| Key features of the data
For the 22 countries that reached decision points under the enhanced
framework in 2000, interim debt relief was only partially received during
that year, as most of them reached their decision points during the second
half of the year. For these countries, the impact of the enhanced Initiative
will be fully reflected from 2001 onwards. For the 2 countries that have
reached their decision points in 2001, the full benefits of the Initiative
are evident from 2002 onwards.
- Under the enhanced HIPC Initiative, the average debt service due
in 2001-03 is roughly 30 percent less than the amount paid before HIPC
relief in 1998-99 (see Tables
1 and 2; and Chart A).
- During 2001-03, the World Bank and IMF will reduce debt
service payments by 65 and 55 percent, respectively, by providing
interim relief.
- Debt service drops sharply in relation to exports or fiscal
revenues over this period. On average these ratios fall by one-half
.
- In all cases, social expenditures are expected to increase in
2001-02 from the levels in 1999 (see Tables
4). Average social spending in 2001-02 is expected
to be more than 45 percent higher than in 1999, with HIPC savings
accounting for a sizable proportion of this increase.
- Average debt service during 2001-02 will be US$2 billion; average
social expenditure, at about US$6.5 billion, will be more than three
times higher than average debt service (see Tables
1 and 3; and Chart B).
- Average net resource flows (loans + grants - debt service
payable) to this group of countries will increase from US$3.8 billion
in 1998-99 (1.2 times debt service) to US$7.2 billion (3.7 times debt
service) in 2001-2003.
On the whole, assistance from the HIPC Initiative is expected to result
in substantial reductions in debt service, which will open new possibilities
for effective poverty reduction and continued economic growth.
Sources and coverage
Most of the data used has come from the decision point documents considered
by the Executive Boards of the IMF and the World Bank in deciding to grant
HIPC relief, as noted below. The data presented are the best available,
considering that the Initiative is targeted at some of the poorest countries,
where the statistical systems have many limitations. What is more, the
coverage of data on social spending and poverty varies considerably across
countries.
IMF and World Bank staff have assembled the attached tables on the following
basis:
- Debt service for 1998-2005 (Tables
1 and 2; and Chart A): The data for 2000 onwards are based on the
decision point documents for the 24 HIPCs that had reached their decision
points under the enhanced HIPC Initiative as of November 2001. Where
necessary data for debt service paid during 1998-99 is supplemented
by other IMF and World Bank country documents.
- Social expenditures for 1999-2002 (Tables
3 and 4; and Chart B): Figures are mainly based on the decision
point documents. In the case of Cameroon, data compiled by the staff
teams at the time of the decision point are used because there is only
partial information in the decision point document.
The coverage of social expenditure data is quite different across countries.
In principle, all of the social spending numbers include health and education
spending. In addition, social expenditure data includes new programs to
be financed partly by HIPC Initiative assistance in Benin, basic
sanitary infrastructure in Bolivia, rural development and water
supply in Burkina Faso, social affairs in Chad, de-mining
and rural development in Guinea-Bissau, funding for the Social
Impact Amelioration Program and Basic Needs Trust Fund in Guyana,
social safety net and rural development programs in Honduras, poverty
reduction programs in Mauritania, other spending including promotion
of women in Senegal, water supply in both Tanzania and Uganda,
and social safety nets, water and sanitation and disaster relief in Zambia.
Local currency figures are converted into U.S. dollars using relevant
period average exchange rates.
