1 A critic approach to welfare: The case of Costa Rica.
An Application of the BES methodology
Table of Contents
1. Introduction. What is Development? ………… 2
2. The BES. How to measure Development?...4
3. Socio-economical overview of Costa Rica…….6
4. The BES dimensions of welfare……….10
5. Alternative form of showing the BES information… 37
6. Beyond the BES results. 3 approaches……….42
7. Conclusion ………48
8. Annex ………51
2 A critic approach to welfare: The case of Costa Rica.
An Application of the BES methodology
Abstract
The aim of this research is to evaluate the current state of the welfare in Costa Rica, in order to have a wider picture of it, and to comprehend the present status of the Costa Rican society, in order to go beyond the often “economicist” (simplistic) criteria that merely focuses in the GDP growth to consider if the society has performed properly. For this purpose, the BES (Benessere Equo Sostenibile), a recent study that seeks to evaluate the welfare that is experienced in Italy, constitutes a relevant input in the analysis of welfare and its accountability from different areas and different indicators. The methodology implemented by the BES, that is, their defined areas of interest in order to evaluate the well-being experienced by the citizens, constitutes the framework for evaluating the particular well-being of the Costa Rican society. The results observed by this application are commented afterwards in contrast with three possible explanations/theories that give light to understand their present status.
1. Introduction: What is development?
How to measure the development of a country? And first of all, what is understood by development? In many occasions, the center of the attention seems to be put in the accumulation of goods and wealth, making this “accumulation race” equal to the attainment of development… But this shouldn’t be so.
In mainstream economics a common error may be generally observed, which consists of considering GDP growth as equal to development1. As it has been clarified by this analysis and pondering the insights provided by the study BES – Benessere Equo Sostenibile, development should be understood as a much wider concept. It involves, indeed, in order to attain a comprehensive analysis, the evaluation of several variables that affect the well-being of a society. Development is an anthropocentric concept, and its’ fundamental cornerstones may be classified in these three areas: Ecological, economical and, equity and cultural diversity. Its objective attains the welfare of people, since it looks to create a proper
1
3 environment for the enjoyment of the livelihoods by people, having longer, healthier and more creative lives.
In this regard, GDP growth should be seen simply as a proxy variable which is exposing one single dimension of the economic wealth. It relates to how much the production is actually growing, but as some authors2 have proposed, the GDP is an incomplete indicator of welfare, for it doesn’t show costs, for instance, the environmental degradation or the welfare to which people have to renounce in order to reach that particular GDP level. Also, the single number exposed as GDP is not bringing any information about the social composition, such as existing inequalities or the education of the people, aspects that are relevant for development.
In accordance with this general criticism, it comes to mind the genuinely and yet no less correct, affirmation by Ladislau Dowbor:
“We are destroying the ground, the water, the life in the oceans, the vegetable coverage, the oil reserves, the ozone layer, the climate itself, but what we account for is the rate of growth”3.
Another case in which this wrong notion of development can be clearly depicted would be, for example, having some growth of the GDP, along with growing inequalities inside the society. A society under such conditions, just as could be the case of Costa Rica in the last 10 years, would be considered to be fostering its development or not? Maybe mainstream economists wouldn’t disagree in considering that this scenario is indeed positive, since they would merely focus in the growth of production, which they may grant as a mayor advantage, even though the social spectrum of welfare is much wider, as it has been mentioned. This fact goes in line with what is affirmed by author Basu4:
“Developing nations must not focus their energies on the growth rates of
their GDP, NNP, GNP, and the like but should instead try to achieve “human development” or “comprehensive development””.
The author is stating the importance of social, health and economical variables that are represented in the “human development” index, a measure promoted by the
2
Tinbergen and Samuelson, just to mention the origins of this effort, as it’s exposed in “La Polémica de los Límites al Crecimiento” by professor Ramón Tamames.
3
Democracia Económica, Ladislau Dowbor. Taken from the newspaper article: “La Tierra en números rojos: el ser humano, Satán de la Tierra”. 8/14/2017
http://www.elpais.cr/2017/08/14/la -tierra-en-numeros-rojos-el-ser-humano-satan-de-la-tierra/ 4
On the Goals of Develpment, from Frontiers of Development Economics, Meier M.G., Stiglitz, J.E., editors., Oxford University Press, 2000.
4 UNDP since 1990. Nevertheless, his advice hasn’t been quite followed by Costa Rican authorities: in 2006 the country occupied the 48th position at a global level, while ten years later, it is ranked 66th. With this worsening in the positions, could it be stated then that the country has become “less develop in these 10 years”? At least could it be affirmed that the development policies have failed or at least weakened? By observing this single evolution, one would certainly be tempted to do so.
2. The BES. How to measure development?
In his book Ideas Económicas en Costa Rica (1850-2005), author Rodrigo Quesada affirms:
“Both economic and social sciences, as well as those called “humane studies”, should redirect their objectives, in order to serve the most essential needs of the population, instead of just looking the instrument aspects or logistics on how corporations work.”5
This affirmation goes in line with the idea mentioned above of bringing back the focus of development to the actual welfare experienced by the people, the “most essential needs” that population faces. This “needs” aren’t represented just by a single number (the GDP), they correspond to particular areas of current day livelihoods, and in this manner, the research and the framework built by the BES attain a great relevance in trying to make ‘tangible’ some of the various dimensions of what is understood by welfare.
By evaluating the curre nt state of welfare from a particular society one can obtain certain insights that are quite useful, for instance:
1. Welfare is the goal/objective of development, therefore, by directly studying what is considered to be welfare, one is facing firsthand the result of a specific development strategy, which can lead to a more informed and grounded evaluation of this development model or strategy. That is to say: if the observed levels of the welfare that is been analyzed aren’t so promising, then one may conclude that the development path that is been followed doesn’t make much sense, as the populations’ life conditions aren’t being improved. On the opposite side, if the welfare is evaluated as positive, then
5
5 one may approve the success of the development that is being implemented.
2. Regarding the previous point, as public policies are part of the central core that defines a development model, one can determine the level of efficiency when it comes to the implementation of these policies. What is the actual impact or result that specific policies are having in the society? By looking at the welfare indicators one would be able to judge the present effect of the policies in the society.
