Safety Nets and the Poor
61
shown in table 5.3, with the exception of urban Egypt where the distribution is progressive, transfers to the richest quintile exceed those to the poorest quintile. Leakage was particularly serious in the Republic of Yemen in 1992: benefits to the rich were almost sevenfold those to the poor.3 The second characteristic, progressivity in relative terms, arises because the poor spend a bigger proportion of their incomes on food and thus subsidized products represent a larger relative share of their total spending. For instance, in Egypt (in 1997) and Tunisia (in 1990), subsiTABLE 5.3
Incidence of Food Subsidy Programs (Percent) Country (Year) Algeria (1991) Absolute incidence Relative incidence Nutritional impact Algeria (1995) Absolute incidence Relative incidence Nutritional impact Egypt, Arab Rep. of, urban (1997) Absolute incidence Relative incidence Nutritional impact Egypt, Arab Rep. of, rural (1997) Absolute incidence Relative incidence Nutritional impact Morocco (1995) Absolute incidence Relative incidence Nutritional impact Tunisia (1990) Absolute incidence Relative incidence Nutritional impact Tunisia (1993) Absolute incidence Relative incidence Nutritional impact Republic of Yemen (1992) Absolute incidence Relative incidence Nutritional impact
Poor 1
2
3
4
Rich 5
13.3 24.4 —
16.8 18.2 —
18.8 1.8 —
21.9 2.0 —
29.2 1.9 —
100 2.1 —
— 20.8 34.5
— 16.5 30.5
— 14.0 28.9
— 11.7 27.6
— 8.1 25.4
20.8 8.7 43.5
21.4 6.2 40.4
22.1 4.8 36.4
18.9 3.1 30.0
19.5 8.9 37.9
18.9 6.1 32.4
19.5 5.1 30.5
15.0 4.0 12.9
19.0 3.0 10.9
17.0 8.7 59.8
Average
Ratio of 5:1 Ratio of 1:5 2.2 0.07
0.45 12.8
— 14.2 24.4
0.39 0.74
2.57 1.36
16.8 1.4 24.6
100.0 3.1 33.8
0.81 0.16 0.56
1.23 6.11 1.77
21.0 4.2 31.8
21.0 2.6 28.5
100.0 4.9 31.6
1.08 0.29 0.75
0.92 3.42 1.33
20.0 2.4 10.8
21.0 1.7 10.0
25.0 0.9 9.7
100 1.7 10.6
1.7 0.2 0.8
0.6 4.4 1.3
20.0 6.2 63.2
21.0 4.8 60.4
22.0 3.5 59.3
20.0 1.4 49.9
100 3.5 58.5
1.2 0.2 0.8
0.9 5.4 1.02
21 7.8 54.2
20 4.5 45.3
21 3.4 44.3
20 2.4 40.9
18 1.1 32.8
100 2.6 43.5
0.9 0.1 0.6
1.1 7.2 1.6
6.7 10.8 —
11.0 11.1 —
15.4 11.8 —
21.5 10.5 —
45.4 10.4 —
100.0 —
6.78 0.96
0.15 1.04
Source: World Bank 1999a. Note: — Not available. Absolute incidence is the share of benefits accruing to quintile; relative incidence is expenditure on subsidized goods as a share of total expenditure; nutritional impact is calorie intake from subsidized food as a share of total calorie intake.