49,132 66,445 36,870 Rural HouseholdsLabor earnings 538 3,492 3,597 3,909 7,902 4,340 Self-employment 821 553 5,010 6,912 8,177 4,913 Farm Income 14,306 19,348 25,555 25,335 39,763 26,478 Remittances 1,407 1,185 3,144 1,384 4,367 2,442 Transfers 2,695 3,251 2,408 2,468 2,113 2,541 Pensions 1,455 2,598 2,025 1,906 1,647 1,939 Other transfers 1,239 653 383 562 466 603 Assets sold 9 21 64 13 21 26 Total 19,805 27,913 39,953 40,073 62,412 40,821

Notes: Quintiles defined as per adult equivalent consumption quintiles.Source: ILCS 2001.

21

Table I.B.16: Average Household Income Sources in Armenia by Quintiles in 2001,(drams per month, Spring 1999 prices)

Sources Poorest 2 3 4 5 TotalAll Households

Labor earnings 7,081 8,772 10,851 15,138 28,249 14,282 Self-employment 1,195 2,815 6,977 4,808 11,870 5,646 Farm Income 4,149 8,166 10,058 12,243 15,139 10,090 Remittances 3,614 8,152 5,115 8,235 13,023 7,723 Transfers 4,644 4,436 3,953 3,779 3,669 4,082 Pensions 3,047 2,940 2,803 2,790 3,038 2,922 Other transfers 1,597 1,496 1,150 989 631 1,159 Assets sold 190 88 143 119 241 157 Total 20,873 32,429 37,099 44,321 72,191 41,981 Yerevan HouseholdsLabor earnings 9,852 14,100 14,515 24,879 49,340 25,415 Self-employment 2,209 5,273 7,218 7,401 11,538 7,210 Farm Income 701 928 1,636 1,479 1,702 1,328 Remittances 3,967 4,195 9,105 7,631 15,091 8,752 Transfers 4,968 4,904 4,569 3,815 3,372 4,225 Pensions 3,591 3,766 3,453 3,113 2,919 3,319 Other transfers 1,376 1,138 1,116 702 454 906 Assets sold 209 97 198 147 372 224 Total 21,905 29,496 37,242 45,352 81,415 47,154 Other Urban HouseholdsLabor earnings 7,123 10,010 11,756 18,419 22,122 13,566 Self-employment 1,233 2,850 6,487 4,278 11,711 4,982 Farm Income 2,134 3,509 4,367 7,488 8,418 5,065 Remittances 4,156 13,832 4,175 6,186 9,208 7,266 Transfers 5,118 4,969 4,234 4,290 3,475 4,459 Pensions 3,146 2,688 2,867 2,987 2,655 2,887 Other transfers 1,972 2,281 1,367 1,303 820 1,572 Assets sold 310 129 87 184 169 179 Total 20,074 35,299 31,106 40,844 55,102 35,516 Rural HouseholdsLabor earnings 4,859 4,731 7,961 6,948 10,716 7,087 Self-employment 356 1,359 7,236 3,807 12,318 5,101 Farm Income 9,020 15,920 19,647 22,244 33,473 20,368 Remittances 2,754 6,127 3,537 10,294 13,472 7,380 Transfers 3,881 3,759 3,362 3,328 4,105 3,670 Pensions 2,513 2,652 2,369 2,444 3,419 2,674 Other transfers 1,368 1,107 993 885 687 996 Assets sold 48 52 157 48 154 92 Total 20,918 31,948 41,900 46,669 74,239 43,698

Notes: Quintiles defined as per adult equivalent consumption quintiles. Income values expressed in Fall 2001 prices were divided by CPI between Spring 1999 and Fall 2001 (99.2) in order to obtain income in Spring 1999 prices.Source: ILCS 2001.

22

Table I.B.17: Household Income Sources in Armenia by Quintiles in 2001, in %Poorest 2 3 4 5 Total

All HouseholdsLabor earnings 10.1 12.5 15.5 21.6 40.3 100.0Self-employment 4.3 10.2 25.2 17.4 42.9 100.0Farm Income 8.3 16.4 20.2 24.6 30.4 100.0Remittances 9.5 21.4 13.4 21.6 34.1 100.0Transfers 22.7 21.7 19.3 18.4 17.9 100.0 Pensions 20.8 20.1 19.2 19.1 20.8 100.0 Other transfers 27.2 25.5 19.6 16.9 10.8 100.0Assets sold 24.4 11.3 18.4 15.2 30.8 100.0Average 10.1 15.7 17.9 21.4 34.9 100.0Yerevan HouseholdsLabor earnings 8.7 12.5 12.9 22.1 43.8 100.0Self-employment 6.6 15.7 21.5 22.0 34.3 100.0Farm Income 10.9 14.4 25.4 22.9 26.4 100.0Remittances 9.9 10.5 22.8 19.1 37.7 100.0Transfers 23.0 22.7 21.1 17.6 15.6 100.0 Pensions 21.3 22.4 20.5 18.5 17.3 100.0 Other transfers 28.8 23.8 23.3 14.7 9.5 100.0Assets sold 20.4 9.5 19.4 14.4 36.4 100.0Average 10.2 13.7 17.3 21.1 37.8 100.0Other Urban HouseholdsLabor earnings 10.3 14.4 16.9 26.5 31.9 100.0Self-employment 4.6 10.7 24.4 16.1 44.1 100.0Farm Income 8.2 13.5 16.9 28.9 32.5 100.0Remittances 11.1 36.8 11.1 16.5 24.5 100.0Transfers 23.2 22.5 19.2 19.4 15.7 100.0 Pensions 21.9 18.7 20.0 20.8 18.5 100.0 Other transfers 25.5 29.5 17.7 16.8 10.6 100.0Assets sold 35.2 14.6 9.9 21.0 19.2 100.0Average 11.0 19.3 17.1 22.4 30.2 100.0Rural HouseholdsLabor earnings 13.8 13.4 22.6 19.7 30.4 100.0Self-employment 1.4 5.4 28.9 15.2 49.1 100.0Farm Income 9.0 15.9 19.6 22.2 33.4 100.0Remittances 7.6 16.9 9.8 28.4 37.2 100.0Transfers 21.1 20.4 18.2 18.1 22.3 100.0 Pensions 18.8 19.8 17.7 18.2 25.5 100.0 Other transfers 27.1 22.0 19.7 17.6 13.6 100.0Assets sold 10.4 11.3 34.2 10.5 33.5 100.0Average 9.7 14.8 19.4 21.6 34.4 100.0

Notes: Quintiles defined as per adult equivalent consumption quintiles.Source: ILCS 2001.

23

(iv) Poverty regressions

Table I.C.1: Differential effects of determinants of ln(consumption)(estimated coefficients and standard errors for quantile regressions)

10% 25% 50% 75% 90%Fraction age 0-5 0.106 (0.116) 0.090 (0.119) 0.044 (0.116) -0.037 (0.089) -0.012 (0.144)Fraction age 6-14 0.263 (0.095) ** 0.251 (0.098) ** 0.265 (0.092) ** 0.139 (0.070) 0.165 (0.105)Fraction age 15-18 -0.003 (0.099) -0.004 (0.101) 0.001 (0.098) 0.055 (0.077) 0.180 (0.121)Fraction age 19-25 -0.161 (0.093) -0.113 (0.095) -0.050 (0.092) -0.083 (0.070) -0.089 (0.108)Fraction age 26-45 0.018 (0.065) -0.017 (0.066) -0.054 (0.065) -0.032 (0.051) -0.107 (0.080)Fraction age 61+ -0.151 (0.057) ** -0.130 (0.061) * -0.142 (0.059) * -0.205 (0.045) ** -0.238 (0.069) **ln(Household size) -0.125 (0.037) ** -0.158 (0.038) ** -0.154 (0.036) ** -0.149 (0.028) ** -0.210 (0.043) **Age of head 0.005 (0.001) ** 0.003 (0.001) * 0.002 (0.001) 0.001 (0.001) 0.003 (0.002)Female head -0.159 (0.026) ** -0.100 (0.027) ** -0.055 (0.027) * -0.044 (0.021) * -0.008 (0.033)Incomplete Secondary 0.062 (0.045) 0.043 (0.046) -0.002 (0.045) -0.021 (0.036) 0.046 (0.058)Complete Secondary 0.147 (0.040) ** 0.091 (0.043) * 0.052 (0.042) 0.016 (0.033) 0.062 (0.053)Technical 0.208 (0.043) ** 0.183 (0.045) ** 0.139 (0.043) ** 0.074 (0.034) * 0.119 (0.055) *Higher Education 0.304 (0.044) ** 0.286 (0.047) ** 0.262 (0.045) ** 0.241 (0.035) ** 0.256 (0.056) **Non participant -0.128 (0.031) ** -0.125 (0.031) ** -0.064 (0.030) * -0.003 (0.022) -0.018 (0.034)Unemployed -0.121 (0.041) ** -0.100 (0.042) * -0.086 (0.041) * -0.033 (0.032) -0.028 (0.051)Selfemployed -0.141 (0.041) ** -0.125 (0.043) ** -0.023 (0.043) 0.039 (0.033) 0.055 (0.055)Other employment 0.053 (0.111) -0.227 (0.152) 0.038 (0.145) 0.261 (0.119) * -0.055 (0.182)% Unemployed -0.173 (0.037) * -0.151 (0.037) ** -0.166 (0.037) ** -0.218 (0.029) ** -0.270 (0.046) **% Self-employed 0.173 (0.041) ** 0.128 (0.043) ** -0.002 (0.043) -0.085 (0.034) * -0.123 (0.057) *% Other employment -0.169 (0.085) * 0.262 (0.171) 0.099 (0.177) 0.083 (0.141) 0.230 (0.228)Total land

0.000 (0.009) 0.009 (0.010) 0.015 (0.009) 0.033 (0.006) ** 0.023 (0.008) **% owned 0.037 (0.036) -0.005 (0.033) 0.021 (0.032) 0.006 (0.024) 0.046 (0.038)% irrigated -0.044 (0.041) -0.034 (0.038) -0.032 (0.036) -0.042 (0.027) -0.015 (0.043)Received credit? -0.004 (0.039) -0.019 (0.040) 0.020 (0.040) 0.023 (0.032) 0.143 (0.052) **Has livestock? 0.126 (0.031) ** 0.157 (0.029) ** 0.151 (0.029) ** 0.146 (0.022) ** 0.130 (0.034) **Aragatzotn -0.037 (0.048) -0.159 (0.050) ** -0.276 (0.051) ** -0.387 (0.041) ** -0.473 (0.064) **Ararat 0.109 (0.041) ** 0.029 (0.041) -0.061 (0.042) -0.137 (0.033) ** -0.277 (0.053) **Armavir -0.052 (0.040) -0.088 (0.039) * -0.128 (0.038) ** -0.210 (0.029) ** -0.324 (0.046) **

25

Differential effects of determinants of ln(consumption)(estimated coefficients and standard errors for quantile regressions)

10% 25% 50% 75% 90%

Gegharkunik -0.101 (0.052) * -0.149 (0.049) ** -0.276 (0.048) ** -0.386 (0.037) ** -0.515 (0.059) **

