Issue Number 05/2006

December.2006

Download this issue in PDF
Subscribe to the newsletter




Ben Slay and James Hughes
Poverty and inequality

Waltraud Schelkle
Interview with Mart Laar on flat taxes

Deborah Mabbett
Utility tariffs and the political economy of social policy

Janusz Czamarski, Ben Slay
Poland’s very difficult labour market

Mihail Arandarenko
Serbian regional inequalities in access to jobs

Leyla Sen
Inequality in poor households in Turkey: Does only gender matter?

Lyudmila Istomina
Poverty reduction in Belarus: Experience and lessons

Uktam Abdurakhmanov, Sheila Marnie
Poverty and inequality in Uzbekistan

Aghassi Mkrtchyan
Poverty and inequality in Armenia

Cheickna Diawara
Fighting poverty in post-Soviet Tajikistan

Gordon Alexander, Petra Hoelscher
Putting the focus back on children during a time of economic growth

Microfinance

Upcoming Events


Jacek Cukrowski

Print Article


Central Asia: Spatial disparities in poverty

Issue Number: 05/2006
Issue Title: Poverty and Inequality

The economies of the Central Asian republics were centrally planned during the Soviet era and followed development strategies determined in Moscow. Their economic structures were broadly similar, although natural resource endowments varied from country to country. Significant transfers from the central budget reduced differences across the region, so that Gini coefficients (measures of inequality) for all the Central Asian republics were close to the average value for the whole USSR (Table 1). Poverty rates, however, were much higher than in other Soviet republics.

After the dissolution of the Soviet Union, the newly independent Central Asian countries became more distinct from one another as their governments followed different national development paths. All five suffered sharp drops in real output during the first half of the 1990s, the impact of which was exacerbated by the cessation of transfers from Moscow. Inequalities rose in most of the Central Asian states; today, poverty rates in these countries are among the highest in the Commonwealth of Independent States (Table 1).

Table 1. Poverty and inequality in Central Asia
  Initial conditions Recent data
  Per capita GNP (1990)* Gini coefficient (1989) Poverty, per cent of pop. (1989)** Per capita GNP (2003)* Gini coefficient (2003) Poverty, per cent of population*** (2003)
USSR $2870 0.289 11% -- -- --
Kazakhstan $2600 0.289 16% $1780 0.32 21%
Kyrgyzstan $1570 0.287 33% $340 0.28 70%
Tajikistan $1130 0.308 51% $210 0.33 74%
Turkmenistan $1690 0.307 35% $1120 -- 44%
Uzbekistan $1340 0.304 44% $420 0.35 47%
* GNP per capita, Atlas method (current US dollars)
** Individuals in households with gross per capita monthly income of less than 75 roubles
*** Percent of population with expenditures below $ 2.15 (PPP) per day
Sources: Pomfret, Anderson (2001), World Bank (2005a and 2005b)

Increases in poverty did not affect all the countries and their constituent regions uniformly, however. The 15 years of economic transition show that the most successful economic regions are those with or in the vicinity of large urban agglomerations, and especially capital cities. In fact, residence in a capital city is the most important positive determinant of high living standards in all Central Asian countries (Table 2), while poverty rates in rural regions are significantly higher.

The root causes of high rural poverty lie in the large-scale collective and state farms that dominated socio-economic life in rural Central Asia during the Soviet period. In addition to agriculture and food products, these farms provided such social services as schools, health services and housing. Following independence, many of these farms collapsed or underwent dramatic restructuring. Their social responsibilities were often transferred to local governments that did not have the financial or human resources to discharge them. The rural poor often lack formal property rights (in terms of housing, land and other assets), without which they cannot easily borrow money or engage in entrepreneurial activities. Access to piped and running water, heat, healthcare and kindergartens in rural areas has therefore declined and the quality deteriorated (see Table 2). All of this reduced living standards in rural areas.

Table 2. Differences within countries
  Poverty rate $PPP 2.15/ day (per cent, 2003) Household access to water (per cent, 2003)
  Capital Other urban Rural Capital Other Urban Rural
Kazakhstan 2% 14% 31% 100% 96% 87%
Kyrgyzstan 42% 68% 77% 87% 97% 77%
Tajikistan 54% 73% 76% 100% 93% 56%
Turkmenistan -- -- -- -- -- --
Uzbekistan 4% 43% 55% 100% 90% 60%
Source: World Bank 2005

More than 60 per cent of Central Asia’s poor live in rural areas. (In Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan and Uzbekistan, the share is between 72 and 76 per cent). The highest poverty rates are observed in mountainous areas — which are also prone to flooding, landslides and other natural disasters. In Kyrgyzstan, differences in poverty rates between the richest Chuy region (the province surrounding the capital, Bishkek) and the poorest region (mountainous Naryn) exceed 50 percentage points (Figure 1). In Uzbekistan, the regional disparity in poverty rates between Tashkent city and the Syrdarya region exceeds 65 percentage points.

The spatial variation of poverty rates in Central Asia (Figure 2) shows lower levels of poverty in capital cities and central regions and much higher poverty levels in remote border areas. This, together with regional clustering of ethnic minorities in Central Asia, suggests a strong link between spatial distribution of poverty and ethnicity. Capitals and large urban agglomerations are typically populated by large Russian (and other European) communities, as well as by the wealthier members of these countries’ titular nationalities-groups with relatively high levels of human capital. The poor rural and border areas, by contrast, are more likely to be home to non-Russian (or European) ethnic minorities. These patterns of ethnicity and poverty, combined with the presence of extra-territorial enclaves in most Central Asian republics, leave much scope for disruption and conflict.
Reductions in regional disparities in Central Asia could improve regional stability, human security and overall development prospects in Central Asia. Although responsibilities for equalizing regional disparities and ensuring balanced development within these countries must rest with their governments, reducing high poverty levels in border areas requires cooperation between neighbouring states. As indicated in UNDP’s Central Asia Human Development Report,1 regional cooperation, open borders, and the free movement of goods and people are essential for poverty reduction and development in Central Asia. 


References:

Jacek Cukrowski is regional adviser on the Millennium Development Goals, based in UNDP’s Bratislava Regional Centre. (jacek.cukrowski@undp.org)

1. Bringing down barriers: Regional Cooperation for human development and human security. Central Asia Human Development Report. UNDP RBEC Bratislava Regional Centre, Bratislava, 2005.

Pomfret, R., and Anderson K., (2001) Economic Development Strategies in Central Asia since 1991. Asian Studies Review, Vol 25, No.2, pp. 185-200.

World Bank (2005a) Growth, Poverty and Inequality. Eastern and the Former Soviet Union. World Bank, Washington D.C., 2005.

World Bank (2005b) World Development Indicators 2005, World Bank, Washington D.C., 2005.


 
Discussons to the article contains 21 comments Read all comments Post your comment
replicawatches replica watches 22-07-2010 03:04 
replica hangbags replica 21-07-2010 02:32 
Re: replica hangbags sadsad 28-07-2010 12:25 
belstaff belstaff 14-07-2010 05:20 
nike air max jack 10-07-2010 10:41 
Re: nike air max asdsada 12-07-2010 09:46 
Re: Re: nike air max asdsada 28-07-2010 11:30 
Re: COCAH fake watc 09-07-2010 10:28 
adult webcams live jasmin 08-07-2010 18:40 
wedding wedding 07-07-2010 14:31