social progress index: a tool for business

Social Progress Imperative #socialprogress

TITLE HERE DATE/LOCATIONOTHER

SOCIAL PROGRESS INDEXA TOOL FOR BUSINESS

MICHAEL GREEN, Ethos Conference, Sao Paulo, Brazil, 22nd September 2015


WHAT IS THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AND SOCIAL PROGRESS?

Economic Development

GDP per capita

Social Progress

2

THE DUAL CHALLENGES OF DEVELOPMENT: INCLUSIVE GROWTH

Social Progress Imperative #socialprogress3

THE PARADIGM HAS BEEN THAT ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT MEASURED BY GDP WILL LEAD TO SOCIAL PROGRESS.



GDP per capita

Social Progress


BUT SOMETIMES THAT LINK IS MISSING.ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT DOES NOT ALWAYS LEAD TO SOCIAL PROGRESS…

4



GDP per capita

Social Progress


…AND SOMETIMES SOCIAL PROGRESS INFLUENCES ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT.

5



GDP per capita

Social Progress


TO UNDERSTAND INCLUSIVE GROWTH WE NEED TO MEASURE SOCIAL PROGRESS DIRECTLY

6


Social Progress


TITLE SLIDE: SOCIAL PROGRESS INDEX

SOCIAL PROGRESS INDEX


SOCIAL PROGRESS INDEX: DESIGN PRINCIPLES

Outcomes – not inputs

Actionability

Relevant to all countries

Exclusively social and environmental indicators


THE SOCIAL PROGRESS FRAMEWORK


SOCIAL PROGRESS INDEX FRAMEWORK INDICATORS 2015

10

Basic Human Needs Opportunity

Nutrition and Basic Medical Care Undernourishment Depth of food deficit Maternal mortality rate Child mortality rate Deaths from infectious diseases

Water and Sanitation Access to piped water Rural access to improved water source Access to improved sanitation facilities

Shelter Availability of affordable housing Access to electricity Quality of electricity supply Indoor air pollution attributable deaths

Personal Safety Homicide rate Level of violent crime Perceived criminality Political terror Traffic deaths

Access to Basic Knowledge Adult literacy rate Primary school enrollment Lower secondary school enrollment Upper secondary school enrollment Gender parity in secondary enrollment

Access to Information and Communications Mobile telephone subscriptions Internet users Press Freedom Index

Health and Wellness Life expectancy Premature deaths from non-

communicable diseases Obesity rate Outdoor air pollution attributable deaths Suicide rate

Ecosystem Sustainability Greenhouse gas emissions Water withdrawals as a percent of

resources Biodiversity and habitat

Personal Rights Political rights Freedom of speech Freedom of assembly/association Freedom of movement Private property rights

Personal Freedom and Choice Freedom over life choices Freedom of religion Early marriage Satisfied demand for contraception Corruption

Tolerance and Inclusion Tolerance for immigrants Tolerance for homosexuals Discrimination and violence against minorities Religious tolerance Community safety net

Access to Advanced Education Years of tertiary schooling Women’s average years in school Inequality in the attainment of education Globally ranked universities

