DOCSLIB.ORG

The Child Development Index 2012 Progress, Challenges and Inequality the Story the CHILD in Numbers

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
The Child Development Index 2012 Progress, Challenges and Inequality the Story the CHILD in Numbers THE CHILD DEVELOPMENT INDEX 2012 Progress, challenges and inequality THE STORY THE CHILD IN NUMBERS Greenland (Denmark) Finland Norway 127 Iceland Faeroe Is Sweden (Den) Russia Estonia United Kingdom Latvia countries improved their scores Denmark Lithuania Canada Netherlands Rep of Belarus Ireland Germany Poland Lux. Cze. Ukraine on the Child Development Index Belgium Slovakia Kazakhstan Lie. Swi. AustriaHungary Moldova France Slov. Mongolia Cro. Romania Serbia in the period of 2005 –10 Monaco Bos. San Marino Kos.Bulgaria Andorra Mon. FYR Georgia Uzbekistan Alb. Kyrgyzstan The Azores (Port) Italy Mac. Democratic Spain Turkey Armenia People’s Rep Portugal AzerbaijanTurkmenistan of Korea United States Tajikistan Republic of Korea Japan Greece Malta Cyprus Syria China Tunisia Lebanon Iran Afghanistan Madeira (Port) Morocco Israel Iraq Bermuda (UK) OPT. OPT. Jordan Midway Is (US) 9,000 Canary Is (Sp) Algeria Kuwait Pakistan Bhutan Libya Nepal Egypt Bahrain Qatar Bahamas Western fewer children under-five died UAE Oman Bangladesh Cuba Sahara Saudi Arabia Republic of China Hawaiian Turks & Caicos Is (Taiwan) (UK) India Myanmar Islands (Burma) per day on average in the period (USA) Revilla Gigedo Is Mexico Wake Is Cayman Is Dominican Rep. Mauretania (Mex) Puerto Rico (US) Lao (US) Mali Chad PDR Jamaica Haiti Anguilla (UK) Niger Belize Northern of 2005–10 than in 1995–99 St Kitts Antigua & Barbuda Eritrea Thailand Mariana Is Honduras & Nevis Guadeloupe (Fr) Cape Verde (US) Dominica Vietnam Guatemala Martinique (Fr) Senegal Sudan Yemen St Lucia Kampuchea El Nicaragua Curaçao Barbados The Gambia Burkina Philippines Salvador Faso Djibouti Socotra (Yem) Guinea-Bissau Benin Laccadive Is Andaman Is Trinidad & Tobago (Ind) (Ind) Marshall Islands Guinea Costa Rica Nigeria Ethiopia Venezuela Kingman Reef (US) Sierra Leone Nicobar Is Panama Guyana Central South Palmyra Is (US) Côte Sudan (Ind) Micronesia Suriname d'Ivoire African Republic Cocos French Liberia To g o Somalia Sri Lanka Brunei (CR) Guiana Ghana Cameroon 50 MILLION Malaysia Colombia Bioko (Eq G) The Uganda Maldives Equatorial Guinea Democratic Sao Tomé Republic Kiribati more children were in primary Jarvis Is (US) Galapagos Is Sao Paulo (Br) e Principé of Congo (Ecu) Gabon Kenya Line Ecuador Rwanda Nauru Islands Annabón (Eq G) (Kiri) Burundi Papua school in the period of 2005–10 Congo New Guinea Indonesia Cabinda (Angola) Seychelles Chagos Tanzania Archipeligo than in 1995–99 (UK) Marquesas Ascension (UK) Providence Is Solomon Is Islands Brazil Aldabra Is (Sey) Tuvalu (Fr) (Sey) Peru Agalega Is Comoros Farquhar Is (Maur) Angola (Sey) Christmas Is Malawi (Aus) Western Samoa Mayotte Keeling Is Zambia (Fr) (Aus) St Helena (UK) Vanuatu Bolivia Fiji Society Mozambique Zimbabwe Madagascar Cook Islands Rodriguez Is 36 MILLION Islands (Fr) (Maur) (NZ) Mauritius Tonga Namibia Reunion New (Fr) Caledonia Paraguay Botswana Australia (Fr) fewer children were underweight in Tubai Is (Fr) Gambier Islands Sala-y-Gómez(Chile) (Fr) Pitcairn Is S Felix (UK) (Chile) S Ambrosio Swaziland Easter Is (Chile) 2005–10 than 1995–99 (Chile) De Bass (Fr) Lesotho Christmas Is Kermadec Is South Africa (Aus) (NZ) Chile Juan Fernandez Is Argentina MAP A (Chile) Uruguay Amsterdam Is (Fr) But… St Paul (Fr) New Zealand Countries’ progress in child well-being Chatham Is between 1995–99 and 2005–10 (NZ) Krozet Is Bounty Is Prince Edward Is (Fr) (S Afr) (NZ) NOT INCLUDED Kerguelen Is VERY HIGH MEDIUM (Fr) Auckland Is Antipodes Is IN THE INDEX Falkland Is (NZ) (NZ) (UK) South Georgia (UK) Heard Is (Aus) Campbell Is Macquarie Is (NZ) HIGH LOW (Aus) 1.5 MILLION South Sandwich Is (UK) more children suffered from acute malnutrition in 2005–10 than in the first half of the 2000s. THE CHILD DEVELOPMENT INDEX 2012 