Budget Expenditure Elasticity Coefficient for Education and Training According to the Economic Statistics Period 2001

Group 4

Source: ILSSA calculated from the 2010 VHLSS survey of the General Statistics Office [ 136 , 2012, p. 64 ]

Education spending

multi - generational

one person goes to school

in the past 12 months

The poorest household's expenditure in public schools is 1,088 thousand VND, equal to 21.3% of the household's expenditure .

The richest, the lowest level is because he can hear .

preferential policies

education (tuition exemption and reduction policies, etc.). However, current support policies for poor households only cover about 50% of households' educational costs.

Low investment cannot have poor human capital (Table 3.20). [ 136 , 2012, p. 64 ]

high . This is the vicious circle of the group

Table 3.20. Education and training expenses

bin

1 person goes to school

in the past 12 months

by school type , income group, urban-rural, 2010

Unit: Thousand people

Nationwide	Public	Private	Private	Other
Urban	5,354	4.124	10,090	15,759	9,052
Group 1 – poorest	1,328	1,315	1,702	2,375	9,060
Group 2	2,273	2.112	4,249	3,710	2,050
Group 3	2,946	2,809	4,855	2,666	3,390
Group 4	3,800	3,658	5,842	4,326	2,695
Group 5 – the richest	8,677	6.062	13,789	29,707	15,041
Countryside	2.131	2.012	4,571	3,999	2,836
Group 1 – poorest	1.101	1,067	1,860	1,467	1,953
Group 2	1,670	1,624	3.204	1,834	1,552
Group 3	2,275	2,174	4,622	3,615	2,279
Group 4	3,280	3.115	7,448	2,336	2,784
Group 5 – the richest	3,986	3,675	5,363	7,734	7,267
Nationwide	3.113	2,609	7,434	12,805	5.014
Group 1 – poorest	1,120	1,088	1,851	1,826	1,853
Group 2	1,757	1,691	3.404	2,994	1.611
Group 3	2,451	2,332	4,711	2,985	2,558

Maybe you are interested!

3.503	3,338	6,595	3,873	2,744
Group 5 – the richest	6,944	5.109	12,226	25,996	12,344

Group 4

Source: ILSSA calculated from the 2010 VHLSS survey of the General Statistics Office [ 136 , 2012, p. 65 ]

TTKT contributes to improving the quality of education, creating conditions for the state to invest in

construction

infrastructure , investment in upgrading equipment and services

day labor

, dig

Create a team of qualified teachers, improve the lives of all teachers , especially in remote areas and ethnic minority areas.

know

The impact of education and training in Vietnam on economic growth is very clear. A recent study focused on examining the impact of education on economic growth in provinces/cities in Vietnam through a measure of the educational level of the labor force, which is "Average years of schooling". The regression results show that "Average years of schooling" of the labor force has a positive impact on GDP and GDP/labor. The estimated coefficient varies between 0.10 and 0.14 for GDP or 0.10 and 0.16 for GDP/labor, implying that: if all other factors remain unchanged, a 1% increase in the average years of schooling will increase GDP by 0.10 to 0.14/year or GDP/labor by 0.10 to 0.16%/year. In Vietnam, the average education level of the labor force in most provinces varied from 5 to 9 years in the period 2000 - 2006, so when "Average years of schooling" increased by 1 year, it can be predicted that the country's income would increase by 1.5 - 2.7%/year. The estimated coefficient of education level when measured by "Average years of schooling" is quite low. This shows that the role of education has not been clearly demonstrated as physical capital and labor, or in other words, the Vietnamese economy still relies on extensive growth (increasing input factors such as physical capital and labor) rather than intensive growth (based on accumulation of human capital and technological progress). The relationship between education and training services and economic growth is shown in the elasticity coefficient of expenditure on education and training according to economic growth (Table 3.21). [ 136, 2012, p.66 ]

Table 3.21. Elasticity coefficient of budget expenditure for education and training according to economic growth rate in the period 2001 - 2014

