Search results

This paper develops criteria for an alternative concept of inequality dominance and shows how they relate to criteria for comparing relative poverty. The results warn inter alia against the use of some popular indices of inequality. They do, however, provide an ethical basis for the use of other popular indices of (restricted) inequality as potential relative poverty indices. The results also suggest an interesting extension of the Schutz coefficient as well as a use of Lorenz curves for the analysis of relative poverty and restricted inequality. A graphical illustration shows how the new criteria of restricted inequality dominance extend the ranking power of previously proposed inequality dominance criteria.

The analysis of poverty is fundamentally focused on examining the well-being condition of the poor. We usually neglect the information provided by the rich. Nevertheless, perhaps the non-considered information indicating the determinants of non-poverty is also useful for fighting against poverty. The purpose of this paper is to analyze poverty under a new angle i.e. focusing on the information provided by the non-poor instead of the poor. For that a richness index is calculated in order to estimate econometric models regressing both indices i.e. poverty and richness indices on same selected characteristics. Thus, the comparison of the determinants of poverty and non-poverty for Tunisian case have allowed the classification of the selected explanatory variables with significant effect into four categories: the variables having significant effect on both sides (permanent effect), the variables having significant effect on the poor but not on the non-poor (transitory effect), the variables having significant effect on the non-poor but not on the poor (insurance effect) and the variables without any effect on both cases (neutral effect). This procedure is thus important given that it provides additional information and new way to enhance the targeting efficiency of the poor and fighting against poverty.

Using Tunisian data, an original procedure is proposed for calculating a richness index, defined based on the common formula of calculating the poverty index. Next econometric models are estimated regressing both the indices i.e. poverty and richness index on same selected characteristics.

The comparison of the determinants of poverty and non-poverty have allowed the classification of the selected explanatory variables with significant effect into four categories: the variables having significant effect on both sides (permanent effect), the variables having significant effect on the poor but not on the non-poor (transitory effect), the variables having significant effect on the non-poor but not on the poor (insurance effect) and the variables without any effect on both cases (neutral effect).

The analysis and the classification of the determinants of poverty according to the determinants of non-poverty is never made before in the litterature. This procedure is important given that it provides additional information and a new way to enhance the efficiency of targeting the poor and fighting against poverty.

This paper deals with poverty decompositions into subgroups defined with respect to intervals of income and the robustness of comparisons of the absolute contribution of such groups to poverty. For instance, world poverty estimates by the World Bank often distinguish between the extreme poor whose incomes are lower than $1.25 a day (in PPP terms) and the other poor with incomes between $1.25 and $2.5 a day. Existing dominance conditions can tell whether overall poverty and extreme poverty have declined in a robust manner when comparing countries at two points of time, but they cannot say anything for the contribution of the non-extreme poor to overall poverty. In the present paper we propose stochastic generalized dominance criteria to perform robust poverty ordering when the focus is placed on some interval of the poverty domain. Using generated data based on grouped data from World Bank’s PovcalNet tool, the paper finally investigates whether the robust decline of extreme poverty around the world during the last decades was also accompanied by a decline of the contribution of non-extreme poverty.

There has been a rapid expansion in the literature on the measurement of multidimensional poverty in recent years. This paper focuses on the longitudinal aspects of multidimensional poverty and its link to dynamic income poverty measurement. Using panel household survey data in Vietnam from 2007, 2008, and 2010, the paper analyses the prevalence and dynamics of both multidimensional and monetary poverty from the same dataset. The results show that the monetary poor (or non-poor) are not always multidimensionally poor (or non-poor) – indeed the overlap between the two measures is much less than 50 percent. Additionally, monetary poverty shows faster progress as well as a higher level of fluctuation than multidimensional poverty. We suggest that rapid economic growth as experienced by Vietnam has had a larger and more immediate impact on monetary than on multidimensional poverty.