Social Progress Index

Foundations of Wellbeing

10


GLOBAL PERFORMANCE ON SOCIAL PROGRESS

11


FOR THE WORLD HAS A WHOLE WE CAN SEE WHICH AREAS WE HAVE MADE THE MOST PROGRESS…AND THE LEAST

12


THE WORLD IS DOING BEST IN AREAS THAT HAVE BEEN THE FOCUS OF THE MILLENIUM DEVELOPMENT GOALS


THE WORLD STRUGGLES MOST WITH PERSONAL RIGHTS AND TOLERANCE AND INCLUSION


THOUGH NOT THE WORST AREA OF PERFORMANCE, ECOSYSTEM SUSTAINABILITY IS AT RISK OF GETTING WORSE


COUNTRY PERFORMANCE


SOCIAL PROGRESS INDEX VS. GDP PER CAPITA (PPP)*



NOR



CAF

NOR



NZL

CAF

NOR



NZL

MWI

CAF

NOR



NZL CAN

MWI

CAF

NOR



NZLGBR

CAN

MWI

CAF

NOR



NZL

USAGBR

CAN

MWI

CAF

NOR



NZL

USAFRA

GBRCAN

MWI

CAF

NOR



NZL

USAFRA

GBRCAN

BRA

MWI

CAF

NOR



NZL

USAFRA

GBRCAN

BRA

ZAF

MWI

CAF

NOR



NZL

USAFRA

GBRCAN

BRA

RUSZAF

MWI

CAF

NOR



NZL

USAFRA

GBRCAN

BRA

RUSZAF

CHN

MWI

CAF

NOR



NZL

USAFRA

GBRCAN

BRA

RUSZAF

CHN

IND

MWI

CAF

NOR



NZL

KWT

USAFRA

GBRCAN

BRA

RUSZAF

CHN

IND

MWI

CAF

NOR



NZL

KWT

USAFRA

GBRCAN

CRI

BRA

RUSZAF

CHN

IND

MWI

CAF

NOR


SOCIAL PROGRESS DOES INCREASE WITH GDP PER CAPITA BUT IT IS NOT THE WHOLE STORY

KWT

CRI

BRA

ZAF

IND

MWI

CAF

NORUSA

FRA

NZLCANGBR

RUS

CHN


SOME ASPECTS OF SOCIAL PROGRESS IMPROVE LITTLE WITH GREATER WEALTH


COUNTRY PERFORMANCE RELATIVE TO PEERS

35

Social Progress Imperative #socialprogress 36

SPI rank

SPI score Country SPI

rankSPI

score Country SPI rank


rankSPI

score Country

1 88.36 Norway 18 81.91 Portugal 35 74 Lithuania 52 68.19 Albania

2 88.06 Sweden 19 81.62 Slovenia 36 73.66 Mauritius 53 67.79 Macedonia

3 87.97 Switzerland 20 81.17 Spain 37 73.3 Croatia 54 67.5 Mexico

4 87.62 Iceland 21 80.82 France 38 73.08 Argentina 55 67.23 Peru

5 87.08 New Zealand 22 80.59 Czech Republic 39 72.79 United Arab Emirates 56 67.1 Paraguay

6 86.89 Canada 23 80.49 Estonia 40 72.6 Israel 57 66.34 Thailand

7 86.75 Finland 24 79.21 Uruguay 41 71.79 Panama 58 66.24 Turkey

8 86.63 Denmark 25 78.45 Slovakia 42 70.89 Brazil 59 66.15 Bosnia and Herzegovina

9 86.5 Netherlands 26 78.29 Chile 43 70.19 Bulgaria 60 65.89 Georgia

10 86.42 Australia 27 77.98 Poland 44 69.83 Jamaica 61 65.7 Armenia

11 84.68 United Kingdom 28 77.88 Costa Rica 45 69.79 Serbia 62 65.69 Ukraine

12 84.66 Ireland 29 77.7 Korea, Republic of 46 69.55 Malaysia 63 65.64 South Africa

13 84.45 Austria 30 77.45 Cyprus 47 69.19 Kuwait 64 65.46 Philippines

14 84.04 Germany 31 77.38 Italy 48 69.01 Montenegro 65 65.22 Botswana

15 83.15 Japan 32 74.8 Hungary 49 68.85 Colombia 66 64.98 Belarus

16 82.85 United States 33 74.12 Latvia 50 68.37 Romania 67 64.92 Tunisia

17 82.83 Belgium 34 74.03 Greece 51 68.25 Ecuador 68 64.31 El Salvador

Social Progress categorization:

• SPI rank 01 – 10: very high

• SPI rank 11 – 31: high• SPI rank 32 – 56: upper middle• SPI rank 57 –98: lower middle• SPI rank 99 – 125: low• SPI rank 126 – 133: very low

