1. Art and Diseño

Economic
and Social
Panorama
of the Community
of Latin American
and Caribbean States,
2014
Alicia Bárcena
Executive Secretary
Antonio Prado
Deputy Executive Secretary
Luis Fidel Yáñez
Officer in Charge, Office of the Secretary of the Commission
Ricardo Pérez
Chief, Publications and Web Services Division
This document was prepared by Enrique Oviedo, Political Affairs Officer at the Office of the Secretary of the Commission of the Economic Commission
for Latin America and the Caribbean (ECLAC).
Distr.: Limited • LC/L.3946 • January 2015 • Original: Spanish
Printed at United Nations • Santiago, Chile
Contents
Foreword7
I. Economic panorama
9
A.Growth
11
B.Employment
13
C.Terms of trade
15
D.Fiscal policy
17
II. Foreign direct investment
19
A.Foreign direct investment in Latin America and the Caribbean
21
B.Latin American and Caribbean transnational corporations: strategies
and outcomes
23
C.Effects of foreign direct investment on employment in Latin America
and the Caribbean
24
III. The region in the world economy
25
A.Trade
27
B.Value chains
28
C.Production integration
28
IV. Social panorama
31
A.Poverty (measured by income)
33
B.Income distribution
35
C.Residential segregation and the reproduction of inequalities
36
D.Social spending in Latin America
37
V. Population
39
A.Urbanization and demographic transition
41
B.Diversity in urbanization in Latin America
43
3
Economic Commission for Latin America and the Caribbean (ECLAC)
VI. Gender equality
45
A.Economic autonomy
47
B.Decision-making autonomy
48
C.Physical autonomy
49
D.Violence against women
50
Table
Table V.1
Latin America: distribution of countries by stage of urban transition process,
1950, 1970, 1990 and 2010
43
Figure I.1
Selected regions and countries: GDP growth, 2007-2015
11
Figure I.2
Index of international commodity prices, weekly values, January 2013 to November 2014
11
Figure I.3
Latin America and the Caribbean: GDP growth rates, 2014
12
Figure I.4
Latin America and the Caribbean: economic growth and variation
in the urban employment rate, 2000-2014
13
Latin America (10 countries): participation, employment and unemployment rates,
rolling years, first quarter 2011 to third quarter 2014
14
Latin America and the Caribbean (16 countries): year-on-year variation
in urban participation and employment rates, average for first to third quarters of 2014
14
Figure I.7
Latin America and the Caribbean: variation in the terms of trade, 2011-2014
15
Figure I.8
United States, European Union, China and the other BRICS: year-on-year
variation in imports, first quarter of 2011 to third quarter of 2014
16
Figure I.9
Latin America (19 countries): central government fiscal indicators, 2005-2014
17
Figure I.10
The Caribbean (13 countries and territories): central government fiscal indicators,
2005-2014 17
Latin America and the Caribbean: total fiscal revenues and central government
tax revenues by subregion and country grouping, 2013-2014
18
Latin America and the Caribbean: disaggregated central government public
spending by subregion and country grouping, 2013-2014
18
Latin America and the Caribbean: foreign direct investment inflows and FDI inflows
as a proportion of GDP, 1990-2013
21
Latin America and the Caribbean (selected countries): inward foreign
direct investment, 2012-2013
22
Figure II.3
Latin America and the Caribbean: outflows of foreign direct investment, 1995-2013
23
Figure II.4
Latin America and the Caribbean: foreign direct investment by the main investor
countries, annual averages, 2000-2013
23
Figures
Figure I.5
Figure I.6
Figure I.11
Figure I.12
Figure II.1
Figure II.2
4
Economic and Social Panorama of the Community of Latin American and Caribbean States, 2014
Figure III.1
Latin America and the Caribbean: year-on-year variation in foreign trade
by value and volume, January to June 2014
27
Figure III.2 Selected groupings: intra-group exports as a share of total exports, 2008-2013
28
Figure III.3
Latin America (selected countries): distribution by origin of parts
and components imports, 2013
29
Figure IV.1
Latin America: poverty and indigence, 1980-2014 33
Figure IV.2
Latin America (14 countries): ratio between rates of poverty among people
of between 0 and 14 years and between 15 to 24 years in respect
of those among people 55 and over, around 2013
34
Latin America (15 countries): annual variation of Gini coefficient,
2002-2008 and 2008-2013 35
Brazil: women aged 19 who are mothers and who have always resided
in the same municipality, by per capita household income and favela
residence or non-residence, 2000 36
Latin America and the Caribbean (21 countries): public social spending
and total public spending as shares of GDP, and social public spending
as a share of total spending, 1990-1991 to 2012-2013
37
World, Latin America and developed and developing regions: urban population
estimates and projections, 1950-2050
41
Latin America: estimated average annual growth of the total, rural and urban
populations, by five-year periods, 1950-2015
42
Latin America: estimated average annual growth rate of the total,
rural and urban populations, by five-year periods, 1950-2015
42
Figure V.4
Latin America: urban population and rate of urbanization, 1950-2010
44
Figure VI.1
Latin America (17 countries): economically active female population
by income quintile, latest data available
47
Latin America (16 countries): population without own income, by sex,
latest period available
47
Latin America (19 countries) and the Caribbean (14 countries): elected
women in national parliaments, single house or lower house,
by existence of quota laws, 2013
48
Figure VI.4
Latin America and the Caribbean: elected women councillors and mayors, 2002-2012
48
Figure VI.5
Latin America (11 countries): women aged 15-19 who are mothers,
initial data and latest data available
49
Latin America (7 countries): women who have experienced some form of physical
or sexual violence by their partner or former partner, by marital status
50
Latin America (7 countries): women who had ever experienced intimate-partner or formerpartner physical violence, by educational level, most recent survey data available
50
Figure IV.3
Figure IV.4
Figure IV.5
Figure V.1
Figure V.2
Figure V.3
Figure VI.2
Figure VI.3
Figure VI.6
Figure VI.7
5
Economic Commission for Latin America and the Caribbean (ECLAC)
Figure VI.8
Figure VI.9
6
Latin America (selected countries): intimate-partner physical or sexual violence
among women aged 15-49 who are married or in a union, by language spoken
in the home, around 2010
51
Latin America (7 countries): femicide or homicide of women for reasons of gender
and women killed by a current or former intimate partner, latest data available
51
Figure VI.10 Latin America (12 countries) and Iberian Peninsula (2 countries): women killed
by an intimate partner or former partner, latest period available
52
Figure VI.11 The Caribbean (8 countries): women killed by an intimate partner or former partner,
latest period available
52
Foreword
This issue of the Economic and Social Panorama of the Community of Latin American and Caribbean States is a contribution
by the Economic Commission for Latin America and the Caribbean (ECLAC) to the third Summit of Heads of State
and Government of the Community of Latin American and Caribbean States (CELAC), to be held in San José in
January 2015.
This document is based on excerpts from some of the annual flagships published by the Commission in 2014:
Statistical Yearbook for Latin America and the Caribbean 2013 (LC/G.2582-P); Demographic Observatory 2013 (LC/G.2615-P);
Economic Survey of Latin America and the Caribbean 2014 (LC/G.2619-P); Preliminary Overview of the Economies of Latin
America and the Caribbean 2014 (LC/G.2632-P); Foreign Direct Investment in Latin America and the Caribbean 2013
(LC/G.2615-P); Latin America and the Caribbean in the World Economy 2014 (LG/G.2625-P) “Social Panorama Social of
Latin America 2014. Briefing Paper”; as well as the Gender Equality Observatory of Latin America and the Caribbean. Annual
Report 2013-2014 (LC/G.2626). All these publications are available online at http://www.cepal.org/en/publications.
ECLAC has had the opportunity to support CELAC since its inception, at the meetings at which it was was first
conceived and took shape —in Costa de Sauípe, Brazil; Montego Bay, Jamaica; and Riviera Maya, Mexico— as well
as at its establishment in Caracas in 2011. Indeed, we view its creation as a historic event of the utmost importance
for the region.
This document is the second such report prepared for a CELAC meeting; the first was prepared in 2014 for the
second CELAC Summit held in Havana. It testifies to our ongoing commitment to the countries of the region and, if
they so decide, it could be made a regular annual publication to support the work of CELAC.
On this occasion, the report has six sections summarizing the situation in Latin America and the Caribbean as
regards economic, social and population affairs, as well as foreign direct investment, trade and gender equality.
We are committed to forging the development of Latin America and the Caribbean from within the region itself,
hence our enthusiasm for these efforts and the conviction we share with the Heads of State and Government, gathered
in Caracas, who declared “that the unity and political, economic, social and cultural integration of Latin America
and the Caribbean constitute both a fundamental aspiration of the peoples […] and a requirement for the Region to
successfully confront the challenges before us”.
7
Economic Commission for Latin America and the Caribbean (ECLAC)
CELAC is the most significant political achievement of the region in recent times and ECLAC offers these
contributions as a token of its commitment to the Community’s consolidation and success.
