Economic and Social Development – 1999
1999
The Government undertook to respond appropriately to the damage from Hurricane Mitch without compromising its commitments to the implementation of the Peace Agreements. It succeeded in fulfilling its disaster response plans, but those efforts did in fact hinder progress in the economic and social development components of the Agreements.1
The Fiscal Pact Preparatory Commission was established in March 1998 to help reach the goal of raising tax revenue to 12% of GDP by 2002. The Congress approved the Land Trust Fund Act, and the Ministry of Agriculture, Livestock and Food set priorities and strategies for economic and social development in keeping with the Agreements. Real improvements were made in the equitable distribution of public investment between rural and urban areas. The Presidential Unit for Legal Assistance and Dispute Settlement in Land Matters (CONTIERRA) helped reduce conflicts over agricultural lands, but little progress was made in land registration and legislation had yet to be passed to clarify who has jurisdiction over undeveloped land.2
Public spending on health increased, both in absolute terms and in proportion to total public spending, which in turn improved the health infrastructure and health services coverage. The Ministry of Health and SIAS improved the cost-efficiency of their services and reached out to sectors of the population previously left without access to health care. However, health services still wanted for quality and public health indicators showed the rate of progress was not enough to meet all of the standards set by the Agreements. Infant mortality, for example, was supposed to be brought down to about 25 deaths per 1000 live births by the year 2000, but at the beginning of 1999 it was only down to 45 in 1000. Vaccination coverage was also still insufficient to prevent epidemics.3
Budget allocations for housing development reached the benchmark of 1.5% of annual tax revenue, thus fulfilling the commitment made in the Agreements. However, the services provided by FOGUAVI and FONAPAZ most directly benefited private industry and lacked quality control measures. Housing policies were also more generally failing to meet the purpose, as stipulated by the Agreements, of enabling poor people to have access to affordable housing in safe and sustainable condition.4
The Government did not make good progress with regard to labor laws, union protections and equitable vocational training. Labor union organizers faced harassment, threats and direct violence, even murder. The alleged perpetrators were either unknown or claimed to represent local citizens.5