2015 SOCIAL PROGRESS INDEX RESULTS

36


SPI rank


rankSPI

score Country SPI rank


rankSPI

score Country

1 88.36 Norway 18 81.91 Portugal 35 74 Lithuania 52 68.19 Albania

2 88.06 Sweden 19 81.62 Slovenia 36 73.66 Mauritius 53 67.79 Macedonia

3 87.97 Switzerland 20 81.17 Spain 37 73.3 Croatia 54 67.5 Mexico

4 87.62 Iceland 21 80.82 France 38 73.08 Argentina 55 67.23 Peru

5 87.08 New Zealand 22 80.59 Czech Republic 39 72.79 United Arab Emirates 56 67.1 Paraguay

6 86.89 Canada 23 80.49 Estonia 40 72.6 Israel 57 66.34 Thailand

7 86.75 Finland 24 79.21 Uruguay 41 71.79 Panama 58 66.24 Turkey

8 86.63 Denmark 25 78.45 Slovakia 42 70.89 Brazil 59 66.15 Bosnia and Herzegovina

9 86.5 Netherlands 26 78.29 Chile 43 70.19 Bulgaria 60 65.89 Georgia

10 86.42 Australia 27 77.98 Poland 44 69.83 Jamaica 61 65.7 Armenia

11 84.68 United Kingdom 28 77.88 Costa Rica 45 69.79 Serbia 62 65.69 Ukraine

12 84.66 Ireland 29 77.7 Korea, Republic of 46 69.55 Malaysia 63 65.64 South Africa

13 84.45 Austria 30 77.45 Cyprus 47 69.19 Kuwait 64 65.46 Philippines

14 84.04 Germany 31 77.38 Italy 48 69.01 Montenegro 65 65.22 Botswana

15 83.15 Japan 32 74.8 Hungary 49 68.85 Colombia 66 64.98 Belarus

16 82.85 United States 33 74.12 Latvia 50 68.37 Romania 67 64.92 Tunisia

17 82.83 Belgium 34 74.03 Greece 51 68.25 Ecuador 68 64.31 El Salvador

37

2015 SOCIAL PROGRESS INDEX RESULTS

37

Social Progress categorization:

• SPI rank 01 – 10: very high

• SPI rank 11 – 31: high• SPI rank 32 – 56: upper middle• SPI rank 57 –98: lower middle• SPI rank 99 – 125: low• SPI rank 126 – 133: very low


BENCHMARKING SOCIAL PROGRESS RELATIVE TO PEERS

• We define a country’s economic peers as the 15 countries closest in GDP PPP per capita. In order to reduce the influence of year-to-year fluctuations in GDP data, a four-year average is used (2010-2013).

• Each country’s performance is compared to the median performance of countries within the peer cohort.

• If the country’s score is greater than (or less than) the average absolute deviation from the median of the comparator group, it is considered a strength (or weakness). Scores are within one average absolute deviation are within the range of expected scores and are considered neither strengths nor weaknesses (neutral).

Strengths and weaknesses are relative to 15 countries of similar GDP: Relative Strength n/a – no data availableNeutralRelative Weakness

UNITED STATES

Score Rank Score Rank Score RankBASIC HUMAN NEEDS 91.23 21 W FOUNDATIONS OF WELLBEING 75.15 35 W OPPORTUNITY 82.18 8 N Nutrition and Basic Medical Care 98.52 39 N Access to Basic Knowledge 95.33 45 W Personal Rights 82.16 24 W Undernourishment (% of pop.) 5.0 1 N Adult literacy rate (% of pop. aged 15+) 99.0 1 N Political rights (1=full rights; 7=no rights) 1 1 NDepth of food deficit (cal./undernourished person) 8 1 N Primary school enrollment (% of children) 91.8 73 W Freedom of speech (0=low; 2=high) 2 1 SMaternal mortality rate (deaths/100,000 live births) 28 55 W Lower secondary school enrollment (% of children) 98.0 57 W