Greenland (Denmark) Finland Norway Iceland Faeroe Is Sweden (Den) Russia Estonia United Kingdom Latvia Denmark Lithuania Canada Netherlands Rep of Belarus Ireland Germany Poland Lux. Cze. Ukraine Belgium Slovakia Kazakhstan Lie. Swi. AustriaHungary Moldova France Slov. Mongolia Cro. Romania Serbia Monaco Bos. San Marino Kos.Bulgaria Andorra Mon. FYR Georgia Uzbekistan Alb. Kyrgyzstan The Azores (Port) Italy Mac. Democratic Spain Turkey Armenia People’s Rep Portugal AzerbaijanTurkmenistan of Korea United States Tajikistan Republic of Korea Japan Greece Malta Cyprus Syria China Tunisia Lebanon Iran Afghanistan Madeira (Port) Morocco Israel Iraq Bermuda (UK) OPT. OPT. Jordan Midway Is (US) Canary Is (Sp) Algeria Kuwait Pakistan Bhutan Libya Nepal Egypt Bahrain Qatar Bahamas Western UAE Oman Bangladesh Cuba Sahara Saudi Arabia Republic of China Hawaiian Turks & Caicos Is (Taiwan) (UK) India Myanmar Islands (Burma) (USA) Revilla Gigedo Is Mexico Wake Is Cayman Is Dominican Rep. Mauretania (Mex) Puerto Rico (US) Lao (US) Mali Chad PDR Jamaica Haiti Anguilla (UK) Niger Belize Northern St Kitts Antigua & Barbuda Eritrea Thailand Mariana Is Honduras & Nevis Guadeloupe (Fr) Cape Verde (US) Dominica Vietnam Guatemala Martinique (Fr) Senegal Sudan Yemen St Lucia Kampuchea El Nicaragua Curaçao Barbados The Gambia Burkina Philippines Salvador Faso Djibouti Socotra (Yem) Guinea-Bissau Benin Laccadive Is Andaman Is Trinidad & Tobago (Ind) (Ind) Marshall Islands Guinea Costa Rica Nigeria Ethiopia Venezuela Kingman Reef (US) Sierra Leone Nicobar Is Panama Guyana Central South Palmyra Is (US) Côte Sudan (Ind) Micronesia Suriname d'Ivoire African Republic Cocos French Liberia To g o Somalia Sri Lanka Brunei (CR) Guiana Ghana Cameroon Colombia Bioko (Eq G) The Malaysia Uganda Maldives Equatorial Guinea Democratic Sao Tomé Republic Kiribati Jarvis Is (US) Galapagos Is Sao Paulo (Br) e Principé of Congo (Ecu) Gabon Kenya Line Ecuador Rwanda Nauru Islands Annabón (Eq G) (Kiri) Burundi Papua Congo New Guinea Indonesia Cabinda (Angola) Seychelles Chagos Tanzania Archipeligo (UK) Marquesas Ascension (UK) Providence Is Solomon Is Islands Brazil Aldabra Is (Sey) Tuvalu (Fr) (Sey) Peru Agalega Is Comoros Farquhar Is (Maur) Angola (Sey) Christmas Is Malawi (Aus) Western Samoa Mayotte Keeling Is Zambia (Fr) (Aus) St Helena (UK) Vanuatu Bolivia Fiji Society Mozambique Zimbabwe Madagascar Cook Islands Rodriguez Is Islands (Fr) (Maur) (NZ) Mauritius Tonga Namibia Reunion New (Fr) Caledonia Paraguay Botswana Australia (Fr) Tubai Is (Fr) Gambier Islands Sala-y-Gómez(Chile) (Fr) Pitcairn Is S Felix (UK) (Chile) S Ambrosio Swaziland Easter Is (Chile) (Chile) De Bass (Fr) Lesotho Christmas Is Kermadec Is South Africa (Aus) (NZ) Chile Juan Fernandez Is Argentina MAP A (Chile) Uruguay Amsterdam Is (Fr) St Paul (Fr) New Zealand Countries’ progress in child well-being Chatham Is between 1995–99 and 2005–10 (NZ) Krozet Is Bounty Is Prince Edward Is (Fr) (S Afr) (NZ) NOT INCLUDED Kerguelen Is VERY HIGH MEDIUM (Fr) Auckland Is Antipodes Is IN THE INDEX Falkland Is (NZ) (NZ) (UK) South Georgia (UK) Heard Is (Aus) Campbell Is Macquarie Is (NZ) HIGH LOW (Aus) South Sandwich Is (UK) Save the Children works in more than 120 countries. We save children’s lives. We fight for their rights. We help them fulfil their potential. Acknowledgements The Child Development Index 2012 was made possible by the extensive contributions of Terry McKinley and Giovanni Cozzi of the Centre for Development Policy and Research at the School of Oriental and African Studies, University of London. This paper was written by Alex Cobham, Nuria Molina and Maricar Garde at Save the Children UK, with support from Brendan Cox, Liam Crosby, Shani Winterstein, Simon Wright, Michel Anglade, John Lundine, Patricia Norimarna, Elizabeth Hughes, Melinda van Zyl, Karen Allan, Madhuri Dass and Dragana Strinic. Without implication, we are grateful for comments from Terry McKinley, Isabel Ortiz and Michael Klosson. The report, data and maps of The Child Development