DOCSLIB.ORG

Measurement of Poverty

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Measurement of Poverty 2015 Measurement of Poverty ntres n OIC Member Countres r Cou e 2015 2015 C Memb I y n O t r f Pove nt o reme su C C M M Mea Y Y K “Enhancing National K Statistical Capacities” STATISTICAL, ECONOMIC AND SOCIAL RESEARCH AND TRAINING CENTRE FOR ISLAMIC COUNTRIES Kudüs Cad. No:9 Diplomatik Site 06450 ORAN-Ankara, Turkey Tel: (90-312) 468 61 72-76 Fax: (90-312) 468 57 26 Email: [email protected] Web: www.sesric.org MEASUREMENT OF POVERTY IN OIC MEMBER COUNTRIES: ENHANCING NATIONAL STATISTICAL CAPACITIES This report is funded by COMCEC under Project # 2013-SESRIC-028 titled “Enhancing National Capacities of OIC Member Countries in Poverty Statistics”. STATISTICAL ECONOMIC AND SOCIAL RESEARCH STANDING COMMITTEE FOR ECONOMIC AND AND TRAINING CENTRE COMMERCIAL COOPERATION OF THE FOR ISLAMIC COUNTRIES (SESRIC) ORGANIZATION OF ISLAMIC COOPERATION (COMCEC) © 2015 The Statistical, Economic and Social Research and Training Centre for Islamic Countries (SESRIC) Kudüs Cad. No: 9, Diplomatik Site, 06450 Oran, Ankara –Turkey Telephone +90–312–468 6172 Internet www.sesric.org E-mail [email protected] The material presented in this publication is copyrighted. The authors give the permission to view, copy, download, and print the material presented provided that these materials are not going to be reused, on whatsoever condition, for commercial purposes. For permission to reproduce or reprint any part of this publication, please send a request with complete information to the Publication Department of SESRIC. All queries on rights and licenses should be addressed to the Publication Department, SESRIC, at the aforementioned address. DISCLAIMER: Any views or opinions presented in this document are solely those of the author(s) and do not reflect the views of COMCEC Coordination Office. ISBN: 978-975-6427-36-1 Cover design by Publication Department, SESRIC. SESRIC hereby expresses its profound appreciation to Republic of Turkey Ministry of Food, Agriculture and Livestock for providing printing facilities. For additional information, contact Statistics and Information Department, SESRIC through: [email protected] 2 TABLE OF CONTENTS ACRONYMS ...................................................................................................................................... 4 ACKNOWLEDGEMENT ................................................................................................................. 5 FOREWORD ...................................................................................................................................... 6 I. UNDERSTANDING POVERTY .................................................................................................. 8 1.1. Basic Concepts, Definitions and Approaches .................................................................................... 8 1.2. Poverty and Inequality Measures .................................................................................................... 11 1.3. Determinants of Poverty.................................................................................................................... 16 II. STATE OF POVERTY IN OIC MEMBER COUNTRIES .................................................... 20 2.1. Poverty Profile ................................................................................................................................. 20 2.2. Determinants of Poverty in OIC Member Countries ....................................................................... 25 III. IMPROVING CAPACITIES FOR THE MEASUREMENT OF POVERTY .................... 38 3.1. Present Situation on Data Collection, Collation and Dissemination ............................................... 39 3.2. Poverty Assessment Approaches in OIC Member Countries .......................................................... 40 3.3. Current Capacity of National Statistical Offices ............................................................................. 47 3.4. Requirements for Enhancing National Capacities in Poverty Statistics .......................................... 49 IV. THE WAY FORWARD ............................................................................................................ 52 4.1. Concluding Remarks ....................................................................................................................... 53 4.2. Policy Recommendations ................................................................................................................ 55 APPENDIX ....................................................................................................................................... 