•  
  •  
 

Abstract

Pemerintah Indonesia sedang melakukan uji coba program bantuan tunai bersyarat (BTB), yakni Program Keluarga Harapan (PKH). Program ini memberikan bantuan tunai kepada rumah tangga miskin dengan mensyaratkan mereka melakukan investasi sumber daya manusia. Pelaksanaan BTB di berbagai negara selalu diikuti upaya sistematis untuk mengukur efektivitas dan memahami dampak yang lebih luas dari program pada perilaku rumah tangga. Artikel ini menyajikan bukti nyata bahwa BTB telah meningkatkan kehidupan penduduk miskin. BTB dipuji sebagai cara untuk mengurangi kesenjangan terutama di sejumlah negara Amerika Latin; membantu rumah tangga keluar dari lingkaran setan kemiskinan yang ditularkan dari satu generasi ke generasi berikutnya; meningkatkan status kesehatan dan gizi anak, serta membantu negara memenuhi tujuan-tujuan pembangunan millenium. Artikel ini juga mengupas lebih dalam mengenai rancang bangun PKH, termasuk alasan-alasan pengembangan PKH kesehatan serta proses penetapan persyaratan kesehatan.

The Government of Indonesia is testing a conditional cash transfer (CCT) program, e.g., Family Hope Program. This program provides money to poor households conditional on investments in human capital. CCTs implementation in various countries has been followed by systematic efforts to measure their effectiveness and understand their broader impact on households’ behavior. The article shows empirical evidence that CCTs have improved the lives of poor people. CCTs have been hailed as a way of reducing inequality, especially in Latin America countries; helping households break out of a vicious cycle whereby poverty is transmitted from one generation to another; promoting child health and nutrition; and helping countries meet the Millennium Development Goals. This article explores more deeply on the design of the Indonesian CCT program, including the reasons for the development of CCT health and health conditionalities determination process.

References

  1. Departemen Sosial Republik Indonesia. Kepesertaan PKH. Jakarta: Departemen Sosial RI; 2010.
  2. Gertler PJ. Do conditional cash transfers improve child health? evidence from PROGRESA’s control randomized experiment. American Economic Review. 2004; 94(2):336-41.
  3. Maluccio JA, Flores R. Impact evaluation of a conditional cash transfer program: the nicaraguan red de protección social. IFPRI Research Report 141, International Food Policy Research Institute, Washington, DC; 2005.
  4. Skoufias E. PROGRESA and its impacts on the welfare of rural households in Mexico. IFPRI Research Report 139, International Food Policy Research Institute, Washington, DC; 2005.
  5. Pemerintah Republik Indonesia. Pedoman umum program keluarga harapan. Jakarta: Pemerintah Republik Indonesia; 2007.
  6. Hidayat B. Kebijakan penggunaan data kemiskinan. In: Thabrany H, dkk. Sakit, Pemiskinan dan MDGs. Jakarta, Indonesia: Penerbit Kompas; 2008.
  7. Behrman JR, Hoddinott J. Programme evaluation with unobserved heterogeneity and selective implementation: the Mexican Progresa impact on child nutrition. Oxf Bull Econ Stat. 2005;67(4): 547-69.
  8. Rivera JA, Sotres-Alvarez D, Habicht JP, Shamah T, Villalpando S. Impact of the Mexican program for education, health, and nutrition (Progresa) on rates of growth and anemia in infants and young children: a randomized effectiveness study. JAMA. 2004; 291(21):2563-70.
  9. Morris SS, Olinto P, Flores R, Nilson EA, Figueiro´ AC. Conditional cash transfers are associated with a small reduction in the rate of weight gain of preschool children in northeast Brazil. J Nutr. 2004; 134 (9):2336-41.
  10. Attanasio O, Go´ mez LC, Heredia P, Vera-Herna´ ndez M. The shortterm impact of a conditional cash subsidy on child health and nutrition in Colombia. 2005.
  11. Schultz TP. School subsidies for the poor: evaluating the Mexican PROGRESA poverty program. J. Dev Econ. 2004; 74(1):199–250
  12. Hoddinott J, Skoufias E. The impact of PROGRESA on food consumption. Econ Dev Cult Change 2004; 53: 37-61.
  13. Gertler PJ, Martínez S, Rubio-Codina. Investing cash transfers to raise long-term living standards. Policy Research Working Paper 3994, World Bank, Washington, DC; 2006.
  14. Bobonis G, Finan F. Endogenous social interaction effects in school participation in rural Mexico. Review of Economics and Statistics; 2008.
  15. Departemen Kesehatan Republik Indonesia. Profil kesehatan Indonesia 2006. Jakarta: Departemen Kesehatan RI; 2007.
  16. Hidayat B, Thabrany H, Dong H, Sauerborn R. The effects of mandatory health insurance on equity in access to outpatient care in Indonesia. Health Policy and Planning. 2004; 19(5):322-35.
  17. BPS. Statistik Indonesia 2007. Jakarta (Indonesia): Badan Pusat Statistik; 2007.
  18. Departemen Kesehatan Republik Indonesia. Rencana strategis nasional Making Pregnancy Saver (MPS) di Indonesia 2001-2010. Jakarta: Departemen Kesehatan RI; 2003.
  19. Hjortsberg C. Why do the sick not utilise health care? The case of Zambia. Health Econ. 2003; (12): 755-70. 20. Departemen Kesehatan Republik Indonesia. Buku pegangan ibu dan anak. Jakarta: Departemen Kesehatan RI; 2005.
  20. Alatas V. Perhitungan efek CCT terhadap peningkatan permintaan. Bahan Diskusi, the World Bank, Jakarta, Indonesia; 2006.

Download

Included in

Health Policy Commons

Share

COinS