Alicia Bárcena
Executive Secretary
Economic Commission for Latin America
and the Caribbean (ECLAC)
8
I. Economic panorama
9
A. Growth
10.8
10
9.3
8
5.9
6
4
4.7
4.8
4.7
4.4
2.6
2.8 2.4
2.3
2.1
1.5
1.6
1.3
1.2
2 1.8
0.3
0
2.8
2.8
2.2
2.1
1.8
1.5
1.4
1.2
0.8
0.3
1.6
0.0
World
Developed
countries
United
States
2007-2010
0.7 0.5
Japan
2011
1.4
0.8
0.2
0.6
-2
7.7 7.7
7.3
7.0
5.9
3.1
2012
Eurozone
2013
Developing
countries
2014 a
China
2015 b
Source: Economic Commission for Latin America and the Caribbean (ECLAC), on the basis
of United Nations, Global Economic Outlook, New York, Department of Economic and Social
Affairs, October 2014.
a
Estimates.
b
Projections.
Figure I.2
Index of international commodity prices, weekly values, January
2013 to November 2014
(Base value at January 2013=100)
110
100
90
80
70
Oct
Dec
Sep
Jul
Aug
Jun
Apr
2013
Metals
May
Feb
Mar
Dec
Jan
Oct
Nov
Sep
Jul
Aug
Jun
Apr
60
May
■■
(Percentages)
12
Mar
■■
Figure I.1
Selected regions and countries: GDP growth, 2007-2015
Jan
■■
The world economy improved slightly in 2014, amid a mixed
performance from developed countries and a slowdown
in emerging economies.
Global economic growth increased to 2.6%, compared with
2.4% in 2013. Trends were varied among the developed
countries. The United Kingdom stood out with economic
growth accelerating to 3.1% in 2014, up from 1.7% the
previous year. The United States economy grew by 2.1%,
slightly down on the 2013 figure of 2.2%, albeit with a
second-half performance that bodes well for greater gains
in 2015. Eurozone growth was again limited in 2014, with
marked contrasts among countries.
Growth in developing economies continued to slow in 2014,
while nevertheless remaining far more buoyant than in
the developed world. On average, developing economies
grew by an estimated 4.4% in 2014, with China’s growth
slowing from 7.7% in 2013 to 7.3% in 2014, and India’s
rising to 5.4%, from 4.7% in 2013.
Raw material prices resumed a downward trend, especially
in the second half of 2014, albeit with variation from one
commodity to another. The estimated average price fall
for the group of raw materials steepened to 10.5% in 2014,
from a 5.2% drop in 2013. The price of metals fell by 2.3%
in 2014, having tumbled by 16.7% in 2013. Food prices were
down by about 6.9%, compared with a 15.5% fall in 2013;
while energy prices plunged by some 17%, following
a 4.6% climb in 2013.
Feb
■■
2014
Foods
Commodities
Energy
Source: Economic Commission for Latin America and the Caribbean (ECLAC), on the basis of
Bloomberg and JP Morgan Commodity Index.
11
Economic Commission for Latin America and the Caribbean (ECLAC)
■■
■■
■■
The GDP of the Latin American and Caribbean region grew
by 1.1% in 2014, its slowest rate of expansion since 2009.
Considerable differences were observed between countries,
with the sluggish regional rate largely determined by
slow or negative growth in some of the largest economies:
Argentina (-0.2%), the Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela
(-3.0%), Brazil (0.2%) and Mexico (2.1%).The median GDP
growth rate for the region was 2.8%, broadly in line with
the 2013 figure.
The region’s fastest-growing economies were the Dominican
Republic and Panama (6.0% in both cases), followed by
the Plurinational State of Bolivia (5.2%), Colombia (4.8%)
and Nicaragua (4.5%). Argentina, the Bolivarian Republic
of Venezuela and Saint Lucia contracted by 0.2%, 3.0%
and 1.4%, respectively, while the other economies grew at
rates ranging from 0.5% to 4%.
By subregion, South America posted economic expansion
of 0.7% (as against 2.8% in 2013), while Central America
(including the Spanish-speaking Caribbean and Haiti)
expanded by 3.7% (4.0% in 2013). The Mexican economy
grew by 2.1% in 2014, compared with 1.1% in 2013. The
English- and Dutch-speaking Caribbean likewise saw
growth accelerate on previous years, reaching 1.9% in 2014.
Figure I.3
Latin America and the Caribbean: GDP growth rates, 2014 a
(Percentages on the basis of dollars at constant 2010 prices)
A. Latin America
Panama
Dominican Republic
Bolivia (Plur. State of)
Colombia
Nicaragua
Paraguay
Guatemala
Ecuador
Central America
Costa Rica
Haiti
Uruguay
Honduras
Peru
El Salvador
Mexico
The Caribbean
Chile
Cuba
Latin America and the Caribbean
South America
Brazil
Argentina
Venezuela (Bol. Rep. of)
-3.0
-4
-3
0.2
-0.2
-2
-1
0
1.1
1.1
0.7
1
3.0
2.8
2.2
2.1
1.9
1.8
2
3
6.0
6.0
5.2
4.8
4.5
4.0
4.0
4.0
3.7
3.6
3.5
3.5
4
5
6
7
B. The Caribbean
Guyana
4.5
Suriname
3.5
Belize
3.4
Saint Kitts and Nevis
2.8
Antigua and Barbuda
2.7
Bahamas
2.3
Saint Vincent and
the Grenadines
The Caribbean
2.2
1.9
Trinidad and Tobago
1.8
Grenada
1.3
Jamaica
1.2
Dominica
1.1
Barbados
0.0
Saint Lucia
-1.4
-2
-1
0
1
2
3
4
5
Source: Economic Commission for Latin America and the Caribbean (ECLAC), on the basis
of official figures.
a
The figures for 2014 are projections.
12
Economic and Social Panorama of the Community of Latin American and Caribbean States, 2014
B. Employment
■■
■■
Figure I.4
Latin America and the Caribbean: economic growth and variation
in the urban employment rate, 2000-2014
(Percentages and percentage points)
7
1.0
6
0.8
5
0.6
4
0.4
3
0.2
2
1
0
0.0
2000
2002
2004
2006
2008
2010
-1
2012
2014
a
- 0.2
- 0.4
-2
Variation in the urban employment rate
(percentage points)
■■
One significant consequence of low economic growth was
weak job creation, leading to a sharper-than-expected
0.4 percentage point fall in the urban employment rate.
However, despite weak job creation, the urban open
unemployment rate edged down from 6.2% to 6.0%.
Until 2012, declining unemployment reflected a faster
rise in employment than in participation, but since 2013
participation has fallen more heavily than employment.
The labour performance of the region’s countries was rather
mixed. The regional outcome was determined by similar
trends posted in Argentina, Brazil and Mexico, while a
variety of results were observed in the other countries.
Economic growth (percentages)
■■
- 0.6
-3
Economic growth
Variation in the urban employment rate
Source: Economic Commission for Latin America and the Caribbean (ECLAC), on the basis
of official figures.
a
Figures for 2014 are projections.
13
Economic Commission for Latin America and the Caribbean (ECLAC)
■■
Although job creation has been weak —especially in wage
employment— the labour market situation remains relatively
benign. The open unemployment rate is at historically low
levels, while other positive aspects include a widespread
fall in the hourly underemployment rate, as well as real
wage increases (measured at 1.3% according the weighted
Figure I.5
Latin America (10 countries): a participation, employment and
unemployment rates, rolling years, first quarter 2011 to third
quarter 2014
Figure I.6
Latin America and the Caribbean (16 countries): year-on-year
variation in urban participation and employment rates, average
for first to third quarters of 2014
(Percentages)
61
■■
average of 10 countries, or 1.7% by the simple average of
those countries).
Nevertheless, slower job creation is affecting women more
than men, bringing an end to previous trends in which
some gender labour gaps were narrowing.
(Percentage points)
7.5
60
2
7.0
6.5
57
6.0
56
5.5
55
54
5.0
Q1
Q2
Q3
2011
Q4
Q1
Q2
Q3
2012
Employment rate (left scale)
Q4
Q1
Q2
2013
Q3
Q4
Q1
Q2
Q3
2014
Participation rate (left scale)
Unemployment rate (right scale)
Source: Economic Commission for Latin America and the Caribbean (ECLAC), on the basis
of official figures.
a
Includes Argentina, Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela, Brazil, Chile, Colombia, Ecuador, Jamaica,
Mexico, Peru and Uruguay.
14
Variation in the participation rate
59
58
GUA
DOM
1.5
URY
CRI
1
VEN
0.5
PAN
-1.5
-1
ECU
0
- 0.5
MEX
ARG
CHI
0
BHS
COL
PRY
0.5
PER
- 0.5
Latin America
and the Caribbean
-1
1
1.5
2
JAM
BRA
-1.5
Variation in the employment rate
Source: Economic Commission for Latin America and the Caribbean (ECLAC), on the basis
of official figures.
Economic and Social Panorama of the Community of Latin American and Caribbean States, 2014
C. Terms of trade
■■
■■
■■
Prices for the region’s raw material exports have continued
to slide. The terms of trade have accordingly continued to
deteriorate, as well, and were down by 2.6% in 2014 for
the region overall, although with some differences from
one country to another.
In South America the downturn (-2.7%) is the result of
lower prices for the subregion’s export commodities,
which eroded the terms of trade of the main exporters of
mining products and metals, Brazil (2.7%), Chile and Peru
(2.8%). The hydrocarbon exporters —Bolivarian Republic
of Venezuela, Colombia, Ecuador and Plurinational State
of Bolivia— also saw a significant decline (-4.6%) in their
terms of trade. However, the countries that export agroindustrial products, Argentina, Paraguay and Uruguay,
posted a smaller term-of-trade loss, at -0.4%, than the
subregion overall.