Freedom of assembly/association (0=low; 2=high) 1 48 W

Child mortality rate (deaths/1,000 live births) 6.9 38 W Upper secondary school enrollment (% of children) 89.5 49 W Freedom of movement (0=low; 4=high) 3 67 WDeaths from infectious diseases (deaths/100,000) 31.3 37 N Gender parity in secondary enrollment (girls/boys) 1.0 1 N Private property rights (0=none; 100=full) 80 17 W

Water and Sanitation 98.68 28 WAccess to Information and Communications 85.00 23 W Personal Freedom and Choice 82.64 15 N

Access to piped water (% of pop.) 98.6 25 W Mobile telephone subscriptions (subscriptions/100 people) 95.5 87 W Freedom over life choices (% satisfied) 86.6 27 W

Rural access to improved water source (% of pop.) 98.0 41 W Internet users (% of pop.) 84.2 13 N Freedom of religion (1=low; 4=high) 3 55 WAccess to improved sanitation facilities (% of pop.) 100.0 27 N Press Freedom Index (0=most free; 100=least free) 23.5 36 W Early marriage (% of women aged 15-19) 0.03 32 W

Satisfied demand for contraception (% of women) 84.7 14 N

Corruption (0=high; 100=low) 74 15 N Shelter 90.05 6 N Health and Wellness 68.66 68 W Tolerance and Inclusion 74.46 15 N Availability of affordable housing (% satisfied) 69.0 7 S Life expectancy (years) 78.7 30 W Tolerance for immigrants (0=low; 100=high) 81.5 11 N

Access to electricity (% of pop.) 100.0 1 N Premature deaths from non-comm. diseases (prob. of dying) 14.3 35 W Tolerance for homosexuals (0=low; 100=high) 71.3 15 N

Quality of electricity supply (1=low; 7=high) 6.3 19 W Obesity rate (% of pop.) 31.8 126 W Discrim. and viol. against minorities (0=low; 10=high) 4.5 31 N

Household air pollution attr. deaths (deaths/100,000) 0 1 N

Outdoor air pollution attributable deaths (deaths/100,000) 33.6 78 W Religious tolerance (1=low; 4=high) 3 36 N

Suicide rate (deaths/100,000) 10.7 81 W Community safety net (0=low; 100=high) 90.1 27 W Personal Safety 77.66 30 W Ecosystem Sustainability 51.63 74 W Access to Advanced Education 89.47 1 S Homicide rate (1= <2/100,000; 5= >20/100,000) 2 41 W Greenhouse gas emissions (CO2 equivalents per GDP) 421.7 4 N Years of tertiary schooling 1.8 1 SLevel of violent crime (1=low; 5=high) 1 1 N Water withdrawals as a percentage of resources 2.9 85 W Women's average years in school 13.9 4 N

Perceived criminality (1=low; 5=high) 2 2 N Biodiv. and habitat (0=no protection; 100=high protection) 63.4 68 W

Inequality in the attainment of edu. (0=low; 1=high) 0.07 38 W

Political terror (1=low; 5=high) 3 80 W Number of globally ranked universities 181 1 STraffic deaths (deaths/100,000) 11.4 38 W Saudi Arabia, Switzerland, Netherlands, Ireland, Austria, United Arab Emirates, Sweden, Germany, Denmark, Australia, Canada, Belgium, Iceland, Finland, and Norway

GDP per capita rank: 6/133

Social Progress Index rank: 16/133 Social Progress Index score: 82.85

Strengths and weaknesses are relative to 15 countries of similar GDP: Relative Strength n/a – no data availableNeutralRelative Weakness