Table 1: Summary Debt Service for
24 HIPCs that Reached Decision
Points by November 2001
(In million of US dollars, unless otherwise indicated)
|
| |
1998
|
1999 |
2000 |
2001 |
2002 |
2003 |
2004 |
2005 |
|
| African Countries |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Debt service paid 1 |
2,102 |
1,940 |
1,128 |
|
|
|
|
|
Total debt service due after enhanced
HIPC Initiative relief 2 |
|
|
770 |
1,400 |
1,388 |
1,431 |
1,664 |
1,609 |
Ratio of debt service to
exports (in percent) 3 |
16 |
15 |
13 |
9 |
8 |
8 |
8 |
7 |
Ratio of debt service to
government revenue (in percent) 3 |
23 |
20 |
18 |
12 |
11 |
10 |
10 |
9 |
| Ratio of debt service to GDP (in percent) 3 |
3 |
3 |
3 |
2 |
2 |
2 |
2 |
2 |
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Latin American Countries |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Debt service paid 1 |
1,030 |
670 |
126 |
|
|
|
|
|
Total debt service due after enhanced
HIPC Initiative relief 2 |
|
|
427 |
523 |
670 |
701 |
646 |
693 |
Ratio of debt service
to
exports (in percent) 3 |
19 |
13 |
13 |
8 |
9 |
9 |
7 |
7 |
Ratio of debt service to
government revenue (in percent) 3 |
28 |
18 |
19 |
12 |
14 |
14 |
12 |
11 |
| Ratio of debt service
to GDP (in percent) 3 |
6 |
4 |
4 |
3 |
4 |
3 |
3 |
3 |
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Total (24 countries) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Debt service paid1 |
3,131 |
2,609 |
1,254 |
|
|
|
|
|
| Debt service due after enhanced HIPC Initiative relief 2 |
|
|
1,197 |
1,923 |
2,058 |
2,132 |
2,310 |
2,303 |
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Weighted average
(24 countries) 4 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Debt service/exports
(in percent) |
17 |
14 |
12 |
9 |
8 |
8 |
8 |
7 |
Ratio of debt service
to
government revenue (in percent) |
24 |
20 |
17 |
12 |
12 |
11 |
11 |
10 |
| Debt service/GDP (in
percent) |
4 |
3 |
3 |
2 |
2 |
2 |
2 |
2 |
Sources: HIPC country documents; and World Bank and IMF staff estimates.
1The debt service figures for 2000 include only those countries
that reached their decision points in late 2000 or in 2001. The figures
are largely pre-HIPC relief, as these countries received
little or no HIPC assistance during 2000. The full
impact of relief for these countries will not be felt until 2001 and
thereafter. See Table 2 for a detailed breakdown.
2The debt service figures for 2000 include only those countries
that reached their decision points early that year. See Table 2 for
a detailed breakdown.
3Weighted averages.
4The averages for 2000 are largely pre-HIPC as 14 of the
24 countries did not reach their decision points until late 2000 or
later. See Table 2 for a detailed breakdown.
Note: Debt service figures for 1998 and 1999 reflect
debt relief already provided to Bolivia, Guyana, Mozambique and Uganda
under the original framework. |
Table 2. Debt Service for Individual HIPCs
that Reached Decision Points,
by Country, 1998-2005
(In million of US dollars, unless otherwise indicated)
|
| |
1998 |
1999 |
2000 |
2001 |
2002 |
2003 |
2004 |
2005 |
|
| Benin |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Debt service paid |
64 |