The Central American countries recorded a 1.1% terms-oftrade gain, thanks to higher prices for some of their export
products and lower prices for energy imports. Terms of
trade for the Caribbean food- and fuel- importing countries
(that is, the Caribbean not including Trinidad and Tobago)
are set to post a stable gain of 0.1%. Despite the large share
of manufactures in its export structure, Mexico’s terms of
trade were down by 2.4%, similarly to the figure for the
region overall, owing to the steep price drops for its export
commodities (gold, silver, steel and oil).
Figure I.7
Latin America and the Caribbean: variation in the terms of trade,
2011-2014 a
(Percentages)
Mexico
Brazil
Latin America and the Caribbean
Central America, Haiti and the Dominican Republic
Hydrocarbon exporters (Bolivia (Plur. State of),
Colombia, Ecuador, Venezuela (Bol. Rep. of),
Trinidad and Tobago)
Agricultural product exporters
(Argentina, Paraguay and Uruguay)
Mineral- and metal-exporters (Chile, Peru)
The Caribbean (excl. Trinidad and Tobago)
-15
-10
2011
-5
0
2012
5
2013
10
15
2014 a
Source: Economic Commission for Latin America and the Caribbean (ECLAC), on the basis
of official figures.
a
The figures for 2014 are projections.
15
Economic Commission for Latin America and the Caribbean (ECLAC)
■■
Although the eurozone emerged from recession in the
second half of 2013, its year-on-year quarterly growth rate
has remained stubbornly below 1% and its recovery is likely
to be a lengthy process. China’s economy has continued to
slow as the country seeks to shift its development model
away from exports and investment towards one based
chiefly on domestic consumption. Conversely, growth
is picking up in the United States, which has boosted its
imports from Latin America. United States imports are
gathering strength while those of the European Union
(28 countries, extraregional trade) are still growing only
slowly. China’s imports have flattened out at a relatively
low level compared with previous years, and the rest of
the BRICS countries (Brazil, the Russian Federation, India
and South Africa) turned in a negative performance in the
first half of 2014.
Figure I.8
United States, European Union,a China and the other BRICS: b
year-on-year variation in imports, first quarter of 2011 to third
quarter of 2014
(Percentages)
40
30
20
10
0
-10
Q1
Q2
Q3
2011
United States
Q4
Q1
Q2
Q3
2012
European Union
Q4
Q1
Q2
Q3
Q4
Q1
2013
BRICS (excluding China)
Q2
Q3
2014
China
Source: Economic Commission for Latin America and the Caribbean (ECLAC), on the basis of
figures from the World Trade Organization (WTO).
a
Extraregional trade of 28 countries.
b
Brazil, Russian Federation, India, China and South Africa.
16
Economic and Social Panorama of the Community of Latin American and Caribbean States, 2014
D. Fiscal policy
■■
■■
According to projections, Latin America’s fiscal balance
deteriorated slightly, on average, in 2014. The subregion’s
primary deficit (before public debt interest payments) is
expected to stand at 0.8% of GDP, and the overall central
government deficit will widen from 2.4% of GDP in 2013
to 2.7% in 2014, with a drop in total revenues and a slight
upturn in public spending.
The subregion as a whole has run a fiscal deficit since 2009,
but this has not pushed up public debt, which has held
steady at about 32% of GDP, with an external component
of less than 15% of GDP.
Figure I.9
Latin America (19 countries): central government fiscal
indicators, 2005-2014 a
(Percentages of GDP)
24
22
20
16
12
32
10
31
8
30
6
2.3
1.4
0.1
2.2
4
1.2
0.3
14
-1.0
-0.2
-1.6
-0.4
-1.0
12
-2.8
0.1
2
-0.3
-0.6
-0.8
-2.0
-1.8
-2.7
-4
-6
10
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012
2013
Overall balance (right scale)
Primary balance (right scale)
Total revenues (left scale)
Total spending (left scale)
2014
Source: Economic Commission for Latin America and the Caribbean (ECLAC), on the basis
of official figures.
a
Simple averages. The data for 2014 are estimates.
4
2.9
3
0.8
1.4
2
1.0
29
1
0.2
28
0.0
0.2
0.1
-0.8
27
0
-2
-2.4
■■
Figure I.10
The Caribbean (13 countries and territories): central government
fiscal indicators, 2005-2014 a
(Percentages of GDP)
18
The Caribbean should see an improved fiscal position
in 2014, with the overall average subregional deficit at
the central government level shrinking from 4.1% of GDP
in 2013 to 3.9% of GDP in 2014.
Total fiscal revenues fell in the oil-exporting countries
and tax revenues rose slightly in several of the region’s
economies. Estimates for Latin America show total fiscal
revenues down by 0.2 percentage points of GDP on average
in 2014. In 12 of the 19 countries analysed, the year-onyear variation was less than 0.5 percentage points of GDP,
though some countries did see more significant changes.
■■
-2
-1.9
-2.4
25
-3
-3.0
-3.6
24
-3.6
-3.3
-4.1
-4.5
2005
2006
2007
0
-1
-1.1
26
23
-0.7
2008
2009
Overall balance (right scale)
Primary balance (right scale)
2010
2011
2012
2013
-3.9
2014
-4
-5
Total revenues (left scale)
Total spending (left scale)
Source: Economic Commission for Latin America and the Caribbean (ECLAC), on the basis
of official figures.
a
Simple averages. The data for 2014 are estimates.
17
Economic Commission for Latin America and the Caribbean (ECLAC)
Despite the slowdown, the countries of the region were
able to maintain public spending and investment as a
percentage of GDP. Capital spending also held steady
or even increased as a share of GDP in many countries
in 2014. It was down in Central America and the Dominican
Republic, however, as well as in the oil-exporting countries,
which nevertheless —especially in the cases of Ecuador
and the Plurinational State of Bolivia— kept up very high
levels of public investment. In the Caribbean and in Brazil,
■■
Figure I.11
Latin America and the Caribbean: total fiscal revenues and
central government tax revenues by subregion and country
grouping, 2013-2014 a
5.1
5.4
19.5 19.3
4.4
24.3 24.0
23.7
2.7
2.6
4.0
26.8 26.2
13.9
12.1
21.2
21.4
21.7
18.2
9.7
10.3
13.5
(Percentages of GDP)
2.5
2.9
5.3
18.3
17.3
17.3
13.8
16.5
3.5
16.9
20.1
30.2
30.7
5.4
5.8
27.2
1.7
3.3
3.3
4.5
5.1
1.6
21.4
15.4
20.3
20.1 19.8
19.4
2.8
15.2 15.4
1.7
15.1
7.9
■■
25.4 25.5
22.4
8.6
■■
Figure I.12
Latin America and the Caribbean: disaggregated central
government public spending by subregion and country grouping,
2013-2014 a
(Percentages of GDP)
26.2 26.8
the very heavy burden of interest payments is standing
in the way of more active fiscal measures.
The countries with low public debt (and therefore more
readily available financing) have reacted to the slowdown
with more active fiscal policies.
In countries with higher levels of public debt or financing
difficulties, the weaker public accounts forecast for 2015
have prompted announcements of budget cuts for the
year ahead.
21.9
22.0
4.7
4.6
1.8
1.9
20.5
21.6
15.4
21.6
21.0
28.4
1.8
4.8
21.8
15.5
29.2
25.9
26.0
5.5
4.9
1.9
2.1
18.5
7.9
18.4
18.3
4.3
3.9
1.8
1.9
1.8
19.5
19.0
12.3
12.4
28.4
7.5
1.7
20.2
20.7
4.2
4.3
0.8
0.8
15.2
15.6
19.1
21.5
2.8
1.3
17.3
29.3
29.3
5.6
5.7
3.7
3.7
20.0
20.0
22.7
3.2
1.7
17.8
2013 2014 2013 2014 2013 2014 2013 2014 2013 2014 2013 2014 2013 2014 2013 2014 2013 2014
2013 2014 2013 2014 2013 2014 2013 2014 2013 2014 2013 2014 2013 2014 2013 2014 2013 2014
Latin America The Caribbean
(19 countries) (13 countries)
Latin
The Caribbean
America
(13 countries
(19 countries) and territories)
Brazil
Mexico b
Tax revenues
Central
America
and the
Dominican
Republic
Hydrocarbon
exporters
Mineral
and metal
exporters
Food
exporters
Services
exporters
Other revenues
Source: Economic Commission for Latin America and the Caribbean (ECLAC), on the basis of
official figures and budgets and estimates.
a
The data for 2014 are estimates.
b
Federal public sector.
18
Brazil
Mexico b
Primary current spending
Central
America
and the
Dominican
Republic
Hydrocarbon Mineral
exporters
and metal
exporters
Interest
Food
exporters
Services
exporters
Capital spending
Source: Economic Commission for Latin America and the Caribbean (ECLAC), on the basis
of official figures.
a
The data for 2014 are estimates.
b
Federal public sector.
II. Foreign direct investment
19
Foreign direct investment (FDI) in Latin America and
the Caribbean reached a new all-time high in 2013, at
US$ 188.101 billion, 6% more than the 2012 figure. This means
that FDI inflows were virtually stable for the third year running,
especially measured in nominal terms.
