Poverty and Income Inequality in Indonesia

（1）利用1993年和1996年全国社会经济调查（Susenas）的家庭支出数据，我们研究了1994-1996年Inpres德萨Tertinggal（IDT）方案（Inpres欠发达村庄方案）对1993 - 1996年印度尼西亚省内不平等变化的影响。通过回归分析发现，各省人均IDT赠款对1993 - 1996年间省际支出不平等的变化具有显著的改善作用。纳入其他合理的解释变量进一步阐明了IDT计划的稳健效应。总的来说，IDT方案似乎成功地改善了贫困家庭的经济状况，减轻了总体的不平等程度。(2)We利用1985年、1990年和1995年的投入产出表，分析了1985年至1995年印尼工业增长的结构变化和来源。同时，还探讨了产业结构的变化， 关于我们 从1971年到1995年的25年里，在过去三十年中，印度尼西亚似乎成功地实现了从内向型、政府主导的、靠石油出口融资的工业化向外向型、以市场为导向的、以非石油出口为基础的工业化的过渡，其转折期是在1980-85年期间。在1985- 1995年期间，家庭消费的扩大仍然是产出增长的主要来源，因为它占总产出增长的一半左右;相反，政府消费的贡献减少到可以忽略不计的水平，这表明政府部门在产出增长中的作用正在下降。除了面向出口的投资增加之外，出口的扩大也是产出增长的一个关键因素。值得注意的是，出口的扩大在很大程度上是通过非石油出口而不是石油出口实现的。(3)We根据地区一级的国内生产总值和人口数据，使用Theil指数，估计了1993年至1998年印度尼西亚的地区收入不平等情况。在1993年至1997年期间，当印度尼西亚的年平均增长率超过7%时，地区收入不平等显著上升。两阶段嵌套不平等分解分析表明，这主要是由于省内不平等的增加，特别是在廖内、雅加达以及西爪哇和东爪哇。1997年，省内部分占区域收入不平等的50%左右。经济危机使人均国内生产总值增长恢复到1995年的水平，但各省和各区受到的影响并不均衡。1998年，区域收入不平等下降到1993- 1994年的水平。与1993- 1997年相比，1998年下降的四分之三是由于省与省之间不平等的变化，爪哇-巴厘地区发挥了突出作用。这场危机似乎特别影响到爪哇和苏门答腊的城市。少

(1)Using household expenditure data from the 1993 and 1996 National Socio-Economic Survey (Susenas), we examined the effects of the 1994-1996 Inpres Desa Tertinggal(IDT) Program (Inpres Program for Less-developed Villages) on the change in intra-provincial inequality between 1993 and 1996 in Indonesia. Through regression analysis, it was found that per capita IDT grants per province have a significant ameliorating effect on the change in intra-provincial expenditure inequality between 1993 and 1996. The inclusion of other plausible explanatory variables further clarifies the robust effects of the IDT program. Overall, the IDT program appears to have been successful in improving the economic conditions of the poorer households and in mitigating the overall level of inequality.(2)We analyzed structural changes and the sources of industrial growth in Indonesia between 1985 and 1995 by using the 1985, 90, and 95 input-output tables. It also investigates the changes in the pattern of indust … More rial growth over the 25-year period from 1971-95. In the past three decades, Indonesia appears to have achieved a successful transition from an inward-looking, government-led industrialization financed by oil exports to an outward-looking, market-oriented industrialization based on non-oil exports, in which the turning period was during the 1980-85 period. During 1985-95, the expansion, of household consumption remained the main source of output growth as it accounted for about one-half of total output growth ; in contrast, the contribution of government consumption was reduced to a negligible level, signifying the declining role of the government sector in output growth. The expansion off exports was also a key factor in output growth in addition to the rise in export-oriented investments. It is noteworthy that export expansion was made, to a large extent, by non-oil exports, rather than oil exports.(3)We estimated regional income inequality in Indonesia from 1993 to 1998, using a Theil index based upon district-level GDP and population data. Between 1993 and 1997, when Indonesia's annual average growth rate exceeded 7%, regional income inequality rose significantly. A two-stage nested inequality decomposition analysis indicates this was due mainly to an increase in within-province inequality, especially in Riau, Jakarta and West and East Java. In 1997, the within-province component represented about 50% of regional income inequality. The economic crisis caused per capita GDP growth to revert to its 1995 level, but the impact was spread unevenly across provinces and districts. In 1998 regional income inequality declined to its 1993-94 level. In contrast to 1993-97, three-quarters of the 1998 decline was due to a change in between-province inequality, with the Java-Bali region playing a prominent role. The crisis appears particularly to have afflicted urban Java and urban Sumatra. Less