The great Austrian economist, J.A. Schumpeter stated in an essay about the work of Pareto: “From the beginning of the economic science, the concept of public
welfare - vaguely defined, had an important role in the writings of the economists”6. Under the light of this affirmation, the approach and the goals elaborated by the BES constitute a relevant practical contribution for the development economics. The BES is a project by the Istat and Cnel that began in 2010, with the aim to measure equitable and sustainable well-being. The experts and civil society that have contributed in the elaboration of their reports have measured well-being in accordance to 12 social and environmental dimensions.7 These dimensions of well-being were defined under a quite democratic procedure, after consulting relevant experts and the Italian society through a series of meetings with organizations and associations. This process of defining well-being should be undertaken by each society, in order to have a proper judgment of the public policies that are in action, and that in fact, come to give shape to the society.
Specifically for the UrBES 2015, the report had the purpose to submit relevant and ample information about the quality of the urban life in the Italian main cities. This report had its origins in the year 2011 initiative by the Province of Pesaro and Urbino, in partnership with the Istat, they proposed to apply the original BES methodology to the analysis of their community. In this manner, its elaboration had also the goal to make visible and increase the well-being in these cities, as it was intended as a practical, innovative social-tool, providing relevant information for policy makers and the civil society. Moreover, by utilizing the measures proposed, it seeks to expose the progress of the society and enrich the information that is generally given by the common macroeconomic indicators used to describe growth. The 12 domains of well-being design by the BES are the following:
Health Security
Education Subjective Well-being
6
J.A. Schumpeter, (1996). 7
BES 2014 Equitable and Sustainable well -being in Italy. Document. https://www.istat.it/en/files/2015/03/ bes.pdf
6 Employment and leisure time Landscape and cultural patrimony
Economic welfare Environment
Social Relationships Research and Innovation Politics and institutions Quality of services
The framework provided by the BES is especially useful in the sense that it may be applied as well for local governments, in order for them to have a complete and clear sense of the state of the wellness that their citizens enjoy. For them, the citizens, it is useful as well, since it provides them relevant information from their communities, which may induce them to have a more active role in pa rticipating in the decision-making that involves them.
In regards to what the UrBES has shown from the Italian case, there are tendencies of inequalities among regions. The exposure of this fact, as highlighted by its authors, may contribute to have a relevant influence in promoting a new development model, a contribution that certainly should not be underestimated. Nevertheless, the authors are conscious about this “idealistic” purpose to be reached by their labor (to have a significant influence as to promote positive changes), and they don’t hesitate in manifesting that their project is a work in progress, whose set of indicators may be gradually and continually improved. This is quite a plausible evaluation coming from the authors, considering the innovative approach that is undertaken in the realization of the project. It is clear as well that the project, with its goal of having a response from communities and from the local governments, acting as a kind of input for the owns’ project evolution; will be determined from these particular responses that it will eventually come to have.
3. Socio-economical overview of Costa Rica
Costa Rica is a small nation located in Central America with a territory twice as big as Sicily, and with a similar amount of population (almost 5 million). Historically, it has been recognized for its proper living conditions, among the Latin-American nations.
Most of all, the great diversity of its nature, as well as the strengthen democracy and political stability have been highlighted characteristics. The social harmony of the country and the wealth of its people, a positive effect of the abolition of the army forces in 1948, have differentiated the country from its most immediate neighbors in the region of Central America.
7 Nevertheless this social preconceptions or ideas, under a more detailed and critical analysis, may come to appear as simple “social myths” in regards to the actual living conditions of the country, if it is so that they might have experienced a worsening (considerable) in the past recent decades, specifically, in its capital and main city, San José. Part of this urban problematic, related with the actual welfare that people experience, may be explained by the demographic expansion (mainly in the city) as well as by the migration from rural areas to the capital, along with insufficient investments from the public sector.
Considering these observations, the importance to measure and evaluate the welfare arises, in order to come to proof (or at least have a clearer view) if the living conditions experienced by the Costa Ricans have actually worsen (or not) and which areas have been more unattended.
For example, just to mention one single but illustrative fact, it is surprising the state of the inequality, inside of a country, that just in recent decades was especially proud and recognized for its vast middle class. Certainly, to have an equal society would be ideal for a country that claims proud for its solidarity, not to mention as well that it would be a key element for the fostering of a sustainable development. But the data shows evidence that Costa Rica was one of two exceptions, from 17 Latin-American nations8, for the period 2002-2013 in having an increase in its Gini coefficient. This fact should by itself recall the attention in order to view that, if unattended the inequalities in a country eventually would lead to an unsustainable condition in the core of society.
Regional division of Costa Rica
8
The other country was the Dominican Republic. Both nations were the two mentioned exceptions, inside this historically unequal region. Desigualdad, concent ración del ingreso y tributación sobre las altas rentas en América Latina, J.P. Jiménez (editor), CEPAL, 2015, page 14.
8 Taken from: Estadísticas Regionales 2010-2014
Prior to exposing the application of the BES methodology, it is worth the effort of characterizing basic socioeconomic aspects of the regions of Costa Rica, since it is at this level that the study was elaborated, given the availability of the data required.
The country is subdivided in 6 regions: Central, Brunca, Chorotega, Huetar Caribe, Huetar Norte and Pacífico Central. The biggest one of them is the Chorotega, which represent a 19,8% of the national territory, and the smaller ones are the Central and the Pacific regions, representing 16,7% and 7,6%, respectively.
One of the most important differences among these regions is the amount of population that resides in them: Central, which contains the 4 principal cities of the country (among them San José, capital of the country), gathers more population that the remaining 5 regions considered together, accounting for 62% of the national population. This simple but illustrative fact may begin to bring some light, as a certain intuition may arise, concerning the considerable differences that actually subsist among regions.
Population of the 6 regions
Region/ Year 2010 2015 (proportion) Growth
Central 2.843.356 3.009.724 (62,3% ) 5,85%
Brunca 346.309 358.877 (7,4%) 3,63%
Chorotega 338.257 365.905 (7,5%) 8,17%
9 Huetar Norte 348.067 385.239 (7,9%) 10,68%
Pacífico Central 257.018 280.124 (5,7% ) 8,99%
Total 4.538.307 4.833.752 6,51%
From: Regional Statistics 2010-2015
Another relevant indicator to analyze is the rate of poor households inside the regions, which also brings more significant information, confirming actual inequalities. In this case, the two faces of the coin are represented by the Central and the Brunca regions: Central has the lowest rate, with almost 17% of its households facing poverty conditions for the years 2014-2015, while Brunca doubles this proportion in relation to its own households. The other four regions, as observed, are closer in its values to the extreme of the Brunca region. As a matter of fact, none of them reaches even a 25% of poor households, a fact that ca lls the attention, showing how a dimension of welfare is actually significantly different inside the country. The country’s poverty is around the 20%, though paradoxically 5 of its 6 regions are far above this line of poverty.