2001	2002	2003	2004	2005	2006	2007	2008	2009	2010	2011	2012	2013	2014
1. Growth
Growth rate (%)	6.89	7.08	7.34	7.79	8.4	8.23	8.46	6.18	5.32	6.7	6.5	5.32	5.42	5.98
State budget expenditure for education (billion dong)	15,432	17,844	22,881	25,343	28,611	10,056	10,820	10,840	14,730	19,000	22,600	27,920	30,881	30,360
Stretching the budget for education education according to TTKT		5.66	7.68	1.75	1.64	32.0	2.71	-0.006	-2.57	1.11	-6.34	-1.29	5.64	0.16

Source: Author's calculation based on data from GSO

With stable and developing economic growth, the State has abundant budget resources to develop and invest in education and training. Table 2.21 shows that when the economic growth rate increases by 1%, spending on education and training increases significantly. In 2002, budget spending on education increased by 5.66%, in 2003 it increased by 7.68%, in 2007 it increased by 9.53%, in 2010 it increased by 0.49%, in 2012 it increased by 1.29%, in 2014 it increased by 0.16%. In general, economic growth increases the amount of money from the State budget spent on education, but this relationship is not uniform over the years. This shows that the increase in State budget spending on education is not only mainly linked to economic growth, but also depends on many other factors, especially on the results of implementing other socio-economic programs.

3.2.1.5.2. Weighing

minimum health care system

Health care plays an important role in improving human health .

people, improve quality

g population and food

show

social equity is a factor

important to promote sustainable economic growth. In recent years , the State has increased investment in economic growth for primary health care , strengthening

quality of health care at the grassroots level.

2009, Law

The emergence of health insurance has increased access to health care .

belong to

People come to health services. The number of people participating in health insurance is increasing every year .

2011 reached 58.5 million

people , accounting for 67 % of the country 's population , in which the State supports the purchase

Health insurance for 45.6 million

people , accounting for 78% of eligible people

core

support

alone

part for 16.8 million

people and total support for 28.8 million

people ) . Special

among the ethnic people

minority, the rate of people supported is up to 83%.

Primary health care indicators have achieved remarkable results.

Stage

2001 - 2011, the infant mortality rate decreased from 44.4 % to

15.5%, the mortality rate of children under 5 years old, from 58 % to 24% and the rate of malnutrition in children under 5 years old with underweight has decreased significantly , estimated at 17.3%, malnutrition in children under 5 years old with underweight has decreased to 27.5 % . In 2011 , 96% of women

pregnant

Vaccinations are given to over 90 % of children under 1 year old.

fully vaccinated

The rate of pregnant women receiving 3 or more prenatal check- ups compared to the average of the Vietnamese population is 73.2.

83.4%, average life expectancy

In 2010, over 40% of the country 's population (42.1% of the urban population and 40.5 % of the rural population) went to medical facilities for examination and treatment , including those who were not sick , had no disease, or had no trauma but went for health check- ups , pregnancy check - ups , abortions, IUD placement, fertilization , and vaccinations (See Appendix Figure 3.5) .

Among those who use health care services , the rate of use

Health insurance or

sleep apnea

accounted for 66.7% (72.6% urban and 64.1% non-urban)

rural areas). Assume that 100% of the population has health insurance provided by the State .

free of charge, but a segment of the population with low incomes has to pay out of pocket for it.

medical examination and treatment

The rate of medical examination and treatment of the urban poor group with health insurance is lower than that of the rich group (64% compared to 78 %) (Tables 3.22, 3.23a and 3.23b).

Table 3.22. Turn structure

people who have not been sick in the past 12 months according to

forms of medical examination and treatment , urban - rural and income groups

Treatment of infection	Outpatient medical examination and treatment
Urban	6.6	93.4
Group 1 – poorest	10.6	89.4
Group 2	11.0	89.0
Group 3	6.6	93.4
Group 4	6.4	93.6
Group 5 – the richest	5.7	94.3
Countryside	8.5	91.5
Group 1 – poorest	10.0	90.0
Group 2	9.8	90.2
Group 3	7.7	92.3
Group 4	6.9	93.1

8.4	91.6
Nationwide	7.9	92.1
Group 1 – poorest	10.0	90.0
Group 2	10.0	90.0
Group 3	7.4	92.6
Group 4	6.7	93.3
Group 5 – the richest	6.8	93.2

Group 5 – the richest

Source: ILSSA calculated from the 2010 VHLSS by the General Statistics Office [ 136 , 2012, p. 67 ]