Lori -0.030 (0.036) -0.095 (0.035) ** -0.151 (0.035) ** -0.243 (0.028) ** -0.359 (0.044) **Kotayk 0.062 (0.046) -0.011 (0.045) -0.021 (0.044) -0.077 (0.034) * -0.181 (0.056) **Shirak 0.003 (0.034) -0.098 (0.037) ** -0.166 (0.038) ** -0.241 (0.031) ** -0.418 (0.052) **Syunik 0.398 (0.048) * 0.351 (0.050) ** 0.347 (0.052) ** 0.383 (0.044) ** 0.290 (0.073) **Vaiots Dzor -0.065 (0.063) -0.140 (0.068) * -0.250 (0.065) ** -0.311 (0.049) ** -0.358 (0.072) **Tavush -0.290 (0.051) * -0.339 (0.051) ** -0.344 (0.050) ** -0.411 (0.039) ** -0.486 (0.059) **Constant 8.655 (0.102) ** 9.033 (0.106) ** 9.459 (0.105) ** 9.867 (0.082) ** 10.164 (0.126) **

26

I.C.2: Determinants of Poverty Headcount

27

Probit estimates Number of obs = 4037 LR chi2(46) = 688.31 Prob > chi2 = 0.0000 Log likelihood = -2451.6993 Pseudo R2 = 0.1231 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ poor | dF/dx Std. Err. z P>|z| x-bar [ 95% C.I. ] ---------+-------------------------------------------------------------------- sage05 | .1247981 .1021685 1.22 0.222 .067897 -.075448 .325045 sage614 | -.0880591 .0834782 -1.05 0.291 .166698 -.251673 .075555 sage1518 | .1201364 .0892759 1.35 0.178 .083334 -.054841 .295114 sage1925 | .1728592 .0883505 1.96 0.050 .120901 -.000305 .346023 sage2645 | .0843741 .0640305 1.32 0.188 .286458 -.041123 .209872 sage61 | .2197122 .0620296 3.54 0.000 .142173 .098136 .341288 lhhsz | .1467718 .0316892 4.63 0.000 1.52098 .084662 .208882 hdage | -.0004824 .00118 -0.41 0.683 53.782 -.002795 .00183 hdfemale*| .0367195 .0238223 1.54 0.123 .211033 -.009971 .08341 hdedseci*| -.005328 .0366298 -0.15 0.884 .130416 -.077121 .066465 hdedsecc*| -.0718919 .0338461 -2.11 0.035 .316737 -.138229 -.005555 hdedtehn*| -.1595181 .0339418 -4.57 0.000 .266445 -.226043 -.092993 hdedhigh*| -.2552496 .032501 -7.17 0.000 .189703 -.31895 -.191549 hdlfp0*| .0478499 .025716 1.86 0.063 .402132 -.002553 .098252 hdlfp1*| .0780848 .0357289 2.18 0.030 .117665 .008058 .148112 hdlfp3*| .0556662 .035043 1.59 0.113 .20843 -.013017 .124349 hdlfp4*| .2368876 .109273 1.94 0.052 .00819 .022717 .451059 slfp1 | .1925039 .0312842 6.15 0.000 .25764 .131188 .25382 slfp3 | -.0112391 .034476 -0.33 0.744 .256392 -.078811 .056333 slfp4 | -.3767091 .1592122 -2.37 0.018 .008547 -.688759 -.064659 lndtot | -.0106458 .007837 -1.36 0.174 .574586 -.026006 .004715 slndown | -.0549906 .0275884 -1.99 0.046 .483412 -.109063 -.000918 slndirr | .0339235 .0300376 1.13 0.259 .264548 -.024949 .092796 agcred*| .0079762 .0313096 0.25 0.799 .093623 -.05339 .069342 aglvstk*| -.1354714 .0236901 -5.63 0.000 .349096 -.181903 -.08904 marz1*| .2793814 .0371489 6.52 0.000 .045924 .206571 .352192 marz2*| .0193683 .0348914 0.56 0.579 .117906 -.049018 .087754 marz3*| .136806 .0313793 4.27 0.000 .105323 .075304 .198308 marz4*| .2399947 .0348233 6.31 0.000 .076518 .171742 .308247 marz5*| .1358946 .0312696 4.26 0.000 .107008 .074607 .197182 marz6*| -.0129487 .0389116 -0.33 0.740 .060845 -.089214 .063317 marz7*| .1612467 .0334344 4.66 0.000 .084935 .095716 .226777 marz8*| -.224589 .0441434 -4.49 0.000 .043092 -.311108 -.13807 marz9*| .2134723 .0520626 3.78 0.000 .023185 .111431 .315513 marz10*| .2988139 .0340099 7.45 0.000 .052255 .232156 .365472 month1*| -.2693459 .0338226 -6.81 0.000 .080445 -.335637 -.203055 month2*| -.0341322 .0409806 -0.83 0.407 .083818 -.114453 .046188 month3*| -.012758 .0409974 -0.31 0.756 .084714 -.093111 .067595 month4*| .0244088 .0413416 0.59 0.555 .082196 -.056619 .105437 month5*| .0325301 .0418602 0.78 0.437 .079067 -.049514 .114575 month6*| .0444527 .0417401 1.06 0.287 .079374 -.037356 .126262 month7*| .0267027 .0412051 0.65 0.517 .084372 -.054058 .107463 month8*| -.0551524 .0406816 -1.34 0.179 .086041 -.134887 .024582 month9*| -.0183441 .0412645 -0.44 0.657 .083234 -.099221 .062533 month11*| -.0312566 .0408739 -0.76 0.446 .088236 -.111368 .048855 month12*| -.1134731 .0392671 -2.81 0.005 .08853 -.190435 -.036511 ---------+-------------------------------------------------------------------- obs. P | .4828326 pred. P | .4782801 (at x-bar) ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ (*) dF/dx is for discrete change of dummy variable from 0 to 1 z and P>|z| are the test of the underlying coefficient being 0

28

I.C.3: Determinants of Poverty Gap Tobit estimates Number of obs = 4037 LR chi2(46) = 852.79 Prob > chi2 = 0.0000 Log likelihood = -19781.504 Pseudo R2 = 0.0211 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ pgap | Coef. Std. Err. t P>|t| [95% Conf. Interval] ---------+-------------------------------------------------------------------- sage05 | 316.5142 704.027 0.450 0.653 -1063.772 1696.8 sage614 | -1249.672 582.4849 -2.145 0.032 -2391.668 -107.6762 sage1518 | 679.9591 623.2007 1.091 0.275 -541.8623 1901.781 sage1925 | 1409.968 617.1726 2.285 0.022 199.9654 2619.971 sage2645 | 439.7738 452.7499 0.971 0.331 -447.8688 1327.416 sage61 | 1473.82 440.0236 3.349 0.001 611.1277 2336.512 lhhsz | 1147.551 220.3506 5.208 0.000 715.5411 1579.562 hdage | -14.08531 8.201794 -1.717 0.086 -30.16541 1.994787 hdfemale | 565.6351 163.4614 3.460 0.001 245.1594 886.1108 hdedseci | -263.2378 244.5719 -1.076 0.282 -742.7353 216.2597 hdedsecc | -737.9763 230.7656 -3.198 0.001 -1190.406 -285.5469 hdedtehn | -1395.126 241.7957 -5.770 0.000 -1869.18 -921.071 hdedhigh | -2316.576 259.8332 -8.916 0.000 -2825.994 -1807.158 hdlfp0 | 573.9637 181.4656 3.163 0.002 218.1897 929.7376 hdlfp1 | 644.7519 242.0266 2.664 0.008 170.2447 1119.259 hdlfp3 | 583.1768 249.2263 2.340 0.019 94.55416 1071.799 hdlfp4 | 1570.394 891.0003 1.763 0.078 -176.4646 3317.252 slfp1 | 1364.909 210.1222 6.496 0.000 952.9522 1776.866 slfp3 | -540.2641 242.6133 -2.227 0.026 -1015.922 -64.60656 slfp4 | -1827.236 1084.973 -1.684 0.092 -3954.389 299.9168 lndtot | -76.43451 56.96211 -1.342 0.180 -188.1121 35.24303 slndown | -235.1163 190.7461 -1.233 0.218 -609.0852 138.8525 slndirr | 146.6944 208.3734 0.704 0.481 -261.8338 555.2227 agcred | 105.3931 225.0465 0.468 0.640 -335.8238 546.6099 aglvstk | -1176.523 169.3094 -6.949 0.000 -1508.464 -844.5824 marz1 | 1704.491 307.5403 5.542 0.000 1101.54 2307.441 marz2 | -195.0735 249.4167 -0.782 0.434 -684.0696 293.9226 marz3 | 936.5059 223.9557 4.182 0.000 497.4276 1375.584 marz4 | 1639.687 268.0664 6.117 0.000 1114.127 2165.247 marz5 | 744.2288 220.5231 3.375 0.001 311.8804 1176.577 marz6 | -162.852 278.9227 -0.584 0.559 -709.6964 383.9923 marz7 | 825.4926 240.3004 3.435 0.001 354.3696 1296.616 marz8 | -2245.545 408.0013 -5.504 0.000 -3045.456 -1445.635 marz9 | 1277.402 405.9341 3.147 0.002 481.5444 2073.259 marz10 | 2530.645 273.019 9.269 0.000 1995.375 3065.914 month1 | -2319.921 309.1427 -7.504 0.000 -2926.013 -1713.829 month2 | -245.1797 283.8784 -0.864 0.388 -801.7398 311.3804 month3 | -102.2308 282.8396 -0.361 0.718 -656.7543 452.2927 month4 | 48.6391 283.1209 0.172 0.864 -506.436 603.7142 month5 | 75.20167 286.1941 0.263 0.793 -485.8987 636.302 month6 | 238.6734 284.8768 0.838 0.402 -319.8443 797.1911 month7 | 95.85541 282.2431 0.340 0.734 -457.4987 649.2095 month8 | -661.8791 286.1402 -2.313 0.021 -1222.874 -100.8846 month9 | -424.5658 287.0958 -1.479 0.139 -987.434 138.3024 month11 | -514.8154 282.7116 -1.821 0.069 -1069.088 39.45719 month12 | -1151.232 288.1763 -3.995 0.000 -1716.218 -586.2454 _cons | -673.4349 667.4099 -1.009 0.313 -1981.931 635.0612 ---------+-------------------------------------------------------------------- _se | 3234.684 57.34322 (Ancillary parameter) ------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I.C.4: Determinants of Poverty Severity

Tobit estimates Number of obs = 4037 LR chi2(46) = 812.74 Prob > chi2 = 0.0000Log likelihood = -36607.54 Pseudo R2 = 0.0110

