14.06.2015 Views

Living Standards Measurements Study - Serbia 2002 - 2007

Living Standards Measurements Study - Serbia 2002 - 2007

Living Standards Measurements Study - Serbia 2002 - 2007

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.

support from authorities to fill in applications for<br />

claims.<br />

Of those who applied, 61% of the poor and 37%<br />

of the non poor received MOP during the last 12<br />

months. For those respondents who received MOP<br />

the average length of time they had been receiving<br />

payments was two years and eight months (with<br />

virtually no differences between poor and non poor<br />

households).<br />

Only 6.7 percent of poor households applied<br />

for humanitarian aid in the previous 12 months<br />

(none of the non poor households claimed). Of the<br />

poor households who applied, 38% actually<br />

received humanitarian support during the last twelve<br />

months. An extremely small number of poor<br />

households applied for a one-off municipal cash<br />

subsidy (4.3 percent) and of these a tiny minority<br />

were successful in receiving it (1.2%). Only 10<br />

percent of poor households in the survey used the<br />

CSW in the last 12 months (compared to 3% of non<br />

poor households).<br />

Table 6.3. Reasons why respondents did not take up a particular benefit by poverty status<br />

Didn’t know about<br />

the benefit<br />

Don’t know how to<br />

apply<br />

I know I don’t meet<br />

the criteria<br />

I don’t need this<br />

benefit<br />

Admin procedure is<br />

too complicated<br />

One time municipal cash<br />

MOP<br />

Humanitarian Aid<br />

subsidy<br />

Poor Non Poor Poor Non Poor Poor Non Poor<br />

22 19 23 16 28 22<br />

27 7 29 7 29 6<br />

21 27 20 26 16 23<br />

17 42 17 48 15 44<br />

12 5 12 4 9 4<br />

100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100%<br />

Where columns don’t add to 100% this is due to a small percentage of “other” answers.<br />

6.1.8. Conclusion<br />

The proportion of households receiving some<br />

sort of benefit was lower in <strong>2007</strong> than in <strong>2002</strong> (18<br />

percent in <strong>2002</strong> and 14.7 percent in <strong>2007</strong>). This<br />

reduction is mainly the result of the reduction in the<br />

number of households receiving child allowance,<br />

one-time municipal cash subsidies and humanitarian<br />

aid<br />

When examining only poor households, the<br />

proportion that has received some sort of benefit<br />

increased by 12.4 percent in the last five years.<br />

There has been a significant increase in the number<br />

of poor households receiving attendance and<br />

assistance allowance, veterans and disabled veterans<br />

allowance, MOP, child allowance, parents<br />

allowance and alimony.<br />

There has been a reduction in the number of<br />

poor households receiving humanitarian aid (by<br />

94.3 percent in <strong>2007</strong> compared to <strong>2002</strong>) and those<br />

receiving one-time municipal cash subsidies (61.5<br />

percent reduction).<br />

Approximately 50 percent of poor households<br />

are not particularly well informed about the<br />

possibilities of receiving certain types of benefits.<br />

Social welfare in <strong>Serbia</strong><br />

75

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!