For year 2014, with the entrance of a new government in May, the poverty has increased in all the regions of the country, so it’s safe to say that the preceding government failed in this aspect. What living conditions did it actually left for the citizens?
A year afterwards a sma ll improvement can be attributed to the new government: the most significant reduction in the Chorotega region, while the Hue tar regions suffered small worsening in their levels of poverty of less than 1 percentage point.
Percentage of poor households at the national level and in the 6 regions
Region/ Year 2010 2014 2015 National 21,3 22,4 21,7 Central 17,1 17,2 17,1 Brunca 34,9 36,2 35,4 Chorotega 32,6 33,2 27 Huetar Caribe 28,1 28,2 29 Huetar Norte 25,3 26,8 27,2 Pacífico Central 25,9 29,5 27,4 From: Regional Statistics 2010-2015
Complementing this data, a relevant variable to observe is the Gini coefficient, to actually evaluate the inequality that subsists, at a national level and inside the regions. For the period 2010-2016, policies seeking for equality haven’t been efficient, since the national Gini coefficient has significantly raised, passing from
10 0,503 to 0,515. This rise was as well experienced, during the same period, in the Central, Huetar Caribe and Pacífico Central regions. The poores t region, the Brunca, had an improvement during the period regarding its inequality, but, nevertheless, this region is also the most unequal one.
National and Regional Gini Coefficient, 2010-2016
2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 Nacional 0,503 0,508 0,510 0,519 0,512 0,510 0,515 Central 0,486 0,490 0,498 0,506 0,495 0,492 0,500 Brunca 0,543 0,537 0,525 0,543 0,538 0,534 0,523 Chorotega 0,520 0,515 0,521 0,510 0,501 0,508 0,492 Huetar Caribe 0,482 0,506 0,469 0,478 0,439 0,486 0,496 Huetar Norte 0,519 0,506 0,491 0,501 0,520 0,512 0,516 Pacífico Central 0,501 0,507 0,497 0,508 0,481 0,497 0,513 From: INEC
Just by evaluating the previous information, one may come to reflect, and ask, just as E.F. Schumacher did, if the development model is actually being successful into bringing its benefits along the layers of society and if not, what is the convenience of it for the people.
“One of the negative trends in practically all developing countries is the emergence of an increasingly pronounced form of “dual economy”, whereby there are two distinct models of life as widely separated from one another as two different worlds are. It is not that some people are rich and others are poor, being both united by a common form of life; it is about two fo rms of life coexisting in such a way that even the most humble member of one has a daily income which is a high multiple of the income received by a member of the other group, even considering that the former is a simple worker. The social and political tensions that emerge from a dual economy are too obvious to make an explanation necessary.” 9
4. The BES dimensions of welfare
Deepening into the evaluation of welfare in the Costa Rican society, the categories (dimensions) of welfare used for the UrBES 2015 were applied, when the data was available, for a recent period of time, for the Costa Rican regions. The value of the
9
11 exercise clearly resides in the ample categories of welfare that are considered by the BES, and how their evaluation may bring more light into knowing its actual state inside of a country.
For the UrBES 2015 purposes, the indicators were designed by experts and public officers taking into account these conditions:
- The indicator should consist of a direct measure of the improving/worsening of relevant aspects that attain the well-being from the cities.
- The indicator should be reliable and accurate enough for comparisons among cities and along a certain time scale
1. Health
A primary, if not the most fundamental, dimension of wealth of course regards the health: without proper levels of health all the other socio-economical factors, such as the economical wealth and employment, seem of scarce importance, since health attains directly to the well-being of individuals. With regards to this issue, the indicators at a national level seem promising, showing the appropriate functioning of the states’ policies. The data doesn’t show significant differences among the six regions. The first indicator corresponds to life expectancy, which a t the national level is around 79 years, with a small tendency to increase and with a “natural” difference between the genders, as it is also commonly observed among other countries. This indicator is often praised by the public authorities as a national pride, since it is close to the levels observed in develop nations, and if compared with other Latin-American nations, it corresponds to the second higher (just below Chile), a fact that certainly exposes the fruitful deeds from the costarrican social security system in the past 40 years.
Life expectancy for Costa Rica Year Women Men National
2015 82,07 77,23 79,59 2014 81,91 77,01 79,4 2013 81,76 76,81 79,23 2012 81,59 76,64 79,05 2011 81,42 76,48 78,89 2010 81,25 76,34 78,74 From: datosmacro.com
12 For this same indicator but responding to the regional aggregates, the general tendency was of a small improvement for the six regions: all of them had an increased life expectancy at the end of the given period. For 2014 (last year with availability of data), the Huetar Norte is the one with the highest life expectancy, with 80,6 years, with a difference of 4 years if compared to the lowest observation which corresponds to the Chorotega, which shows the lowest levels, along with the Huetar Caribe for the whole 5 year period.
Regional Life expectancy
2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 Central 78 79 79,2 79,1 79 Brunca 77,6 79 79,2 80,5 79,7 Chorotega 75,5 78 77,7 77,5 76,6 Huetar Caribe 75,8 75,6 75,9 76,6 77,5 Huetar Norte 79,2 80,4 79,7 80,6 80,6 Pacífico Central 77,1 78,2 78,2 78,3 77,8 From: INEC
Another basic indicator in this initial category is child mortality, which for 2015 was of 8,43 deaths for every 1.000 births10 at the national level. Evaluating the regional data one observes that there were two regions above the national average: Chorotega and Huetar Caribe. This last region, which presents the highest value observed, of almost 11 deaths out of 1000 births, almost doubles the region with the lowest value, which is the Pacífico Central, with only 6,3.
Child Mortality ( /1.000 births)
2015 Central 8,13 Brunca 8,38 Chorotega 8,81 Huetar Caribe 11,03 Huetar Norte 7,91 Pacífico Central 6,3
From: Mortalidad Infantil y Evolución Reciente.2016
With regards to cancer mortality, the principal cause of deceases in the country, the national rate is 9 out of every 10.000 people. This rate shows its highest value
10
13 in the Central, a fact to be expected since it is associated to a high density of the population, for the Central concentrates more than half of the country’s population.
Cancer Mortality rate (every 10.000 people)
2012 2015 National 9,16 9,66 Central 10,44 10,95 Brunca 6,82 8,28 Chorotega 8,83 8,44 Huetar Caribe 6,87 6,36 Huetar Norte 5,41 6,36 Pacífico Central 7,41 8,71 From: INEC
Concerning the indicator of other causes of mortality, the two main causes in the country are traffic accidents and drowning.