66 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Debt service due after enhanced
HIPC
Initiative relief1 |
|
|
63 |
46 |
43 |
39 |
39 |
37 |
| Debt service/exports (in
percent) |
16 |
17 |
17 |
11 |
9 |
8 |
7 |
6 |
Debt service/government revenue
(in percent) |
17 |
18 |
12 |
10 |
8 |
7 |
6 |
5 |
| Debt service/GDP (in percent) |
3 |
3 |
3 |
2 |
1 |
1 |
1 |
1 |
Bolivia
|
| Debt service paid |
390 |
250 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Debt service due after enhanced
HIPC
Initiative relief1 |
|
|
260 |
225 |
238 |
234 |
235 |
266 |
| Debt service/exports (in percent) |
29 |
20 |
18 |
14 |
14 |
12 |
11 |
12 |
Debt service/government revenue
(in percent) |
19 |
13 |
14 |
11 |
12 |
11 |
10 |
10 |
| Debt service/GDP (in percent) |
5 |
3 |
3 |
3 |
3 |
2 |
2 |
2 |
Burkina Faso
|
| Debt service paid |
60 |
53 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Debt service due after enhanced
HIPC
Initiative relief1 |
|
|
34 |
30 |
35 |
38 |
40 |
41 |
| Debt service/exports (in percent) |
16 |
18 |
12 |
9 |
10 |
9 |
9 |
8 |
Debt service/government revenue
(in percent) |
18 |
14 |
9 |
7 |
7 |
7 |
7 |
6 |
| Debt service/GDP (in percent) |
2 |
2 |
1 |
1 |
1 |
1 |
1 |
1 |
Cameroon2
|
| Debt service paid3 |
401 |
401 |
312 |
|
|
|
|
|
Debt service due after enhanced
HIPC
Initiative relief1 |
|
|
|
226 |
242 |
291 |
328 |
347 |
| Debt service/exports (in percent) |
18 |
15 |
11 |
8 |
8 |
9 |
9 |
9 |
Debt service/government revenue
(in percent) |
28 |
24 |
18 |
12 |
12 |
13 |
13 |
12 |
| Debt service/GDP (in percent) |
4 |
4 |
3 |
2 |
2 |
3 |
3 |
3 |
Chad
|
| Debt service paid4 |
38 |
39 |
33 |
|
|
|
|
|
Debt service due after enhanced
HIPC
Initiative relief1 |
|
|
|
22 |
25 |
25 |
32 |
36 |
| Debt service/exports (in percent) |
12 |
16 |
14 |
9 |
9 |
9 |
8 |
2 |
Debt service/government revenue
(in percent) |
29 |
31 |
29 |
16 |
16 |
14 |
15 |
11 |
| Debt service/GDP (in percent) |
2 |
3 |
2 |
1 |
1 |
1 |
2 |
1 |
Ethiopia2
|
| Debt service paid 4 |
104 |
91 |
161 |
|
|
|
|
|
Debt service due after enhanced
HIPC
Initiative relief1 |
|
|
|
105 |
74 |
85 |
100 |
100 |
| Debt service/exports (in percent) |
11 |
9 |
17 |
10 |
7 |
7 |
8 |
7 |
Debt service/government revenue
(in percent) |
9 |
8 |
13 |
7 |
7 |
6 |
5 |
5 |
| Debt service/GDP (in percent) |
2 |
1 |
2 |
2 |
1 |
1 |
1 |
1 |
Gambia, The
|
| Debt service paid3 |
26 |
16 |
20 |
|
|
|
|
|
Debt service due after enhanced
HIPC
Initiative relief1 |
|
|
|
16 |
15 |
8 |
9 |
10 |
| Debt service/exports (in percent) |
12 |
13 |
16 |
11 |
10 |
5 |
5 |
5 |
Debt service/government revenue
(in percent) |
12 |
20 |
23 |
17 |
15 |
8 |
8 |
9 |
| Debt service/GDP (in percent) |
6 |
4 |
5 |
4 |
3 |
2 |
2 |
2 |
Guinea
|
| Debt service paid3 |
128 |
108 |
140 |
|
|
|
|
|
Debt service due after enhanced
HIPC
Initiative relief1 |
|
|
|
78 |
90 |
99 |
92 |
88 |
| Debt service/exports (in percent) |
15 |
14 |
16 |
8 |
9 |
9 |
8 |
7 |
Debt service/government revenue
(in percent) |
34 |
28 |
39 |
18 |
18 |
18 |
15 |
12 |
| Debt service/GDP (in percent) |
4 |
4 |
5 |
3 |
3 |
3 |
3 |
2 |
Guinea-Bissau
|
| Debt service paid3 |
7 |
6 |
13 |
|
|
|
|
|
Debt service due after enhanced
HIPC
Initiative relief1 |
|
|
|
5 |
6 |
8 |
5 |
4 |
