Abstract:
Poverty alleviation is one of the greatest phenomenon that
acquired a foremost priority within the development effort of Sri Lanka,
mainly during the past few decades. Public sector has been playing a
vital role in this endeavor. In the first phase of independence, social welfare
was given highest priority. Free education, health services, food rationing,
land reforms, subsidies for agriculture, control of the prices of essential
food items etc. were among the major welfare and poverty alleviation
measures in this phase. In addition to these measures, targeted poverty
alleviation strategies were implemented in 1980s. As a result of these
efforts, the nation has been able to reach to a reasonable level of social
development and to reduce income poverty significantly.
The purpose of the present study is to assess the effects of public
welfare policies on the reduction of rural poverty in Sri Lanka. The study
is based mainly on the Hambantota district of southern Sri Lanka. Logistic
Regression Analysis was employed to assess the effects. State of
multidimensional poverty (Y) was the dependent variable. Six basic capabilities namely, Avoid hunger and food insecurity (Food capability-FOD),
Free from illiteracy and having knowledge (Education capability-EDU), having
a healthy life (Health capability – HEL), Access adequately to clean drinking
water (Drinking water capability - DRW), Sheltered safely and adequately
(Housing capability - HOU) and Access to improved sanitation (Sanitation
capability - SAN) were used as independent variables.
The analysis concluded that food related public policies have
played a significant role in reducing rural poverty. Though, public policies
on health, housing, education, drinking water and sanitation have played
a vital role, they have not still been able to provide adequate opportunities
for the rural poor. Hence, public expenditure on those spheres can play a
significant role in reducing rural poverty. Among the considered areas, public
health policy is the comparatively most effective in reducing rural poverty,
followed by housing and drinking water policies. Thus, expenditure on health
can reduce rural poverty at a comparatively high rate. Education policy is
less effective than other services.