A. Foreign direct investment in Latin America and the Caribbean
■■
■■
(Millions of current dollars and percentages of GDP)
200 000
5.0
180 000
4.5
160 000
4.0
140 000
3.5
120 000
3.0
100 000
2.5
80 000
2.0
60 000
1.5
2013
2011
2012
2010
2009
2007
2008
2005
2006
2003
2004
2001
2002
1999
2000
1997
Inward FDI flows
(left scale)
1998
0
1995
0
1996
0.5
1993
1.0
20 000
1994
40 000
1991
■■
Figure II.1
Latin America and the Caribbean: foreign direct investment
inflows and FDI inflows as a proportion of GDP, 1990-2013 a
1992
■■
Global FDI flows rose by 11%, although behind this global
figure lie large differences between regions. Whereas FDI
in the European Union recovered strongly (38%), after a
heavy fall in 2012 (-56%), flows to the United States slipped
5% and those to developing and transition economies were
up by 6% and 45%, respectively.
Growth in the region slowed to 2.5% in 2013, and United
States monetary policy sowed uncertainty in the markets,
which led to heavy depreciation in the region’s main
currencies. Prices for natural resources, though still at high
levels by historical standards, continued to fall owing to
uncertainty regarding the economic situation in China and
the developed world.
Mexico regained its position as the second largest recipient
of FDI in the region, with total inflows of US$ 38.286 billion,
over double the amount received the year before. Mexico thus
ranked behind Brazil, which received US$ 64.046 billion in
FDI, 2% down on 2012 but ahead of Chile, which received
US$ 20.258 billion, 29% less than in 2012.
By sector, services received the highest proportion of FDI
inflows in 2013, with 38%, followed by manufacturing
(36%) and natural resources (26%). However, these averages
mask large differences between countries and subregions.
Natural resources capture over 50% of FDI inflows in
several countries, and as much as 70% in the Plurinational
State of Bolivia. In fact, in South America (not including
Brazil), natural resources receive more FDI than services,
and manufacturing only small amounts.
1990
■■
Inward FDI flows as a percentage of GDP
(right scale)
Source: Economic Commission for Latin America and the Caribbean (ECLAC), on the basis of
official figures and estimates at 8 May 2014.
a
FDI figures indicate inflows of foreign direct investment, minus disinvestments (repatriation of
capital) by foreign investors. The FDI figures do not include flows into the main financial centres
of the Caribbean. These figures differ from those set out in the 2013 editions of the Economic
Survey of Latin America and the Caribbean and the Preliminary Overview of the Economies
of Latin America and the Caribbean because they show the net balance of foreign investment,
that is, direct investment in the reporting economy (FDI) minus outward FDI.
21
Economic Commission for Latin America and the Caribbean (ECLAC)
■■
■■
■■
■■
22
Not all FDI in the region represents a net inflow of capital.
In 2013 capital contributions accounted for 42% of total FDI,
reinvested earnings 38%, and inter-company loans 20%.
Although reinvestment of profits was lower in 2013 than
in 2012, the profits reported by transnational firms rose 2%,
to US$ 111.662 billion.
The region’s economies also vary greatly in terms of the
origin of investments. The United States remains the largest
investor in Latin America and the Caribbean generally, with
a particularly prominent role in Central America (30% of
inflows) and Mexico (32%). Europe overall is the largest
investor in Brazil (46%), Mexico (54%) and Colombia (36%).
In all the countries except Mexico, trans-Latin firms make
significant contributions to FDI flows. This is especially true
in Ecuador (where FDI by trans-Latins accounts for 46%
of inflows), Colombia (30%) and Central America (39%).
Inflows from Asia have held steady.
In Latin America, FDI inflows have stabilized at a high level
in the past three years, but the impact of these investments
on the well-being of the region’s inhabitants is still a matter
of debate.
Investments in technology-intensive sectors have more
potential to contribute to development through knowledge
transfer and local capacity-building. But FDI in high-tech
manufacturing represents only a small proportion of the
total and showed no change in 2013.
Figure II.2
Latin America and the Caribbean (selected countries): inward
foreign direct investment, 2012-2013
(Billions of dollars)
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
Brazil
Mexico
Chile
Colombia
Peru
2012
2013
Argentina
Central The Caribbean
America
Source: Economic Commission for Latin America and the Caribbean (ECLAC), on the basis of
official figures and estimates as of 8 May 2014.
Economic and Social Panorama of the Community of Latin American and Caribbean States, 2014
B. Latin American and Caribbean transnational corporations:
strategies and outcomes
■■
■■
Between 2003 and 2013, the developing countries’ share
of total outward FDI jumped from 10% to 39%. The most
active regions were East and South-East Asia, which
accounted for more than 50% of these capital flows, and
Latin America and the Caribbean, which lagged behind
somewhat. In consequence, South-South FDI has boomed
in the past 20 years.
Latin America has not remained on the sidelines of this
process, and more and more of the region’s enterprises
are beginning to invest outside their home countries.
Initially, the vast majority of trans-Latins came from a
small group of countries: Argentina, Brazil, Chile and
Mexico. These corporations operated in sectors related to
the abundant natural resources available in their home
countries, in basic infrastructure services such as power
and telecommunications, and mass-market services such
as retail trade, air transport and finance. The first stage of
international expansion was focused on nearby markets
within the region, and subsequently —mainly in the case
of firms from larger countries— spread to more distant
markets, first in North America and later, albeit on a much
smaller scale, in the European Union, Asia, Oceania and
in some cases, Africa.
Figure II.3
Latin America and the Caribbean: outflows of foreign direct
investment, 1995-2013
(Billions of dollars)
50
40
30
20
10
0
1995
1997
1999
2001
2003
Total annual outward foreign
direct investment
2005
2007
2009
2011
2013
Trend represented by an exponential
function (y=3093e 0.1461X )
Source: Economic Commission for Latin America and the Caribbean (ECLAC), on the basis
of official information.
Figure II.4
Latin America and the Caribbean: foreign direct investment by
the main investor countries, annual averages, 2000-2013 a
(Billions of dollars)
Brazil
Mexico
Chile
Colombia
Argentina
Venezuela (Bol. Rep. of)
Peru
0
2
4
2000-2005
6
8
10
2006-2009
12
14
16
2010-2013
Source: Economic Commission for Latin America and the Caribbean (ECLAC), on the basis
of official information.
a
Data for Argentina and Colombia cover up to the third quarter of 2013.
23
Economic Commission for Latin America and the Caribbean (ECLAC)
C. Effects of foreign direct investment on employment in Latin America
and the Caribbean
■■
■■
■■
24
Strong investment inflows into Latin American and
Caribbean countries exert enormous influence over these
economies, while also raising a number of concerns over
the characteristics that such investments imprint on their
production specialization profiles and, especially, on their
domestic labour markets.
During the 1990s, the most significant FDI processes were
privatizations, mergers and acquisitions, especially in South
America. During this period, most investment did not
create new production capacities to spur the recruitment
of additional workers, but instead was associated with
companies’ restructuring processes, which implied
rationalization measures and labour shedding.
Greenfield investments represented around 60% of inward
FDI in the region between 2003 and 2013, following an
■■
■■
upward trend (from 50% of FDI in 2003-2007 to 70%
in 2010-2013).
These investments only accounted for about 5% of net
job creation in the region in the period 2003-2013 (in an
optimistic calculation).
The jobs content of these greenfield investments varies
extensively according to the sectors and subregions in
which they are made, and depends on the profile of the
projects implemented. For every US$ 1 million invested,
only one job is created in extractive activities, while the
same investment creates two jobs in natural-resourceintensive manufacturing. These sectors accounted for
about 47% of investment amounts and 25% of new jobs
announced in investment projects during the 10-year
study period.
III. The region in the world economy
25
A. Trade
■■
■■
■■
■■
■■
■■
The steadily deteriorating global economic outlook is likely
to dampen trade in Latin America and the Caribbean in 2014.
As a group, the developing economies will grow at a similar
pace to that of 2013 (about 4.7%), led by East and South
Asia. China and India are projected to grow at around 7%
and 5%, respectively.
In 2012 and 2013 the volume of global trade expanded
by 2.1% and 2.3%, respectively, a performance which fell
far short of pre-crisis levels, when exports were growing
twice as fast as global output.
World trade grew even less in value terms than it did
by volume, as a result of falling export prices. Weak
trade performance in 2013 is largely attributable to slack
demand for imports in developed countries, partially
offset by a modest increase in the demand for imports in
developing countries.
During the first half of 2014, the value of Latin American
and Caribbean merchandise exports slipped by 0.3%
against the year-earlier period. This change was the result
of a 5.2% increase in exports by volume, and a 5.5% drop
in prices. The value of imports also dropped by 0.6%, as
a 2.2% increase in volume was not enough to offset a 2.8%
fall in prices. The drop in export prices was widespread and
occurred across all the subregions, but was felt particularly
in the Andean Community.
During the first half of 2014, goods exports to other
countries in Latin America and the Caribbean, Asia (not
including China) and the European Union, fell by 5.6%,
1.3% and 0.5%, respectively, in value terms, compared with
the same period in 2013. The region’s exports to China and
the United States posted the fastest growth.
