Download
1 / 19
190 likes | 374 Views
A COMPARATIVE STUDY OF TURKEY AND BRAZIL ON SOCIAL ASSISTANCE POLICIES GROUNDING ON BASIC INCOME . CONTENTS. 1- Central Government Policies vs. Local Government Policies 2- Comparison of Turkey & Brazil 3- Social Assistance Policies in Turkey & Brazil
E N D
A COMPARATIVE STUDY OF TURKEY AND BRAZIL ON SOCIAL ASSISTANCE POLICIES GROUNDING ON BASIC INCOME
CONTENTS 1- Central Government Policies vs. Local Government Policies 2- Comparison of Turkey & Brazil 3- Social Assistance Policies in Turkey & Brazil 4- Conclusion and Policy Suggestion
1- Central Government Policies vs. Local Government Policies
Differences between Central & Local Government Policies: • Autonomy • Discretion • Decision making based on locality • Assistance in kind vs. Assistance in Cash
Purpose of the Law: “To help citizens in the state of poverty and destitution, or, when necessary, to help non-citizens who are in Turkey legally or otherwise, to take measures that will enforce social justice by ensuring the fair distribution of income, to encourage social aid cooperation.” Directorate- General of Social Cooperation and Solidarity is the authoritative public institution.
STRUCTURE • The fiscal resources are drawn up by the fund. • The fund committee decides on the allocation of the resources. • There are affiliates all around the country in the cities and the districts. • In each district three “philantropic individuals” are expected to serve on the boards of trustee.
HOW IT WORKS… • Individuals or households apply to the local muhtar (neighborhood head man) to be considered eligibility. • The case of individual or household is sent to a district board to be considered. • This board often ratifies the decisions of muhtar or sends social workers to see the living conditions of the individual or the family.
WHAT DOES NOT WORK… • Muhtars are elected by the neighborhood and they feel that they are not in position to deny an application even if they feel that the person does not deserve the assistance (Buğra and Keyder) • The decisions of eligibility are left to the discretion. They need clear and formal guidelines, which specify conditions of eligibility. • The assistance is inadequate and uncertain. It consists of one-time aid in small cash of 120 Turkish Lira to 150 Turkish Lira (approximately USD 80 to USD 100), fuel or food. • There is no universal coverage or consistency. Acting like a local charity fund. • Information is lacking and it is by chance that beneficiaries find out about the opportunity. The criteria are not advertised properly. • No attempt to contextualize the decisions or to conduct any discussion with the target population.
The Project of the World Bank-1: Conditional Cash Transfer • Includes pregnancy allowances to poor families and allowances given on the condition of regular health controls for preschool aged children. • Targets poorest 6% of families • Amount of assistance is low. • Open to discretion. • Point- scoring formula that allows for all information on application to be sent directly via internet. The purpose is to establish a process that is objective. However, in practice, the process is varied across districts and implementers. Point formula is not strictly applied.
The Project of the World Bank-2: Local Incentives Project / Rural Social Support Projects • Consists of granting micro-credit for income generating projects, employability training projects, temporary community development and maintenance of social infrastructure, service centers and community well being. • If a person can not pay back, he/she will also not be able to benefit from the allowances of the fund. • Pre-described jobs for men and women are created.
BRAZIL • Brazil had the same problems that Turkey has today. • The Ministry of Social Development and of Fight Against Hunger was established in 2004. • The social policies were gathered under RendaBasica. • Since 2004, 13 million people have been raised out of poverty and 30 million have moved up into the emerging middle class (BIATO, 2009). • The gini of Brazil also fell from 0.59 (2001) to 0.53 (2007) (HAILU, 2009).
A draft law on “Citizenship Income” has been proposed to the Parliament on February 13, 2009. • Targets people having monthly income less than 1/3 of the monthly minimum income in Turkey. • A fund of Citizenship Income is proposed. • The grant is not limited with the number of the children and even the families having children more than 5 years old shall be granted. • A gradual distribution according to the development levels of the parts of the country on yearly basis is also foreseen. • The draft law is in the Commission of Planning and Budget and Health, Family, Work and Social Affairs Sub- Commission in the Parliament as of February 26, 2009.
Conclusion… However, Basic Income is not enough. Besides education, health, civil and political rights are needed. If policies are grounded on human rights based social justice approaches, the target to the reach social justice and a just society will be achieved.