------------------------------------------------------------------------------ psev | Coef. Std. Err. t P>|t| [95% Conf. Interval]---------+-------------------------------------------------------------------- sage05 | 2303093 4219904 0.546 0.585 -5970275 1.06e+07 sage614 | -9084690 3497193 -2.598 0.009 -1.59e+07 -2228240sage1518 | 3805486 3739157 1.018 0.309 -3525350 1.11e+07sage1925 | 7644172 3702419 2.065 0.039 385363.6 1.49e+07sage2645 | 2419575 2719032 0.890 0.374 -2911246 7750397 sage61 | 7615621 2644616 2.880 0.004 2430697 1.28e+07 lhhsz | 6471075 1321782 4.896 0.000 3879644 9062507 hdage | -96666.48 49218.86 -1.964 0.050 -193162.9 -170.0342hdfemale | 3935212 978998.2 4.020 0.000 2015829 5854595hdedseci | -2547137 1462312 -1.742 0.082 -5414085 319811.1hdedsecc | -5532403 1381083 -4.006 0.000 -8240097 -2824708hdedtehn | -9135765 1448113 -6.309 0.000 -1.20e+07 -6296655hdedhigh | -1.43e+07 1557851 -9.166 0.000 -1.73e+07 -1.12e+07 hdlfp0 | 3282154 1089483 3.013 0.003 1146159 5418149 hdlfp1 | 3411624 1448646 2.355 0.019 571468.9 6251778 hdlfp3 | 3719353 1500009 2.480 0.013 778497 6660209 hdlfp4 | 5492009 5307227 1.035 0.301 -4913120 1.59e+07 slfp1 | 8235395 1257333 6.550 0.000 5770320 1.07e+07 slfp3 | -4047388 1459834 -2.772 0.006 -6909477 -1185299 slfp4 | -4806411 6336455 -0.759 0.448 -1.72e+07 7616579 lndtot | -421909.2 344693 -1.224 0.221 -1097700 253881.5 slndown | -1329669 1145143 -1.161 0.246 -3574790 915451.3 slndirr | 553209 1252099 0.442 0.659 -1901605 3008023 agcred | 637669.1 1357008 0.470 0.638 -2022825 3298163 aglvstk | -6590953 1017351 -6.479 0.000 -8585529 -4596376 marz1 | 8758862 1844110 4.750 0.000 5143377 1.24e+07 marz2 | -1529732 1501564 -1.019 0.308 -4473635 1414171 marz3 | 5570979 1341555 4.153 0.000 2940781 8201176 marz4 | 8908195 1607204 5.543 0.000 5757177 1.21e+07 marz5 | 3585327 1321868 2.712 0.007 993726.1 6176927 marz6 | -903312.9 1674791 -0.539 0.590 -4186839 2380213 marz7 | 3771787 1443214 2.613 0.009 942281.3 6601292 marz8 | -1.34e+07 2497840 -5.348 0.000 -1.83e+07 -8461314 marz9 | 6512754 2439821 2.669 0.008 1729343 1.13e+07 marz10 | 1.50e+07 1628854 9.218 0.000 1.18e+07 1.82e+07 month1 | -1.25e+07 1857992 -6.723 0.000 -1.61e+07 -8848037 month2 | -815963.9 1701289 -0.480 0.632 -4151441 2519513 month3 | 334762.6 1694246 0.198 0.843 -2986905 3656430 month4 | 468242.6 1697530 0.276 0.783 -2859865 3796350 month5 | -7573.678 1718133 -0.004 0.996 -3376075 3360927 month6 | 1142328 1709029 0.668 0.504 -2208323 4492980 month7 | 104212 1694309 0.062 0.951 -3217580 3426004 month8 | -4428933 1721403 -2.573 0.010 -7803845 -1054021 month9 | -2284748 1722843 -1.326 0.185 -5662482 1092985 month11 | -3291198 1697604 -1.939 0.053 -6619449 37053.13 month12 | -6800256 1733654 -3.922 0.000 -1.02e+07 -3401325 _cons | -3957207 4005402 -0.988 0.323 -1.18e+07 3895617---------+-------------------------------------------------------------------- _se | 1.92e+07 329733.2 (Ancillary parameter)------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Obs. summary: 2087.805 left-censored observations at psev<=0 1949.195 uncensored observations

29

I.C.5: Determinants of urban consumption

Regression with robust standard errors Number of obs = 2741 F( 25, 2704) = 21.88 Prob > F = 0.0000 R-squared = 0.2098 Adj R-squared = 0.1993 Root MSE = .45609

------------------------------------------------------------------------------ | Robust lpce17 | Coef. Std. Err. t P>|t| [95% Conf. Interval]-------------+---------------------------------------------------------------- sage05 | -.1673988 .1175198 -1.42 0.154 -.3978365 .0630388 sage614 | .0035382 .093226 0.04 0.970 -.1792632 .1863397 sage1518 | -.1162331 .1004332 -1.16 0.247 -.3131668 .0807005 sage1925 | -.3307088 .0917216 -3.61 0.000 -.5105604 -.1508572 sage2645 | -.0493141 .0631676 -0.78 0.435 -.1731759 .0745476 sage61 | -.2341802 .0564616 -4.15 0.000 -.3448925 -.123468 lhhsz | -.0865852 .0401664 -2.16 0.031 -.1653452 -.0078253 hdage | .0006618 .0014146 0.47 0.640 -.002112 .0034355 hdfemale | -.0658285 .0261651 -2.52 0.012 -.1171341 -.014523 hdedseci | .0394641 .0596589 0.66 0.508 -.0775176 .1564458 hdedsecc | .1044816 .0565898 1.85 0.065 -.006482 .2154453 hdedtehn | .1629059 .0574013 2.84 0.005 .0503511 .2754608 hdedhigh | .3431948 .0573152 5.99 0.000 .2308088 .4555808 hdlfp0 | -.1127421 .0290638 -3.88 0.000 -.1697317 -.0557525 hdlfp1 | -.0642439 .03896 -1.65 0.099 -.1406383 .0121505 hdlfp3 | -.0318418 .0450889 -0.71 0.480 -.1202539 .0565703 hdlfp4 | -.0977869 .1812862 -0.54 0.590 -.4532604 .2576865 slfp1 | -.2941497 .0352615 -8.34 0.000 -.3632919 -.2250076 slfp3 | .0371 .0436232 0.85 0.395 -.0484381 .1226382 slfp4 | .3008461 .2359221 1.28 0.202 -.1617598 .7634521 lndtot | .0327006 .0213024 1.54 0.125 -.0090701 .0744712 slndown | -.0400203 .0385294 -1.04 0.299 -.1155704 .0355298 slndirr | -.0074517 .0412686 -0.18 0.857 -.0883728 .0734694 agcred | .1048125 .0576762 1.82 0.069 -.0082815 .2179064 aglvstk | .1608205 .0335205 4.80 0.000 .0950921 .2265489 _cons | 9.544963 .1021888 93.41 0.000 9.344587 9.745339-------------+---------------------------------------------------------------- month | absorbed (12 categories)

30

I.C.6: Determinants of consumption in Yerevan


------------------------------------------------------------------------------ | Robust lpce17 | Coef. Std. Err. t P>|t| [95% Conf. Interval]-------------+---------------------------------------------------------------- sage05 | -.3153811 .1906541 -1.65 0.098 -.689431 .0586688 sage614 | -.0429156 .139675 -0.31 0.759 -.3169481 .2311168 sage1518 | -.079026 .1614263 -0.49 0.625 -.3957331 .2376811 sage1925 | -.5085174 .1424699 -3.57 0.000 -.7880333 -.2290016 sage2645 | -.1139249 .1013078 -1.12 0.261 -.3126837 .0848338 sage61 | -.3367891 .0930993 -3.62 0.000 -.5194434 -.1541347 lhhsz | -.0632778 .0639262 -0.99 0.322 -.1886965 .0621409 hdage | -.0021018 .0020469 -1.03 0.305 -.0061177 .0019141 hdfemale | -.0543436 .0409684 -1.33 0.185 -.1347207 .0260335 hdedseci | .0735783 .0970295 0.76 0.448 -.1167868 .2639434 hdedsecc | .2025137 .0890387 2.27 0.023 .027826 .3772015 hdedtehn | .179508 .0897697 2.00 0.046 .0033862 .3556298 hdedhigh | .4214034 .08785 4.80 0.000 .2490478 .5937589 hdlfp0 | -.0783252 .0438894 -1.78 0.075 -.1644331 .0077828 hdlfp1 | -.017016 .0649483 -0.26 0.793 -.1444399 .1104079 hdlfp3 | .0528071 .0737213 0.72 0.474 -.0918289 .1974432 hdlfp4 | -.3863679 .1745826 -2.21 0.027 -.7288867 -.043849 slfp1 | -.3745924 .0562115 -6.66 0.000 -.4848755 -.2643093 slfp3 | -.0054957 .0713924 -0.08 0.939 -.1455625 .1345711 slfp4 | .7043945 .1458279 4.83 0.000 .4182904 .9904986 lndtot | .0401801 .0726542 0.55 0.580 -.1023624 .1827226 slndown | .0159559 .0881379 0.18 0.856 -.1569645 .1888763 slndirr | .0411867 .1044778 0.39 0.693 -.1637914 .2461648 agcred | .4493922 .1704567 2.64 0.008 .1149681 .7838164 aglvstk | .2429898 .0829409 2.93 0.003 .0802656 .405714 _cons | 9.721535 .1516425 64.11 0.000 9.424024 10.01905-------------+---------------------------------------------------------------- month | absorbed (12 categories)

31

I.C.7: Determinants of consumption in other urban areas


------------------------------------------------------------------------------ | Robust lpce17 | Coef. Std. Err. t P>|t| [95% Conf. Interval]-------------+---------------------------------------------------------------- sage05 | .1303989 .1420703 0.92 0.359 -.1482849 .4090828 sage614 | .227477 .1226662 1.85 0.064 -.013144 .468098 sage1518 | .0722594 .1237523 0.58 0.559 -.1704921 .3150108 sage1925 | -.0514588 .1144868 -0.45 0.653 -.276035 .1731175 sage2645 | .0576282 .0795469 0.72 0.469 -.0984103 .2136667 sage61 | -.2034445 .0664987 -3.06 0.002 -.3338877 -.0730013 lhhsz | -.1945599 .0464948 -4.18 0.000 -.2857638 -.103356 hdage | .0045466 .0018501 2.46 0.014 .0009175 .0081757 hdfemale | -.0970398 .0316595 -3.07 0.002 -.1591429 -.0349367 hdedseci | .0234427 .0716435 0.33 0.744 -.1170926 .1639781 hdedsecc | .0431456 .0670418 0.64 0.520 -.088363 .1746541 hdedtehn | .1510424 .0687501 2.20 0.028 .0161829 .2859019 hdedhigh | .2191586 .0679787 3.22 0.001 .0858122 .3525051 hdlfp0 | -.1372267 .0369699 -3.71 0.000 -.2097465 -.0647068 hdlfp1 | -.1086052 .0442365 -2.46 0.014 -.195379 -.0218313 hdlfp3 | -.0730644 .0529498 -1.38 0.168 -.1769302 .0308014 hdlfp4 | .3690291 .2807922 1.31 0.189 -.1817705 .9198286 slfp1 | -.2290516 .0412527 -5.55 0.000 -.3099725 -.1481306 slfp3 | .0120512 .0506354 0.24 0.812 -.0872747 .1113771 slfp4 | -.3720524 .3466937 -1.07 0.283 -1.052124 .3080189 lndtot | .0582985 .0211408 2.76 0.006 .0168289 .099768 slndown | -.0321692 .0409042 -0.79 0.432 -.1124066 .0480681 slndirr | -.0055878 .0404621 -0.14 0.890 -.084958 .0737823 agcred | .0926904 .0487833 1.90 0.058 -.0030024 .1883833 aglvstk | .1503191 .0344748 4.36 0.000 .0826937 .2179446 _cons | 9.354504 .1353821 69.10 0.000 9.088939 9.620068-------------+---------------------------------------------------------------- month | absorbed (12 categories)