Index 2012 are available online at www.savethechildren.org.uk/onlinelibrary Published by Save the Children 1 St John’s Lane London EC1M 4AR UK +44 (0)20 7012 6400 savethechildren.org.uk First published 2012 © The Save the Children Fund 2012 The Save the Children Fund is a charity registered in England and Wales (213890) and Scotland (SC039570). Registered Company No. 178159 This publication is copyright, but may be reproduced by any method without fee or prior permission for teaching purposes, but not for resale. For copying in any other circumstances, prior written permission must be obtained from the publisher, and a fee may be payable. Typeset by Grasshopper Design Company Printed by Page Bros Ltd. CONTENTS Executive summary iv Box: Measuring children’s well-being vi 1 A decade of progress in child well-being 1 Developing countries accelerate progress 1 Inequalities between developed and developing countries remain 6 Box: The Child Development Index and the Human Development Index 8 2 Undernutrition: holding back progress 10 Under-five mortality 10 Primary school enrolment 12 Undernutrition 14 Box: The uncounted 15 3 Food and financial crises threaten increased undernutrition 16 Conclusions 19 Recommendations 20 Appendix 21 Endnotes 25 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY During the last decade, the world witnessed and primary school enrolment was even more unprecedented progress in child survival impressive, as the rate of improvement more than and children’s well-being. Millions of children doubled during the 2000s (from 11% to 23%; and were able to go to school for the first time, from 14% to 32% respectively). and many more were given a chance at life In addition to the accelerating progress it is clear as mortality rates in most countries that – since the 2000s – developing countries dropped dramatically. experienced higher rates of progress on average than developed countries. While the In the year 2000, world leaders met in New York at world’s poorest countries, mostly in sub-Saharan the Millennium Summit and laid the foundations for Africa and south Asia, tend to show the lowest child the international Millennium Development Goals well-being, the gaps at the top of the Index narrowed (MDGs). These included universal access to primary at the end of the 2000s. education and a dramatic reduction of child mortality rates, to be achieved by 2015.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Holistic Early Childhood Development Index (HECDI) Framework a Technical Guide Holistic Early Childhood Development Index (HECDI) Framework
    Education Sector United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization Holistic Early Childhood Development Index (HECDI) Framework A technical guide Holistic Early Childhood Development Index (HECDI) Framework A TECHNICAL GUIDE Published in 2014 by the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization 7, place de Fontenoy, 75352 Paris 07 SP, France © UNESCO 2014 All rights reserved The designations employed and the presentation of material throughout this publication do not imply the expression of any opinion whatsoever on the part of UNESCO concerning the legal status of any country, territory, city or area or of its authorities, or concerning the delimitation of its frontiers or boundaries. The ideas and opinions expressed in this publication are those of the authors; they are not necessarily those of UNESCO and do not commit the Organization. ED-2014/ws/20 Acknowledgements The HECDI was designed with input from many partners. We gratefully acknowledge the contribution of the following individuals and their organizations: Kate Anderson Simons, Brookings Institution Center for Universal Education and Learning Metrics Task Force; Adem Arkadaş, International Children Centre, Bilkent University (Turkey); Caroline Arnold, Aga Khan Foundation representing the Consultative Group on ECCD; José Ignacio Avalos, Un Kilo de Ayuda; Koli Banik, Global Partnership for Education; Danah Belhoul, PhD candidate at Cambridge University, Founder of Mishka Education Services; Nicole Bella, UNESCO (EFA/GMR); Erin Bresnahan, McGill