BRAZIL

Score Rank Score Rank Score RankBASIC HUMAN NEEDS 71.14 74 W FOUNDATIONS OF WELLBEING 76.21 30 S OPPORTUNITY 65.33 32 S Nutrition and Basic Medical Care 96.34 61 N Access to Basic Knowledge 96.13 38 N Personal Rights 75.20 33 N Undernourishment (% of pop.) 5.0 1 N Adult literacy rate (% of pop. aged 15+) 92.6 81 N Political rights (1=full rights; 7=no rights) 2 38 NDepth of food deficit (cal./undernourished person) 12 52 N Primary school enrollment (% of children) 95.0 52 N Freedom of speech (0=low; 2=high) 1 15 NMaternal mortality rate (deaths/100,000 live births) 69 71 W Lower secondary school enrollment (% of children) 114.0 1 N

Freedom of assembly/association (0=low; 2=high) 2 1 N

Child mortality rate (deaths/1,000 live births) 13.7 57 N Upper secondary school enrollment (% of children) 95.3 40 N Freedom of movement (0=low; 4=high) 4 1 NDeaths from infectious diseases (deaths/100,000) 92.8 78 W Gender parity in secondary enrollment (girls/boys) n/a Private property rights (0=none; 100=full) 50 39 N

Water and Sanitation 84.98 62 N Access to Information and Communications 73.60 54 N Personal Freedom and Choice 71.63 36 N

Access to piped water (% of pop.) 92.1 41 N Mobile telephone subscriptions (subscriptions/100 people) 135.3 1 N Freedom over life choices (% satisfied) 70.4 67 N

Rural access to improved water source (% of pop.) 85.3 77 N Internet users (% of pop.) 51.6 55 N Freedom of religion (1=low; 4=high) 4 1 NAccess to improved sanitation facilities (% of pop.) 81.3 73 W Press Freedom Index (0=most free; 100=least free) 34.0 84 N Early marriage (% of women aged 15-19) 0.04 38 N

Satisfied demand for contraception (% of women) 86.8 10 N

Corruption (0=high; 100=low) 43 52 N Shelter 67.70 69 N Health and Wellness 73.63 34 N Tolerance and Inclusion 66.45 24 S Availability of affordable housing (% satisfied) 41.5 86 N Life expectancy (years) 73.6 68 N Tolerance for immigrants (0=low; 100=high) 66.6 50 N

Access to electricity (% of pop.) 98.9 67 N Premature deaths from non-comm. diseases (prob. of dying) 19.4 74 N Tolerance for homosexuals (0=low; 100=high) 64.2 21 S

Quality of electricity supply (1=low; 7=high) 4.1 77 W Obesity rate (% of pop.) 19.5 70 W Discrim. and viol. against minorities (0=low; 10=high) 5.6 49 N

Household air pollution attr. deaths (deaths/100,000) 12.0 46 N

Outdoor air pollution attributable deaths (deaths/100,000) 3.9 18 N Religious tolerance (1=low; 4=high) 3 36 N

Suicide rate (deaths/100,000) 6.4 49 N Community safety net (0=low; 100=high) 89.6 32 N Personal Safety 35.55 122 W Ecosystem Sustainability 61.49 38 N Access to Advanced Education 48.05 62 N Homicide rate (1= <2/100,000; 5= >20/100,000) 5 113 W Greenhouse gas emissions (CO2 equivalents per GDP) 401.6 4 N Years of tertiary schooling 0.4 65 NLevel of violent crime (1=low; 5=high) 4 105 W Water withdrawals as a percentage of resources 0.9 46 W Women's average years in school 9.3 77 N

Perceived criminality (1=low; 5=high) 4 94 W Biodiv. and habitat (0=no protection; 100=high protection) 66.7 58 N

Inequality in the attainment of edu. (0=low; 1=high) 0.25 79 W

Political terror (1=low; 5=high) 4 119 W Number of globally ranked universities 22 3 STraffic deaths (deaths/100,000) 22.5 105 W Botswana, Montenegro, Iraq, Thailand, Bulgaria, Costa Rica, Iran, Algeria, Mauritius, Mexico, Serbia, Azerbaijan, Lebanon, Belarus, and South Africa

GDP per capita rank: 55

Social Progress Index rank: 42/133 Social Progress Index score: 70.89


FROM INDEX TO ACTION TO IMPACT


SOCIAL PROGRESS NETWORK: LATIN AMERICA

• 107 organizations from the government, private sector and civil society.