The purpose of this paper is to extend the methodology proposed in Majumder et al. (2012) for the estimation of the item-specific purchasing power parities (PPPs) within countries, to the cross-country context. It estimates item-specific intra-country PPPs (i.e. spatial prices) and inter-country PPPs in a unified framework using unit records of household food expenditures from three Asian countries: India, Indonesia and Vietnam, covering contemporaneous time periods. The study addresses a key limitation of the International Comparison Program (ICP) exercise, namely, that it treats all countries, large and small, as homogeneous entities. Moreover, it directly calculates bilateral PPPs between countries based on their expenditure patterns and prices alone and directly estimates the price-level indices (PLI) and their standard errors, allowing formal tests of the hypothesis of PLI being unity. The usefulness of the estimated PPPs is illustrated by applying them to comparisons of real food expenditures between the three countries, and benchmarking the comparisons with those using the ICP PPPs.

The methodology is based on the fact that a spatial price index can be viewed as a true cost of living index (TCLI). Using a general cost function underlying the Rank 3 quadratic logarithmic systems, the TCLI is calculated for a reference utility level.

The study provides formal statistical tests of the hypothesis of item invariance of the PPPs. The usefulness of the proposed methodology is illustrated by applying the estimated PPPs in comparisons of food expenditures between subgroups in the three countries. The sensitivity of the expenditure comparisons to the use of item-wise PPPs underlines the need to provide price information on highly disaggregated PPPs to a much greater extent than the ICP has done to date.

The choice of these three Asian countries was dictated by the fact that, though comparability of items between them remains an issue as with all cross-country comparisons. Also, in the absence of price data, this study followed the practice in Majumder et al. (2012, 2015a, 2015b) in using as proxies the raw unit values of the food items, but adjusted for quality and demographic factors using the procedure introduced by Cox and Wohlgenant (1986) and extended by Hoang (2009).

It addresses some limitations of the ICP, namely, ICP treats all countries as single entities with the purchasing power of the country’s currency assumed to be the same in all regions within the country, ICP uses the US dollar as the numeraire (this ignores the fact that the PPPs required in bilateral welfare comparisons between developing countries with vastly different consumption habits from the “international norm” are quite different from the ICP PPPs) and ICP uses distribution invariant prices to calculate PPPs, which overlooks the fact that the poor pay different prices from the “representative” individual.

This study highlights the importance of estimating and using item-specific PPPs in cross-country comparisons by formally testing and rejecting the assumption of item invariant PPPs and by providing empirical evidence that they do make a difference to the welfare comparisons between countries. This study provides PPPs based on food items only, which may be more relevant for poverty comparisons.

It introduces, for the first time, the concept of item-specific PPPs between countries as estimable parameters and operationalizes this concept by using them in cross-country welfare comparisons.

Latin America experienced a long period of sustained growth since 2003 that positively impacted social and labor market indicators, including poverty. This paper contributes to the understanding of this process as it carries out a comparative study of poverty and indigence dynamics in five Latin American countries during 2003–2012. Specifically, it extends the analysis of a previously published study by broadening the time coverage and examining indigence mobility. It analyzes the extent to which countries with different levels of poverty (extreme poverty) incidence diverge in terms of exit and entry rates, and identifies the relative importance of the frequency and impact of events associated with poverty transitions. For this, a dynamic analysis of panel data is carried out using regular household surveys. Sizeable rates of poverty and indigence movements were observed in all five countries and it was found that a large proportion of poor or indigent households experienced positive events, mainly related to the labor market; however, only a small fraction of them actually exited poverty and indigence. It appeared, therefore, that even when the economy behaved reasonably well, high levels of labor turnover and income mobility (even of a negative nature) still prevail, mainly associated with the high level of precariousness and the undeveloped system of social protection that characterize the studied countries.

The purpose of this paper is to assess whether any meaningful lessons can be learned from South Africa's early twentieth century experience of White poverty and to what extent such lessons can be applied in order to combat Black poverty today.

This paper uses quantitative measures to assert the scale of poverty for both White and Black poverty in the two periods. An extensive discussion of the causes of poverty in both periods concludes with specific policy implications for today. Because of the unique characteristics and history of South Africa, this paper provides a unique dimension to poverty analysis.