Year 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015
Number of deaths 567 516 570 578 613
% from accidents and drownings
45,3% 49,6% 44,4% 46,2% 55,2% From: Muertes accidentales 2015, Poder Judicial
For the total quantity of these events the values observed were rising during the period, with a significant exception in the year 2012. Regarding the percentage that traffic accidents and drowning represent from the total number of deaths, they reached the highest value with more than half of the events at the end of the period.
From this variable there are two facts worth noticing:
- There is a quite significant difference between victims of the incidences according to their gender. The occurrence to men accounts for approximately 85% of the total incidents for the period. As a matter of fact, having a mortality rate from accidents of (almost) 13 deaths every 100.000 people for the year 2015, in the case of just men this number raises to 22. - 51,5% of the incidents occurred during the weekend (including Fridays).
This lead to the authorities supposing that the more “free” time is a dangerous factor affecting the incidence of these events.
14 This mortality rate caused by accidents faces its highest values in 2015 in the Pacific and Chorotega, with 26,9 and 20,2 respectively, with that corresponding to men at 47,9 and 35,4, while for women the contrast is clear: just 4,8 and 4,5. Since the proportion of deaths caused by drowning is always increasing in this rate, it is kind of straightforward to observe a higher rate in these regions, since they have the most visited beaches inside the country, continuously receiving visitors, among them tourists, but especially people from the city, that is, the Central, and most of all, for the weekends.
2. Education
Education in the country is considerably homogeneous during the basic periods, since their attendance is mandatory, defined as a right and a duty, by a Government decree. Furthermore the government has implemented since 2006 a system of economic support to the families with lowest incomes, as an incentive to promote the maintenance in school. This leads to the result of having a 94,7% as the average rate of attendance for the first cycle of schooling, for the period 2010-2015.
Nevertheless, this optimistic scenario suffers a considerable drop for the superior levels of study, as may be expected considering what has been seen historically regarding the Costa Rican system: the average rate of attendance to the second cycle, for the period 2010-2015 was of 84,7% at a National level, while for the next range of studies, the third cycle, and for the same period, the average rate of attendance drops to 70,5%.
This fact can also be observed when looking to the school participation in the range of specific ages:
Rate of participation in school from ages 5-12 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 National 96,1 96,3 96,3 96,4 97 96,7 Central 97,2 97,2 97,3 97,5 98,0 97,4 Chorotega 95,1 96,6 95,4 96,3 97,5 95,6 Pacífico Central 95,0 96,3 95,9 97,8 96,2 94,7 Brunca 95,4 94,9 93,6 94,9 95,7 96,3 Huetar Atlántica 95,3 95,3 96,4 96,0 94,6 95,9 Huetar Norte 92,9 93,0 93,6 91,4 96,0 96,0
From: Estado de la Nación, 2016. Estadísticas Sociales
15 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 National 83,1 83,7 84,9 86,6 88,5 87,6 Central 85,6 85,9 86,9 88,3 89,4 88,8 Chorotega 81,5 84,1 84,8 85,4 85,0 88,3 Pacífico Central 82,9 85,7 80,5 83,4 90,4 89,9 Brunca 84,0 81,3 81,2 84,6 90,0 87,8 Huetar Atlántica 76,6 80,7 83,1 82,5 85,9 81,5 Huetar Norte 76,4 75,1 81,4 85,0 87,5 84,8
From: Estado de la Nación, 2016. Estadísticas Sociales
In accordance to this first variable proposed by the BES, there isn’t much variability among the regions, but as mentioned above, when it comes to superior levels of study, the attendance starts to diminish. For the range of 13-17 years, the national rate of attendance never reaches the 90% during the given period, though it comes closer to this value for the last two years, 2014-2015. The Central region constitutes a particular case: it is the only region above the national levels for the entire period. This contrasts with both the Huetar regions, which are always below the national rate, but nevertheless it is worth mentioning the increase that the Huetar Norte had from 2011-2013, having a 10 percentage points increase in only these two years.
If a comparison is established between Costa Rica and OCDE countries, the attendance to superior levels of education in Costa Rica is far below from the rates that characterize this group of countries. For the ages 15-19, the Costa Rican rate of attendance is of just 31,6% for the year 2014, while most of the countries from this group are situated from above the 80%11. This same rate for Mexico is of 55,6%, while for Italy it is 77,2%.
Percentage of people with high school degree
2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 CR 15,47 15,80 16,06 16,84 16,00 15,54 16,15 Central 17,02 16,95 16,99 17,89 17,27 16,45 17,22 Brunca 12,02 13,40 13,28 13,42 12,19 13,16 13,83 Chorotega 13,69 14,40 14,67 16,19 15,02 15,90 17,76 Huetar Caribe 11,62 13,95 15,49 16,42 14,08 13,98 13,41 Huetar Norte 10,96 12,24 12,43 12,13 12,49 12,30 12,21 Pacífico Central 15,88 14,83 16,44 16,75 15,01 14,37 13,77 INEC, 2016: Population of 15 or more with studies
11
16 In what regards the attainment of the high school degree for the period 2012-2016 the national rate was almost the same, with a small improving of 0,09 percentage points. Three of the regions, Huetar Caribe, Huetar Norte and Pacífico Central experienced small relative decreases, with the most important one for the Pacífico Central, while on the opposite side, Chorotega and Central were situated above the average.
Percentage of people with superior studies
2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 CR 19,66 20,35 21,16 21,50 21,79 20,55 20,39 Central 23,45 24,40 25,33 25,60 26,37 24,87 24,67 Brunca 14,04 13,21 13,84 14,24 14,92 14,30 14,28 Chorotega 14,40 14,43 15,45 15,74 16,32 17,03 17,22 Huetar Caribe 10,21 11,09 11,14 11,37 9,91 10,08 9,94 Huetar Norte 12,50 13,42 14,04 14,89 13,41 9,64 8,82 Pacífico Central 13,16 13,30 14,69 14,74 13,90 14,03 13,78 INEC, 2016: Population of 15 or more with
studies
Considering the attainment of superior studies the national a verage had its highest value in the year 2014, as well as the Central. This is the only region above the national level, all along the given period. The other regions don’t even reach values near to the 15%, with the exception of the Chorotega region in the last two years. The leading position of the Central in this aspect may be kind of predictable, since great part of the academic offer is located in this region, with the four public universities having their main campuses in this region.