    [Show full text]
  • Prevalence of Underweight, Wasting and Stunting Among Young Children with a Significant Cognitive Delay in 47 Low and Middle-Income
    Prevalence of Underweight, Wasting and Stunting among Young Children with a Significant Cognitive Delay in 47 Low and Middle-Income Countries Abstract Background Undernutrition in early childhood is associated with a range of negative outcomes across the lifespan. Little is known about the prevalence of exposure to undernutrition among young children with significant cognitive delay. Method Secondary analysis of data collected on 161,188 3 and 4-year-old children in 47 low-income and middle- income countries in Rounds 4-6 of UNICEF’s Multiple Indicator Cluster Surveys. Of these, 12.3% (95% CI 11.8% - 12.8%) showed evidence of significant cognitive delay. Results In both middle and low income countries significant cognitive delay was associated with an increased prevalence of exposure to three indicators of undernutrition (underweight, wasting and stunting). Overall, children with significant cognitive delay were more than twice as likely than their peers to be exposed to severe underweight, severe wasting and severe stunting. Among children with significant cognitive delay (and after controlling for country economic classification group), relative household wealth was the strongest and most consistent predictor of exposure to undernutrition. Page 1 of 21 Conclusions Given that undernutrition in early childhood is associated with a range of negative outcomes in later life, it is possible that undernutrition in early childhood may play an important role in accounting for health inequalities and inequities experienced by people with significant cognitive delay in low and middle income countries. Keywords: cognitive delay, developmental delay, intellectual disability, undernutrition, underweight, wasting, stunting, low-income countries, children Page 2 of 21 Introduction Undernutrition has been identified as the largest cause of deaths in children under the age of five globally (World Health Organization 2009).
    [Show full text]
  • Download File
    PROGRESS FOR CHILDREN WITH EQUITY IN THE MIDDLE EAST AND NORTH AFRICA © UNICEF/UN041558/Anmar PROGRESS FOR CHILDREN WITH EQUITY IN THE MIDDLE EAST AND NORTH AFRICA February 2017 CONTENTS 1 Foreword 3 Abbreviations 5 Introduction 6 Purpose of the Publication 7 Limitations 8 Middle East and North Africa (MENA) Region at a Glance 11 Overview of Achievements for Children in MENA 13 References 15 Health 16 Progress in Child and Maternal Health 23 Determinants Of Child and Maternal Survival and Health 30 HIV/AIDS and Malaria 33 References 37 Nutrition 38 Progress in Child Nutrition (children under five years of age) 42 Determinants of Undernutrition 45 Exclusive Breastfeeding 47 References 49 Water and Sanitation 50 Progress in the Use of Improved Water Sources and Sanitation 56 References 57 Education 58 Progress in Access and Completion of Education 70 Quality of Education 76 References 79 Child Protection 80 Birth Registration 80 Child Labour 81 Child Marriage 81 Domestic Violence Against Women and Children 81 Homicide and Conflict-Related Deaths 89 References 91 Poverty 92 Monetary Poverty 96 Multidimensional Child Poverty 99 References 101 Data Challenges and Opportunities 102 Challenges 104 Opportunities 105 Annex 1: Data Tables 105 Health 116 Nutrition 121 Water and Sanitation 126 Education 138 Child Protection 142 Poverty 146 Annex 2: SDG Child-Related Goals, Targets and Indicators, and Comparable Data Availability across MENA countries FOREWORD It has been one year since world leaders committed to the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), a global agenda to improve the lives of all people, particularly the poorest by 2030. This ambitious global agenda addresses a range of social rights including education, health and social protection.