32

I.C.8: Determinants of rural consumption


------------------------------------------------------------------------------ | Robust lpce17 | Coef. Std. Err. t P>|t| [95% Conf. Interval]-------------+---------------------------------------------------------------- sage05 | -.0190658 .1628204 -0.12 0.907 -.3384951 .3003635 sage614 | .2009605 .1346904 1.49 0.136 -.0632818 .4652027 sage1518 | -.0865925 .148466 -0.58 0.560 -.3778605 .2046754 sage1925 | -.0921452 .1412499 -0.65 0.514 -.3692562 .1849659 sage2645 | -.1190898 .0992378 -1.20 0.230 -.3137795 .0756 sage61 | -.0876103 .0852386 -1.03 0.304 -.2548356 .079615 lhhsz | -.154835 .0504076 -3.07 0.002 -.2537271 -.0559428 hdage | .0026082 .001954 1.33 0.182 -.0012252 .0064417 hdfemale | -.0108078 .0429011 -0.25 0.801 -.0949734 .0733578 hdedseci | .1122372 .0531651 2.11 0.035 .0079352 .2165391 hdedsecc | .165323 .047379 3.49 0.001 .0723724 .2582735 hdedtehn | .3036634 .0512921 5.92 0.000 .203036 .4042908 hdedhigh | .3465999 .0616198 5.62 0.000 .2257111 .4674886 hdlfp0 | -.0715423 .0462598 -1.55 0.122 -.1622972 .0192125 hdlfp1 | -.2617399 .0777816 -3.37 0.001 -.4143358 -.1091441 hdlfp3 | -.0330219 .0524132 -0.63 0.529 -.1358486 .0698049 hdlfp4 | .2080906 .2073535 1.00 0.316 -.1987058 .614887 slfp1 | -.0156956 .0668679 -0.23 0.814 -.1468803 .1154891 slfp3 | .0300969 .0499201 0.60 0.547 -.0678388 .1280325 slfp4 | -.0383837 .2641121 -0.15 0.884 -.556532 .4797646 lndtot | .0238239 .0078783 3.02 0.003 .0083679 .0392799 slndown | .0385666 .0551402 0.70 0.484 -.0696101 .1467434 slndirr | .0953561 .0349736 2.73 0.006 .0267431 .1639691 agcred | .0853749 .0385942 2.21 0.027 .0096588 .1610909 aglvstk | .1472185 .0314958 4.67 0.000 .0854286 .2090085 _cons | 9.127633 .1387176 65.80 0.000 8.85549 9.399776-------------+---------------------------------------------------------------- month | absorbed (12 categories)

33

ANNEX II: NON-INCOME DIMENSIONS OF POVERTY

A. Education: technical notes and statistics

(i) Organization of the Armenian education system

The education system in Armenia is composed of pre-school, elementary, lower secondary, upper secondary, which offers both academic and vocational tracks, and higher education, which also offers a wide variety of vocational/technical programs in colleges and academic programs in universities. 11

Pre-school education is not compulsory. Children can enroll in childcare programs and then in pre-school programs from the age of 1.5 years to the time they enter primary school. Data from the ISLC 2001 show that less than 20 percent of children between 3 and 6 years of age are enrolled in a pre-school program, of which majority (close to 90 percent) in fee-based public programs.

Basic education (elementary and lower secondary): All children sixteen years and younger are required to be in school. Beginning with the 2001 academic year, the compulsory age for starting elementary education is 6.5 years of age. There are nine years of compulsory basic education in Armenia: three years of elementary education and six years of lower secondary education. Prior to the academic year of 2001 there were only five years of lower secondary education. For the purpose of this study basic education will include only the first 8 years of schooling. Most basic education is offered in public institutions where 99 percent of those surveyed in the ISLC 2001 were enrolled.

Since the 2001 academic year, upper secondary education has been offered in grades 10 and 11 (before it was offered in grades 9-10). Several vocational/technical and academic tracks are offered. Prior to the academic year of 2001 the vocational/technical tracks included an extra year of education, but today all tracks last only two years.

Tertiary education is offered in both colleges and universities. Colleges offer post-secondary vocational/technical programs which can last from 22 to 58 month. Less than 4 percent of these programs are offered in private institutions, the rest in public institutions where more than 56 percent of the enrolled students pay a fee. Universities offer academic programs that result in bachelor’s degrees after four years, master’s degrees after two years more, and doctorate degrees. There are several public and private universities in Armenia, some of them foreign. Data from the ISLC 2001 show that close to 9 percent of the students are enrolled in a private institution; and about 52 percent pay a fee in state institutions.

(ii) Methodology used to construct consumption quintiles using data from the EPEAS, 2001.

The Education, Poverty and Economic Activity Survey (EPEAS) was conducted in the year 2001 with the objective to inform policy makers about the links between poverty, education, and labor markets in Armenia. This survey was implemented by the Government of Armenia and the UNDP. The main questionnaire was completed during the spring (March-May) and summer (August) of 2001. The survey included socio-economic and demographic information on all household members, as well as detailed education and employment information of all household members between 13 and 33 years of age12.

11 This section borrows heavily from Berryman et al. 200212 UNDP, 2002. Education, Poverty, and Economic Activity in Armenia. Report prepared by: A. Mizakhanyan, H. Minasyan, Y. Suvaryan, R. Yeganyan, N. Shahnazaryan and N. Jrbashyan. Yerevan.

34

As there were not enough variables in common between the EPEAS and the ISLC 2001 to allow a matching of both data sets, the data on consumption in the first data was used to calculate consumption quintiles.

In the household questionnaire, the EPEAS asked the respondents to calculate the total amount of household consumption during the last month, including the estimated value of own production of food consumed in the household. Although, such a generalized question tends to underestimate expenses due to recall problems, it is the only variable that allows estimates of households’ consumption and their household ranking based on it. Using this variable we estimated consumption quintiles in the EPEAS. Unfortunately, 4.4 percent of all households interviewed did not answer or answered that they did not know the total amount of household expenses in the last month.

To impute consumption in those households without information we predicted the log of the per-capita household consumption based on household demographic characteristics, and household location. The following are the variables used to predict consumption: the share of children under 5 years old, the share of members between 6-17 years of age, the share of members older than 60, the age of the head and a spouse, dummies indicating the highest level of education of the head and a spouse, dummies indicating the labor force status of the head and a spouse, and dummies indicating the marz where the household is located. The regression is shown below.

Population size = 2172F( 34, 2138) = 34.14Prob > F = 0R-squared = 0.3363

lnpaex Coef. Std. Err. t P>t [95% Conf. Interval]sage5 -0.352 0.156 -2.260 0.024 -0.657 -0.047sage17 -0.062 0.088 -0.700 0.481 -0.235 0.111sage60 -0.193 0.083 -2.320 0.020 -0.357 -0.030Urban 0.182 0.061 2.970 0.003 0.062 0.301Hhsize -0.006 0.010 -0.590 0.557 -0.026 0.014hdsingle -0.011 0.139 -0.080 0.936 -0.283 0.261Hdage -0.002 0.002 -0.670 0.503 -0.007 0.003Hsage -0.001 0.002 -0.540 0.589 -0.006 0.003Hdedu2 0.032 0.043 0.740 0.458 -0.053 0.117Hdedu3 0.293 0.051 5.790 0.000 0.194 0.392Hsedu2 -0.037 0.060 -0.630 0.529 -0.154 0.079Pempl 0.568 0.096 5.920 0.000 0.380 0.756hdempl 0.249 0.265 0.940 0.347 -0.270 0.768hdsempl 0.177 0.264 0.670 0.504 -0.341 0.694hdunemp -0.009 0.265 -0.030 0.973 -0.528 0.510hdeother 0.102 0.273 0.370 0.708 -0.433 0.637hdpensi 0.211 0.266 0.790 0.427 -0.310 0.733hsempl 0.199 0.160 1.240 0.214 -0.115 0.512hsunemp 0.058 0.157 0.370 0.711 -0.249 0.365hseother 0.186 0.161 1.150 0.248 -0.130 0.501hspensi 0.156 0.179 0.880 0.382 -0.194 0.507K1 -0.189 0.035 -5.340 0.000 -0.259 -0.120Hdage_m 0.043 0.012 3.690 0.000 0.020 0.066Hhsize_m 0.053 0.084 0.630 0.527 -0.111 0.217Aragatzotn -0.161 0.096 -1.670 0.094 -0.349 0.027Kotayk 0.194 0.090 2.140 0.033 0.016 0.371Gegharkunik 0.219 0.094 2.330 0.020 0.035 0.403Tavush 0.158 0.104 1.510 0.131 -0.047 0.362Lori -0.413 0.090 -4.610 0.000 -0.588 -0.237Shirak -0.500 0.076 -6.610 0.000 -0.649 -0.352Ararat -0.347 0.063 -5.480 0.000 -0.471 -0.223Armavir -0.397 0.081 -4.910 0.000 -0.556 -0.239Syunik -0.029 0.078 -0.380 0.706 -0.183 0.124

35

Vayots Dzor 0.017 0.096 0.180 0.861 -0.171 0.204_cons -0.840 0.888 -0.950 0.344 -2.580 0.901

As can be observed in the regression, consumption is correlated with household demographic characteristics such as the share of children under five, and the share of older adults. Both variables significantly decrease household consumption. Among the variables with a significantly positive correlation with consumption are: the education of the household head, a variable indicating whether or not the head is employed, and the variable indicating whether or not the household is in a urban area.