| Debt service/exports (in percent) |
23 |
11 |
18 |
6 |
7 |
8 |
4 |
3 |
Debt service/government revenue
(in percent) |
63 |
15 |
32 |
11 |
12 |
13 |
7 |
5 |
| Debt service/GDP (in percent) |
3 |
3 |
6 |
2 |
2 |
2 |
2 |
1 |
Guyana
|
| Debt service paid3 |
131 |
70 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Debt service due after enhanced
HIPC
Initiative relief1 |
|
|
74 |
48 |
34 |
39 |
42 |
43 |
| Debt service/exports (in percent) |
19 |
10 |
10 |
6 |
4 |
5 |
5 |
5 |
Debt service/government revenue
(in percent) |
65 |
32 |
31 |
19 |
13 |
13 |
14 |
13 |
| Debt service/GDP (in percent) |
18 |
10 |
10 |
6 |
5 |
5 |
5 |
5 |
|
| Honduras |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Debt service paid |
311 |
241 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Debt service due after enhanced
HIPC
Initiative relief |
|
|
167 |
134 |
210 |
276 |
247 |
258 |
| Debt service/exports (in percent) |
13 |
10 |
6 |
4 |
6 |
7 |
6 |
5 |
Debt service/government revenue
(in percent) |
32 |
23 |
15 |
10 |
14 |
16 |
13 |
12 |
| Debt service/GDP (in percent) |
6 |
4 |
3 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
3 |
3 |
Madagascar5
|
| Debt service paid3 |
166 |
106 |
105 |
|
|
|
|
|
Debt service due after enhanced
HIPC
Initiative relief1 |
|
|
|
64 |
56 |
68 |
79 |
82 |
| Debt service/exports (in percent) |
21 |
12 |
11 |
6 |
5 |
5 |
6 |
5 |
Debt service/government revenue
(in percent) |
42 |
25 |
21 |
12 |
9 |
10 |
10 |
9 |
| Debt service/GDP (in percent) |
4 |
3 |
3 |
2 |
1 |
1 |
1 |
1 |
Malawi
|
| Debt service paid3 |
90 |
87 |
110 |
|
|
|
|
|
Debt service due after enhanced
HIPC
Initiative relief1 |
|
|
|
59 |
57 |
45 |
45 |
47 |
| Debt service/exports (in percent) |
16 |
18 |
23 |
12 |
11 |
8 |
8 |
8 |
Debt service/government revenue
(in percent) |
22 |
30 |
31 |
13 |
11 |
8 |
7 |
6 |
| Debt service/GDP (in percent) |
5 |
5 |
6 |
4 |
3 |
2 |
2 |
2 |
Mali
|
| Debt service paid |
74 |
84 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Debt service due after enhanced
HIPC
Initiative relief1 |
|
|
88 |
64 |
64 |
66 |
67 |
66 |
| Debt service/exports (in percent) |
11 |
13 |
14 |
9 |
8 |
8 |
7 |
7 |
Debt service/government revenue
(in percent) |
17 |
18 |
20 |
13 |
12 |
11 |
10 |
9 |
| Debt service/GDP (in percent) |
3 |
3 |
3 |
2 |
2 |
2 |
2 |
2 |
Mauritania
|
| Debt service paid |
88 |
98 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Debt service due after enhanced
HIPC
Initiative relief1 |
|
|
87 |
80 |
58 |
49 |
43 |
43 |
| Debt service/exports (in percent) |
22 |
24 |
20 |
18 |
13 |
10 |
8 |
8 |
Debt service/government revenue
(in percent) |
35 |
35 |
22 |
20 |
14 |
10 |
8 |
8 |
| Debt service/GDP (in percent) |
10 |
10 |
9 |
9 |
6 |
4 |
3 |
3 |
Mozambique
|
| Debt service paid |
104 |
81 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Debt service due after enhanced
HIPC
Initiative relief1 |
|
|
50 |
28 |
67 |
66 |
64 |
68 |
| Debt service/exports (in percent) |
19 |
14 |
9 |
3 |
6 |
6 |
3 |
3 |
Debt service/government revenue
(in percent) |
23 |
17 |
9 |
7 |
14 |
12 |
10 |
9 |
| Debt service/GDP (in percent) |
3 |
2 |
1 |
1 |
2 |
2 |
1 |
1 |
Nicaragua
|
| Debt service paid3 |
198 |
108 |
126 |
|
|
|
|
|