Figure III.1
Latin America and the Caribbean: year-on-year variation in
foreign trade by value and volume, January to June 2014
(Percentage variation)
A. Exports
Mexico
8.2
-4.0
Central America
-2.4
Chile
4.1
1.3
-1.1
Andean Community
7.3
-9.9
MERCOSUR
-5.4
3.1
South America
-5.8
2.9
Latin America and
the Caribbean
-5.5
-15
-10
5.2
-5
0
5
10
15
B. Imports
Mexico
2.3
-0.9
Central America
6.0
-3.7
Chile
-8.5
Andean Community
-0.3
-6.1
MERCOSUR
8.6
-4.0
-0.5
South America
-1.2
-2.4
Latin America and
the Caribbean
-2.8
-15
-10
-5
Value
2.2
0
5
10
15
Volume
Source: Economic Commission for Latin America and the Caribbean (ECLAC), on the basis of
official information from the countries.
27
Economic Commission for Latin America and the Caribbean (ECLAC)
B. Value chains
■■
A general assessment based on data for international trade
in intermediate goods confirms that, except for Mexico and
Central America, the region has limited participation in
the three value chains known as Factory North America,
Factory Europe and Factory Asia. In fact, the region is
not an important supplier of non-primary intermediate
goods for any of these chains, nor is it a major importer
of intermediate goods from the participating countries.
Mexico is an exception, as medium-tech products represent
a large share of its intermediate goods exports to its North
American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) partners. All the
same, the country’s integration into Factory North America
is based mainly on the export of final goods produced from
imported inputs, with little value added domestically.
C. Production integration
■■
■■
28
Although the regional market has strong potential to boost
production and export diversification, the region is not
taking advantage of this. In 2013, just 19% of regional exports
stayed within the region. This figure rises to 25% if Mexico
is left out but, even so, the intraregional portion of total
exports is far smaller in Latin America and the Caribbean
than in other major regions of the world economy.
Despite the high manufacturing density of intraregional
trade, most of it consists of finished products, as the small
share of intermediate goods reveals. Intermediate goods
account for over 30% of the value of goods traded between
the countries of “factory Asia” and for almost 20% between
the member countries of the North American Free Trade
Agreement (NAFTA), but for only 10% between the countries
of Latin America and the Caribbean. This is evidence of a
low degree of production integration between the Latin
American and Caribbean economies. In fact, imports of
parts and components by the region’s largest economies
originate mostly from extraregional suppliers.
Figure III.2
Selected groupings: a intra-group exports as a share of total
exports, 2008-2013
(Percentages)
80
60
40
20
0
2008
2009
2010
Latin America and the Caribbean
ASEAN+5 a
European Union
2011
2012
2013
Latin America and the Caribbean
(excluding Mexico)
North American Free
Trade Agreement
Source: Economic Commission for Latin America and the Caribbean (ECLAC), on the basis of
information from the United Nations Commodity Trade Database (COMTRADE).
a
Includes the 10 member countries of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN)
and China, Japan, the Republic of Korea, Hong Kong Special Administrative Region of China
and Taiwan Province of China.
Economic and Social Panorama of the Community of Latin American and Caribbean States, 2014
■■
In short, for most of the region’s countries, the most
immediate opportunities for engaging with value
chains lie within the regional market. There are three
explanations for this. First, trade within value chains is
particularly sensitive to distance-related costs. Second,
the relatively high manufacturing density of intraregional
trade suggests that it is the most conducive setting
for establishing production linkages. Third, the bold
regionwide expansion of the trans-Latins opens up similar
opportunities, provided that those companies establish
networks of local suppliers of goods and services in the
countries where they set up.
Figure III.3
Latin America (selected countries): distribution by origin of parts and components imports, 2013
(Percentages)
A. Argentina
Rest of the world
(26)
B. Brazil
China
(27)
Rest of Latin America
and the Caribbean
(4)
Rest of the world
(32)
China
(28)
Rest of Latin America
and the Caribbean
(2)
Japan
(4)
Brazil
(26)
United States
(6)
United States
(11)
Mexico
(2)
Argentina
(3)
Germany
(7)
Germany
(5)
C. Colombia
Rest of the world
(27)
Japan
(6)
Rep. of Korea
(11)
D. Mexico
Rest of the world
(18)
China
(38)
Rest of Latin America
and the Caribbean
(3)
Rest of Latin America
and the Caribbean
(4)
United States
(38)
Malasia
(3)
Japan
(5)
Brazil
(4)
Japan
(5)
Mexico
(6)
United States
(17)
Rep. of Korea
(7)
China
(25)
Source: Economic Commission for Latin America and the Caribbean (ECLAC), on the basis of information from the United Nations Commodity Trade Database (COMTRADE).
29
IV. Social panorama
31
A. Poverty (measured by income)
■■
■■
■■
Figure IV.1
Latin America: poverty and indigence, 1980-2014 a
(Percentages and millions of people)
60
48.4
50
43.9
43.8
40.5
40
33.5
Percentages
■■
The poverty rate in Latin America stood at 28.1% in 2013,
while the indigence or extreme poverty rate was 11.7%.
These percentages represent 165 million poor people,
including 69 million in extreme poverty.
These values show that the poverty rate was largely
unchanged in respect of levels seen in 2012 (28.1%). There
was, however, a slight uptick in extreme poverty, which
rose by 0.4 percentage points on 2012 levels (11.3%). This
means that there were no substantial changes in number
of poor in 2013, but the number in extreme poverty rose
by about 3 million while the number of non-indigent poor
decreased by a similar figure.
Estimates for the region show that the downward trend in
the rates of poverty and extreme poverty has slowed and
even reversed in the early years of this decade, a situation
which, coupled with population growth, has increased
the number of people living in extreme poverty in 2013.
One of the hallmarks of poverty in Latin America is its
higher incidence among younger rather than older segments
of the population. Compared to adults aged over 55, the
poverty rate for those aged under 15 is 2.8 times higher,
and the rate for the 15-24 age group is 1.9 times higher.
Poverty rates also vary by gender, particularly in the age
group comprising adults most likely to participate in the
labour market. In Latin America on average the poverty
rate among women aged 25-49 years is 1.2 times that of
men in the same age group.
29.6
30
22.6
20
28.1
28.0
19.3
18.6
18.6
28.1
12.9
11.6
12.0
11.7
11.3
10
0
1980
1990
1999
2002
2008
2011
2012
2013
2014 b
250
225
215
204
200
186
171
Millions of people
■■
150
167
165
164
136
95
100
91
99
72
62
67
66
69
71
50
0
1980
1990
1999
2002
Indigents
2008
2011
2012
2013
2014 b
Non-indigent poor
Source: Economic Commission for Latin America and the Caribbean (ECLAC), on the basis
of special tabulations of data from household surveys conducted in the respective countries.
a
Estimate for 19 countries, including Haiti. Cuba not included.
b
Projection.
33
Economic Commission for Latin America and the Caribbean (ECLAC)
Figure IV.2
Latin America (14 countries): ratio between rates of poverty
among people of between 0 and 14 years and between 15 to 24
years in respect of those among people 55 and over, around 2013
9
8
7
6
5
4
3
2
1
Paraguay
Dominican
Rep.
El Salvador
Peru
Bolivia
(Plur. State of)
Ecuador
Costa Rica
Mexico
Colombia
Panama
Venezuela
(Bol. Rep. of)
Chile
Latin America
Brazil
0
Argentina
■■
Poverty rates among those who have completed uppersecondary or tertiary education are, respectively, 26% and
74% lower than among the population at large. Poverty
rates among those with three years or fewer of education
is 66% higher than the average for the general population,
while it is 34% and 15% higher among those with four to
six years and seven to nine years of education, respectively.
Poverty rates are 90% higher among the unemployed,
23% higher among inactive persons and 18% among selfemployed workers than in the total population. Poverty
rates among wage workers are on average 41% below those
of the general population, further evidence of the crucial
role of employment in staving off poverty and indigence.
Uruguay
■■
Poverty rate for the group aged 0-14 years / poverty rate for the group aged 55 years and over
Poverty rate for the group aged 15-24 years / poverty rate for the group aged 55 years and over
Source: Economic Commission for Latin America and the Caribbean (ECLAC), on the basis
of special tabulations of data from household surveys conducted in the respective countries.
34
Economic and Social Panorama of the Community of Latin American and Caribbean States, 2014
B. Income distribution
(Percentages)
2
1
0
-1
-2
Costa Rica
Panama
Paraguay
Venezuela
(Bol. Rep. of)
Chile
Brazil
Colombia
2008-2013
Dominican Rep.
2002-2008
Mexico
El Salvador
Peru
-4
Ecuador b
-3
Argentina b
■■
Figure IV.3
Latin America (15 countries): annual variation of Gini coefficient,
2002-2008 and 2008-2013 a
Uruguay b
■■
In the early 2000s inequality began to decrease in most of
the countries of the region, and this trend is still holding.
Between 2002 and 2013 the average Gini coefficient for the
region fell approximately 10%, from 0.542 to 0.486.
With regard to income distribution across population
groups, the share of the poorest 20% of households increased
between 2008 and 2013, from an average of 5.2% to 5.6%
of the total. 1 By contrast, the same period saw the average
share of the richest quintile decrease from 48.4% in 2008
to 46.7% in 2013.
In 11 of the 15 countries reviewed, the share of the poorest
quintile rose during the period, while the share of the
richest quintile shrank.