Correlates of secondary school enrollment

Girls 15-16 years oldNumber of Obs. 326LR chi2(22) 44.8Prob > chi2 0.0028Pseudo R2 0.2376Data ISLC 2001

enroll dF/dx Std. Err. Z P>|z| x-bar [ 95% C.I. ]lnpce17 0.027 0.021 1.300 0.195 9.341 -0.015 0.070hedu2* -0.007 0.031 -0.240 0.809 0.301 -0.068 0.053hedu3* -0.010 0.033 -0.320 0.752 0.288 -0.075 0.055hedu4* -0.019 0.043 -0.500 0.614 0.183 -0.103 0.065hsingle* -0.015 0.034 -0.490 0.623 0.211 -0.082 0.052hage 0.001 0.001 0.770 0.439 50.698 -0.002 0.004sage5 0.021 0.149 0.140 0.890 0.033 -0.271 0.312sage614 0.182 0.123 1.560 0.118 0.153 -0.059 0.422sage1518 0.091 0.129 0.720 0.474 0.295 -0.163 0.344sage1925 0.017 0.109 0.150 0.878 0.059 -0.197 0.230sage60 -0.007 0.130 -0.060 0.956 0.078 -0.262 0.248hhsize -0.025 0.010 -2.830 0.005 5.356 -0.044 -0.005age -0.088 0.023 -3.740 0.000 15.466 -0.133 -0.043urban* -0.022 0.022 -0.970 0.333 0.584 -0.066 0.021marz2* -0.081 0.076 -1.460 0.144 0.131 -0.231 0.069marz3* -0.022 0.048 -0.540 0.589 0.132 -0.116 0.071marz4* -0.005 0.051 -0.100 0.917 0.077 -0.105 0.095marz5* -0.025 0.047 -0.610 0.539 0.118 -0.118 0.068marz6* -0.090 0.086 -1.510 0.131 0.067 -0.260 0.079marz7* 0.029 0.021 0.940 0.346 0.116 -0.012 0.071marz8* -0.203 0.177 -1.870 0.061 0.031 -0.549 0.144marz10* 0.012 0.033 0.310 0.753 0.087 -0.052 0.076obs. P 0.9156846pred. P 0.9654301(at x-bar)

36

Boys 15-16 years oldNumber of Obs. 331LR chi2(22) 54Prob > chi2 0.0004Pseudo R2 0.1833Data ISLC 2001

enroll dF/dx Std. Err. z P>|z| x-bar [ 95% C.I. ]lnpce17 0.106 0.041 2.560 0.011 9.355 0.027 0.186hedu2* 0.064 0.045 1.330 0.185 0.326 -0.025 0.153hedu3* 0.109 0.043 2.210 0.027 0.303 0.025 0.193hedu4* 0.096 0.041 1.780 0.076 0.183 0.015 0.177hsingle* -0.059 0.075 -0.850 0.398 0.206 -0.206 0.089hage -0.001 0.003 -0.230 0.820 49.319 -0.007 0.005sage5 0.640 0.466 1.370 0.171 0.014 -0.272 1.553sage614 0.062 0.256 0.240 0.808 0.146 -0.440 0.564sage1518 0.034 0.283 0.120 0.906 0.299 -0.522 0.589sage1925 0.012 0.245 0.050 0.960 0.070 -0.467 0.492sage60 0.383 0.333 1.140 0.254 0.067 -0.271 1.036hhsize -0.011 0.018 -0.580 0.560 5.008 -0.047 0.025age -0.119 0.037 -3.190 0.001 15.457 -0.191 -0.047urban* 0.023 0.046 0.500 0.616 0.541 -0.068 0.114marz1* 0.009 0.101 0.090 0.930 0.053 -0.189 0.208marz2* -0.013 0.095 -0.140 0.891 0.099 -0.198 0.173marz3* -0.050 0.099 -0.550 0.582 0.106 -0.244 0.144marz4* -0.223 0.135 -2.050 0.040 0.089 -0.489 0.042marz5* -0.090 0.096 -1.070 0.285 0.122 -0.278 0.099marz6* -0.025 0.103 -0.260 0.798 0.071 -0.227 0.177marz7* -0.020 0.088 -0.240 0.808 0.102 -0.192 0.152marz8* -0.022 0.130 -0.180 0.856 0.054 -0.277 0.233marz9* -0.112 0.147 -0.910 0.362 0.039 -0.401 0.176marz10* -0.248 0.169 -1.860 0.063 0.051 -0.579 0.083obs. P 0.837pred. P 0.883(at x-bar)

37

(iii) Statistical data

Table II.A.1: Armenia: Schools, teachers and classrooms across marzesNumber of

schoolsstudent/teacher

Enrollment per class

student/teacher grade10

Total 1407 10 20 8Aragatsotn 121 9 18 7Ararat 111 11 22 9Armavir 124 11 21 10Gegharkunik 128 10 20 7Kotayk 120 12 22 8Lori 169 11 21 9Shirak 179 8 18 7Syunik 118 9 14 5Tavush 82 9 18 7Vayots Dzor 51 9 18 7Yerevan 204 10 21 6Source: NSS and calculations based on data from the Education Management Information System (MOE). Note: Data from EMIS include boarding schools as well.

Table II.A.2 : Armenia: Net enrollment in education by age and consumption quintiles 1998/99Poorest II III IV Richest Total

male female male female male female male female male female male female3-6 years Rural 11.1 6.1 6.3 7.7 0.0 5.6 15.7 9.6 10.2 13.7 8.6 8.6Urban 17.4 21.1 29.3 26.7 35.0 27.5 39.1 41.4 36.0 38.5 29.8 28.3Total 15.2 17.1 18.8 16.8 16.9 16.2 25.0 21.0 17.9 24.4 18.9 18.77-14 yearsRural 90.2 94.2 95.9 96.4 97.0 98.1 97.5 97.6 96.8 96.6 96.3 96.8Urban 93.0 93.1 99.2 98.3 97.5 99.3 97.1 98.4 98.6 98.5 97.0 97.5Total 92.3 93.5 97.8 97.4 97.3 98.8 97.3 97.9 97.7 97.5 96.7 97.215-16Rural 62.5 78.6 85.7 100.0 73.3 81.8 86.7 100.0 89.3 91.7 82.1 91.4Urban 78.4 82.1 77.4 96.8 88.6 91.2 85.7 94.4 93.3 96.6 84.5 91.7Total 75.6 81.1 80.8 97.9 81.5 87.5 86.2 96.9 91.4 93.5 83.5 91.6Source: ILSC 1998/99.

Table II.A.3 : Armenia: Net enrollment in education by age and consumption quintiles 2001Poorest II III IV Richest Total

male female male female male female male female male female male female3-6 yearsRural 3.6 0.0 0.0 7.4 10.6 6.3 25.6 4.3 20.0 10.3 11.9 5.8Urban 13.1 12.1 20.0 12.2 25.9 34.1 32.9 33.3 37.5 47.9 25.8 27.0Total 9.4 7.2 9.4 10.2 17.8 19.7 29.7 21.4 29.4 30.8 19.2 17.67-14 yearsRural 93.8 81.3 93.1 96.3 98.0 98.0 100.0 99.1 98.9 98.9 96.9 95.7Urban 96.1 93.5 93.6 93.7 99.3 97.2 97.2 95.5 97.8 96.8 96.7 95.4Total 95.3 89.1 93.4 94.8 98.6 97.6 98.4 97.4 98.2 97.7 96.8 95.615-16 yearsRural 61.1 91.3 73.0 100.0 88.5 90.0 81.0 100.0 91.7 87.5 79.4 93.2Urban 75.0 85.7 97.4 91.9 75.0 91.3 89.7 93.6 97.9 95.2 87.3 91.2Total 70.3 87.7 83.4 95.6 82.1 90.7 86.0 95.7 95.4 91.8 83.7 92.0Source: ILSC 1998/99.

38

B. Living conditions: statistics

Table II.B.1: Housing characteristics in Armenia (% of individuals by dwelling type)Consumption-ranked quintiles

Totalq1 q2 q3 q4 q5YerevanHouse 33.0% 34.9% 32.8% 30.8% 27.4% 31.4%Apartment 66.1% 64.5% 67.2% 69.2% 72.5% 68.3%Other 0.9% 0.5% 0.0% 0.0% 0.1% 0.3%UrbanHouse 39.4% 36.5% 37.0% 47.1% 41.0% 40.2%Apartment 55.4% 60.2% 60.9% 51.1% 56.2% 56.7%Other 5.3% 3.3% 2.1% 1.7% 2.8% 3.1%RuralHouse 75.9% 87.6% 82.1% 83.1% 83.0% 82.6%Apartment 18.2% 8.2% 11.9% 11.7% 13.1% 12.4%Other 5.9% 4.2% 6.0% 5.2% 3.8% 5.0%TotalHouse 47.4% 54.5% 52.1% 54.4% 48.4% 51.3%Apartment 48.6% 42.6% 45.0% 43.2% 49.6% 45.8%Other 4.1% 2.9% 2.9% 2.4% 2.0% 2.8%Source: ILSC 2001.

Table II.B.2: Ownership of dwelling in Armenia (% of individuals in owned dwelling)Consumption-ranked quintiles

Totalq1 q2 q3 q4 q5Yerevan 94.1% 92.5% 92.9% 96.3% 92.5% 93.6%Urban 86.0% 90.7% 90.5% 93.9% 90.1% 90.2%Rural 93.3% 93.5% 93.1% 95.1% 95.4% 94.1%Total 90.6% 92.2% 92.1% 95.0% 92.8% 92.5%Source: ILSC 2001.

Table II.B.3: Dwelling conditions, self-reported (% of individuals)Consumption-ranked quintiles

Totalq1 q2 q3 q4 q5Yerevan Very good 1.4 0.4 0.6 0.0 1.5 0.9 Good 4.1 2.2 2.8 4.7 6.5 4.3 Normal 26.3 39.9 44.4 44.7 59.4 44.1 Not so good 30.1 38.1 27.7 30.7 21.6 28.9 Bad 38.2 19.4 24.5 19.9 11.1 21.9Other urban areas Very good 0.5 0.4 0.8 1.4 2.7 1.1 Good 2.3 3.4 4.9 10.4 13.2 6.4 Normal 24.9 38.1 40.9 41.1 43.1 36.9 Not so good 38.6 40.1 40.9 32.0 31.3 36.9 Bad 33.8 18.1 12.5 15.0 9.7 18.7Rural areas Very good 0.0 0.0 0.5 1.3 1.9 0.7 Good 2.9 3.2 7.3 7.4 11.3 6.5 Normal 23.5 33.8 40.2 46.5 48.5 38.8 Not so good 45.3 45.4 35.3 28.2 31.8 37.1 Bad 28.3 17.7 16.7 16.5 6.4 16.9Source: ILSC 2001.

39

Table II.B.4: Overcrowding in Armenia: number of people per bedroom (% of individuals)Consumption-ranked quintiles

Totalq1 q2 Q3 q4 q5Yerevan 1 or less 10.1 12.9 15.7 12.2 16.5 13.7 2 or less 45.4 50.1 49.7 57.9 58.4 52.8 3 or less 24.0 31.7 21.2 20.3 17.8 22.5 More than 3 20.6 5.3 13.4 9.5 7.4 11.1Urban 1 or less 14.3 16.9 18.7 27.5 24.4 20.0 2 or less 50.7 52.7 62.1 55.5 58.0 55.6 3 or less 25.6 21.2 15.4 12.5 12.2 17.9 More than 3 9.4 9.1 3.8 4.5 5.4 6.6Rural 1 or less 23.3 21.0 26.9 33.5 29.8 26.9 2 or less 51.9 62.5 53.8 55.7 54.7 55.9 3 or less 12.2 11.8 16.4 7.8 13.9 12.5 More than 3 12.6 4.7 2.9 3.0 1.6 4.7Total 1 or less 15.4 17.2 20.8 25.1 22.7 20.3 2 or less 49.3 55.5 55.8 56.3 57.1 54.8 3 or less 21.4 20.8 17.3 13.2 15.2 17.6 More than 3 13.8 6.4 6.0 5.4 5.0 7.4Source: ILSC 2001.