58 REFERENCES ................................................................................................................................. 82 3 ACRONYMS ADB : African Development Bank ANCC : Antenatal Care Coverage AROPE : At-Risk-of-Poverty or Social Exclusion Indicator COMCEC : Standing Committee for Economic and Commercial Cooperation of the OIC DRC : Danish Refugee Council EAP : East Asia and Pacific ECA : Europe and Central Asia EGM : Expert Group Meeting FAO : Food and Agricultural Organization GDI : Gender-related Development Index GDP : Gross Domestic Product GHI : Global Hunger Index GPI : Governance Performance Index HDI : Human Development Index HPI : Human Poverty Index ICCIA : Islamic Chamber Of Commerce, Industry And Agriculture IDB : Islamic Development Bank IEO : Inequality of Economic Opportunity IMF : International Monetary Fund IMR : Infant Mortality Rate ISESCO : Islamic Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization ISFD : Islamic Solidarity Fund for Development LAC : Latin America and Caribbean LEB : Life Expectancy at Birth LIFDCs : Low Income Food Deficit Countries MDG : Millennium Development Goals MENA : Middle East and North Africa MNCH : Maternal, New Born and Child Health MPI : Multidimensional Poverty Index MPPN : Multidimensional Poverty Peer Network NER : Net Enrolment Rate NGO : Non-Govermental Organisation NSO : National Statistical Office ODA : Official Development Assistance OIC : Organization of Islamic Cooperation OPHI : Oxford Human Development and Poverty Initiative PRSP : Poverty Reduction Strategy Paper SA : South Asia SDG : Sustainable Development Goals SSA : Sub-Saharan Africa U5MR : Under Five Mortality Rate UNDP : United Nations Development Programme UNSD : United Nations Statistics Division USD : US Dollars WDI : World Development Indicators WEO : World Economic Outlook WHO : World Health Organization 4 ACKNOWLEDGEMENT This report is the output of the Project No. SESRIC-028 titled “Enhancing National Capacities of Organization of Islamic Cooperation (OIC) Member Countries in Poverty Statistics” supported by Standing Committee for Economic and Commercial Cooperation of the Organization of Islamic Cooperation (COMCEC) Project Cycle Management (PCM) Programme. The project aims at providing an overview about the state, causes and consequences of poverty in OIC member countries, building national statistical capacity in the area of poverty and, thus, overall contributing to the National Statistical Systems (NSSs) of the OIC member countries. The report also provides effective recommendations in the area of poverty alleviation and monitoring the state of poverty in OIC member countries. The project was carried out and coordinated by SESRIC. The report was prepared by Zehra Zumrut Selcuk and Mazhar Hussain, Senior Researchers and Dr. Nilufer Oba, Researcher at SESRIC. Technical assistance was also provided by the following researchers at SESRIC: Davron Ishnazarov, Abdulhamit Ozturk, Sumeyye Karatay and Syed Tahir Mahmud. Nabil M. Dabour, Director of Economic and Social Research Department and Hüseyin Hakan Eryetli, Director of Statistics and Information Department at SESRIC, were the project coordinators. Prof. Savaş Alpay supervised overall implementation of the project and was the principal editor of the report. The research team at SESRIC extends its thanks and appreciation to the 40 National Statistical Offices (NSOs) of OIC member countries for their valuable cooperation on sharing the information on the methodologies they used in poverty measurement through the Questionnaire on the national statistical capacities of the member countries, which has been designed and circulated by SESRIC during the preparation of the report. The research team also benefitted greatly from the invaluable contributions of the participants of the First Experts Group Meeting (EGM1) held on 7-8 August 2014 in Ankara, and the Second Experts Group Meeting (EGM2) held on 19-20 November 2014 in Ankara. The team would like to extend their thanks to all the participants1 in these meetings for their enlightening comments and views on the report of the project as well as on their valuable recommendations for the way ahead: Yashar Pasha (Azerbaijan), Hamit Baghirov (Azerbaijan), Md. Mizanur Rahman Khondker (Bangladesh), Ahmad Malam (Cameroon), Ali Ousmane Khassim (Chad), Samassi Daouda (Cote d’Ivoire), Sekou Tidiani Konate (Djibouti), Sohair Metwally Ahmed (Egypt), Lamin L. Dibba (Gambia), Wynandin Imawan (Indonesia), Karim (Indonesia), Raoof Al-Khateeb (Iraq), Rafi Alqudah (Jordan), Gulmira Karaulova (Kazakhstan), Awatif M. Al Sleem (Kuwait), Amal Hamed Al-Rifaee (Kuwait), Azahari Mohd. Raslan (Malaysia), Didi El Yass (Mauritania), Ousmane Maimouna Ali Boulhassane (Niger), Rahman Busari (Nigeria), Rabia Awan (Pakistan), Qais Hasiba (Palestine), Abdulmohsen bin Saad Al-Nassar (Saudi Arabia), Diouf Macoumba (Senegal), Somaia Khalid Elkhair
