Search results

This paper investigates the effect of reducing inequality in household education, health and access to credit on pro-poor growth in Cameroon using the 2001 and 2007 Cameroon household consumption surveys. Results indicate that education and access to credit registered relative pro-poor growth driven by a fall in inequality. However, health failed to record pro-poor growth due to an increase in health-inequality at the bottom of the welfare distribution. In addition, equalizing education, health and access to credit among households, would increase average growth in household spending and pro-poor growth.

This paper has two purposes. The first is to provide a critical evaluation of current methods of measuring monetary versus non-monetary pro-poor growth. The second is to propose an alternative method based on the fuzzy logic aggregation approach, which allows including both monetary and non-monetary indicators simultaneously for measuring the “global pro-poor growth”.

The methodology that we propose is based on the fuzzy logic approach to aggregate both monetary and non-monetary indicators simultaneously and thus to calculate the “Global Welfare Index”. This index will be considered as the main global wellbeing indicator based on which a “Global Growth Incidence Curve” is constructed to analyze the pro-poor growth. 10; Also, an application of the main previous procedures for measuring monetary vs non-monetary pro-poor growth is presented to compare their results and to discuss their advantages and limitations.

Empirical validation using Tunisian data reveals that on one hand, results of the pro-poor growth analysis are very sensitive to the used measurement method and may lead to different conclusions. On the other hand, our alternative procedure may provide a more appropriate analysis of pro-poor growth given that it takes into consideration the multidimensional aspect of poverty while remaining faithful to the fundamental principle of pro-poor growth measurement.

The proposed method for constructing the “Global Growth Incidence Curve” is original given that it presents a new procedure to take into account both monetary and non-monetary indicators simultaneously, which allows having a more global view of the phenomenon. Also, the comparative study of the different proposed methods in the literature of measuring pro-poor growth is useful to identify their limitations and advantages.

As the essential requirement of socialism with Chinese characteristics, common prosperity stands for both the goal of and the approach to economic growth. Shared development is a new stage of the process of common prosperity. From the perspective of economic growth, it requires the low- and middle-income groups to gain more from the growth than high-income groups. The paper aims to discuss these issues.

Based on provincial panel data, the random effect model and the dynamic panel model are used in this paper to analyze the path to achieve pro-poor growth.

The keys to achieve pro-poor growth are first to promote new urbanization with people at the center, diversify the forms of employment and improve the income structure of the residents, and second to improve the accuracy in designing redistribution policies.

After the realization of “some get rich first” policy, it is important to swiftly adapt to a new mindset of shared development, which charters a new course to the Marxist common prosperity. There exist few established economic theories or action plans with respect to shared development. Pro-poor growth, however, offers a perspective to achieve both sharing and development.

This paper focuses on three key metrics of poverty, income distribution and employment to ascertain the pro-poor and inclusive-growth position of the western African region. The roles of governance structures and their interactive effects are also accommodated to capture the peculiarity of the region.

The paper employs fixed and dynamic models.

Evidence suggests that growth is pro-poor, although virtually all governance indicators are sterile in stimulating poverty reduction. The authors observe that health and education spending coupled with trade-openness stimulate pro-poor growth potentials, whereas conflicts culminate the pervasiveness of poverty in the region. By empirically answering the question of how inclusive is economic growth through the lens of income-distribution and employment, the authors show that growth has been exclusive as per-capita-GDP growth rather dampens income shared by the poorest 20%. Also, it is observed that growth has not been inclusive as the jobless-growth argument remains valid while high inequality further exacerbates unemployment in the region. It is further shown that governance has been generally weak in propelling inclusive growth except where the institutional-component of governance stimulates inclusive growth through improvement in equality and labor employability.

The study jointly examines the metrics of poverty, income distribution and employment to ascertain growth pro-poorness and inclusivity which are key for the achievement of African-union (AU) agenda 2063. The study captures cross-sectional dependence among selected countries which previous studies ignored.

The aim of this paper is to analyse the cross‐country variation in the growth elasticity of poverty across a sample of developing countries during the period from 1990 to 2000.

In order to identify variables that may explain the cross‐country variation in the growth elasticity of poverty, the paper sets up a theoretical framework. Subsequently, the explanatory power of these variables is tested empirically by panel data econometric analysis.

For a sample of 52 low and middle income countries, it is found that the level of initial income inequality, credit available to the private sector, literacy, the extent of business regulations and trade openness are important determinants of the growth elasticity of poverty.

Countries that reduce regulatory burdens, improve literacy, increase access to finance, undertake land reforms (asset redistribution), and provide safety nets while liberalizing trade can create more growth and ensure that it is pro‐poor.