17 From: Atlas de la Educación, Estado de la Educación.
Related to the last observation, and having that the Central, by concentrating 62% of the population is the region with the lowest levels of poverty, the results from the abandonment of high school don’t seem surprising at all: the Central was the only region to be set under the national abandonment rate of 2015. Nevertheless it is worth noticing that all the regions , with the exception of the Brunca and the Pacífico Central, had relative decreases in their rates, a positive fact to be highlighted at a general level. The most significant one corresponds to the drop of the Huetar Caribe.
On the opposite side, the Brunca has the highest rates of abandonment, a negative fact, since this region, along with the Chorotega, are considered the poorest regions of the country.
Percentage of students that abandoned high school 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Costa Rica 10,2 11,1 10,7 9,9 8,7 9,2 Central 8,2 9,4 8,7 7,8 6,9 7,4 Brunca 13,7 13,1 14,6 12,8 12,9 13,9 Chorotega 11,9 13,3 13,2 10,7 9,8 10 Huetar Caribe 15,5 14,2 13,4 13,9 11,1 11,6 Huetar Norte 13,1 13,9 12,5 13,5 10,9 10,1 Pacífico Central 10,6 11,9 13,1 12,5 11,4 11,9
18 In relation to the young people that do not study nor work, the average rate at the national level for 2010-2015 is of 15%. When it comes to the ages between 10-15 years the rate lowers to 10,5%, and to the ages of 18-24 it increases to almost 14%, also one more fact in accordance to the observation mentioned above that with the increase of ages the desertion from school rises. For the rate of the students that passed the last year’s tests, the national average had a relative small improvement for the period 2010-2015. All the regions had considerable improvements in the rate of their students approving the tests, only the Chorotega and Huetar Caribe experienced a worsen. In the case of the Huetar Caribe this drop was more critical, having almost only half of the students with the correspondent approval, a problematic that may come to sum up with others present in the region, such as unemployment (as it would be seen lately).
Percentage of students that approved last year's tests 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Costa Rica 68 66,9 69,8 69,8 67,9 70,7 Central 72,6 71,5 74,7 75 71,6 77,6 Brunca 66,5 64,2 67,8 65,2 71,4 73,3 Chorotega 59,1 56,5 60,9 60,6 62,7 58,4 Huetar Caribe 62,3 61,6 58,6 70,2 66,2 50,4 Huetar Norte 57,8 57,8 59 55,8 57,1 64,1 Pacífico Central 61,9 63,5 65,9 62,8 55,6 65,9
From: Estadísticas Regionales, 2010-2015
The general frame observed in this area of development for Costa Rica is that there is a differentiation among the regions, with better results (even if not by much) by the Central region. The Costa Rican system of education seems nevertheless homogeneous in terms of attendance, which with the increase of ages starts to face more desertion. Nevertheless, the results observed for the last two years of observation 2014-2015 seem optimistic, this in comparison with what has been observed historically in the country. This is a relevant issue since education is commonly regarded as a fundamental basis in the attainment of a sustainable development12.
3. Employment and leisure time
12
Schumacher, E.F. Small is Beautiful, page 210. But as has been mentioned it is commonly regarded as this by many authors, also Stigliz (2012), Hall, J et al. (2010).
19
“The economic calculus that measures success in terms of production or income, without any consideration of the number of jobs is quite inappropriate (…) because it implies a static approach to the problem of development”
-E.F. Schumacher, Small is Beautiful.13
As mentioned by author Schumacher, and as was commented at the beginning of this study, the economic interest should not just focus in production, but also in the employment of the citizens. Employment is a fundamental dimension of wealth since it represents the means that make it possible for people to improve their material living standards, and most of all, to be able to independently fulfill their most basic needs. To the present days, the lack of employment opportunities in most of the regions is seen as one of the biggest problems in Costa Rica. At the same time it forces people to immigrate to the Central region, reinforcing a non-virtuous circle of underdevelopment based on the dependence from the economic activity from the center, given a mistaken development model that doesn’t create many opportunities outside the central valley. This in part may be an essential factor that explains the high concentration of population in this area, along with the fact that 71,5%14 of the products that are exported are elaborated in this region. Looking at the first relevant indicator, the employment rate, the leading role of the Central region is clear: this region presented the highest rates for the period 2010-2016, followed by the Huetar Norte. Nevertheless, the Central’s rate had a worsen for this period, decreasing in 2,5 percentage points. This same situation of a worsening of the rate was experienced in the Brunca and the Pacífico Central, with this case being the most notorious since the fall was of 10 percentage points. A peak in the period’s rates for the different regions can be seen in the 2013, and afterwards most of them have a downfall for the end of the period, with the exceptions of the Chorotega and the Huetar Caribe.
Employment rate 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 Central 58,6 57,3 58,5 60,5 59,5 56,7 56,1 Brunca 51,1 53,1 52 51,7 48 46,8 48,2 Chorotega 45,3 47,3 47,9 48,6 46,8 50,5 50,5 Huetar Caribe 44 46,8 51 53,7 52,1 52,4 55 Huetar Norte 53 55,7 57,4 58,7 53,6 54,8 55 Pacífico Central 55 53,8 51,5 51,4 47,7 42,8 45,2 13 Ibid, page 180. 14
20
From: INEC
In what concerns the unemployment rate, also as a direct counterpart of the previous analysis, the lowest rates for the end of the period correspond to Huetar Norte and Central. However, for the whole period the Central, Brunca and Pacífico Central experienced a worsening of their rate. The regions located in the Pacific coast (Chorotega, Pacífico Central and Brunca) are the ones were unemployment represents a more critical issue. This fact results an irony, since these regions are the most visited by national and international tourism , given their invaluable natural richness, which hosts a great quantity of the national parks. This critical state of the indicator may be a signal in a certain way that the tourism-focused model isn’t being successful enough to attain the needs of employment that those particular populations require. That model should be reinforced (if not substituted) or complemented by other areas, such as agriculture and public investments, that may help to employ the people that to the present days are being left behind. By observing both rates related with employment, the hypothesis of the center-oriented policies by the state, is once again reinforced.
Unemployment rate 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 Central 7,2 9 8,7 7,1 8,6 9,1 8,3 Brunca 11,3 11,9 12,4 10,1 10,7 12,3 13 Chorotega 18,6 17,7 14,9 14,1 17 11,7 13,2 Huetar Caribe 15,7 15,9 13 11,1 12,7 10,9 9,9 Huetar Norte 9,8 9,7 9,6 8,3 9,4 8,9 8,1 Pacífico Central 9,9 11,1 10,6 9,6 8,2 9,2 16,6 From: INEC 4. Economic wellness
In relation to the income availab le for families, once again as an expected result, the Central has, by far, the highest incomes, which rose all along the period, except for the last year, where it had a small decrease. The difference is such with the other regions that the least difference among incomes is seen only at the beginning of the period, and this difference is of almost 20% in relation to the income of the Huetar Norte. For the other years the difference is even bigger, reaching the biggest difference in 2014, where the next income after the Central’s represents its 63%, again that from the Huetar Norte.