    [Show full text]
  • CHILD POVERTY, EVIDENCE and POLICY Mainstreaming Children in International Development
    child_poverty_aw_pb_v1:Policy Press Cover 02/02/2011 14:25 Page 1 C H “This book is a significant and timely contribution to an improved I understanding of the neglected but all-too-important subject of child poverty L D and what to do about it. It is a 'must read' for researchers and policy makers interested in child poverty and evidence-based advocacy and public policy.” P O Dr Assefa Bequele, Director, African Child Policy Forum V E R “Jones and Sumner provide a sophisticated analysis of the multi-dimensional T interplay between evidence and policy on child poverty. The result is a Y , compelling account of why child poverty in developing countries needs to be E tackled by increasing children's visibility, voice and vision in both knowledge V I generation and policy processes. Academics and policy audiences alike will D find it invaluable.” E N Sandra Nutley, Professor of Public Management, University of Edinburgh C Business School E A This book concerns the opportunities and challenges involved in mainstreaming N knowledge generated by and about children into international development policy and D practice. It focuses on the ideas, networks and institutions that shape the development of P evidence about child poverty and wellbeing, and the use of such evidence in development O L policy debates. It also pays particular attention to the importance of power relations in I influencing the extent to which children's voices are heard and acted upon by international C Y development actors. The book weaves together theory, mixed methods approaches and case studies spanning a number of policy sectors and diverse developing country contexts • in Africa, Asia and Latin America.
    [Show full text]
  • Progress in Child Well-Being: Building on What Works
    PROGRESS IN CHILD WELL-BEING Building on what works Save the Children works in more than 120 countries. We save children’s lives. We fight for their rights. We help them fulfil their potential. Acknowledgements This report was commissioned from the Overseas Development Institute It should be noted that Save the Children and UNICEF made a number (ODI) by Save the Children and UNICEF. It was written by Rachel Marcus, of factual edits to the report before publication. They also edited the Paola Pereznieto, Erin Cullen and Patrick Carter at the ODI. The ODI executive summary. authors would like to thank Andrea Locatelli, Hanna Alder, Evie Browne and Chloe Brett for their research assistance during the development of Disclaimer: The views presented in this paper are those of the author(s) this report and Nicola Jones for very helpful peer review comments. and do not necessarily represent the views of ODI, Save the Children or UNICEF. Published by Save the Children 1 St John’s Lane London EC1M 4AR UK +44 (0)20 7012 6400 savethechildren.org.uk First published 2012 © The Save the Children Fund 2012 The Save the Children Fund is a charity registered in England and Wales (213890) and Scotland (SC039570). Registered company no. 178159 This publication is copyright, but may be reproduced by any method without fee or prior permission for teaching purposes, but not for resale. For copying in any other circumstances, prior written permission must be obtained from the publisher, and a fee may be payable. Cover photo: [???] (Photo: [???]) Typeset by Grasshopper
    [Show full text]
  • Intimate Partner Violence, Maternal and Paternal Parenting, and Early
    Intimate Partner Violence, Maternal and Paternal Parenting, and Early Child Development Joshua Jeong, ScD,a Avanti Adhia, ScD,b Amiya Bhatia, ScD,c Dana Charles McCoy, PhD,d Aisha K. Yousafzai, PhDa BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Previous research has demonstrated associations between maternal abstract experience of intimate partner violence (IPV) and a range of adverse outcomes among women and their young children. However, few studies have examined the associations between maternal experience of IPV and early child development (ECD) outcomes in low- and middle- income countries (LMIC). Our objectives in this study were to examine the association between IPV victimization and ECD and assess whether the association was mediated by maternal and paternal stimulation. METHODS: We combined cross-sectional data from the Demographic and Health Surveys for 15 202 households representing mothers and fathers of children aged 36 to 59 months in 11 LMIC. We used multivariable linear regression models to estimate the association between IPV victimization in the year preceding the survey and ECD, which we measured using the Early Child Development Index. We used path analysis to determine if the association between IPV victimization and ECD was mediated through maternal and paternal stimulation. RESULTS: After adjusting for sociodemographic variables, IPV victimization was negatively associated with ECD (b = 2.11; 95% confidence interval = 2.15 to 2.07). Path analysis indicated that the direct association between IPV victimization and ECD was partially and independently mediated through maternal and paternal stimulation. CONCLUSIONS: Interventions that include components to prevent IPV may be effective for improving ECD in LMIC. aDepartment of Global Health and Population, Harvard T.H.