Debt service due after enhanced
HIPC
Initiative relief16 |
|
|
|
117 |
188 |
153 |
123 |
127 |
| Debt service/exports (in percent) |
24 |
13 |
13 |
11 |
17 |
12 |
9 |
9 |
Debt service/government revenue
(in percent) |
37 |
19 |
20 |
16 |
26 |
21 |
13 |
12 |
| Debt service/GDP (in percent) |
9 |
5 |
6 |
5 |
7 |
5 |
4 |
4 |
Niger
|
| Debt service paid3 |
27 |
28 |
20 |
|
|
|
|
|
Debt service due after enhanced
HIPC
Initiative relief1 |
|
|
|
49 |
49 |
26 |
29 |
29 |
| Debt service/exports (in percent) |
7 |
9 |
8 |
18 |
17 |
8 |
9 |
8 |
Debt service/government revenue
(in percent) |
15 |
16 |
13 |
27 |
24 |
11 |
11 |
10 |
| Debt service/GDP (in percent) |
1 |
1 |
1 |
2 |
2 |
1 |
1 |
1 |
Rwanda
|
| Debt service paid3 |
14 |
21 |
40 |
|
|
|
|
|
Debt service due after enhanced
HIPC
Initiative relief1 |
|
|
|
16 |
13 |
8 |
11 |
11 |
| Debt service/exports (in percent) |
13 |
19 |
31 |
11 |
8 |
4 |
5 |
4 |
Debt service/government revenue
(in percent) |
7 |
11 |
21 |
8 |
6 |
3 |
4 |
3 |
| Debt service/GDP (in percent) |
1 |
1 |
2 |
1 |
1 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
São Tomé
and Príncipe
|
| Debt service paid3 |
7 |
8 |
6 |
|
|
|
|
|
Debt service due after enhanced
HIPC
Initiative relief1 |
|
|
|
2 |
1 |
1 |
1 |
1 |
| Debt service/exports (in percent) |
55 |
24 |
24 |
10 |
6 |
6 |
4 |
3 |
Debt service/government revenue
(in percent) |
84 |
44 |
41 |
17 |
10 |
10 |
6 |
6 |
| Debt service/GDP (in percent) |
16 |
17 |
13 |
4 |
3 |
2 |
2 |
2 |
|
| Senegal |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Debt service paid |
222 |
219 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Debt service due after enhanced
HIPC
Initiative relief1 |
|
|
173 |
159 |
145 |
143 |
225 |
134 |
| Debt service/exports (in percent) |
14 |
15 |
10 |
8 |
7 |
7 |
10 |
5 |
Debt service/government revenue
(in percent) |
27 |
28 |
19 |
16 |
14 |
12 |
18 |
10 |
| Debt service/GDP (in percent) |
5 |
5 |
3 |
3 |
2 |
2 |
3 |
2 |
Tanzania2
|
| Debt service paid |
224 |
193 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Debt service due after enhanced
HIPC
Initiative relief1 |
|
|
154 |
142 |
144 |
148 |
152 |
158 |
| Debt service/exports (in percent) |
21 |
16 |
12 |
10 |
8 |
8 |
7 |
7 |
Debt service/government revenue
(in percent) |
29 |
20 |
15 |
12 |
11 |
11 |
10 |
9 |
| Debt service/GDP (in percent) |
3 |
2 |
2 |
1 |
1 |
1 |
1 |
1 |
Uganda2
|
| Debt service paid |
110 |
98 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Debt service due after enhanced
HIPC
Initiative relief1 |
|
|
48 |
51 |
56 |
68 |
94 |
103 |
| Debt service/exports (in percent) |
15 |
12 |
11 |
6 |
6 |
6 |
6 |
8 |
Debt service/government revenue
(in percent) |
16 |
13 |
11 |
6 |
5 |
5 |
5 |
6 |
| Debt service/GDP (in percent) |
2 |
2 |
1 |
1 |
1 |
1 |
1 |
1 |
Zambia
|
| Debt service paid3 |
147 |
136 |
169 |
|
|
|
|
|
Debt service due after enhanced
HIPC
Initiative relief1 |
|
|
|
158 |
148 |
151 |
211 |
202 |
| Debt service/exports (in percent) |
16 |
16 |
16 |
13 |
10 |
10 |
13 |
12 |
Debt service/government revenue
(in percent) |
24 |
25 |
26 |
25 |
21 |
20 |
27 |
24 |
| Debt service/GDP (in percent) |
5 |
4 |
5 |
5 |
4 |
4 |
5 |
4 |
|
| Total debt service paid7 |
3,131 |
2,609 |