• 21 initiatives

• 10 Latin American and Caribbean countries

• Brazil• Chile• Colombia• Costa Rica• El Salvador• Guatemala• Panama

• Paraguay • Peru• Trinidad and

Tobago


PROGRESSO SOCIAL BRASIL: PARTNER ORGANIZATIONS

# Membro1 Arapyau2 Banco do Brasil3 Camargo Correa4 Centro Ruth Cardoso5 CLUA6 Coca Cola7 Comunitas8 Deloitte9 Ecosocial10 Ethos11 Fundação Amazônas Sustentável12 Fundacíon Avina13 GIFE14 Giral15 Good Energies16 ICE

17 Imaflora18 Imazon19 Instituto Camargo Correa20 Instituto Cidade Democrática21 Instituto Coca Cola22 IPSOS 23 ISA

# Membro - Academia

29 FDC

30 FGV

31 PUC

32 USP

33 UFSC

# Membro24 Natura25 Observatório do Clima26 Sistema B27 SPI28 Vale


SOCIAL PROGRESS INDEX FOR THE BRAZILIAN AMAZON: AUGUST 2014

Carauari


Carauari

MUNICIPALITY OF CARAUARIPopulation: 27,645 (70% urban, 30% rural)Life Expectancy: 61.45 years

• Riverside communities in the Juruá River region provide biodiversity ingredients such as murumuru, andiroba and ucuuba in the Natura value chain.

• This region is also one of the main producers of acai in the Coca-Cola value chain.

• Identified by Amazon Social Progress Index as one of the most deprived municipalities, Carauari comprises two Protected Areas (Resex, RDS).

• Natura and Coca-Cola needed a more granular analysis of the needs of local farmers; specific communities within Carauari municipality (Resex, RDS, Baixo and Urban centre).

• Natura and Coca-Cola partnered with #Progresso Social Brasil to create a community needs survey, based on Social Progress Index framework.

• Ipsos collected primary data and developed the first community-level SPI through surveys.

TARGET POPULATION: JURUA RIVER REGION IN THE MUNICIPALITY OF CARAUARI

Carauari Riverside

MUNICIPALITY OF CARAUARIPopulation: 27,645 (70% urban, 30% rural)Life Expectancy: 61.45 years

Resex

RDS

Baixo

Urban

Urban Carauari

Resex

RDS

Suburb

5.95238095238

09551

20

7

1

43

80

93

99

AB C DE

TARGET POPULATION: INCOME BRACKETS AND ECONOMIC CLASSES

47

% home income

% economic class

Basis: Urban Carauari: 84 / Resex: 126 / RDS: 123 / Suburb: 82 RF) }Could you tell me what is the approximated monthly income in your house, in other words, the sum of every member’s monthly income? B1 / CB1 / CB2 / A4a / A4f

Urban Carauari

Resex

RDS

Baixo

6

19

23

26

24

40

33

46

40

27

29

20

15

7

9

5

12

3

4

2

Untik ½ MW ½ to 1 MW 1 to 2 MW 2 to 3 MW 3 MW or more

MW: minimum wage


Measurement Process

Stakeholders engagement

METHODOLOGY: A TERRITORIAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR THE JURUA REGION

STEP 2:Participative Diagnosis with the community

STEP 1: Creation of a Forum

for Territorial Development

STEP 3: Qualitative Needs Assessment Matrix

DEVELOPMENT PLAN√ INITIATIVES√ INDICATORS√ GOALS√ AGENDASTEP 2:

Field work with validation of the community (415 interviews)

STEP 1: Designing the questionnaire(Expert group, local community)