Table 3.23a. Turn structure

inpatients by type of medical facility ,

urban, rural and income groups

State Hospital	Ward health station	Regional clinic area	Private healthcare	Other
Urban	90.0	2.4	1.9	4.7	0.9
Group 1 – poorest	92.2	5.2	1.3	1.3	0.0
Group 2	88.9	3.5	4.4	1.5	1.8
Group 3	91.9	2.0	2.2	3.5	0.3
Group 4	91.5	3.4	1.1	3.1	0.9
Group 5 – the richest	88.6	1.3	1.4	7.7	1.0
Countryside	80.7	8.5	4.5	4.9	1.4
Group 1 – poorest	77.2	13.1	6.2	2.3	1.2
Group 2	82.0	9.7	4.5	3.5	0.3
Group 3	85.2	5.1	3.7	4.1	1.9
Group 4	82.7	5.9	4.1	7.2	0.0
Group 5 – the richest	74.5	8.1	3.4	9.5	4.5
Nationwide	83.2	6.9	3.8	4.8	1.3
Group 1 – poorest	78.3	12.5	5.8	2.2	1.1
Group 2	83.2	8.6	4.5	3.1	0.6
Group 3	86.8	4.3	3.4	4.0	1.5

85.7	5.1	3.1	5.8	0.3
Group 5 – the richest	81.6	4.6	2.4	8.6	2.7

Group 4

Source: ILSSA calculated from the 2010 VHLSS survey of the General Statistics Office [ 136 , 2012, p. 67 ]

Table 3.23b. Turn structure

inpatients by type of medical facility ,

urban, rural and income groups

State Hospital	Ward health station	Regional clinic area	Private healthcare	Other (including doctor)
Nationwide	83.2	6.9	3.8	4.8	1.3
Group 1 – poorest	78.3	12.5	5.8	2.2	1.1
Group 2	83.2	8.6	4.5	3.1	0.6
Group 3	86.8	4.3	3.4	4.0	1.5
Group 4	85.7	5.1	3.1	5.8	0.3
Group 5 – the richest	81.6	4.6	2.4	8.6	2.7

Source: ILSSA calculated from the 2010 VHLSS survey of the General Statistics Office [ 136,2012 , p. 68 ]

Among those who do not have a medical examination , the two lowest income groups have the highest rates of

internal medicine

higher than the rest of the group

. The burden of costs makes

listeners tend to be lazy

choose

public health facility

(patient)

state or

commune/ward health stations) while the rich often stay away .

choose

hospital

State

private medical facilities . The relationship between medical services and economic growth is shown in the coefficient of

State budget allocation for health care according to TTKT (Table 3.24).

Table 3.24. Elasticity coefficient of health budget expenditure with economic growth in the period 2001 - 2014

2001	2002	2003	2004	2005	2006	2007	2008	2009	2010	2011	2012	2013	2014
1. Growth
Growth rate (%)	6.89	7.08	7.34	7.79	8.4	8.23	8.46	6.18	5.32	6.7	6.5	5.32	5.42	5.98
State budget expenditure for health (billion VND)	4.211	3,453	1,333	1.51	7,608	4,294	3.142	3,995	8.63	12,000	10,200	12.24	13,862	13,130
Elastic budget expenditure for medical according to TTKT		-6.5	-16.7	2.1	51.5	21.5	-9.5	-1.00	-8.3	1.50	5.0	1.1	7.04	0.51

Source: Author's calculation based on data from GSO

Over the years, the economic growth rate has changed a lot, leading to the increase or decrease of the health budget depending on economic development conditions. In 2007, the economic growth rate reached 8.46%, the health budget was 3,142 billion VND. By 2012, the economic growth rate decreased to 5.03%, so the health budget was 12,240 billion VND. By 2014, the economic growth rate increased to 5.98%, so the health budget was 13,130 billion VND. Thus, the economic growth rate has a great impact on the health budget. On the contrary, when the health sector is invested in, the hospital and clinic system is complete, and the medical staff is highly skilled, people's health is guaranteed, they will be treated when they are sick, and the country will have a higher quality human resource. For the economy to grow well, it is necessary to have a healthy workforce with the ability to work to create products for society, contributing to the development of the family and social economy. The elasticity of state budget expenditure for health care with economic growth is quite clear. In 2004, the economic growth rate reached 1%, the state budget for health care increased by 2.1%, in 2005 it was 51.5%, in 2006 it was 21.5%, in 2011 it was 5%, in 2012 it was 1.1%, in 2014 it was 0.51%. In general, economic growth increases the amount of state budget spent on health care, but this relationship is not uniform over the years. This shows that the increase in state budget expenditure for health care is not only mainly linked to economic growth, but also depends on many other factors, especially the results of implementing other socio-economic programs.