21 What this variability among the regions exposes is quite clear: it is the palpable result of the inequalities among regions. The Central, by concentrating the most productive forces or activities of the country, has higher incomes (in average) than the other regions, a fact that certainly is a promoter of the migration to the center and in this manner, it comes to reinforce the existing inequalities.
Available income (in local currency, colones)
2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Central 937 624 1 021 751 1 103 834 1 183 922 1 203 752 1 174 569 Chorotega 646 273 676 741 659 209 697 602 681 566 830 707 Brunca 635 546 657 140 630 336 687 873 671 465 674 560 Huetar Caribe 593 570 611 571 654 213 687 452 630 404 681 704 Huetar Norte 748 215 722 905 782 073 806 527 760 205 696 442 Pacífico Central 655 715 681 968 718 976 736 939 731 946 761 224 From: INEC
Considering now the quality of the houses along the regions the results are coherent with the previous income observations, that is: the region with a smaller proportion of bad and regular quality of houses is the Central, being the only region with levels below the national average. Nevertheless, the proportion of bad quality houses for this region increased during those five years, as it also happened in the Huetar Caribe, which is the region that has the biggest proportion of this quality of houses for 2015, with 17%.
In what regards the houses in regular conditions, these represent almost the triple of the previous category, at the national level, with a 31% in 2015. The highest values at the end of the period were observed in both the Huetar regions. As it occurred with the past dimension of wealth, employment, the inequalities among regions are very clear if one evaluates the present factor of the quality of housing and how its proportion varies substantially among the Central and the other five regions.
22 From: INEC
From: INEC
5. Social Relationships
Regarding the cooperatives, the number of these organizations has increased considerably in the past decades: in the year 2000 there were 318 cooperatives in the entire country, while for the 2012 (last year of data available) there were 594. Since those years the Chorotega, Brunca, Pacífico Central and Huetar Caribe regions, accounted for less than 20% of the total cooperatives. The tendency hasn’t been reversed, with Central and Huetar Norte regions concentrating almost 80% of these entities. 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20
Proportion of bad quality houses 2010
Proportion of bad quality houses 2015 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45
Proportion of regular quality houses 2010
Proportion of regular quality houses 2015
23 In relation to the population that is involved in their functioning, in the year 2012 there are 887.335 associates at the national level (21% of population). Compared with the number of associates from the year 2000, the number is almost doubled: by year 2000 the associates were 446 .127, representing 12% of the country’s population. This participation has lead to 21.632 direct employments created all along the country.
The main four cities of the country, all of them located in the Central region, have a vast presence of service cooperatives15, with savings and loans as their mayor activities16. For the present year, more than half of these organizations are located in the Central Region, with the mayor concentrations in the cities of San José and Alajuela (the two most important cities from Central). On the opposite hand, both the Huetar Caribe and Chorotega regions account for less than a 10% of the cooperatives of the country, with 3,5% and 6,2% respectively. This variable reveals again a quite significant difference among the regions, in this case regarding the unequal distribution of these organizations along the multiple regions.
As a matter of fact this pattern can be observed since the year 2000: the number of cooperatives in Huetar Caribe didn’t vary in the 12 year period, remaining in just 21 cooperatives, while that of Chorotega increased from 28 to 37, for the same period. Together, these two regions account for almost 17% of the population, so this scarce presence of cooperatives seems limited still.
6. Politics and Institutions
Gender equality has been increasing successfully in the political representation in the past decade, thanks to the implementation of specific electoral laws which force the political parties to set complete gender parity rules that have guaranteed the participation of women in their electoral ballot. This legal framework does not guarantee the perfect balance of representation by its own means, but the effort has proven its worth, since results show a promising tendency in the recent national elections.
As for the congress participation the highest observed participation for women has been of 38,6% in the year 2010, and in the present administration it decreased to 35%. Nonetheless, efforts from the Presidency, specifically from the Vice-President Chacón (a woman) have been taking place, with the aim to change the present status-quo in which the differences among genders are significant in the political
15
In the map provided as a reference, and taken from INFOCOOP, this marked conc entration can be easily observed.
16
24 representation. Just to point out how much things have changed in the past decade, in 1996 the participation of women in the National Congress was of 14%. At the Municipal level, the tendency of women’s representation is the same. For the period of 2002-2006 the value for the election of local representatives was of just 31% of the elected posts. However, for the next election (2006-2010), it rose considerably, reaching a 45%. This doesn’t mean that in these mentioned elections women were elected as Majors of their municipalities. From this perspective the numbers aren’t promising at all: In the 2002 election, women elected as Majors represented only 8,6% at the national level, only having their reduced representation in the Central and Chorotega regions. In the other regions, there wasn’t even 1 woman to be elected.17
This pattern was similar in the next two elections for the years 2006 and 2010, where only 9 and 10 women were elected respectively in the whole country, from a total of 81 municipalities.
7. Security
Security represents an invaluable condition in every society: without it, social relationships among the people cannot take place. It is a fundamental requirement for a harmonious living inside the society. This dimension of welfare is an actual challenge for the Costa Rican society18: located in a historically violent region, the country has seen a risen criminality and violent acts that are not always reflected in the statistics. This in part because when a case of robbery or violence is committed, people, having already a considerable discontent with the authorities, may not even file the complaint. This lack of hope in the effectiveness of the system evidently makes that the actual episodes which are accounted are less than the ones that actually took place. In this regard, the variables proposed by the BES (except the rate of homicides), are more promising for Costa Rica, showing stabilization in the last two years of the government of Chinchilla, 2013-2014. The national rate of robberies for the given period 2010-2014, has an average of 4 robberies per each 1000 people, with a very subtle tendency to diminish in the last 3 years. During the first 3 years the statistics for the Central and Huetar Norte regions were located below the national average, but it is just Central the one that maintains its rate below for the entire period, since Huetar Norte experienced a considerable increase in 2013, passing from 3,7 to 4,3. Even though the highest levels of the rate of robberies are observed at the Pacífico Central, for the last
17
Candidat os electos por cargo y sexo según partido político. http://www.atlas.iis.ucr.ac.cr/documentos/PPPAlcaldes
18
25 years there is a tendency to diminish, with a rate of 5,8 for the year 2014, a value that is very close to that of the Chorotega region, which is the highest one for the last year with 6 robberies per each 1000 people .
