in the remaining districts in April 2008. To understand the effect of the program on financial inclusion, we compare the impact of the implementation of MGNREGS in the first two sets of districts vis-à-vis the third set of districts.
6The PPI index is made up of 10 questions on household size, assets, education and cooking sources, and can take a value of 0–100 (zero being the lowest). Households scoring less than 54 points are classified as Below Poverty Line (BPL) (living below USD 2.50). In 2015, the median (mean) score was 38 (39.7).
CHAPTER 9
Gender, Education, and Programma Bolsa Familia in Brazil
Aparajita Gangopadhyay
Centre for Latin American Studies, Goa University, India
Introduction
In Latin America, poverty and inequality run parallel. Every state in Latin America mirrors this reality. Also, the contours of inequality run broadly along racial and ethnic lines. Data on racial and ethnic minorities in Latin America are poor, and the criteria for classification of minorities vary. Estimates suggest that indigenous groups account for about for 10% (50 million) of the region’s population, while groups of African descent account for 30% (150 million).1 Indigenous and Afro-descendent people are, when compared to the ‘whites’, as a rule, are less educated, less healthy, and have lesser access to such basic institutions like the justice system. They face greater difficulties in transforming educational and occupational achievements into income, generally earning considerably less for the same number of years of schooling.
Brazil is known for its striking levels of destitution and poverty. However, in the last few decades, democracy has promoted poverty alleviation and equity-enhancing reforms. Since, the initiation of the redemocratization process in 1985, voting rights have been restored to the ordinary people; the constitution of 1988 was one of the most progressive constitutions of Latin America and reflected the activism by the social movements in advocating the rights of the poor. The role played by the center-left and left governments in Brazil since the late 1980s have extended such programs to previously excluded or marginalized peoples. They implemented new programs which were aimed at ensuring the most basic levels of social protection. Spending increased and the social protection programs have definitely reduced poverty, but the reduction is not commensurate with the resources spent. Socioeconomic equality remains acute; notwithstanding this, there have been modest improvements in income distribution over the last few years. However, reforms that systematically restructured the existing benefits toward equity enhancements have continued on in a laggard fashion over the years (Hunter and Sugiyama, 2009).
Despite recent increases in financing for education, the population as a whole remains poorly educated, especially in relation to Brazil’s overall levels of development. Educational mobility is exceedingly low. Social mobility in Brazil remains closely tied to family background. Brazil’s high incidence of poverty, low educational achievement, and middling health indicators explain its low ranking in overall human development indicators (Hunter and Sugiyama, 2009, p. 32).
The access to education, social security, healthcare, and housing are the core social sectors where the governments in Latin America, and Brazil, have tried to implement reforms for the marginalized. Of all the marginalized, the women suffer a kind of ‘double discrimination’.2 For instance, indigenous girls’ performance in school contrasts sharply with the rule that throughout the region girls do as well and even better than the boys. In Guatemala, for instance, indigenous girls complete fewer than two years of schooling on average. Indigenous girls start school later and drop out earlier. For Afro-Brazilian women in urban labor markets in São Paulo in the 1990s, a lower return in their education and age, compared with ‘white-men’, accounted for 50% lower overall wages (Naercio and Scorzafave, 2012). In regard to physical violence statistics, the World Health Organization (WHO) surveys of 1999 and 2000 indicated that, for instance, in Nicaragua 27% of women had reported being physically abused (in Quito, 37%; in Lima, 31%; in Colombia, 1 out of 5 in 1995, which has since risen to 27%) (Naercio and Scorzafave, 2012). Social surveys also show that for instance, in urban households in 1999, poor and younger women with fewer years of schooling were likely victims of domestic violence than wealthier, older, and more educated women. Each year of schooling reduced the probability of victimization by 1.4% (World Bank, 2007). In order to deal with the issues related to race and identity, countries in the region, like Peru and Honduras, have established mechanisms for the promotion of racial and ethnic equality.3 In contrast, Panama, Venezuela, and Dominican Republic although having significant Afro-descendants have failed to advance policies and address racial discrimination. Indigenous representation rose in Bolivia, Ecuador, and, to a lesser degree, in Argentina and Colombia. By 2004, 11 countries had instituted quotas establishing a minimum level of representation (20–40%) for women in political parties. The overall quotas increased women’s presence in legislatures, but there was significant variation in the law. For example, whether it was obligatory, whether it only reserves a slot as in Brazil, or if it required a slot to be filled by a woman, or whether a woman must be placed in an electionable position, like in Argentina, also depended on the country’s electorate system (Htun, 2003).
More than 15 countries have been collecting information on ethnicity through the census, but only a few, Brazil and Colombia, collect data on Afro-descendants. Peru and Guatemala follow the same for indigenous peoples. In Brazil, minorities like Afro-descendants account for 45%, Japanese 1%, and indigenous groups like Yanomami, Tukano, Urueu, Wau-Wau, Awa, Arara, Guarani (0.2–2.4%), and Jews 0.00056%. Brazil currently has 197 forest-dwelling indigenous groups (Telles, 2015).
In Brazil, nearly 80% of Afro-Brazilians live below the nation’s poverty line compared to the ‘whites’. Only 4% of Afro-Brazilians between the ages of 18 and 24 are in universities, compared to 12% of the ‘whites’. Three-fourths of all Afro-Brazilians have not completed secondary school, and 40% do not complete elementary school. In the UNDP’s Human Development Index, Brazil’s rank continued to stay at 79 among 159 odd countries (HDI Ranking, 2017). In 2007, Afro-Brazilians earned 50% less than the national average income. Afro-Brazilians suffer from the highest homicide, poverty, and illiteracy rates in the country. They are seriously under-represented in professional positions and in middle and upper classes and over-represented in prisons (56%). The situation is similar among the indigenous peoples in the region. FUNAI’s data (National Foundation for the Indigenous) showed that the indigenous people continue to suffer from disease, poor healthcare, loss of native culture, and recurring incursions, especially in rain forests (National Native News, 2017).
Historical Antecedents of the Racial Issue
Often contrasted with the United States, Brazilian post slavery race relations were said to be harmonious, tolerant, and devoid of prejudice or discrimination. The image of presumed equality was based primarily on Brazil’s unparalleled level of miscegenation among European, African, and indigenous peoples. Widespread intermixing of the population gave rise to a unique pattern of social differentiation in which, allegedly, ‘racial appearances’ (phenotype) rather than ‘origin was key’. Due to the resulting ambiguity of racial identity, many Brazilians denied the existence of race or racism in their country. Race relations in Brazil, as a result, received much less attention among social scientists in Brazil. However, recent empirical research has amply documented the persistence of racial prejudice and discrimination. Brazil’s image of racial equality has eroded greatly over the past two decades.
Today, vigorous public debate over Brazil’s image of racial equality has displaced the ideology of ‘racial democracy’.4 The overwhelming evidence makes it clear that racial inequality, prejudice, and discrimination are Brazil’s social reality. Scholars have often argued that one of the basic determinants of contemporary racial inequality is the geographic polarization of Brazil’s economy and population (Andrews, 1992, Figueiredo, 2015; Skidmore, 1992). Of the total population, it was found that Afro-Brazilians lived