1,254 |
|
|
|
|
|
| Total debt service due1 |
|
|
1,197 |
1,923 |
2,058 |
2,132 |
2,310 |
2,303 |
| Ratio of debt service to
exports (in percent) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Simple average |
18 |
15 |
15 |
10 |
9 |
8 |
7 |
7 |
| Weighted average |
17 |
14 |
12 |
9 |
8 |
8 |
8 |
7 |
Ratio of debt service to
government revenue
(in percent) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Simple average |
29 |
22 |
21 |
14 |
13 |
11 |
10 |
9 |
| Weighted average |
24 |
20 |
17 |
12 |
12 |
11 |
11 |
10 |
| Ratio of debt service to
GDP (in percent) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Simple average |
5 |
4 |
4 |
3 |
3 |
2 |
2 |
2 |
| Weighted average
|
4 |
3 |
3 |
2 |
2 |
2 |
2 |
2 |
Sources: HIPC country documents; and World Bank and IMF staff
estimates.
1Debt service due after the full use of traditional debt
relief mechanism and assistance under the enhanced HIPC Initiative.
2On fiscal year basis, i.e. 2000 column shows FY 2000/2001.
3The debt service figures for 2000 largely reflect pre-HIPC relief
debt service because these countries did not reach their decision point
until late in 2000. Thus, the full impact of relief for them will not be
felt until 2001 and thereafter.
4 Debt service for 2000 is pre-HIPC, as decision point was reached
in 2001.
5The assistance for Madagascar is indicative and subject to change.
The Madagasy authorities and Paris Club creditors would need to revisit
the outstanding bilateral debt numbers. Also, minor adjustments need to
be incorporated in the case of three multilateral creditors. Consequently,
the IMF Board approved US$790 million in HIPC assistance with the the understanding
that Madagascar's exact level of HIPC assistance will be determined once
such revisions are made.
6Debt service due in 2002/03 reflects a hypothetical assumption
that arrears to non-Paris Club creditors (about US$2 billion) would be regularized
and serviced. It also reflects the resumption of payments to the Paris
Club creditors that had provided a total deferral of debt service in the
wake of Hurricane Mitch in 1998.
7Debt service for 2000 is largely pre-HIPC, as 14 of the 24 countries
did not reach their decision point until December 2000 or later. See footnotes
3 and 4.
Note: Debt service figures for 1998 and 1999 reflect debt
relief already provided to Bolivia, Guyana, Mozambique, and Uganda under
the original framework.
|
Table 3. Social Expenditure
by the 24 Countries that Reached Decision Points1
|
|
|
1999
|
2000
|
2001
|
2002
|
|
| |
(In
millions of US dollars) |
| Social expenditure |
|
|
|
|
| African Countries |
2,783 |
3,098 |
3,768 |
4,259 |
| Latin American Countries |
1,625 |
2,031 |
2,274 |
2,638 |
| Total |
4,407 |
5,129 |
6,042 |
6,897 |
| |
|
| |
(In
percent) |
| Ratio of social expenditure
to government revenue2 |
|
|
|
|
| African Countries |
29 |
30 |
33 |
33 |
| Latin American Countries |
43 |
52 |
53 |
57 |
| Total |
33 |
36 |
38 |
39 |
| |
|
|
|
|
| Ratio of social expenditure
to GDP2 |
|
|
|
|
| African Countries |
4 |
5 |
5 |
6 |
| Latin American Countries |
10 |
12 |
13 |
14 |
| Total |
5 |
6 |
7 |
7 |
Sources: HIPC country documents; and World Bank and
IMF staff estimates.