From: Estadísticas Regionales de Costa Rica. 2010-2015
Regarding the pick pocketing, the average of the national level for the period 2010-2014 is of 3 events per each 1000 people. In this variable, we have an opposite observation regarding the Central region in comparison to the last category: in this case, the Central is situated above the national average. This in part may be due to a clear and popular problematic known from the cities: the insecurity to which their pedestrians are affected in everyday life. This is also the case for the Huetar Caribe, which along with the Central region, correspond to the only two regions above the national average for the period. On the opposite side the regions with the lowest rate of these events are Chorotega, Brunca and Huetar Norte , all of them below the national average, and corresponding to a much reduced rate than the one from Central, not even reaching an average rate for the period of 2 events per each 1000 people.
0 2 4 6 8 10
2010 2011 2012 2013 2014
Rate of robberies per 1000 people
Costa Rica Central Brunca Chorotega Huetar Caribe Huetar Norte Pacífico Central
26 From: Estadísticas Regionales de Costa Rica. 2010-2015
In regard to the rate of homicide the observations for the period 2011-2015 aren’t promising. This rate had its highest value in the last year of the period, and even for the present year it is estimated that the rate will reach a higher value of 12 homicides per 100.000 inhabitants. This rate reflects a relevant concern in the Costa Rican society, exposing an increasing problematic. The state of this dimension of well-being certainly constitutes the biggest challenge in regard to all the other dimensions of well-being.
Year 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015
Rate of homicide per 100.000 people 10,3 8,7 8,7 10 11,5 From: Compendio de indicadores, Poder Judicial
As an additional variable not utilized by the BES, and which I considered particularly relevant in exposing another perspective of well-being (for the case of Costa Rica, of course), is the people caught in the penitentiary system. I locate this variable in this category of well-being, for mere simplicity, but it could certainly also belong to that of social relationships, since people that are convicts belong, first of all, to a specific society. The interpretation that I assumed is that having an increased number of convicts isn’t positive (what kind of logic would that be?) , and this number would of course reflect a worsening in the social environment. As was recently highlighted by the Vice-minister of Justice of the country, the system in Costa Rica has caught historically “people belonging to a specific socio-economic
0 0,5 1 1,5 2 2,5 3 3,5 4 4,5
2010
2011
2012
2013
2014
Rate of pick pocketing per 1000 people
Costa Rica Central Brunca Chorotega Huetar Caribe Huetar Norte Pacífico Central
27 origin” and for the social system as a whole, when there is “more inequality the delinquency increases”19
.
Rate of convicts at the national level per 100.000 people
2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 Population 4.538.307 4.592.346 4.651.166 4.711.986 4.772.098 4.833.752 4.890.379
Convicts 10541 12154 12916 13127 13618 13167 13077
Rate /100.000
people 232,27 264,66 277,69 278,59 285,37 272,40 267,40
From: Mecanismo Nacional de Prevención de la Tortura, Informe Anual de Labores 2016
For the period 2010-2016, the number of convicts and therefore the rate are increasing until 2015, making evident the growing tendency of the problematic. For the last two years the change in the public policies implemented by the different administrations is evident, since for these years (Presidency of Solís), there is a marked decrease in the number of convicts, nonetheless rising again for 2016. This responds to the political choice of the minister of liberating convicts that respond to a particular profile (having shown proper behavior, and without a very serious crime, among others). Without the aim to deepen in the discussion of this specific policy (which I personally grant as positive), this is just a kind of “patch” to a more serious and complex problematic, since as was pointed before the people in the jails belong to particular socio-economic profiles (marginalized populations), so if this number increases it shows that there are certain problems in the society that are not being properly solved. This increasing tendency responds, or may be a direct reflect, of what was shown at the introduction in regard to the growing inequality of the country in the past decades, situation that hasn’t been reversed in the past years.
8. Landscape and cultural patrimony
This domain of well-being focuses in specific cultural asse ts, mainly present in urban conditions, such as Museums and Public Libraries. Also it accounted for the conservation of historical patrimony in the cities, a variable evidently central for Italy. Shamefully, for Costa Rica, also responding to how it’s development and culture have “evolve” the indicators regarding the preservation of this cultural heritage aren’t easily accessible for the different communities. This in a certain way is evident and linked to the historical development of the center of the country,
19
Interview with Vice-minister Marco Feoli, September, 2017. “Repensar el sistema carcelario y la ideología punitiva desde un enfoque de derechos humanos ”.
28 where all of the colonial history and heritage was practically lost. The only available information, leaving aside this cultural heritage component, regards a bit to the composition of the National System of Public Libraries.
In 2010, the number of libraries of the National System of Public Libraries was 58. The number hasn’t change as of to date. Out of that number, 33 are characterized as “officials”, which means that the library is in charge of the Ministry of Culture, while 25 are “semiofficials”, which means that those are administered by the Ministry of Culture, along with the collaboration of the Local Government.
Ouf of the 58 public libraries, 34 are located in the Central region, according to the demand of the greatest part of the population, showing as well the existing unbalance for the availability of services for the rest of the regions. Besides this offer of public libraries, the Municipality of San José (the capital of the State) administers other 7 public libraries, which come to join the state’s offer of culture for the people.
As for the rest of the regions, the distribution of public libraries goes as follow: the Pacífico Central region administers 4; the Brunca region 2; the Chorotega region 10; the Huetar Caribe region 3; and finally the Huetar Norte region 5.
Relating this offer of public libraries with the given population of the regions, it comes to attention the scarce offer in the second most populated region, the Huetar Caribe, which counts only 3 public libraries.
29 From: Sistema Nacional de Bibliotecas de Costa Rica
This dimension of welfare is one of the less variable, for according to the BES, it is the result of a process of accumulation along history. In regards to the available variable for Costa Rica in this dimension of welfare, the number of public libraries (and also that of museums), this was specifically the observed case, since the public offer of this cultural institutions remained i nvariable. This of course has a lot to do with how the public administration, along with the citizens, understands “culture” (the entire cultural heritage composed across the centuries) and how it approaches to it. The case of the Costa Rican society may result peculiar since the investments in the cultural component are really scarce, representing an invariable 0,2 of the GDP for all the years of the period 2010-2015.
