412
The Great Recession and Developing Countries
Table 9.1. Labor and Employment Indicators, 2000–09 2004
2005a
2006
28,285 29, 157 30,062 30,628 31,248
32,189
32,635 33,560 34,090 35,060
2000 Employment Level (thousands) percent change
–2.4
2001
3.1
2002
3.1
2003
1.9
2.0
3.0
2007
2008
1.4
2.8
1.6
2009
2.8
Employment by compensation type (% total employment) Wage and salaried
50.7
49.5
48.7
50.1
52.3
50.5
51.1
52.2
52.3
53.3
Own account
37.1
37.5
37.9
37.6
36.6
37.3
36.6
35.8
35.4
34.7
Unpaid family workers
12.2
13.0
13.3
12.3
11.2
12.2
12.3
12.1
12.3
12.0
Underemployment rate (%)
21.7
17.2
17.0
17.0
17.5
22.5
22.6
20.1
19.3
19.1
Unemployment rate (%) New definitionb
—
—
—
—
—
7.9
8.0
7.3
7.4
7.5
Old definition
11.2
11.1
11.4
11.4
11.9
—
—
—
—
—
33.0
—
—
30.0
—
—
32.9
—
—
—
Poverty incidence
Source: NSCB; National Statistics Office (NSO). Note: Figures from 2004 to 2008 are averages of quarterly surveys; estimates for these years are based on the 2000 census; the rest are based on previous censuses; — = not available. a. April–October average. b. A new unemployment definition was adopted in 2005 and includes all persons who are 15 years old and over as of their last birthday and are reported as (1) without work, (2) currently available for work, and (3) seeking work or not seeking work for valid reasons.
employed workers were either working on their own account (self-employed, largely earning meager incomes) or unpaid (table 9.1) (World Bank 2010d). Growth did not bring greater progress in the reduction of poverty. The share of the population living below the national poverty line actually increased—from 30.0 percent in 2003 to 32.9 percent in 2006—and now stands at its late-1990s level. The government has made slow progress toward achieving some key Millennium Development Goal targets, such as universal access to primary education and improved maternal and reproductive health. The lack of robust (on a per capita basis) and inclusive growth explain the failure in reducing poverty since 2000 (World Bank 2010d). The relatively high degree of income inequality has the effect of reducing the income elasticity of poverty, posing a further barrier to faster poverty reduction. These findings imply that the modest growth on a per capita basis that took place during 2003–06 must have had an anti-poor bias or been associated with a deteriorating distribution of income.