<!-- Start of picture text --> F IGURE V-8: P ROGRESSIVITY AND REDISTRIBUTIVE EFFECT OF TRANSFERS AND SUBSIDIES IN L ATIN A MERICA<br>Panel A: Direct transfers Panel B: Subsidies<br>1 0.024 1.0000 0.009<br>0.9 0.021 0.9000<br>0.8 0.8000<br>0.018<br>0.7 0.7000<br>0.006<br>0.6 0.015 0.6000<br>0.5 0.012 0.5000<br>0.4 0.009 0.4000<br>0.003<br>0.3 0.3000<br>0.006<br>0.2 0.2000<br>0.1 0.003 0.1000<br>0 0 0.0000 0<br>Kakwani Coefficient Marginal contribution Kakwani Coefficient Marginal contribution<br>Source: The Impact of Taxes and Social Spending on Income Distribution and Poverty in Latin America. An Application of the Commitment to Equity<br>Methodology (CEQ), 2017. Colombia World Bank Group staff estimates using the ENPH 2017<br>c) In-kind transfers: Education and health care<br>As regards transfers for health and education services, the results presented must be interpreted carefully<br>given that in this analysis, the quality of the services provided was not taken into account. For the analysis,<br>only the amount transferred per student in the case of education spending, and the amount transferred<br>per user in the case of health expenditure were considered. That is, the analysis assumes that the benefit<br>received is equal to the amount spent per student or person belonging to the health care system.<br>FIGURE V-9: PROGRESSIVITY AND REDISTRIBUTIVE EFFECT OF EXPENDITURE ON EDUCATION AND HEALTH IN LATIN AMERICA<br>Panel A: Education Expenditure Panel B: Healthcare Expenditure<br>0.8 0.055 0.8 0.04<br>0.05<br>0.7 0.7 0.035<br>0.045<br>0.6 0.04 0.6 0.03<br>0.5 0.035 0.5 0.025<br>0.03<br>0.4 0.4 0.02<br>0.025<br>0.3 0.02 0.3 0.015<br>0.2 0.015 0.2 0.01<br>0.01<br>0.1 0.1 0.005<br>0.005<br>0 0 0 0<br>Kakwani Coefficient Marginal contribution Kakwani Coefficient Marginal contribution<br>Source: The Impact of Taxes and Social Spending on Income Distribution and Poverty in Latin America. An Application of the<br>Commitment to Equity Methodology (CEQ), 2017. Colombia World Group staff estimates using the 2017 ENPH<br>Kakwani Coefficient<br>Kakwani Coefficient Redistributive effect<br>Redistributive effect<br>Regressive <---------> Progressive Unequalizing <---------> Equalizing Regressive <---------> Progressive Unequalizing <---------> Equalizing<br>Peru, 2009 Uruguay, 2009 Costa Rica, 2010 Ecuador, 2011 Chile, 2013 Mexico, 2010 Colombia, 2017 Brazil, 2009 El Salvador, 2011 Bolivia, 2009 Brazil, 2009 Colombia, 2017 Chile, 2013 Mexico, 2010 Ecuador, 2011 El Salvador, 2011 Bolivia, 2009<br><---------> Equalizing<br>Kakwani Coefficient Redistributive effect Coeficiente de Kakwani Redistributive effect<br>Regressive <---------> Progressive Regresivo <---------> Progresivo<br>Unequalizing Unequalizing <---------> Equalizing<br>Brazil, 2009 Ecuador, 2011 Peru, 2009 Chile, 2013 Colombia, 2017 Uruguay, 2009 Mexico, 2010 El Salvador, 2011 Costa Rica, 2010 Bolivia, 2009 Brazil, 2009 Ecuador, 2011 Uruguay, 2009 Chile, 2013 Colombia, 2017 Costa Rica, 2010 Bolivia, 2009 Peru, 2009 Mexico, 2010 El Salvador, 2011<br><!-- End of picture text --> The results show that education and health services are progressive and contribute to the reduction of inequality, having considered the preceding limitation in this document. Finally, as seen in Figure V-9, the progressivity of health spending and education spending in Colombia is just above that of the other 39