1For the six countries where no data is available for 2002
(Benin, Bolivia, Guinea, Senegal, Uganda and Zambia), social expenditure
has been assumed to remain unchanged as a percentage of GDP from the
previous year.
2Weighted averages. |
Table 4. Social Expenditure
for Individual HIPCs that Reached Decision Points,
by Country1
(In millions of US dollars)
|
|
|
1999 |
2000 |
2001 |
2002 |
Benin
|
| Social Expenditure |
115 |
148 |
195 |
2142 |
| Social Expenditure/Government
revenue (in percent) |
31 |
36 |
39 |
39 |
| Social Expenditure/GDP
(in percent) |
5 |
6 |
7 |
7 |
Burkina Faso
|
| Social Expenditure |
141 |
142 |
165 |
192 |
| Social Expenditure/Government
revenue (in percent) |
36 |
37 |
39 |
40 |
| Social Expenditure/GDP
(in percent) |
5 |
5 |
6 |
6 |
Bolivia
|
| Social Expenditure |
839 |
872 |
941 |
1,0862 |
| Social Expenditure/Government
revenue (in percent) |
43 |
46 |
47 |
52 |
| Social Expenditure/GDP
(in percent) |
10 |
10 |
11 |
12 |
Cameroon1
|
| Social Expenditure |
264 |
316 |
389 |
451 |
| Social Expenditure/Government
revenue (in percent) |
16 |
18 |
21 |
22 |
| Social Expenditure/GDP
(in percent) |
3 |
3 |
4 |
4 |
Chad1
|
| Social Expenditure |
63 |
65 |
75 |
87 |
| Social Expenditure/Government
revenue (in percent) |
50 |
58 |
54 |
56 |
| Social Expenditure/GDP
(in percent) |
5 |
5 |
5 |
5 |
Ethiopia1
|
| Social Expenditure |
268 |
351 |
502 |
595 |
| Social Expenditure/Government
revenue (in percent) |
23 |
30 |
41 |
43 |
| Social Expenditure/GDP
(in percent) |
4 |
6 |
8 |
9 |
The Gambia1
|
| Social Expenditure |
23 |
26 |
30 |
34 |
| Social Expenditure/Government
revenue (in percent) |
29 |
30 |
33 |
35 |
| Social Expenditure/GDP
(in percent) |
5 |
6 |
7 |
7 |
Guinea1
|
| Social Expenditure |
101 |
105 |
109 |
1202 |
| Social Expenditure/Government
revenue (in percent) |
26 |
30 |
29 |
29 |
| Social Expenditure/GDP
(in percent) |
4 |
3 |
3 |
3 |
Guinea-Bissau1
|
| Social Expenditure |
26 |
30 |
42 |
47 |
| Social Expenditure/Government
revenue (in percent) |
66 |
74 |
89 |
87 |
| Social Expenditure/GDP
(in percent) |
12 |
13 |
17 |
16 |
Guyana1
|
| Social Expenditure |
77 |
101 |
106 |
114 |
| Social Expenditure/Government
revenue (in percent) |
35 |
42 |
42 |
42 |
| Social Expenditure/GDP
(in percent) |
11 |
14 |
14 |
15 |
Honduras
|
| Social Expenditure |
442 |
685 |
721 |
844 |
| Social Expenditure/Government
revenue (in percent) |
42 |
60 |
54 |
55 |
| Social Expenditure/GDP
(in percent) |
8 |
12 |
12 |
13 |
Madagascar1
|
| Social Expenditure |
156 |
188 |
223 |
277 |
| Social Expenditure/Government
revenue (in percent) |
37 |
38 |
41 |
45 |
| Social Expenditure/GDP
(in percent) |
4 |
5 |
5 |
6 |
Malawi1
|
| Social Expenditure |
99 |
118 |
143 |
161 |
| Social Expenditure/Government
revenue (in percent) |
34 |
33 |
32 |
32 |
| Social Expenditure/GDP
(in percent) |
5 |
7 |
9 |
10 |
Mali
|
| Social Expenditure |
83 |
98 |
115 |
126 |
| Social Expenditure/Government