Table II.B.5: Location of water tap (% of individuals)Consumption-ranked quintiles

Totalq1 q2 q3 q4 q5Yerevan Indoor 90.7 93.2 96.0 97.2 97.0 94.9 In yard 9.3 6.8 3.6 2.8 2.4 4.8 In street 0.0 0.0 0.5 0.0 0.6 0.3Other urban Indoor 89.4 86.2 86.2 80.9 83.7 85.3 In yard 7.7 13.2 12.9 17.2 15.4 13.2 In street 2.9 0.7 1.0 1.9 0.9 1.5Rural areas Indoor 49.9 39.6 40.3 39.5 52.8 44.2 In yard 46.5 52.2 51.3 56.4 41.9 49.8 In street 3.6 8.2 8.3 4.1 5.4 6.0Source: ILSC 2001.

40

ANNEX III: DEMOGRAPHICS, MIGRATION AND LABOR MARKET

(i) Labor market indicators between LFS and LSLC 2001

As we are particularly interested in the regional differences of the labor market opportunities between 1999 and 2001, we use the 2001 LFS data for comparisons with the 1999 ILCS, given very limited information on that issue in the 2001 ILCS. The main reason for such decision is the fact that both surveys have comparable labor market modules which allow us to monitor changes in the labor market activity over the two years using the ILO definition. The same quarters (second and fourth) were used in both surveys, in order to overcome the seasonality problem. This means that we re-computed participation and unemployment rates and other labor market figures reported in the APU (World Bank, 2002a) to obtain corresponding measures for the second and fourth quarter together.

In those two periods, the LFS is undertaken along with the ILCS, so that the same households can be observed in both surveys. About 75% of the households from the LFS were matched with the households of the corresponding quarters in the 2001 ILCS. However, the LFS data have some drawbacks. Firstly, there is no information on labor market earnings which can provide some insight into relationship between labor market performance and poverty (wage differences between ownership sectors, branches, farm and non-farm activities in rural areas etc). Secondly, it is not possible to match individuals from the 2001 LFS with the 2001 ILCS which has information on labor earnings, due to limited information on individuals that can be used in the matching process. Hence, we may have only indirect observations about categories of labor force participants who benefited from economic growth (based on the 2001 ILCS). However, we can use the LFS data to verify our measures of labor market activity and its composition provided by the 2001 ILCS (see section 2.2). Thirdly, there is no information on braches of economy in the 2001 LFS, so that we can only observe farmers according to their place of work (farm, land).

Table III.A.1 Participation rates by regions using the ILCS and LFS 1999-2001, in %1999 ILCS 2001 ILCS 2001 LFS

Q1-Q4 Q1-Q4 Q2 Q4 Q2 Q4Urban 50.5 57.4 55.9 58.1 58.5 57.6 Yerevan 48.3 58.5 58.6 59.0 62.7 59.4 Other urban 52.6 56.3 53.5 57.3 55.9 56.0Rural 70.1 56.4 59.4 54.8 66.1 56.9Total 58.4 57.0 57.2 56.8 61.1 57.4

Source: ICLS 2001 and LFS 2001.

Tables III.B.1 and III.B.2 report basic labor market indicators (participation and unemployment rates) using the ILCS for 1998/99 and 2001, and the LFS for 2001. Due to seasonality problem, we only compare corresponding quarters between ILCS and LFS for 2001.

Table III.A.1 Participation rates by regions using the ILCS and LFS 1999-2001, in %1999 ILCS 2001 ILCS 2001 LFS

Q1-Q4 Q1-Q4 Q2 Q4 Q2 Q4Urban 42.8 39.1 37.2 39.0 36.5 36.4 Yerevan 44.4 37.5 35.5 35.4 35.2 29.8 Other urban 41.3 40.6 38.3 42.6 37.7 42.7Rural 5.2 17.2 13.8 21.9 23.3 23.6Total 24.4 30.7 28.1 32.6 32.0 32.4

Source: ICLS 2001 and LFS 2001.

41

Overall participation rate and unemployment rate are the same for the fourth quarter using both surveys, while differences appear in the second quarter. Looking across regions, the differences in participation and unemployment rate are slightly larger. We expected greater discrepancies between those two data sets, primarily because participation and unemployment rates in the ILCS are based on self-reporting of respondents while the LFS allow us to use standard ILO definition, which corresponds to the actual situation in the labor market.

(ii) Statistical tables

Table III.B.1 Migration transition for internal migrants (out of 388 cases)

Origin Destination TotalYerevan Other towns Rural

Yerevan 3.1 11.1 6.7 20.9Other towns 9.5 24.0 9.8 43.3Rural 5.7 19.8 10.3 35.8

18.3 54.9 26.8 100.0Source: ISLC 2001.

Table III.B.2: Armenia: Characteristics of the unemployed in 1998/99 (total unemployed =100%) Total Urban Yerevan Other urban Rural

Male 55.0 55.3 51.9 58.9 53.1Schooling Primary 0.7 0.8 0.3 1.3 0.0Incomplete Secondary 8.6 8.7 9.5 7.8 7.4Complete Secondary 43.0 42.5 36.9 48.6 46.9Complete Technical 29.9 29.0 29.4 28.5 37.0Higher Education 17.9 19.1 23.9 13.8 8.6Age 16-18 4.7 4.5 3.2 6.0 6.2 19-25 19.0 18.5 17.0 20.1 23.5 26-35 24.6 24.6 22.8 26.6 24.7 36-45 30.4 29.1 31.1 27.0 40.7 46-55 15.5 16.8 19.9 13.5 4.9 55+ 5.8 6.5 6.1 6.9 0.0

Source:ILCS 2001 (Q2 and Q4).

42

Table III.B.3: Armenia: Composition of working age population (over 16) by education in 1998/99 and 2001

Primary Incomp.secondary

Complete secondary

Complete technical

Higher education

Total

1998/99Non-participants 12.1 17.2 33.2 17.7 19.8 100.0Unemployed 0.7 8.7 43.2 29.7 17.7 100.0Salaried workers 1.5 4.1 24.0 30.7 39.7 100.0Self-employed 7.8 16.7 51.7 17.6 6.1 100.0Other employment 6.1 6.1 21.2 15.2 51.5 100.0Total working age population 7.3 13.2 37.4 21.9 20.2 100.02001Non-participants 4.7 13.2 44.8 21.5 15.8 100.0Unemployed 1.2 7.6 46.4 26.7 18.1 100.0Salaried workers 0.5 3.6 23.5 35.1 37.3 100.0Self-employed 3.9 8.8 43.3 31.1 13.0 100.0Other employment 2.0 16.3 49.0 28.6 4.1 100.0Total working age population 2.8 9.0 39.2 27.4 21.6 100.0

Source: ICLS 1998/99 (Q2 and Q4) and LFS 2001 (Q2 and Q4).

Table III.B.4: Armenia: Education by categories of the working age population (over 16) in 1998/99 and 2001

Primary IncompleteSecondary

Complete secondary

Complete technical

Higher education

Total

1998/99Non-participants 67.3 52.8 36.1 32.9 39.9 40.7Unemployed 1.3 9.3 16.2 19.0 12.3 14.0Salaried workers 4.0 6.1 12.6 27.5 38.6 19.6Self-employed 26.9 31.6 34.7 20.2 7.6 25.1Other employment 0.5 0.3 0.3 0.4 1.5 0.6Total 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.02001Non-participants 69.7 59.6 46.7 32.0 29.9 40.8Unemployed 8.1 16.0 22.6 18.6 16.0 19.1Salaried workers 5.1 10.8 16.4 35.1 47.1 27.4Self-employed 16.2 11.1 12.6 12.9 6.8 11.4Other employment 1.0 2.5 1.7 1.4 0.3 1.4Total 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0

Source: ICLS 1998/99 (Q2 and Q4) and LFS 2001 (Q2 and Q4).

43

ANNEX IV: SOCIAL PROTECTION

(i) Proxy-means targeting in Armenia

Background: Proxy means-testing targeting in Armenia builds on the experience acquired through the humanitarian aid distribution. Humanitarian aid started flowing into Armenia in 1988, after the catastrophic earthquake. It continued intensely through the initial years of transition. It is estimated that in 1993, when the economic crisis bottomed out, approximately 80 percent of the population was surviving on humanitarian assistance. With economic stabilization and recovery, the flow of humanitarian aid started to dry out; by the end of the 1990s it became almost insignificant from the household consumption point of view (Integrated Living Conditions Survey - ILCS 2001).

Early on, humanitarian assistance was distributed on a priority bases to individuals or families belonging to certain categories of the population that were considered the most needy. Those included disabled, orphans, children of single parents, single mothers, single pensioners, households comprising only pensioners, pensioners supporting children below 18 years of age, families with three and more children and families with children under two years of age. Gradually, a more sophisticated approach to targeting was introduced. By 1994, (i) a computerized data base with standardized information requirements documenting households’ social and economic status was developed; (ii) a proxy means-tested targeting mechanism, where households were ranked based on a single-index formula, was introduced. A formula, developed by the Armenian experts, included not only old indicators (socio-economic categories), but also additional household-level indicators that were strongly correlated with poverty; and (iii) a nation-wide network of territorial centers for social services that were processing applications and distributing humanitarian assistance was established.

Social assistance system reform: During the 1997-98 period, Armenian Government was working on the reform of the social assistance system. The major component of the reform was consolidation of 26 small, uncoordinated categorical benefits in cash paid to individuals into a single monthly cash benefit that would be targeted at the most needy families (the family benefit). Various targeting options were considered, including using a regression calculated from the 1996 Household Budget Survey. However, consumption correlates were not sufficiently strong and the Government decided to target the new family benefit using somewhat adjusted proxy means-testing targeting mechanism developed for humanitarian assistance distribution. The new system was introduced in January 1999.

The proxy means-testing formula:13 The formula consists of the following variables:

- social category of each of the family members, or individual “social risk” (P k) and related average “social risk” for the family (Pm);

- number of the family members not capable of working (Pc); - place of residence (Pr); - housing situation (Ph); - car ownership (Pa); - private business (Pb); - the document issued by respective territorial center for social services verifying the

social and economic situation of the applicant family (Pf) and its eligibility for the benefit (“eligible” and “not eligible”);

- family income (Pi).

The score of the family need (P) is calculated using the following formula:

13 Based on the various documents of the Armenian Ministry of Social Security.

44

P = Pm * Pc * Pr * Ph * Pa * Pb * Pf * Pi

(a) Socio-economic category of each of the family members (individual social risk)—P k and related average “social risk” for the family (Pm). This is the most important element in calculating the score of the family need.

Each family member is screened for a certain social category, e.g. for whether she/he belongs to a certain category of “social risk”. Each category brings a certain number of points. The number reflects the assumed level of need of each category. The list of categories and corresponding number of points is presented in the following table.