Bolivia
(Plur. State of)
■■
Source: Economic Commission for Latin America and the Caribbean (ECLAC), on the basis
of special tabulations of data from household surveys conducted in the respective countries.
a
Includes only the countries for which information was available for the period between 2011
and 2013. The classification order corresponds to the magnitude of the variation in the second
subperiod (2008-2013).
b
Urban areas.
Calculated on the basis of the 15 countries for which the most
recent data are available. Does not include Guatemala, Honduras
or Nicaragua.
1
35
Economic Commission for Latin America and the Caribbean (ECLAC)
C. Residential segregation and the reproduction of inequalities
■■
36
resident has invariably higher odds of becoming a mother
by the age of 19 than a non-favela resident, according to
the 2000 census. In the 2010 census, these results were
corroborated for well-known favelas (Rocinha, Complexo
do Alemão and Maré) and affluent areas (Tijuca); the
likelihood of teenage motherhood in the three favelas
was higher than the city average and much higher than
in wealthy neighbourhoods.
Figure IV.4
Brazil: women aged 19 who are mothers and who have always
resided in the same municipality, by per capita household
income and favela residence or non-residence, 2000
(Percentages and multiples of the minimum wage)
60
50
40
30
20
10
Total
5 or over
3 to 5
2 to 3
1.5 to 2
1.25 to 1.5
1 to 1.25
0.75 to 1
0.5 to 0.75
0.25 to 0.5
Up to 0.25
0
No income
■■
In Latin America, socioeconomic groups generally
exhibit distinctive location patterns in cities. If these
patterns involve physical distances that hinder or prevent
interaction, recognition and cooperation between these
groups, social cohesion and city governance are likely to
be weakened. Where the location pattern of socioeconomic
groups helps perpetuate social inequalities in the city,
socioeconomic residential segregation ensues, posing a
fundamental challenge for the development of inclusive
and sustainable cities.
One of the hallmarks of urbanization in the region is the
concentration of poor populations in peripheral areas,
especially in large cities (those with a population of
more than 1 million inhabitants). This pattern is typically
disadvantageous, since these groups are subject to more
precarious conditions in terms of access to housing, basic
services and community infrastructure, among other
factors. The other side of the coin is that groups with high
socioeconomic status have consolidated their presence in
a few areas of the city which, as well as having abundant
private resources owing to residents’ income levels, are
usually well connected to city centres and hubs of good
quality employment. Residents of these areas benefit from
a higher quality of life and more efficient urban services
than in the rest of the city.
For example, analysis of the “neighbourhood effect” on
the behaviours of children and adolescents, especially
with regard to the likelihood of adolescent motherhood,
shows that, in the case of Brazil’s favelas, a female favela
Percentages
■■
Per capita income in multiples of the minimun wage
Favela
Not favela
Source: Economic Commission for Latin America and the Caribbean (ECLAC), on the basis of
special processing of 2000 census microdata.
Economic and Social Panorama of the Community of Latin American and Caribbean States, 2014
D. Social spending in Latin America
Figure IV.5
Latin America and the Caribbean (21 countries):a public social
spending and total public spending as shares of GDP, and
social public spending as a share of total spending, 1990-1991
to 2012-2013 b
(Percentages of GDP and of total public spending)
50
75
45
40
70
38.5
38.1
38.6
38.1
36.8
35
36.2
36.6
36.6
37.3
38.4
38.3
38.1
60
30
55
25
20
15
10
5
0
65
35.8
13.8
37.5
38.1
14.3
14.7
38.6
39.7
14.7
14.6
41.4
41.5
15.0
15.2
42.4
44.8
47.6
49.4
50.1
50
45
40
35
15.5
16.7
18.3
18.9
19.1
1990- 1992- 1994- 1996- 1998- 2000- 2002- 2004- 2006- 2008- 2010- 20121991 1993 1995 1997 1999 2001 2003 2005 2007 2009 2011 2013
Percentage of total public spending
■■
In spite of ups and downs in the economic cycle, the trend
in the region until 2013 was towards a real increase in the
resources available for financing social services and cash
transfers to households.
In the early 1990s, social spending as a share of gross
domestic product (GDP) stood at 13.8%, rising steadily,
albeit slowly, in the bienniums under review to reach
16.7% in 2006-2007. It then soared to 19.1% of the region’s
GDP in 2012-2013. In the last year under consideration,
social spending in the region (21 countries) amounted to
nearly US$ 685 billion (at constant 2005 prices). In 2012 the
overall growth trend in social spending in both absolute
and relative terms began to weaken somewhat.
Percentage of GDP
■■
30
Total public spending as a percentage of GDP
Social public spending as a percentage of GDP
Social public spending as a percentage of total public spending
Source: Economic Commission for Latin America and the Caribbean (ECLAC), on the basis
of social spending data.
a
Argentina, Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela, Brazil, Chile, Colombia, Costa Rica, Cuba,
Dominican Republic, Ecuador, El Salvador, Guatemala, Honduras, Jamaica, Mexico, Nicaragua,
Panama, Paraguay, Peru, Plurinational State of Bolivia, Trinidad and Tobago, and Uruguay.
b
Weighted average for the countries. The figures on total public spending correspond to official
data, mostly from the functional classification of public spending, and may not correspond to
those based on an economic classification of spending.
37
V. Population
39
ECLAC estimates and projections place the population of Latin
America and the Caribbean at 623 million in 2014.
One of Latin America’s characteristics is that its urban population
is larger, in percentage terms, than the world average. Until
the early 1960s the subregion was predominantly rural, but
the application of the import-substitution policies and the
absence of reform in the countryside intensified rural-to-urban
migration. As a result, the urban population, as a proportion
of the total rose dramatically between 1950 and 1995. This
trend continued until the end of the twentieth century, by
which time Latin America had overtaken the most developed
regions in terms of urban population. Today, with about 80%
of its population residing in cities, Latin America has the most
urbanized population of any region in the developing world.
Figure V.1
World, Latin America and developed and developing regions:
urban population estimates and projections, 1950-2050
(Percentages)
100
90
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
1950
1960
1970
1980
1990
2000
2010
Less developed regions
Latin America
2020
2030
2040
2050
World
More developed regions
Source: United Nations, World Urbanization Prospects: The 2011 Revision [online]
http://esa.un.org/unup/, 2012 and Latin American and Caribbean Demographic Centre
(CELADE)-Population Division of ECLAC, population estimates and projections, 2013 revision.
A. Urbanization and demographic transition
■■
It is estimated that in 1950, about 68 million people were
living in urban areas and 93.5 million in rural areas.
Projections indicate that in 2015, there will be about
491 million people living in urban areas and almost
122 million in rural areas. This means that between 1950
and 2015, the urban population will have multiplied by
a factor of 7.2, while the rural population will only be
1.3 times larger. This is the result of rapid growth in the
■■
number of city dwellers, and the stagnation and subsequent
decline of the rural population.
In the 1950s, the urban population grew 1.6 times faster
than the total population, and while the two rates have
followed similar trajectories, urban population growth
has remained higher. Demographic growth since the
1970s has been driven by the expansion of its urban
population.
41
Economic Commission for Latin America and the Caribbean (ECLAC)
Figure V.2
Latin America: estimated average annual growth of the total,
rural and urban populations, by five-year periods, 1950-2015
Figure V.3
Latin America: estimated average annual growth rate of the total,
rural and urban populations, by five-year periods, 1950-2015
(Thousands of people)
(Per hundred)
10 000
5
8 000
4
6 000
3
4 000
2
2 000
1
0
0
-2 000
1950
1955
1960
1965
1970
Rural
1975
1980
1985
Urban
1990
1995
2000
2005
2010
2015
Total
Source: Latin American and Caribbean Demographic Centre (CELADE)-Population Division
of ECLAC, population estimates and projections, 2013 revision.
42
-1
1950
1955
1960
1965
1970
1975
Rural
1980
Total
1985
1990
1995
2000
2005
2010
2015
Urban
Source: Latin American and Caribbean Demographic Centre (CELADE)-Population Division
of ECLAC, population estimates and projections, 2013 revision.
Economic and Social Panorama of the Community of Latin American and Caribbean States, 2014
B. Diversity in urbanization in Latin America
■■
■■
■■
Regions and countries can be classified in four groups by
degree of urbanization (or percentage of urban population),
corresponding to the different stages of the urban transition:
delayed transition, incipient or moderate transition, full
transition, and advanced transition.
The regional average conceals the broad heterogeneity of
urbanization in Latin America, in terms of both the degree
of urbanization reached, and the speed at which countries
have become urbanized.
Different rates of urbanization observed in the region,
highlighting the rapidity of the process between 1950
and 1970 in the Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela, Brazil,
■■
Colombia, the Dominican Republic, Ecuador, Guatemala,
Haiti, Mexico, Nicaragua and Peru. Urban population
growth in these countries outpaced the average for Latin
America during this period. Between 1970 and 1990, Brazil
and Ecuador maintained this rapid pace of urbanization,
while Costa Rica, the Dominican Republic, El Salvador,
Haiti, Honduras and the Plurinational State of Bolivia all
outpaced the regional average.
It is projected that by 2020, 64% of the Latin American
population will live in countries at the advanced transition
phase (in which more than 80% of the population is urban),
rising to over 86% by 2050.
