Evaluation of equal opportunity measures in the Hungarian Operational Programmes Monitoring and evaluation of Roma projects and policies 30 November 2010, Brussels Anikó Bernát TARKI Social Research Institute, Budapest, Hungary

New Hungary Development Plan New Hungary Development Plan = Hungary’s National Strategic Reference Framework Focuses on expanding employment and creating conditions for long- term growth… … through 7 sectoral & 7 regional OPs … by applying several horizontal policies along the priorities of sustainability and economic, regional and social cohesion  ensuring that equal opportunities for disadvantaged people and non-discrimination are indispensable and essential conditions of social cohesion Now: focusing on the impact of the OPs on socially disadvantaged people, including Roma selection of comments and recommendations from the evaluations of the OPs based on ex-ante evaluation ( ) and mid-term indicator evaluation (2010)

Background: the situation of Roma  Roma are the largest ethnic minority in the EU and in HU: cca 4 million Roma are living in the NMSs, 600,000 in Hungary  live in large numbers often under extremely disadvantageous conditions in many parts of Eastern Europe, incl. in Hungary.  The situation of Roma is far more unfavourable in the NMSs than that of the majority population in terms of housing, health, education and employment  quality of life of Roma is often not much different than that of those living in third world countries.  A number of factors combine to create these disadvantages: –territorial segregation, overrepresentation in economically and infrastructurally underdeveloped areas –low level of education, school segregation, overrepresentation in schools/classes for mentally disabled children  low level of employment, discrimination on labour market  severe poverty with poor housing conditions, limited access to basic services  poor heath and high mortality and morbidity rates combination of multiple disadvantages  comprehensive programmes are needed

Ex-ante and indicator evaluation of the OPs: findings Direct: 1.Effectiveness of program elements in reducing social inequalities is unclear 2.Elimination of disadvantaged social situation is often mentioned just as an obligation 3.Comprehensive integration programs are needed to improve the situation of the Roma… 4.… and programs directly targeting Roma should harmonized with those programs that have an indirect or partial impact on Roma Indirect: 5.Even the ethnicitization of poverty is a serious risk… 6. … the programs do not deal with segregation and discrimination properly. Recommendations: 1.Roma integration programs are seriously needed. 2.Human capital investments should be receive more attention, while less emphasis is needed on infrastructural investments. 3.Special programs are needed to block the regeneration of low education.

1. Effectiveness of program elements in reducing social inequalities is unclear Problem:  Many programs take aim directly at the expansion of employment among people with low education and at employment rates of those living in underdeveloped areas…  … but these programs are focusing on active labour market policies, which have little impact on inequality reduction due to their weak or unsure effectiveness. What should we do? + focus on better access to underdeveloped areas  mobilizing capital and labour  decreasing the cost of searching for jobs and regular work  easier access to public services and institutions  decreasing income inequalities But:  Transportation OP does not directly prioritise better access to less developed regions  mobilizing capital and labour not decreases, but, in another way, even increases inequalities, if capital and labour leave an area.

2. Elimination of disadvantaged social situation is often mentioned just as an obligation Problem: 1.Mentioning the elimination of disadvantaged social situation is only an obligatory, desirable allusion in those OPs where the measures are connected to the disadvantaged population indirectly – even in those cases, when a measure could affect these people positively if it would be properly targeted 2.Many programs within the relevant sectoral or regional OPs plan adequate measures to improve the situation of disadvantaged people – but these can not taken seriously due to the lack of proper indicators or data sources (if the indicator requires external data source) that should measuring the effectiveness of the programmes.

3. Comprehensive integration programs are needed to improve the situation of the Roma Multiple reasons are behind the disadvantageous situation of Roma  measures that refer to only single areas can not be effective in themselves  multidimensional approach is essential  condensation of these problems: ghetto neighbourhoods Problem:  just a few regional OPs offer comprehensive programmes What should we do? -All regional OPs as well as the relevant sectoral OPs (Social Renewal, Social Infrastructure) should offer multidimensional programmes to reduce poverty and improve those sectors that can lead directly or indirectly to poverty with a special focus on the Roma where it is appropriate -Multidimensional = education (early childhood intervention programmes, kindergarten for all, school drop-out, school segregation), labour market, housing, health -access & combating discrimination

4. Direct Roma programs should harmonized with those programs that refer the Roma partly or indirectly  The Roma are targeted directly only in a few programmes, but…  … there are many programmes in which Roma should be more focused even though the programme covers them indirectly (e.g. as a sub-group of the disadvantaged / low-educated / unemployed people) as they are over-represented in the direct target group.  Possible programmes in which Roma are over-represented:  expansion of employment  dissolution of regional and qualitative inequalities in education  dissolution of ghettos

5. Ethicitization of poverty  Cumulation of disadvantages must be hindered  Cumulated deprivation with ethnic aspect  more attention, more serious  Some OPs refer to the risk of ethnicization of poverty in Hungary, and offers some measures, but….  … it is more typical that the OPs aims the disadvantages one by one and do not refer their multidimensionality

6. The programs are not dealing with segregation and discrimination properly Problem:  More that 1,600 ghetto or „ghettosised” areas were discovered in Hungary  However, only a few regional OPs dealing with the problem of ghetto neighbourhoods  These programmes are focusing on urban areas – no attention to the rural parts (small settlements, villages) What should we do?  Comprehensive programmes with a special focus on housing and neighbourhood aspects comined with measures on employment, education, access to basic and health services etc.  Focus on sustainability

Mid-term indicator evaluation: findings Problem:  Lack of appropriate data sources which are independent from the programmes  no data sources to to the indicators  Difficulties on ethnic data collection What should we do?  Basic and focused surveyes are needed (Roma focus?)  Thinking on how to improve the regulation on ethnic data collection – serving as an appropriate data source for social policy measures and planning

Thank you for your attention!