9. Environment
This dimension of welfare should be of a considerable importance for Costa Rica, since the country is widely recognized for its natural richness and its contributions for proper environmental policies20. Costa Rica is one of the 12 mega diverse
20
For instance the innovative system, which has proved a positive impact for the wellness of people, the P ayment for Environmental Services, as well as the Certificate for Sustainable Tourism.
30 countries of the world21, and with only 51.100 km2 of territory it may be the most diverse one considering the number of species per km2.
The first variable proposed by the BES in this dimension, is clearly one of vital relevance for the well-being of all the members of the population. In refers to the coverage of potable water, for which the whole country has an ample coverage, showing that the wellness of people is properly attained in this respect. 98,5% of the Central Region is served with potable water, while in the rural areas this coverage drops considerably to 75,4%22. This difference regarding the coverage, as in many of the indicators defining we lfare and seen above, especially those that represent a certain “material” dimension, exposes the significant difference that exists between the Central region and the other five.
In regard to the Protected Natural Areas, they definitely constitute one, if not the most, invaluable asset of the Nation, since it is world widely known the efforts undertaken by Costa Rica to protect and preserve nature and its biodiversity. An interesting fact worth of mentioning here, is that 4% of the planet’s biodiversity is located in Costa Rica, a fact that by itself would constitute a reasonable justification for all the conservation efforts. Approximately 25% of the country’s territory is protected and declared as national parks, forestry reserves and wetlands. This policy of protection had its most significant origins back in the decade of the 1970’s.
In general terms this is what accounts in relation to this topic for the six regions: Central: 3 conservation areas, 7 national parks, 2 biological reserves. Nonetheless, the “chaotic development” (disorganized urbanization) of this region is considered the most alarming environmental problem faced by the country23, with all the pollution that it has involved.
Brunca: 2 main areas of conservation, which at the same time contain several national parks. Among these conservation areas there are 41 wetlands, with the most important one of them, the Mangrove Térraba-Sierpe with an extension of 14.637 ha, which was included in the “Ramsar List”. Nonetheless, there are current social and civil disputes concerning the preservation of the environmental resources in this area, since there is a campaign from local authorities to promote the expansion of the growing of pineapple, an activity that would certainly involve significant pollution and constitutes a risk for this special mangrove. It is expect, by Also the most notorious achievement would reside in the energy matrix of the country, provided mainly by renewable resources, thus reducing the impact of the country in polluting.
21
Plan Nacional de Desarrollo, 2006 -2010, page 74. 22
Page 5, Análisis Sectorial. Agua Potable y Saneamiento de Costa Rica (2002). 23
31 the civil society, to see the congruence in the acting of the government, respecting established measures of protection and of prevention of pollution.
Chorotega: 3 conservation areas, 8 national parks, 1 biological reserve and 13 National Refuges of wild life, 5 mangroves areas.
Huetar Caribe: 38% of its territory is under a certain kind of natural protection regime. In this regard it constitutes the “greenest” region of the country, with 22 Protected Wild Life Areas, among them 4 National Parks.
Huetar Norte: 7 Protected Wild Life Areas, with 2 National Parks.
Pacífico Central: It is as well one of the most important areas in terms of the preservation of the biodiversity. It has 4 conservation areas, among them the Coco Island, Patrimony of Humanity declared by UNESCO, and it has the only Absolute National Reserve, Cabo Blanco, along with 9 national Parks and 6 biological reserves.
For what concerns the formulation of this category of wellness by the BES, there are other variables, such as noise pollution and the pollution from the cars that obviously are “urban oriented”, and to this regard seems unfitted for the present analysis, that is, taking into consideration the regional division of Costa Rica. Even though this data corresponding to this aggregate level of regions doesn’t exist, it is clear anyways, that a region that concentrates almost 2/3 of the population in just 16,7% of the territory would represent the lowest levels of welfare, since a more concentrated population implies a rise in the environmental conflicts. That is to say, these categories of wellness are clearly a fundamental concern in the urban live, and in the other five regions they wouldn’t represent such an important aspect for the development of their communities.
For the analysis of this category, as has occurred in some other dimensions of welfare, given such a strong heterogeneity between one region and the other five, and also given the orientation of the BES structure, it may be of greater interest to undertake two kinds of studies, one for the Central region and its specific composition, and one for the rest of the regions, that is to admit: there seems to be “two Costa Rica’s” in the present model of development. Unfortunately not all the items that the BES methodology suggests to be measured are available for a micro level, as the one proposed regarding specifically the Central region.
In this category of well-being, when trying to apply/’adapt’ the BES’ framework to a country such as Costa Rica, it would be of a significant relevance to account with an indicator that shows the vulnerability and exposure of the country (and evidently its population) to natural events or disasters. This condition of vulnerability is seen
32 year after year, with the beginning of the rainy season and the occurrence of climate phenomena, such as tropical storms or slidings, which affect quite considerably the li ving conditions of thousands of families, especially from coastal regions such as the Huetar Norte and the Pacífico Central. To account for the exposure to damages is relevant, considering that with the climate change triggered by human activity, it is expected that this events will become more intense in coming decades24. It is considered that 37% of the country’s territory is exposed in a vulnerable way to climate phenomena, making the country the second most vulnerable to such events25. In the last 40 years more than 53 of this kind of natural events have affected more than 1,7 million people, conferring losses for 1.100 million dollars. A country under such conditions of significant risk should have more prevention policies and a clearer frame of action and registration of the events in order to be adequately prepared for the coming ones. It is therefore that having that account, disaggregated for the different regions would certainly constitute a relevant input for a benchmarking analysis, and promoting, as it is clear, the wellbeing of the people.
10. Research and Innovation
This dimension, along with the “cultural one” has a more marked significance for a country of the first world, such as Italy. In regard to one variable used by the BES in which Italy has historically been a referent such as inventions and their correspondent patents, the contrast with Costa Rica in this area is pretty obvious, since Costa Rica in this area is completely lagged.
Nevertheless the production of technology goods in the country has had a marked increase, since two decades ago, when the multinational Intel, along with other corporations of the sector, began to function in the Central region.
A first indicator of this dimension of welfare corresponds to the exports in high technology products. As mentioned, at a national level these products, especially those related to medical kits have had a significant increase in the last decade. In 2000 there were 8 manufactures; and in 2013 there were 57. This rise in the manufactures was obviously accompanied by more jobs: 1500 people were
24
As widely reported in various studies, the Stern report for instance, also in studies from the CEPAL, such as La Economía del Cambio Climático, 2011.
25
As mentioned in the article “Costa Rica mejora su preparació n para afrontar riesgos naturales con apoy o del BID”.