STEP 3: Social Progress quantitative diagnosis

SOCIAL CHANGE√ GOVERNANCE

STRUCTURE√ IMPLEMENTING

INITIATIVES√ MONITORING

PROGRESS


Access to Markets

Income Generation

Infrastructure and

Transportation

High Economic Priorities

QUALITATIVE NEEDS ASSESSMENT

Education Ecosystem Sustainability

Tolerance, Inclusion and

Social Empowerment

High Social Priorities

SPI DIMENSIONS – BASIC HUMAN NEEDS

50

BHN Nutrition and Basic Medical Care

Water and Sanitation Shelter Personal Safety

76

65 65

9282

62 61

40

53

94

5460

2837

92

5059

13

30

96

Urban Carauari Resex RDS Suburb

6066

45

6862

45

58

18

52 5043

53

16

52 50

4044

18

57

39


51

SPI DIMENSIONS – FOUNDATIONS OF WELLBEING

SPI DIMENSIONS – OPPORTUNITY

OPT Personal Rights Personal Freedom and Choice

Tolerance and Inclusion Access to Advanced Education

54

71

82

56

7

54

65

85

61

4

55

68

90

59

5

4955

82

53

4



Access to Markets

Income Generation

Infrastructure, Transportation

& EnergyHealth Garbage &

Solid Waste

Tolerance, Inclusion &

Social Empowerm

ent

Ecosystem Sustainabili

ty

Intermediate Priorities

Shelter

High Economic Priorities

Low Priority

KEY PRIORITIES OF THE TERRITORIAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR THE JURUA REGION

EducationWater,

Sanitation and Bathrooms

Access to Information

and Communicatio

ns

High Social Priorities


SPI Component Water and Sanitation

Access to piped water (%)

PROMOTING ACTIONS: WATER AND SANITATION

• Partnership signed in early 2015 with the Ministry of Social Development and Combatting Hunger (MDS)

• Implement the sanitation project SANEAR AMAZONIA to riverside communities in Território Médio Juruá.

• The project will work to build basic sanitation infrastructure and provide access to drinking water for 500 households in the region.

• The project's execution, which is coordinated by the Carauari Rural Producers Association (ASPROC) in partnership with Memorial Chico Mendes, has already begun.


PROMOTING ACTIONS: ACCESS TO ADVANCED EDUCATION

• Partnership with the State University of Amazonas (UEA) to implement a university-level program to train public school teachers in riverside communities in Médio Juruá.

• The program will be taught on-site at conservation units and provide an opportunity for members of the community with high school degrees to continue their studies, while also improving the quality of education in riverside communities.

• The partnership agreement is currently being signed and the academic program should be implemented locally by 2016

Urban Carauari

RESEX

RDS

Baixo

54

61

63

79

15

13

20

16

29

24

16

4

2

2

1

1

Elementary School Middle School High SchoolHigher Education


SOCIAL PROGRESS: THE OPPORTUNITY FOR BUSINESS

• The Social Progress Index provides a rigorous understanding of the relationship between economic performance and social progress. Business cannot ignore social progress.

• It helps prioritization by identifying communities’ most pressing areas for improvement, absolutely and relatively.

• It creates a common language across government, business, and civil society to foster collaboration.

• The Social Progress Index framework can be applied at different scales, offering a granular understanding down to the community level.

“It’s not just about a measurement process, it’s about bringing partners together to solve social problems in a collective way engaging and empowering communities. Applying index it is just starting point”, Pedro Massa, Coca-Cola

“Based on the diagnosis and availability of relevant and accurate data, companies, government, NGOs and social organizations will be able to work synergically to have a bigger positive impact on and foster social development in these communities”, Bruno Bidoia, Natura.


JOIN THE MOVEMENT: PROGRESSO SOCIAL BRASIL

• Website: www.progressosocial.org.br

• twitter: @ProgSocBr

• FB: www.facebook.com/progressosocialbrasil

• Email.: [email protected]


THANK YOU!

[email protected]

@shepleygreen

@socprogress

www.socialprogressimperative.org

mailto:[email protected]