Table V.1
Latin America: distribution of countries by stage of urban transition process, 1950, 1970, 1990 and 2010
Delayed transition
(<50% urban population)
Incipient or moderate transition
(50% - 70% urban population)
Full transition
(70% - 80% urban population)
1950
World average, Latin America
BOL, BRA, COL, CRI, ECU, SLV,
GTM, HTI, HND, MEX, NIC, PAN,
PRY, PER, DOM
ARG, CHL, CUB, VEN
URY
1970
World average
BOL, CRI, ECU, SLV, GTM, HTI,
HND, NIC, PAN, PRY, DOM
Latin America
BRA, COL, CUB, MEX, PER
ARG, CHL, VEN
URY
1990
World average
SLV, GTM, HTI, HND
BOL, COL, CRI, ECU, NIC, PAN,
PRY, PER, DOM
Latin America
BRA, CUB, MEX
ARG, CHL, CUB, VEN
2010
HTI (47.5%)
World average
BOL, ECU, SLV, GTM, HND, NIC,
PAN, PRY
Latin America (78.7%)
COL, CRI, CUB, MEX, PER, DOM
ARG, BRA, CHI, URY, VEN
Year
Advanced transition
(>80% urban population)
Source: United Nations, World Urbanization Prospects. The 2011 Revision [online] http://esa.un.org/unup/, 2012 and Latin American and Caribbean Demographic Centre (CELADE)-Population
Division of ECLAC, population estimates and projections, 2013 revision.
43
Economic Commission for Latin America and the Caribbean (ECLAC)
Figure V.4
Latin America: urban population and rate of urbanization, 1950-2010
A. Urban population, 1950, 1970, 1990 and 2010 a
B. Rate of urbanization, 1950-2010 b
(percentages)
HTI
URY
HND
100
URY
DOM
ARG
CHL
GTM
ECU
40
CUB
1.4
1.0
0.8
SLV
20
0
PRY
MEX
BOL
COL
NIC
PER
1970
0.2
BOL
GTM
0.0
Latin
America
1950
BRA
0.4
CRI
BRA
COL
1.2
0.6
VEN
PAN
HTI
1.6
PRY
60
PER
1.8
CUB
80
DOM
2.0
ECU
ARG
MEX
HND
VEN
PAN
SLV
1990
CRI
NIC
CHL
2010
1950-1970
Latin
America
1970-1990
1990-2010
Source: Latin American and Caribbean Demographic Centre (CELADE)-Population Division of ECLAC, population estimates and projections, 2013 revision.
a
Countries are ordered by smallest to largest urban population percentage in the first year analysed (1950).
b
The rate of urbanization is measured by the relative difference between the urban population percentage observed in a given year and the percentage recorded 20 years previously. Countries are
ordered by fastest to slowest urban population growth rate in the first period represented (1950-1970).
44
VI. Gender equality
45
The efforts States in the Latin American and Caribbean region
have made to eradicate violence against women have seen
substantial headway on a number of fronts over the past 20 years.
Progress has been greatest as regards the recognition of rights,
legal reforms and implementation of promising policies. National
legal systems have expanded the scope of State action, and cast
light on the persistence of certain problems and the emergence
of further issues.
Three pillars represent those aspects of women’s autonomy
related to the ability to earn one’s own income and control
assets (economic autonomy), control one’s own body (physical
autonomy) and fully participate in decisions affecting their lives
and society (decision-making autonomy).
A. Economic autonomy
At present, in Latin America and the Caribbean, more than
100 million women (some 50% of the female working-age
population) are part of the labour force. Of that total,
22.8 million entered the labour market in the past 10 years;
this represents one of the most sweeping social and economic
transformations in recent decades.
Gains in the female labour market participation rate vary
among and within countries —the latter according to age
group, educational attainment and socioeconomic sector
of the population.
Figure VI.1
Latin America (17 countries): economically active female
population by income quintile, latest data available
Figure VI.2
Latin America (16 countries): population without own income, by
sex, latest period available
(Percentages)
(Percentages)
33.9 34.0 34.5
35
30
25
20
11.1
10
Quintile V
Source: Economic Commission for Latin America and the Caribbean (ECLAC), on the basis
of special tabulations of data from household surveys conducted in the respective countries.
a
Simple average of the nearest year’s data available for each country.
11.2
16.1
14.3
14.7 14.3
8.5
10.4
10.9 10.2
8.6
16.1
10.7
8.9
12.1
Women
Latin America
(simple average). 2010 a
Honduras. 2010
Guatemala. 2006
Bolivia
(Plur. State of). 2012
Costa Rica. 2012
Venezuela
(Bol. Rep. of). 2012
El Salvador. 2012
5.4
Uruguay. 2012
Latin America
(simple average). 2010 a
Peru. 2011
Bolivia
(Plur. State of). 2009
Brazil. 2011
Uruguay. 2011
Colombia. 2011
Ecuador. 2011
Paraguay. 2011
Venezuela
(Bol. Rep. of). 2011
Chile. 2011
Costa Rica. 2011
Mexico. 2010
Guatemala. 2006
Panama. 2011
Honduras. 2010
Nicaragua. 2009
0
El Salvador. 2010
5
0
Dominican Rep. 2011
10
Quintile I
16.0
15 14.8
23.4
32.7
30.9 31.2 31.5
29.2 29.7 29.8
Ecuador. 2012
38.4
36.0
31.8 33.5
27.2 27.7 28.2 28.3 28.7 29.9 30.7
27.3 28.1
Panama. 2012
49.4
Peru. 2012
20
60.0
43.1 43.5 44.4
40
30
58.9 59.1
54.6
38.3 38.9 40.8 41.2
40
61.9
Dominican Rep.. 2012
50
67.0 67.2
64.2 66.3
64.7
60.9 62.7
Colombia. 2012
65.5
61.6 63.4 59.8
58.3 61.6
67.6
Mexico. 2012
60
45
65.8
Paraguay. 2011
80
70
■■
Chile. 2011
■■
The regional labour participation rate for women averages 62%
in the wealthiest quintile and only 38.4% in the first quintile.
Women’s autonomy is also threatened by the high proportion
with no income of their own: in 2010 this figure was 32.7%,
compared with 12.1% for men. A substantial percentage
of women with no income of their own perform unpaid
work, especially domestic and care work. But among
employed women the number of hours of unpaid work is
also very high —in some cases as much as four times the
figure for men.
■■
Brazil. 2012
■■
Men
Source: Economic Commission for Latin America and the Caribbean (ECLAC), on the basis
of special tabulations of data from household surveys conducted in the respective countries.
a
Simple average of the nearest year’s data available for each country.
47
Economic Commission for Latin America and the Caribbean (ECLAC)
B. Decision-making autonomy
■■
■■
(Percentages)
60
50
40
30
26
20
10
Ecuador
Cuba
Latin America and
the Caribbean
Nicaragua
Mexico
Argentina
Costa Rica
Guyana
Grenada
El Salvador
Trinidad and Tobago
Peru
Honduras
Bolivia (Plur. State of)
Saint Lucia
Dominican Rep.
Venezuela (Bol. Rep. of)
Chile
Paraguay
Barbados
Bahamas
Guatemala
Jamaica
Dominica
Saint Vicent and
the Grenadines
Uruguay
Colombia
Brazil
Suriname
Panama
Antigua and Barbuda
0
Haiti
■■
Figure VI.3
Latin America (19 countries) and the Caribbean (14 countries):
elected women in national parliaments, single house or lower
house, by existence of quota laws, 2013
Belize
■■
Five women presidents currently hold office in Latin
America and the Caribbean; in recent years the number
of female legislators, judges and mayors has grown.
Substantial progress has thus been made over the past 20
years in this sphere.
Between 2003 and 2013, the proportion of women in
legislative bodies in the region climbed from 19% to 26%.
The differences among countries are striking: in a number
of parliaments (including Argentina, Costa Rica, Ecuador,
Mexico and Nicaragua), around 40% are women; in some
(Brazil and Panama) they fall short of 10%.
The increase in the proportion of female mayors has
been smaller and progress slower, so most countries fall
below 20% and the regional average is just 11.7%, only
1.7 percentage points higher than the average for 2011
(10.0%). As for female city council members, the regional
average has risen over the past 10 years, from 19.8% in 2002
to 25.6% in 2012.
The presence of more women in decision-making areas
has brought historically private matters into the public
discourse. Among these are care of minors, older persons
and the ill, access to sexual and reproductive health, and
gender-based violence and its relationship to physical and
decision-making autonomy.
With respect to gender institutions, the number of countries
with machineries at ministerial level increased from 35%
in 2009 to 45% in 2013 (nine countries, two more than in 2009).
Saint Kitts and Nevis
■■
Countries with quota laws
Source: Economic Commission for Latin America and the Caribbean (ECLAC), Gender
Equality Observatory for Latin America and the Caribbean, on the basis of official sources.
Figure VI.4
Latin America and the Caribbean: elected women councillors and
mayors, 2002-2012
(Percentages)
30
25.0
25
20
19.8
20.0
20.8
21.3
21.2
22.0
21.6
26.2
25.6
22.5
15
11.7
10
5
0
2002
10.0
6.4
2003
6.4
2004
6.6
2005
7.0
2006
7.5
2007
Female councillors
7.8
7.7
2008
2009
10.0
8.4
2010
2011
2012
2013
Female mayors
Source: Economic Commission for Latin America and the Caribbean (ECLAC), Gender
Equality Observatory for Latin America and the Caribbean, on the basis of official sources.