    [Show full text]
  • Early Childhood Development (ECD) Definitions Referred to in Paper
    Web appendix 1: Early childhood development (ECD) definitions referred to in paper TERM DEFINITION Screening test A brief measure used to identify children who are at risk of developmental problems in one or more domains.(1) Ability test An assessment that provides a range of scores representing children’s development levels across the range of typical development, in contrast to a screening test, which indicates risk of delay but does not provide a range of scores in a group of typically developing children.(1) Developmental monitoring The term developmental monitoring is used here for approaches in which a health care provider, who follows the child and family regularly, uses standardized instruments to monitor the child’s developmental functioning in all areas. In this model, the child’s cognitive, language, social-emotional and motor development is followed on a regular basis, in conjunction with other aspects of the child’s health and the family’s functioning. Monitoring also includes working with the family to provide special support when needed to ensure the child’s optimal development (2) Note: Often used interchangeably with developmental surveillance in literature (2) Developmental evaluation When developmental surveillance or screening identifies a child as being at high risk of a developmental disorder, diagnostic developmental evaluation should be pursued. This evaluation is aimed at identifying the specific developmental disorder or disorders affecting the child, thus providing further prognostic information and allowing
    [Show full text]
  • Child Development Index
    Note on the Save the Children ʻChild Development Indexʼ (CDI) Achim Wolf [email protected] The Child Development Index1 is “an index combining performance measures specific to children - primary education, child health and child nutrition”. Or, to be more specific, net non-enrollment ratio in primary education (%), under-five mortality rate (per 1,000 births) and underweight children under 5 years (%). The average of these three variables is the CDI. However, this method of aggregation presupposes that these variables can be compared with one another and are on the same scale. This is not the case: the education variable ranges from 0-81%; the health variable from 0.8-79.4 (per 1000s, so also on a different scale); the nutrition variable from 0-47.5%. I have used two alternative methods: - By using Z-scores, the variable's effect on the data is negated, thus allowing underlying characteristics of the data sets to be compared: this allows data on different scales to be compared, by bringing them to a common scale. This allows us to see how countries compare to each other and to the worldʼs average results. For example, Japan is 1.13 Standard Deviations below the mean for underweight children; Bangladesh is 2.42 standard deviations above the mean. Averaging the three Z-scores allows us to see how much below or above the worldʼs mean a country is, combining all three of these variables. it also takes into account both the degree of dispersion and the ranking within the data. 1 Save the Children UK, (2008) The Child Development Index [online].
    [Show full text]
  • Analysis of the Situation of Children and Young People in Turkey 2011
    Analysis of the Situation of Children and Young People in Turkey 2011 Introduction and Executive Summary Children in Society Aim of the report: This report aims to describe the well-being of children in Turkey, to analyse how far they are able to enjoy the rights set out in the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child, and to contribute to the determination of policies and practices that will improve child well-being in the future. The “big picture”: Children do not live in separate worlds of their own. Their growth and development, and the opportunities and risks which they face, are determined by their parents, families and communities, by the institutions and professionals that educate and care for them, and by advertising, television and the internet. All these in turn operate under the influence of history, culture, politics, government, demographics, economics, and technology. This report seeks to examine the “micro” situation of children in the light of these wider “macro” issues. Children and social change: The social environment is changing rapidly under the influence both of global trends and domestic dynamics. The population continues to grow, but the birth rate has slowed, and adolescents and young adults are increasingly forming the most important tranche of the population. Migration from rural areas to urban environments is well advanced, but not yet over. The economy boomed between 2002 and 2007, and again in 2010, creating job opportunities and permitting a general increase in private consumption and public services. In 2008-9, however, the economy was caught up in the global crisis, which interrupted the growth of output and welfare and highlighted the issue of unemployment.
