INTRODUCTION Social inclusion is the concept that a citizen has
the ability to participate in the basic political, economic and social
functioning of his or her society. It includes not just economic empowerment, but also access to basic social services, access to infrastructure (physical and institutional), access to the formal labor
market, civil and political participation and voice, and the absence of
legally sanctioned discrimination based on race, ethnicity or gender.
States have the capacity (and responsibility) to directly or indirectly
affect these conditions. For this reason we have organized the index
into: INPUTS TO SOCIAL INCLUSION (the political environment, economic conditions, state policies, and access to services that promote
social inclusion) and OUTPUTS OF SOCIAL INCLUSION (the economic, political and policy outcomes that result from policies, rights and
economic conditions that lead to social inclusion over the long term).
For each of the 15 variables below, we scored all 11 countries
on a relative scale that we then combined and converted to 0– 100
(with 100 representing the highest a country could score if it were
to outperform its hemispheric neighbors in all 15 variables). We also
developed a scale that included the U.S., based on 7 of the variables
for which we have data. With the exception of the U.S., the 15-variable
relative score is noted for each country card in the lower right corner.
(The U.S. score is based only on its performance regionally in the 7
indicators.) The lower a country’s overall score, the lower its ranking.
On page 122 we rank the 11 countries for which we have data in our
Social Inclusion Index, overall and by variable. For more on the methodology we used to calculate the scores and rank the countries, and
the data sources we consulted, please visit www.americasquarterly.
org/social-inclusion-index.
GDP GROW TH A country can only reduce poverty
and inequality if it is growing economically. The
first measure of the index takes the average of
the country’s growth from 2001–2010.
INPU TS
Name of Country
PERCENT GDP SPENT ON SOCIAL PROGRAMS There
are no measures of the effectiveness of state spending
on social programs, so we used this simpler, imperfect
measure of percent GDP spent. Countries were scored
on a relative basis, since there is no optimal level—
though up to a certain point, more, of course, is better.
Social Inclusion Index 2012
ENROLLMENT IN SECONDARY
SCHOOL Since there is near-universal
enrollment in primary schools in the
region, we chose secondary school to
measure access. We used household
data disaggregated by gender and
race/ethnicity and analyzed by the
World Bank ( WB). For sake of ease,
non-minority refers to respondents
who did not self-identify as
Indigenous, Afro-descendant or other
similar terms in specific countries.
PERCENT LIVING ON
MORE THAN $4 PER DAY
Based on household data
disaggregated by gender and
race/ethnicity (non-minority/
minority). According to
the WB, over $4 per day is
defined as above moderate
poverty—for our purposes a
better measure than being
out of absolute poverty
($2.50/day).
OUTPUTS
PERSONAL EMPOWERMENT
This is the standard measure of
what is called internal efficacy
in political science. Drawn
from 2010 AmericasBarometer
survey data, it is based on the
statement, “You feel that you
understand the most important
political issues of the country,”
asking respondents to disagree
or agree on scale of 1 to 7. The
survey has a margin of error of
+/- 2.9%.
Political Rights Civil Rights 0 10 20 30 40 50 inputs GDP Growth 2001–2010 GDP Spent on Social Programs Enrollment Secondary School by gender by race Civil Society Participation 0 10 20 1 2 3 4 5 comments
%
%
30 40
male
%
female
%
non-minority
%
minority
%
outputs
Percent Living on More than $4 per day
by gender
by race
Percent Access to a Formal Job (age 25–65)
by gender
by race
male
%
female
%
non-minority
%
minority
%
12
Personal Empowerment
Government Responsiveness (Efficacy)
1
234
Access to Adequate Housing
by gender
by race
male
%
female
%
non-minority
%
minority
%
male
%
345
%
female
%
non-minority
%
minority
overall score
POLITICAL RIGHTS
These scores, from 0– 40—
with 40 being the greatest
degree of rights—are from
Freedom House’s survey of
Freedom in the World 2011.
They evaluate a
country’s respect for
10 political rights grouped
into 3 categories: the
electoral process ( 3
questions); political
pluralism and participation
( 4); and functioning of
government ( 3).
CIVIL SOCIETY PARTICIPATION
Based on 2010 survey data from
AmericasBarometer, this measures
the average number of associations
respondents said they participated
in, out of a possible 6. The survey
has a margin of error of +/- 2.9%.
PERCEN T ACCESS TO A FORMAL JOB
Based on household data disaggregated
by gender and race/ethnicity. An
individual between 25 and 65 is
considered to have a formal job if he/
she will receive a pension.
CIVIL RIGH TS These scores, from 0– 60—with 60 representing
the greatest degree of rights—are from Freedom House’s
survey of Freedom in the World 2011. They evaluate a country’s
respect for 15 civil liberties grouped into 4 categories:
freedom of expression and belief ( 4 questions); associational
and organizational rights ( 3); rule of law ( 4); and personal
autonomy and individual rights ( 4).
ACCESS TO ADEQUATE HOUSING
Based on household data
disaggregated by gender and race/
ethnicity. It includes 3 indicators of
adequate housing: access to water;
access to electricity; and lack of
severe overcrowding.
GOVERNMENT
RESPONSIVENESS
(EFFICACY) This is the
standard measure of what
is called external efficacy in
political science. Drawn from
2010 AmericasBarometer
survey data, it is based on
the statement, “Those who
govern are interested in what
people like you think,” asking
respondents to disagree or
agree on a scale of 1 to 7. The
survey has a margin of error
of +/- 2.9%.
AMERICASQUARTERLY.ORG
115 Americas Quarterly SPRING 2012