Social category Points1 Biological orphan (no parents) 502 First category disabled 483 Child invalid (up to 16) 454 Biological orphan (one parent deceased) 435 Second category disabled 396 Pensioner (75+) 397 Single pensioner 368 Child below 2 year of age 359 Pensioner 3410 Child 2-18 3311 Pregnant women (20+ weeks) 3012 Third category disabled (below pension age) 2813 Unemployed 2714 Single mother child 2615 Child of divorced parents 2616 Public university student 2217 No social category 20 20

In cases where one person belongs to several social categories, a weighted average is calculated. The weights are as follows: for the category with the highest number of points 1.0; for the second highest 0.3 and for the third and all the rest 0.1. For instance, a person can be a 17-year old child (category 10), with divorced parents (category 15), a student (category 16) and a third category disabled (category 12). Her/his individual social category (or “social risk”) score is calculated in the following way:

Pk(ind) = P10 + 0.3*P12 + 0.1*(P15+P16) = 33+0.3*28+0.1(26+22) = 46.2

The average “social risk” score for a family is calculated as arithmetic mean of the family members scores.

(b) Number of family members not capable of working (Pc). The value of this factor is calculated in the following way: Pc = 1.0 + 0.02*m, where m is the number of the family members incapable of working, namely children up to 16, women over 63, men over 65 and first and second category disabled.

(c) Place of residence (Pr). For most of the settlements in Armenia, the value of this factor is one. However, there is a list of 173 settlements (in the earthquake zone and border territories) for which the coefficient ranges between 1.03 and 1.05.

(d) Housing situation (Ph). Housing situation is classified into 6 categories with the following coefficients: “domik” (temporary shelter such as a carriage, a barrack, etc., in particular in the earthquake zone) – 1.2; homeless – 1.07; unsafe dwelling – 1.05; collective center – 1.03; other – 1.02; permanent dwelling – 1.

45

(e) Filter variables (0 or 1). The following factors are used as filters: a car ownership (Pa), private business (Pb), and a document issued by respective territorial center for social services verifying the social and economic situation of the applicant family and its eligibility for the benefit (P f). Their value can be either 1 or 0. Obviously, 0 for any of the three (the family has a car and uses it, the family or its members are running private business and the social services center has assessed the family as ineligible for the benefit) eliminates the family from the list of beneficiaries.

(f) Family income. The family income coefficient is calculated using the following formula:

Pi = 1.2 – 0.04*(Sj/m*M) (j=1...n)

Where n is the number of the household members, sj is the income of the j-th household member, m is the number of the present household members, and M is the minimum wage (regulated by the Government). The income includes wages and salaries, income from self-employment, pensions, stipends and unemployment compensation. Income from farming is estimated based on cadastral income, while income from cattle breeding is estimated separately using a methodology regulated by the Government.

The qualifying score: The score that qualifies the household for the benefit is 36.01.14 It has remained unchanged since the family benefit was introduced.

The poverty family benefit: The household that qualifies for the benefit is awarded the benefit for the period of 12 months. In order to continue receiving the benefit, the household has to apply for the benefit again and go through the same eligibility testing procedure. The household is obliged to report any changes in its economic and social situation to the respective territorial center for social services. A failure to do so, or any fraud in order to get the benefit leads to the benefit suspension and consequent prosecution.

The benefit consists of a basic amount (paid to each eligible family) plus a supplement. From January 1999 till end 2001 the basic benefit was 3,500 drams per month. The supplement was given to each family member and amounted to 1,300 drams per month. Hence, the family of four whose score was at the minimum of 36.01 points would receive 8,700 drams per month. As of beginning of 2002, the benefit amount calculation was changed, so that the base benefit is 4,000 drams and only children below 18 are awarded a supplement—currently 1,500 drams per child per month. Due to this change most of the recipient families experienced a decrease in the benefit amount. For instance, a family of four members, but no children would receive 4,000 drams instead of 8,700 drams. A family of four (two adults two children) would receive 7,000 drams (instead of 8,700 drams). As of July 2003, the supplement per child is to be increased to 2,000 drams.

Changes in the poverty family benefit introduced since 1999: As of July 2000, the “family benefit” became “poverty family benefit”. The change was motivated by hopes that adding the word “poverty” would contribute to self-targeting/screening behavior of the Armenian population.

Also, territorial center for social services are not any more responsible for issuing the document that would verify the social and economic situation of the applicant family and its eligibility for the benefit. Instead, a Local Social Protection Council was established. It consists of 5 local self-government representatives responsible for the social sectors in a self-government and 5 representatives of the non-government organizations. By issuing the opinion on each household’s eligibility for the poverty family benefit, the council is actually supervising the decision making process in the territorial centers for social services. Since the inception of the councils the public discontent concerning the benefit award process has decreased substantially. The council is also given the authority to allocate 5 percent of the family

14 In 1999, electricity tariff in Armenia was increased significantly. Given that the poverty family benefit was introduced at the same time, the Government decided not to introduce any additional benefit. However, in order to cushion any potential social dissatisfaction, households whose “score of need” was between 33.7 and 36 points were awarded a monthly compensation of 1,450 dram for a period of one year (till the end of 1999).

46

poverty benefit budget for a given local self-government to beneficiaries who do not qualify for the benefit, but are found to be needy. They are awarded a single benefit (currently 4,000 drams).

Implementation and administration arrangements: The benefit is regulated and supervised by the Ministry of Social Security. Direct administration (receipt of applications and eligibility assessment, including the field visits) is performed by 55 territorial centers for social services, which are established, funded and directly report to the local administration. The centers which employ about 500 people cover entire Armenia. The benefit administration is computerized, with the centralized data base managed by the Ministry of Social Security. The data base is linked to other data bases relevant for cross-checking of the economic and social situation of the applicant families (electricity consumption, telephone bills, customs records, the list of pensioners, etc.).

The draft of the final list of recipient families is prepared monthly by the centralized data base and sent to the territorial centers for final decision. However, as noted above, local social protection councils play a very important role in the decision making process as well.

The benefit is delivered to the beneficiaries through the post offices.

As of beginning of 2002, in order to make the territorial centers for social assistance more accountable for management of the poverty family benefit budget, each center is allocated fixed yearly benefit budget. The allocations were decided based on the 2001 data, as well as estimates of the demand for the benefit on the territory covered by each respective center. If there are savings due to better targeting of the benefit, the center may decide to include new beneficiaries or the council may award a one-time benefit to more families that are assessed to be extremely poor (based on the field visit) but formally do not qualify for the benefit. All appeals are addressed to the respective local social protection council. If a client is not satisfied, he can appeal to the court. Often, clients complain directly to the Ministry.

The Ministry of Social Security has put substantial efforts into improving the family poverty benefit administration, including provision of clear guidelines (that are promptly adjusted to reflect any changes in the benefit administration procedures), developing and improving management information system, training of the benefit administrators in the territorial centers for social assistance, and continuous monitoring and supervision. Particularly important is that the Policy Analysis and Development Unit in the Ministry of Social Security employs highly qualified staff capable of designing a household survey type research, as well as conducting sophisticated econometric analysis of household surveys data. This is extremely important for the assessment of the poverty benefit targeting efficiency and effectiveness and further development of the targeting mechanism. The Ministry also pays attention to informing the public on any changes in the benefit.

47

(ii) Statistical information

Table IV.B.1: Expenditures on social transfers in Armenia 1999-2003 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003

Total expenditures in bill dramsPensions 32.17 34.10 39.11 43.25 48.46 Labor pensions 26.47 26.24 29.77 32.97 36.86 Social pensions 1.93 1.91 2.01 1.98 2.00 Military and special pensions 3.77 5.95 7.33 8.30 9.59Unemployment compensation 1.07 0.44 0.25 0.69 0.36Maternity leave compensation 0.37 0.38 0.44 0.51 0.32Sick-leave compensation 0.43 0.37 0.38 0.44 0.34Child care allowance 0.00 0.28 0.28 0.21 0.25Newborn allowance 0.14 0.15 0.15 0.15 0.14Poverty family benefit 21.08 17.72 16.85 14.85 13.23TOTAL 55.25 53.43 57.45 60.10 63.10

Structure: total = 100%Pensions 58.2 63.8 68.1 72.0 76.8 Labor pensions 47.9 49.1 51.8 54.9 58.4 Social pensions 3.5 3.6 3.5 3.3 3.2 Military and special pensions 6.8 11.1 12.8 13.8 15.2Unemployment compensation 1.9 0.8 0.4 1.2 0.6Maternity leave compensation 0.7 0.7 0.8 0.8 0.5Sick-leave compensation 0.8 0.7 0.7 0.7 0.5Child care allowance 0.0 0.5 0.5 0.3 0.4Newborn allowance 0.2 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.2Poverty family benefit 38.1 33.2 29.3 24.7 21.0TOTAL 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0

GDP shares (%)Pensions 3.26 3.31 3.33 3.19 3.25 Labor pensions 2.68 2.54 2.53 2.43 2.47 Social pensions 0.20 0.18 0.17 0.15 0.13 Military and special pensions 0.38 0.58 0.62 0.61 0.64Unemployment compensation 0.11 0.04 0.02 0.05 0.02Maternity leave compensation 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.02Sick-leave compensation 0.04 0.04 0.03 0.03 0.02Child care allowance 0.00 0.03 0.02 0.02 0.02Newborn allowance 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01Poverty family benefit 2.14 1.72 1.43 1.09 0.89TOTAL 5.60 5.18 4.89 4.43 4.23Memo item: GDP (current, in bill drams) 987 1031 1175 1357 1493

Public transfers in real terms: 1999=100Pensions 32.17 34.38 38.27 41.84 Labor pensions 26.47 26.45 29.13 31.89 Social pensions 1.93 1.92 1.97 1.91 Military and special pensions 3.77 6.00 7.17 8.03Unemployment compensation 1.07 0.44 0.25 0.67Maternity leave compensation 0.37 0.38 0.43 0.49Sick-leave compensation 0.43 0.38 0.37 0.42Child care allowance 0.00 0.29 0.28 0.20Newborn allowance 0.14 0.15 0.15 0.15Poverty family benefit 21.10 17.86 16.48 14.36TOTAL 55.28 53.87 56.22 58.13Memo item: CPI (199=100) 100 99.18 102.19 103.38Source: Ministry of Social Security of Armenia and State Social Insurance Fund of Armenia.Notes: Poverty benefit spending for 2002 comprises 12.252 billion drams for 2002 and 2.598 bill drams for payment of two months of arrears from 2001. Data for 2003 refer to planned budget. Labor pensions comprise old-age, disability and survivor's pensions based on the mandatory social insurance. Social pensions are regular monthly payment to the elderly who do not qualify for a labor pension, orphans, and disabled since childhood. As of January 1993, social pensions are financed by the Government budget, previously by the social insurance budget. Military pensions comprise pensions to officers, as well as pensions to soldiers and their families. Special pensions are awarded by GOA under special legislation (for former presidents, etc.). Military and special pensions are financed by the Government budget. Unemployment compensation, maternity leave compensation and sick-leave compensation are financed from the social insurance contributions. Only employed are entitled. Child care allowance and newborn allowance are financed by the Government budget and administered by the social insurance administration. Poverty family benefit is financed by the Government budget and administered by territorial centers for social services under the guidance and supervision of the Ministry of Social Security.