48
Economic and Social Panorama of the Community of Latin American and Caribbean States, 2014
C. Physical autonomy
■■
■■
(Percentages)
25
20
19.7
16.7
17.0
16.3
15
17.4
15.4
15.4
14.4
15.0
14.6
14.8
13.1
12.4
12.4
12.1
11.8 12.011.7
13.2
11.1
10
13.9
9.5
Initial data
Uruguay
(1995-2011)
Costa Rica
(2000-2011)
Peru
(1993-2007)
Brazil
(2000-2010)
Mexico
(2000-2010)
Argentina (2001-2010)
Venezuela (Bol. Rep. of)
(2001-2011)
0
El Salvador
(1992-2007)
5
Panama (2001-2010)
■■
Figure VI.5
Latin America (11 countries): women aged 15-19 who are
mothers, initial data and latest data available
Ecuador ((2001-2010)
■■
The gains in this regard have meant acknowledging that
violence against women is a threat to their autonomy and
accepting State intervention.
Women’s autonomy in the area of sexual and reproductive
health still faces challenges that in a number of countries
take the form of restrictions on access to fertility control
for the population as a whole or certain segments of the
population (lack of appropriate and timely policies and
measures aimed at adolescents). Other challenges are
presented by the lack of education in this area and by the
imposition of unwanted pregnancy.
One serious consequence is adolescent pregnancy. Although
fertility rates for women overall are trending down, not
only has there been no significant drop among adolescent
women but some countries have seen an increase among
lower-income, less educated adolescents.
Adolescent pregnancy and motherhood are more than a
major barrier to overcoming poverty and to young women
entering the workplace. They also put girls and young
women at greater risk of physical or sexual violence by
their partners.
Three Latin American countries, as well as Mexico City,
now have legislation that allows abortion. In five countries
abortion is illegal in all its forms, including when the
woman’s life is in danger. Of the 11 countries that permit
abortion in certain circumstances, 2 of them do so only
when the woman’s life is in danger.
Dominican Rep.
(2002-2010)
■■
Latest data available
Source: Economic Commission for Latin America and the Caribbean (ECLAC), Gender
Equality Observatory for Latin America and the Caribbean, on the basis of official sources.
49
Economic Commission for Latin America and the Caribbean (ECLAC)
D. Violence against women
■■
■■
■■
■■
Figure VI.6
Latin America (7 countries): women who have experienced some
form of physical or sexual violence by their partner or former
partner, by marital status
(Percentages)
60
57.0
56.8
50
41.0
40
30
34.0
31.5
25.9
25.4
21.1
20
25.0
20.1
13.5
14.6
11.1 10.6
10
0
Bolivia
(Plur. State of)
2008
Colombia
2010
Ecuador
2004
El Salvador
2008
Married or in a union
Peru
2012
Honduras
2011/2012
Haiti
2012
Separated/divorced
Source: Economic Commission for Latin America and the Caribbean (ECLAC), Gender Equality
Observatory for Latin America and the Caribbean on the basis of Demographic and Health Surveys
(DHS) [online] http://www.measuredhs.com/ and Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.
Figure VI.7
Latin America (7 countries): women who had ever experienced
intimate-partner or former-partner physical violence, by
educational level, most recent survey data available
(Percentages)
50
46
45
42
40
37
41
38
38
35
30
25
29
33 32
30
26
26
23
20
21
18
16
15
13
18
15
19
14
11 10 10
10
12
7
No education
Primary
Honduras
2011-2012
Haiti
2012
Ecuador
2004
Colombia
2010
Bolivia
(Plur. State of)
2008
5
0
39
Secondary
Dominican Rep.
2007
■■
There are two types of instruments for measuring violence
against women: (a) surveys, which gauge the incidence and
prevalence of violence against women; and (b) administrative
records, which yield information on incidents that have taken
place and have been entered in the information systems
of public services (health, police, justice, Ministry of the
Interior) as well as information on State resources available.
Physical and/or sexual violence against women by an
intimate partner or former partner cuts across all countries
and socioeconomic strata and is territorially diverse.
The strongest and most consistent factors associated with
intimate partner violence are being separated or divorced,
the number of children and a family history of the father
physically abusing the mother or stepmother. All of these
conditions increase women’s vulnerability and dependence
in the context of naturalization of violence.
Age at first union is an important factor for the likelihood of
suffering violence. In all countries with such data available,
women who were less than 15 years old at the time of their
first union reported having been a victim of violence in a
higher proportion than those who entered their first union
at an older age.
In Ecuador and Peru about 38% of indigenous women have
experienced physical or sexual violence at the hands of a
partner; this figure is estimated to be 24% of indigenous
women in Guatemala and 20% in Paraguay.
Femicide is one of the areas where the information void
is most apparent, because of the many different sources
of information, as well substantial underreporting, a lack
of methodological validation, no official figures and no
agency assigned to generate them, among other issues.
Peru
2012
■■
Post-secondary
Source: Economic Commission for Latin America and the Caribbean (ECLAC), Gender Equality
Observatory for Latin America and the Caribbean on the basis of Demographic and Health Surveys
(DHS) [online] http://www.measuredhs.com/ and Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.
50
Economic and Social Panorama of the Community of Latin American and Caribbean States, 2014
The Gender Equality Observatory for Latin America and
the Caribbean gathers official information provided by the
governments of the region, facilitating progress in establishing
the numbers of women are killed by an intimate partner or
former partner. Simultaneously, information on the total
number of violent deaths of women (femicide) has been
compiled on the basis of responses from seven countries.
■■
Figure VI.8
Latin America (selected countries): intimate-partner physical or
sexual violence among women aged 15-49 who are married or in
a union, by language spoken in the home, around 2010
(Percentages)
45
35
37.6
28.7
26.4
25
20
160
21.8
21.5
15.6
13.9
8.7
8.6
10.3
12.7
8.8
8.1
98
100
14.9
80
60
7.6
4.3
5
0
160
120
24.3
18.9
10.7
39.7
140
32.1
30
10
Figure VI.9
Latin America (7 countries): femicide or homicide of women
for reasons of gender and women killed by a current or former
intimate partner, latest data available
180
40 38.4
15
The processing of the indicator for deaths of women caused
by a current or former intimate partner has improved
substantially since 2010, when ECLAC began compiling
data on seven countries in Latin America, two in the
Caribbean, and Spain. Currently, information is available
for 12 countries in Latin America and 8 in the Caribbean,
plus Spain and Portugal.
■■
98
83
71
54
46
40
20
Indigenous Mestizo
White
Indigenous Spanish Guaraní
languages
Guatemala
2008-2009
Ecuador
2004
Ever
Guaraní Spanish Portuguese Indigenous Spanish
languages
and
Spanish
Paraguay
Peru
2008
2007-2008
In the past 12 months
Source: Economic Commission for Latin America and the Caribbean (ECLAC), “Mujeres
indígenas en América Latina: dinámicas demográficas y sociales en el marco de los derechos
humanos”, Project Documents, No. 558 (LC/W.558), Santiago, Chile, 2013.
0
17
Dominican
Rep.
El Salvador
Peru
Puerto Rico
27
25
25
20
Uruguay
Paraguay
18
11
Costa Rica
Women killed by intimate partner or former partner
Total gender-based women’s homicides (femicides)
Source: Economic Commission for Latin America and the Caribbean (ECLAC), Gender
Equality Observatory for Latin America and the Caribbean.
51
Economic Commission for Latin America and the Caribbean (ECLAC)
Figure VI.10
Latin America (12 countries) and Iberian Peninsula (2 countries):
women killed by an intimate partner or former partner, latest
period available
Figure VI.11
The Caribbean (8 countries): women killed by an intimate partner
or former partner, latest period available
(Absolute numbers and rates)
(Absolute numbers and rates)
17
20
25
40
46
0.27
0.3
0.18 0.2
0.12
0.1
Colombia
Peru
Spain
Dominican Rep.
El Salvador
Chile
Nicaragua
Portugal
Absolute number
Honduras
Uruguay
Paraguay
Puerto Rico
Guatemala
Costa Rica
0
0.0
Rate (per 100.000 inhabitants)
Source: Economic Commission for Latin America and the Caribbean (ECLAC), Gender
Equality Observatory for Latin America and the Caribbean, December 2013.
52
4
0.94
3
0.91
0
1.0
0.56
2
1
4
3
0
0.00
1
1
0.30
1
0.29
0.5
Rate (per 100.000 inhabitants)
17
0.11
40
0.23
0.0
Absolute number
Jamaica
11
30
34
1.5
1.39
5
Barbados
20
0.28
0.4
2.0
6
6
Trinidad and
Tobago
0.29
0.23
0.5
54
8
7
Suriname
40
0.45
2.11
Saint Vincent and
the Grenadines
0.46
60
0.7
0.6
71
2.5
8
Grenada
83
88
Dominica
0.69
Saint Lucia
Absolute number
80
9
0.8
0.73
0.67
Absolute number
0.73
Rate (per 100.000 inhabitants)
100
Rate (per 100.000 inhabitants)
Source: Economic Commission for Latin America and the Caribbean (ECLAC), Gender
Equality Observatory for Latin America and the Caribbean, December 2013.