    [Show full text]
  • Situation Analysis of Children in Yemen 2014 Situation Analysis of Children in Yemen 2014
    Republic of Yemen Ministry of Planning & international Cooperation Situation Analysis of Children in Yemen 2014 Situation Analysis of Children in Yemen 2014 Situation Analysis of Children in Yemen: 2014 iii Republic of Yemen (Ministry of Planning Contents and International Cooperation) & UNICEF, Foreword .....................................................................................................................12 Situation Analysis of Children in Yemen 2014 Acronyms and abbreviations ....................................................................................13 Acknowledgements ...................................................................................................15 © United Nations Children’s Fund (UNICEF), 2014. Executive summary ....................................................................................................16 Prepared by the UNICEF Country Office, Sana’a, Yemen. PART A ........................................................................................................................23 Cover photo credit ©UNICEF/Yemen/2007/Pirozzi NATIONAL FRAMEWORK ..........................................................................................23 2 The national environment .....................................................................................23 Permission to reproduce any part of this publication is required. Please contact the Publications Section, Division of Communication, UNICEF New York 2.1 Demographic overview ...................................................................................57
    [Show full text]
  • The Sustainable Child Development Index (SCDI) for Countries
    sustainability Article The Sustainable Child Development Index (SCDI) for Countries Ya-Ju Chang * ID , Annekatrin Lehmann, Lisa Winter ID and Matthias Finkbeiner Institute of Environmental Technology, Technische Universität Berlin, Straße des 17. Juni 135, 10623 Berlin, Germany; [email protected] (A.L.); [email protected] (L.W.); matthias.fi[email protected] (M.F.) * Correspondence: [email protected]; Tel.: +49-30-314-29062 Received: 20 March 2018; Accepted: 9 May 2018; Published: 14 May 2018 Abstract: Despite the relevance of children in inheriting and shaping society, an index assessing sustainable development with a focus on children is missing. To tackle this gap, this study established the Sustainable Child Development Index (SCDI) by considering child development topics in the context of inter-generational equity and applying indicators with available statistical data on country level. The SCDI at present addresses health, education, safety, economic status and environmental aspects described by 25 indicators. By taking reference points derived from the targets of the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), the SCDI scores for the year 2015 were calculated for 138 countries and then classified into four sustainable child development levels (very high, high, medium and low). The results showed great regional inequality on the status of sustainable child development. European countries generally have better status of sustainable child development. By contrast, 90% of African and 76% of Asian countries were classified as countries with medium and low levels. Moreover, the comparison of the SCDI, the Human Development Index (HDI) and the Child Development Index (CDI) based on correlation analysis and 10-year (2006–2015) country rankings demonstrated that the SCDI can complement existing development indices to provide a more comprehensive evaluation of sustainable development.
    [Show full text]
  • Child Well-Being in Rich Countries a Comparative Overview Innocenti Report Card 11 Was Written by Peter Adamson
    UNICEF Office of Research Innocenti Report Card 11 Child well-being in rich countries A comparative overview Innocenti Report Card 11 was written by Peter Adamson. The UNICEF Office of Research – Innocenti would like to acknowledge the generous support for Innocenti Report Card 11 provided by the Andorran and Swiss National Committees for UNICEF, and the Government of Norway. Any part of this Innocenti Report Card may be freely reproduced using the following reference: UNICEF Office of Research (2013). ‘Child Well-being in Rich Countries: A comparative overview’, Innocenti Report Card 11, UNICEF Office of Research, Florence. The Report Card series is designed to monitor and compare the performance of economically advanced countries in securing the rights of their children. In 1988 the United Nations Children’s Fund (UNICEF) established a research centre to support its advocacy for children worldwide and to identify and research current and future areas of UNICEF’s work. The prime objectives of the Office of Research are to improve international understanding of issues relating to children’s rights, to help facilitate full implementation of the Convention on the Rights of the Child supporting advocacy worldwide. The Office aims to set out a comprehensive framework for research and knowledge within the organization in support of its global programmes and policies. Through strengthening research partnerships with leading academic institutions and development networks in both the North and South, the Office seeks to leverage additional resources and influence in support of efforts towards policy reform in favour of children. Publications produced by the Office are contributions to a global debate on children and child rights issues and include a wide range of opinions.
    [Show full text]