The paper identifies variables (at a cross‐country level) that may guide the conscious policies which create pro‐poor growth.

The growth incidence curve of Ravallion and Chen (2003) is based on the quantile function. Its distribution-free estimator behaves erratically with usual sample sizes leading to problems in the tails. The authors propose a series of parametric models in a Bayesian framework. A first solution consists in modeling the underlying income distribution using simple densities for which the quantile function has a closed analytical form. This solution is extended by considering a mixture model for the underlying income distribution. However, in this case, the quantile function is semi-explicit and has to be evaluated numerically. The last solution consists in adjusting directly a functional form for the Lorenz curve and deriving its first-order derivative to find the corresponding quantile function. The authors compare these models by Monte Carlo simulations and using UK data from the Family Expenditure Survey. The authors devote a particular attention to the analysis of subgroups.

The purpose of this paper is to analyse inclusive growth that focuses on the creation of opportunities for all. Inclusive growth allows people to contribute to and benefit from economic growth, while pro-poor growth approaches focusing on welfare of the poor only to reduce inequality.

Social capital forms with the development of human capital through schooling. Educated individuals are interested in dialogue and conversation. Interaction enables people to build trust, confidence and cooperation, to commit themselves to each other (i.e. reciprocity), and thereby to knit the social fabric. This study deals with the formation of social capital through development of human capital that is created through improvement of schooling and/or social inclusion. Creation of human and social capital is the basis for inclusive growth.

Recently, economics literature incorporates social capital for explaining regional disparities. Economic development of country depends on the impact of social capital which includes social culture, norms and regulations that promote economic reforms and development activities. Social capital forms with the development of human capital through schooling.

More detail regional levels data are required for empirical findings.

This paper definitely suggests a clear policy for inclusive growth model in less developed regions/countries. Briefly and specific few policies are suggested as: first, improve productive consumption providing nutritional intake to all the excluded people of the society; second, dismal the social blocking and create the base for bridging social capital formation; third, improve school enrollment and strengthen the feeling of togetherness; fourth, design school curriculum as per need base; and fifth, develop institutions and improve capacity building.

The Government expenditure policy should be focused more on productive consumption rather than unproductive consumption. The government should concentrate on the development of education and health sectors.

The inclusive economic growth process overcomes low-level equilibrium trap. The predictions of the model are examined empirically for a cross-section of countries and have substantial support in the chosen sample data.

Though Indian economy since 1980s has expanded very rapidly, yet the benefits of growth remain very unequally distributed. The purpose of this paper is to provide new evidence about the shape, intensity and decomposition of inequality change between 2005 and 2012. The authors find that Gini, as a measure of income inequality, has increased irrespective of geographic regions.

Based on a recent distribution analysis tool, “ABG,” the paper focuses on local inequality, and summarizes the shape of inequality in terms of three inequality parameters (α, β and γ) to examine how the income distributions have changed over time. Here, the central coefficient (α) measures inequality at the median level, with adjustment parameters at the top (β) and bottom (γ).

The results reveal that at the middle of distribution (α), there is almost the same inequality in both the periods, but the coefficients on the curvature parameters β and γ show that there is increasing inequality in the subsequent period. Finally, an analysis of decomposition of inequality change suggests that though income growth was progressive, however, this equalizing effect was more than offset by the disequalizing effect of income reranking.

This paper shows how it can be possible both for “the poor” to fare badly relatively to “the rich” and for income growth to be pro-poor.

This paper stresses the significance of inequality reduction.

Inequality reduction is very much imperative in ending poverty and boosting shared prosperity.

Perhaps, this research work is first of its kind to examine the shape and decomposition of change in income inequality in India in recent years.

This paper aims to address the thesis that poverty is best alleviated by a policy emphasising the growth of per capita average income, a strategy that affords little room for direct pro-poor interventions or a movement towards a more equal distribution of incomes. This policy prescription is based on the empirical finding that cross-country variations in poverty are largely explained by variations in growth rates of average income.

The paper contends, as has been done in other commentaries on the subject, that inferring the dictum that “growth is [virtually the only thing] good for poverty” from cross-country evidence on poverty, growth and inequality is neither logically plausible nor normatively compelling. This is sought to be established both through conceptual reasoning and (secondary) data-based analysis. In particular, the thesis under review implicitly rejects the value of counter-factual analysis. Such a hypothetical illustrative analysis is attempted here, using evidence relating to urban poverty, growth and inequality in India.

The paper concludes, without undermining the salience of growth, that there is little basis for the pre-eminence accorded to it as the instrument for poverty redress.

This paper has not been published elsewhere. A collaborative paper by one of the present authors with another scholar, on a similar theme is, however, under preparation for publication.