48

Table IV.B.2: Social transfers in Armenia: recipients, and average nominal and real benefits1999 2000 2001 2002 2003

Number of recipientsPensions 568169 560082 550976 543646 559976 Labor pensions 509769 501711 491723 485446 491723 Social pensions 47451 46687 47312 46675 47312 Military and special pensions 23073 22829 21870 20978 21870Unemployment compensation 26525 15633 6602 5402 8000Maternity leave compensation (days) 1038700 1056900 926800 895845 675900Sick-leave compensation (days) 560400 535900 548100 622800 351900Child care allowance 0 10490 9226 7721 9400Newborn allowance 26200 24500 25674 25707 24000Poverty family benefit Regular monthly benefit (as of January 1) Number of families 211555 199456 174800 149603 141218 Number of individuals 657071 667879 598616 532014 505560 Single benefit Number of families 66980 11797 15917 10140 14889 Number of individuals 289711 44935 54139 30544 39456Note: Military pensions without officers.

Average monthly benefitPensions Labor pensions 4328 4357 5046 5660 6248 Social pensions 3394 3403 3542 3527 3522 Military and special pensions 6278 7018 8942 10156 10567Unemployment compensation 2990 3169 3302 3231 3705Maternity leave compensation (daily average) 356 355 470 567 880Sick-leave compensation (daily average) 761 699 684 704 508Child care allowance 0 2256 2262 2241 2251Newborn allowance 5252 5900 5900 5900 5900Poverty family benefit (per household) Regular monthly benefit 7193 7196 7712 6554 7099 Single benefit 3500 3500 3500 4000 4000Memo item: average wage (drams per month) 18530 21001 23987 25255Notes: Data for 2003 are planned amounts. Military pensions refer only to soldiers (not officers).

Average monthly benefit – real; 1990=100Pensions Labor pensions 4328 4393 4938 5475 Social pensions 3394 3431 3466 3412 Military and special pensions 6278 7076 8750 9824Unemployment compensation 2990 3195 3231 3125Maternity leave compensation (daily average) 356 358 460 548Sick-leave compensation (daily average) 761 705 669 681Child care allowance 0 2275 2214 2168Newborn allowance 5252 5949 5774 5707Poverty family benefit Families (January 1) 7400 7255 7547 6340Memo item: CPI 100 99.18 102.19 103.38Memo item: average wage (drams per month) 18530 21175 23473 24429Note: Military pensions without officers’ pensions.Source: Ministry of Social Security and State Social Insurance Fund.

49

Table IV.B.3: The family poverty benefit recipients by socio-economic category1/1/1999 1/1/2000 1/1/2001 1/1/2002 1/1/2003

Disabled (1st category) 7,776 7,729 7,243 6,737 6,609Disabled (2nd category) 32,320 34,999 30,845 28,663 28,651Disabled (3rd category) 3,928 4,704 4,116 3,656 3,982Invalids since childhood (below 16) 5,257 5,607 4,993 4,555 4,361Child under 2 13,028 14,603 12,535 10,714 9,617Child 2-18 249,681 255,713 237,689 217,670 208,249Child with one parent deceased 31,286 34,938 34,133 33,427 32,137Single-parent child 12,943 14,585 14,780 14,762 14,930Divorced parents' child 14,047 14,162 13,610 13,253 12,841Child with both parents deceased 1,043 1,204 1,091 1,023 943Pregnant women (20+ weeks) 72 297 251 259 183Unemployed 14,168 24,862 24,178 22,392 21,244Pensioner (under 75 years) 139,656 120,526 98,999 70,932 66,723Single pensioner 18,340 16,751 16,454 14,939 15,157Pensioner (over 75 years) 30,396 47,806 25,717 25,253 26,929Source: Ministry of Social Security of Armenia

Table IV.B.4: Armenia: Poverty reduction and alleviation impact of pensions Mean Standard Error 95 percent Confidence

IntervalChange in poverty indicators

(percentage points)Poverty incidence

Post-pensions rate 48.3 2.4 43.4 53.2 0.0Pre-pensions rates depending on the percent of pensions substituted by other households resources

75 percent 49.9 2.4 45.1 54.8 +1.650 percent 51.3 2.4 46.5 56.1 +3.025 percent 52.2 2.4 47.4 57.0 +3.90 percent 52.9 2.3 48.2 57.6 +4.6

Extreme poverty incidencePost-pensions rate 19.9 1.5 16.9 23.0 0.0

Pre-pensions rates depending on the percent of pensions substituted by other households resources75 percent 21.0 1.6 17.9 24.1 +1.150 percent 22.3 1.6 19.0 25.5 +2.325 percent 23.9 1.6 20.7 27.2 +4.00 percent 25.1 1.7 21.8 28.5 +5.2

Poverty shortfall (P1/P0)Post-pensions shortfall 27.0 0.9 25.3 28.7 0.0

Pre-pensions poverty shortfall (P1/P0) depending on the percent of pensions substituted by other households resources75 percent 27.5 0.9 25.8 29.3 +0.550 percent 28.4 0.9 26.6 30.1 +1.325 percent 29.5 0.9 27.6 31.4 +2.50 percent 30.8 1.0 28.9 32.7 +3.8

SeverityPost-pensions severity 10.7 0.6 9.5 11.8 0.0

Pre-pensions severity of poverty depending on the percent of pensions substituted by other households resources75 percent 11.1 0.6 9.9 12.3 +0.450 percent 11.7 0.6 10.5 13.0 +1.125 percent 12.7 0.7 11.3 14.0 +2.00 percent 13.9 0.7 12.4 15.3 +3.2Source: ILCS 2001

50

Table IV.B.5: Armenia: Poverty reduction and alleviation impact of social assistance Mean Standard Error 95 percent Confidence

IntervalChange in poverty indicators

(percentage points)Poverty incidence

Post-social assistance rate 48.3 2.4 43.4 53.2 0.0Pre-social assistance rates depending on the percent of social assistance substituted by other households resources

75 percent 48.9 2.4 44.0 53.8 ++0.650 percent 49.5 2.5 44.6 54.5 +1.225 percent 49.8 2.5 44.8 54.9 +1.50 percent 50.3 2.5 45.2 55.3 +2.0Extreme poverty incidencePost-social assistance rate 19.9 1.5 16.9 23.0 0.0

Pre-social assistance rates depending on the percent of social assistance substituted by other households resources75 percent 20.6 1.5 17.5 23.7 +0.750 percent 21.3 1.6 18.1 24.5 +1.325 percent 21.9 1.6 18.6 25.1 +1.90 percent 22.5 1.7 19.2 25.8 +2.5

Poverty shortfall (P1/P0)Post-social ass. shortfall 27.0 0.9 25.3 28.7 0.0

Pre-social assistance poverty shortfall 27.8(P1/P0) depending on the percent of assistance substi29.5tuted by other households resources75 percent 27.4 0.8 26.8 29.1 +0.450 percent 27.8 0.8 26.2 29.5 +0.825 percent 28.5 0.8 25.7 30.1 +1.50 percent 29.1 0.8 27.4 30.7 +2.0

SeverityPost-social assist. severity 10.7 0.6 9.5 11.8 0.0

Pre-social assistance severity of poverty depending on the percent of assistance substituted by other households resources75 percent 11.0 0.6 9.8 12.2 +0.350 percent 11.4 0.6 10.2 12.5 +0.725 percent 11.9 0.6 10.7 13.1 +1.30 percent 12.5 0.6 11.3 13.8 +1.9Source: ILCS 2001

51

Table IV.B.6: Determinants of social assistance

Probit estimates Number of obs = 4037 LR chi2(34) = 460.01 Prob > chi2 = 0.0000Log likelihood = -1421.7951 Pseudo R2 = 0.1392

------------------------------------------------------------------------------ socass | dF/dx Std. Err. z P>|z| x-bar [ 95% C.I. ]---------+-------------------------------------------------------------------- sage02 | .3099883 .0943644 3.28 0.001 .01941 .125037 .494939 sage25 | .341662 .0716792 4.75 0.000 .035263 .201173 .482151 sage510 | .2663926 .0582446 4.56 0.000 .078139 .152235 .38055sage1015 | .319749 .0531182 6.00 0.000 .101858 .215639 .423859sage1518 | .2287723 .0539159 4.23 0.000 .083334 .123099 .334446sage1925 | -.0393263 .0563158 -0.70 0.485 .120901 -.149703 .071051sage2645 | -.1360278 .0401665 -3.38 0.001 .286533 -.214753 -.057303 sage61 | .1992699 .0364543 5.44 0.000 .142173 .127821 .270719 lhhsz | .0121314 .0186719 0.65 0.516 1.52098 -.024465 .048728 hdage | -.000501 .0006353 -0.79 0.430 53.8236 -.001746 .000744hdfemale | .0740712 .0128732 5.75 0.000 .211195 .04884 .099302hdedseci*| .0055305 .0204528 0.27 0.784 .130416 -.034556 .045617hdedsecc*| -.0130369 .0184629 -0.69 0.487 .316737 -.049224 .02315hdedtehn*| -.0035414 .0197399 -0.18 0.858 .266445 -.042231 .035148hdedhigh | -.0107075 .0215953 -0.50 0.620 .190649 -.053034 .031619 slfp1 | .0594815 .014862 4.01 0.000 .25764 .030352 .08861 slfp3 | .0169785 .015406 1.10 0.270 .256342 -.013217 .047174 slfp4 | .1616022 .0531043 3.04 0.002 .008547 .05752 .265685 owncar*| -.0575987 .0111257 -4.56 0.000 .234963 -.079405 -.035793 tmplodg*| .1809419 .0524268 4.41 0.000 .020371 .078187 .283696 oth*| -.0503567 .0355346 -1.11 0.268 .010486 -.120003 .01929 slndown | -.0303542 .0140694 -2.16 0.031 .483412 -.05793 -.002779 lpce17 | -.0332898 .0114722 -2.90 0.004 9.35868 -.055775 -.010805 urban*| .0030286 .0144478 0.21 0.834 .597398 -.025289 .031346 marz1*| -.0131145 .0275838 -0.46 0.649 .045924 -.067178 .040949 marz2*| .0789821 .0274536 3.31 0.001 .117906 .025174 .13279 marz3*| .0005943 .0206926 0.03 0.977 .105323 -.039962 .041151 marz4*| -.0745407 .0157718 -3.27 0.001 .076518 -.105453 -.043629 marz5*| .119875 .0264636 5.44 0.000 .107008 .068007 .171743 marz6*| .0523898 .0292945 2.01 0.045 .060845 -.005026 .109806 marz7*| .0952648 .0265956 4.23 0.000 .084935 .043138 .147391 marz8*| .1285077 .0427975 3.69 0.000 .043092 .044626 .212389 marz9*| -.0169396 .0344904 -0.46 0.644 .023185 -.08454 .05066 marz10*| .1864651 .0398986 5.92 0.000 .052255 .108265 .264665---------+-------------------------------------------------------------------- obs. P | .1423267 pred. P | .1084254 (at x-bar)------------------------------------------------------------------------------(*) dF/dx is for discrete change of dummy variable from 0 to 1 z and P>|z| are the test of the underlying coefficient being 0

wb56473/tt/file_convert/601d1943481ee365396182b7/document.doc

52

poverty profile: technical notes and statistics€¦ · web viewaverage monthly benefit pensions...

Documents