The paper suggests that three key policy lessons can be learned from the twentieth‐century effort to combat White poverty and applied to Black poverty as it exists in South Africa today: an improvement in the quality of education, an improvement in the property right ownership of the poor, and policies to eliminate the constraints on economic growth, by investment, for example, in infrastructure and new technological industries.

Caution is advised when comparing past eras with the present; in comparing two periods that differ widely, only tentative recommendations is possible.

Since many areas of the world are faced with the difficult task of eradicating poverty, attempts that, to any extent, are successful are of interest and contribute positively to the development of the available knowledge base. The time‐span and design of this paper offers a unique perspective on poverty eradication efforts.

The importance of gender equality is reflected not only in the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs), but also in the World Bank’s Gender Action Plan launched in 2007 as well as in other treaties and actions undertaken at regional and international levels. Unlike other gender poverty works, which are mostly based on monetary measurement, the purpose of this paper is to adopt a non-monetary approach.

The present study makes use of a counting approach to examine gender issues in Burkina Faso and Togo using household surveys, namely Enquête Intégrale surles Conditions de Vie des Ménages (2009/2010) and Core Welfare Indicators Questionnaire (2011), respectively. It focusses on six dimensions (housing, basic utilities, assets, education, employment and access to credit) largely recognized as MDG targets.

Main findings indicate that overall individuals are the most deprived in education in Burkina Faso, while the reverse situation is true in Togo. Gender inequality is observed in all dimensions since women always seem to be more deprived than men. The situation is also marked by regional disparities. Moreover, the assessment of dimensional contributions shows different patterns for each country. While employment proves to be the main contributor of gender inequality in Burkina Faso, three dimensions (assets, access to credit and employment) account together for most of the total contribution to gender inequality in Togo.

The main contribution of the paper is to use a multidimensional method (counting approach) to assess gender deprivation, with countries comparison. It also proposes an interesting combination of the decomposition by dimension with the subgroup’s decomposition in order to determine the largest contributor to gender inequality.

A growing polarization of society accompanied by an erosion of the middle class is receiving increasing attention in recent German economic and social policy discussion. Our study contributes to this discussion in two ways: First, on a theoretical level we propose extended multidimensional polarization indices based on a constant elasticity of substitution (CES)-type well-being function and present a new measure to multidimensional polarization, the mean minimum polarization gap, 2DGAP. This polarization intensity measure provides transparency with regard to each single attribute, which is important for targeted policies, while at the same time respecting their interdependent relations. Second, in an empirical application, time is incorporated, in addition to the traditional income measure, as a fundamental resource for any activity. In particular, genuine personal leisure time will account for social participation in the sense of social inclusion/exclusion and Amartya Sen’s capability approach.

Instead of arbitrarily choosing the attribute parameters in the CES well-being function, the interdependent relations of time and income are evaluated by the German population. With the German Socio-Economic Panel (GSOEP) and detailed time use diary data from the German Time Use Surveys (GTUSs) 1991/1992 and 2001/2002, we quantify available and extended multidimensional polarization measures as well as our new approach to measuring the polarization of the working poor and affluent in Germany.

There are three prominent empirical results: Genuine personal leisure time in addition to income is an important and significant polarization attribute. Compensation is of economic and statistical significance. The new minimum 2DGAP approach reveals that multidimensional polarization increased in the 1990s in Germany.

European Union (EU) indicators on poverty and social exclusion employ only two child breakdowns: the proportion of children living in households with incomes below 60% of the national median using the modified OECD equivalence scale and the proportion of children living in workless households. The UK also uses these indicators in the Opportunities for All series. This article first develops a new indicator of child poverty based on income, subjective and deprivation indicators which may be more reliable than income alone. It then explores the extent to which income poverty and worklessness represent international variation in child well‐being using an index that we have developed. The conclusions are that: (1) relative income poverty and worklessness are poor indicators of child well‐being, especially for some of the new EU countries; (2) deprivation has a stronger association with overall well‐being than relative income poverty or worklessness; (3) there are a number of other single indicators of child well‐being that could be used as proxies for overall child well‐being; and (4) The EU (and the UK) could easily develop its own index of child well‐being.