Brazil’s Socioeconomic Performance Index rises 12.8%

The Socioeconomic Performance Index (IDS) in Brazil rose 12.8% between 2008-2009 and 2017-2018, periods of the last two editions of the Family Budget Survey (POF). The indicator went from 5.452 to 6.147. Added to the non-monetary purchases of services, the IDS reaches 6,212, captured only in the 2017-2018 edition.

The categories that were most important in the composition of the marginal effects of the GDI for Brazil, in 2017-2018, were education and access to financial services and standard of living. The percentages were around 19%. Housing reached 16.1% and access to public utility services and health and food, around 14% of the total marginal effects observed in the result of this indicator.

Considering non-monetary purchases of services, the highest IDS in the 2017-2018 period were with the Federal District (6.981) and São Paulo (6.878). The lowest rates were those of Maranhão (4.909) and Pará (5.108). The data are part of the POF 2017-2018: Evolution of quality of life indicators in Brazil, released this Friday (23) by the Brazilian Institute of Geography and Statistics (IBGE).

According to the IBGE, non-monetary income is the sum of all the values ​​of goods and services for which the person did not have to pay. This includes values ​​for goods and services provided by the government, such as health care, and for families who have expenses paid by a relative, as well as estimated rent.

“In the POF, in addition to asking for all the expenses that people had in the reference period, of products and services (on) that they actually disbursed money — for example, they paid for a doctor’s appointment, so this is a monetary service –, but there are cases where the person who paid for the consultation was a relative. This came in a non-monetary way, as in the case of a consultation through the SUS (Sistema Único de Saúde) in which no money is disbursed”, explained IBGE analyst Luciana dos Santos, in a virtual press conference.

According to the survey, all federation units showed gains. Roraima (32%) and Sergipe (25.8%) had the highest growth and Rio Grande do Sul and Rio de Janeiro, the lowest, 9.1% and 5.6%, respectively.

Quality of life

In a period of almost ten years, the loss of quality of life of the population decreased from 0.227 to 0.157. In the period between the 2008-2009 POF and the most recent one, from 2017-2018, the Quality of Life Loss Index (IPQV) had a retraction of 30.8%. “The variation in the IPQV of 30.8%, going from 0.227 to 0.157, reflects not only the improvement of one group, but of all groups. The reduction in the index reflects the improvement both for people who had high losses and for those who had few losses. During this period, the improvement was practically generalized”, said research analyst Leonardo Oliveira, also during the interview.

In the IPQV calculated after the last edition of the POF, the index was 0.183, when the reference person was black or brown, which means a 31.4% drop in relation to the previous survey, and reached 0.122, when he was white , which is equivalent to a decrease of 32.3%. As the rates of the indicators fall at similar levels, inequality between the two groups in relative terms remains, added Oliveira.

Despite the improvements, there were also inequalities in the groups in which the reference person is a woman (-27.6%) and in which the reference person is a man (-33.5%). “The improvement in the case of the group in which the reference person is the man is a little bigger”, highlighted the analyst.

The research showed that, when observing the behavior of the urban and rural regions, the retraction of the aggregate loss approached the same percentage found for Brazil. For the urban area, the IPQV went from 0.205 to 0.142 and, for the rural area, from 0.337 to 0.244. “An additional highlight is that, despite the reduction in loss, the contributions to the composition of the national index remained stable over time, with the contribution of the population living in urban areas around 75% of the IPQV. On the other hand, the population concentrated in the rural area maintained its contribution around 25%”, informed the IBGE.

To continue the series of studies that investigate the quality of life in Brazil, within the experimental statistics of the IBGE, the research makes a temporal analysis of the theme, based on the calculation of the Quality of Life Loss Index and the Socioeconomic Performance Index related to to the 2008-2009 and 2017-2018 editions. This is the first time that the IBGE makes a temporal comparison of the two indicators that measure the quality of life of the population based on data from the last two editions of the POF.

“The IPQV is presented by geographic cuts; variables associated with qualification for social interaction and for entering economic activity, such as education; and variables related to the insertion of the family’s reference person in the labor market. The IDS, in turn, is presented for Brazil and the federative units”, informed the Director of Research at the IBGE, Cimar Azeredo Pereira, in the research presentation text.

The IBGE informed that, due to the relevance and impact of the results achieved with the calculation of the two indices for the 2017-2018 POF, the researchers decided to expand the analysis of these multidimensional indicators for the 2008-2009 survey and observe the evolution of the quality of life of the Brazilian population between the two editions of the survey.

“The temporal analysis undertaken now also has an experimental nature, as it contemplates new statistics, which are still in the test phase and under evaluation”, completed the IBGE.

According to the IBGE, the Family Budget Survey provides information on the domestic budget composition, the living conditions and the nutritional profile of the population, measuring consumption structures, expenses, income and part of the variation in the wealth of families. “It makes it possible, therefore, to draw a profile of the living conditions of the Brazilian population based on the analysis of their domestic budgets.”