revenue (in percent) |
18 |
22 |
24 |
23 |
| Social Expenditure/GDP
(in percent) |
3 |
4 |
4 |
4 |
Mauritania
|
| Social Expenditure |
85 |
97 |
111 |
121 |
| Social Expenditure/Government
revenue (in percent) |
30 |
34 |
37 |
38 |
| Social Expenditure/GDP
(in percent) |
8 |
8 |
9 |
9 |
Mozambique
|
| Social Expenditure |
158 |
161 |
173 |
203 |
| Social Expenditure/Government
revenue (in percent) |
32 |
30 |
29 |
30 |
| Social Expenditure/GDP
(in percent) |
4 |
4 |
4 |
4 |
Nicaragua1
|
| Social Expenditure |
267 |
374 |
506 |
594 |
| Social Expenditure/Government
revenue (in percent) |
47 |
59 |
71 |
83 |
| Social Expenditure/GDP
(in percent) |
12 |
15 |
19 |
20 |
Niger1
|
| Social Expenditure |
99 |
85 |
112 |
132 |
| Social Expenditure/Government
revenue (in percent) |
58 |
55 |
62 |
64 |
| Social Expenditure/GDP
(in percent) |
5 |
4 |
6 |
6 |
Rwanda1
|
| Social Expenditure |
75 |
73 |
89 |
108 |
| Social Expenditure/Government
revenue (in percent) |
40 |
39 |
45 |
47 |
| Social Expenditure/GDP
(in percent) |
4 |
4 |
5 |
6 |
São Tomé and Príncipe1
|
| Social Expenditure |
8 |
8 |
9 |
12 |
| Social Expenditure/Government
revenue (in percent) |
93 |
77 |
76 |
86 |
| Social Expenditure/GDP
(in percent) |
17 |
17 |
20 |
22 |
Senegal
|
| Social Expenditure |
257 |
258 |
277 |
3012 |
| Social Expenditure/Government
revenue (in percent) |
33 |
29 |
29 |
28 |
| Social Expenditure/GDP
(in percent) |
6 |
5 |
5 |
5 |
Tanzania
|
| Social Expenditure |
289 |
327 |
361 |
379 |
| Social Expenditure/Government
revenue (in percent) |
30 |
31 |
30 |
30 |
| Social Expenditure/GDP
(in percent) |
3 |
4 |
4 |
4 |
Uganda
|
| Social Expenditure |
306 |
349 |
400 |
4362 |
| Social Expenditure/Government
revenue (in percent) |
40 |
39 |
39 |
36 |
| Social Expenditure/GDP
(in percent) |
5 |
6 |
6 |
6 |
Zambia1
|
| Social Expenditure |
167 |
152 |
248 |
2632 |
| Social Expenditure/Government
revenue (in percent) |
30 |
24 |
39 |
38 |
| Social Expenditure/GDP
(in percent) |
5 |
5 |
7 |
7 |
|
| Total social expenditure |
4,407 |
5,129 |
6,042 |
6,897 |
| Ratio of social expenditure
to government revenue Simple average |
38 |
41 |
43 |
45 |
| Weighted average
|
33 |
36 |
38 |
39 |
| Ratio of social expenditure
to GDP |
|
|
|
|
| Simple average |
6 |
7 |
8 |
9 |
| Weighted average
|
5 |
6 |
7 |
7 |
Sources: HIPC country documents; and staff estimates.
1The figures for 2000 largely reflect social expenditure
before HIPC relief because these countries reached their decision
points in late 2000 or in 2001. Thus, or in 2001. Thus, the full impact
of HIPC relief for them will not be felt until 2001 and thereafter.
2For the six countries where no data is available for 2002
(Benin, Bolivia, Guinea, Senegal, Uganda and Zambia), social expenditure
has been assumed to remain unchanged as a percentage of GDP from the
previous year. |
Sources: HIPC country documents; and World Bank and IMF staff estimates.
1/ Simple averages. |
|
