Government admits: poverty is increasing

Poverty rates have increased from 54% in 2002-3 to 55% in 2008-9, the government admits. Increases in poverty have been particularly dramatic in the centre of the country. The figure is embarrassing for both donors and government, which have been loudly trumpeting a claimed unprecedented fall in poverty from 69% in 1996-7 to 54% in 2002-3. There are also indications that malnutrition is not falling, and may be increasing.

The results come from the 2008-9 family expenditure survey, which was submitted to the Council of Ministers in July and has not yet been published. But a Ministry of Planning and Development Power Point presentation from July has now been distributed by CIP (Centro de Integridade Publica) and is attached.

The most dramatic increase in what is called “consumption poverty” is in Zambezia, where poverty rose from 68% in 1996-7 to 70% in 2008-9. No other province shows higher poverty now than 14 years ago. But Zambezia, Manica and Sofala provinces, and Matola and Nampula cities all show increased poverty in 2008-9 compared to 2002-3. Nationally, urban poverty has fallen from 52% to 50% while rural poverty increased from 55% to 57%. The survey claims Maputo city poverty dropped from 54% to 36%, which will not reflect recent prices rises.

Non-monetary poverty shows a mixed picture. Education is clearly improving. Access to health services is improving in rural areas but deteriorating in urban areas. Access to water is generally unchanged, except for a big improvement in urban areas in the south.

The failure to reduce poverty since the previous survey is blamed on “lack of increase in agricultural productivity, particularly in the family sector.”

The earlier two family expenditure surveys were called IAF (Inquérito aos Agregados Familiares) and the most recent is called IOF (Inquérito sobre Orçamento Familiar).

Comment: The “rise” in poverty and subsequent embarrassment may not be real at all. We explain in Do bicycles equal development in Mozambique? chapter 7 that the 2002-3 IAF offered two different figures, based on different poverty lines. If the same poverty line is used in 2002-3 as in 1996-7, then the fall in poverty was from 69% to 63% - reasonable but not dramatic. And that would mean a drop now to 55% simply continues the trend. But the report offered an alternative much lower poverty line (lowering the line simply moves more people over the line) which showed 54% poverty, and naturally donors and government all cited the lower number. Now they pay the price of using an artificially low poverty line six years ago. And what do donor staff in Maputo tell their headquarters now? Do they say “our aid has only brought an increase in poverty” or do they say “we have been misleading you for the past six years over the fall in poverty”? jh

Joseph Hanlon

Source: MOZAMBIQUE 170 News reports & clippings 29 September 2010