3.2.1.5.3. Housing

In recent times, a series of policies, programs and projects have been implemented nationwide to improve housing conditions for households, especially poor households, social policy households, etc. (Table 3.25).

Table 3.25. Structure of households with housing by type of house, urban - rural area and income group, 2010

Unit:%

Shared	Solid house try	House for sale strong	House lacking strong	Home simple
Urban	100.0	46.1	48.9	3.0	2.0
Group 1 – poorest	100.0	31.2	43.5	14.0	11.3
Group 2	100.0	33.5	52.9	7.7	5.9
Group 3	100.0	38.8	53.7	4.2	3.3

100.0	44.4	52.3	2.3	1.0
Group 5 – the richest	100.0	53.9	44.8	0.9	0.4
Countryside	100.0	50.4	32.8	9.5	7.3
Group 1 – poorest	100.0	41.1	29.2	16.2	13.5
Group 2	100.0	51.6	29.1	10.7	8.6
Group 3	100.0	54.7	32.6	7.6	5.1
Group 4	100.0	55.5	36.2	5.0	3.3
Group 5 – the richest	100.0	52.4	42.0	3.6	2.0
Nationwide	100.0	49.1	37.7	7.5	5.7
Group 1 – poorest	100.0	40.4	30.2	16.0	13.4
Group 5 – the richest	100.0	53.3	43.6	2.0	1.1

Group 4

Source: ILSSA calculated from VHLSS 2010 of GSO [ 136, 2012, p. 68 ]

Looking at Table 3.25, we see that by 2010, nearly 50% of households nationwide had solid houses, ensuring safe and convenient living conditions. However, 7.5% of households still had to live in non-solid houses and 5.7% of households lived in simple, temporary, unsafe houses. Compared to groups of households with average or higher living standards, the proportion of poor households living in houses of lower quality is quite large.

3.2.1.5.4. Clean water for daily life

Clean water supply is a pressing issue for both the poor and non-poor (Table 3.26).

Table 3.26. Household structure by main source of drinking water, urban - rural area and income group, 2010

Unit: %

Shared

Private tap water

Tap water

add

Well drilling has

pump

well

Other

Urban

100.0

66.5

1.8

15.3

8.2

8.1

Group 1 – poorest

100.0

34.8

1.7

16.6

22.5

24.4

100.0	47.0	1.9	18.5	18.8	13.9
Group 3	100.0	58.4	2.0	18.9	11.4	9.3
Group 4	100.0	66.6	2.0	16.3	7.8	7.3
Group 5 – the richest	100.0	76.6	1.7	12.6	3.7	5.4
Countryside	100.0	9.2	1.3	30.7	23.5	35.3
Group 1 – poorest	100.0	4.3	1.0	19.5	26.1	49.1
Group 2	100.0	8.1	1.4	29.0	26.9	34.6
Group 3	100.0	9.5	1.2	33.8	23.2	32.3
Group 4	100.0	1.3	1.4	35.9	20.7	29.7
Group 5 – the richest	100.0	1.1	1.5	42.6	16.5	23.3
Nationwide	100.0	26.7	1.4	26.0	18.8	27.1
Group 1 – poorest	100.0	6.4	1.1	19.3	25.8	47.4
Group 2	100.0	13.9	1.5	27.4	25.7	31.5
Group 3	100.0	22.0	1.4	30.0	20.2	26.4
Group 4	100.0	33.5	1.6	28.3	15.6	21.0
Group 5 – the richest	100.0	52.2	1.6	24.7	8.9	12.6

Budget Expenditure Elasticity Coefficient for Education and Training According to the Economic Statistics Period 2001 - 2014

Comment