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Chapter III the Poverty of Poverty Measurement
    45 Chapter III The poverty of poverty measurement Measuring poverty accurately is important within the context of gauging the scale of the poverty challenge, formulating policies and assessing their effectiveness. However, measurement is never simply a counting and collating exercise and it is necessary, at the outset, to define what is meant by the term “poverty”. Extensive problems can arise at this very first step, and there are likely to be serious differences in the perceptions and motivations of those who define and measure poverty. Even if there is some consensus, there may not be agreement on what policies are appropriate for eliminating poverty. As noted earlier, in most developed countries, there has emerged a shift in focus from absolute to relative poverty, stemming from the realization that the perception and experience of poverty have a social dimension. Although abso- lute poverty may all but disappear as countries become richer, the subjective perception of poverty and relative deprivation will not. As a result, led by the European Union (EU), most rich countries (with the notable exception of the United States of America), have shifted to an approach entailing relative rather than absolute poverty lines. Those countries treat poverty as a proportion, say, 50 or 60 per cent, of the median per capita income for any year. This relative measure brings the important dimension of inequality into the definition. Alongside this shift in definition, there has been increasing emphasis on monitoring and addressing deficits in several dimensions beyond income, for example, housing, education, health, environment and communication. Thus, the prime concern with the material dimensions of poverty alone has expanded to encompass a more holistic template of the components of well-being, includ- ing various non-material, psychosocial and environmental dimensions.
    [Show full text]
  • Poverty in Egypt: 1974 - 1996
    Loyola University Chicago Loyola eCommons Topics in Middle Eastern and North African Economies Quinlan School of Business 9-1-2003 Poverty in Egypt: 1974 - 1996 Tamer Rady Ain-Shams University George A.Slotsve Northern Illinois University Khan Mohabbat Northern Illinois University Follow this and additional works at: https://ecommons.luc.edu/meea Part of the Economics Commons Recommended Citation Rady, Tamer; A.Slotsve, George; and Mohabbat, Khan, "Poverty in Egypt: 1974 - 1996". Topics in Middle Eastern and North African Economies, electronic journal, 5, Middle East Economic Association and Loyola University Chicago, 2003, http://www.luc.edu/orgs/meea/ This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Quinlan School of Business at Loyola eCommons. It has been accepted for inclusion in Topics in Middle Eastern and North African Economies by an authorized administrator of Loyola eCommons. For more information, please contact [email protected]. © 2003 the authors 1 Copyright License Agreement Presentation of the articles in the Topics in Middle Eastern and North African Economies was made possible by a limited license granted to Loyola University Chicago and Middle East Economics Association from the authors who have retained all copyrights in the articles. The articles in this volume shall be cited as follows: Rady, T., G. Slotsve, K. Mohabbat, “Poverty in Egypt: 1974-1996”, Topics in Middle Eastern and North African Economies, electronic journal, ed. E. M. Cinar, Volume 5, Middle East Economic Association and Loyola University Chicago, September, 2003. http://www.luc.edu/publications/academic/ Poverty in Egypt: 1974-1996 Tamer Rady* Ain-Shams University E-mail: [email protected] George A.
    [Show full text]
  • Determinants of Multidimensional Poverty Index of Niger State, Nigeria
    International Journal of Academic Research in Business and Social Sciences Vol. 1 1 , No. 14, Contemporary Business and Humanities Landscape Towards Sustainability. 2021, E-ISSN: 2222-6990 © 2021HRMARS Determinants of Multidimensional Poverty Index of Niger State, Nigeria Musa Mohammed, Rossazana Ab-Rahim To Link this Article: http://dx.doi.org/10.6007/IJARBSS/v11-i14/8532 DOI:10.6007/IJARBSS/v11-i14/8532 Received: 29 November 2020, Revised: 25 December 2020, Accepted: 18 January 2021 Published Online: 30 January 2021 In-Text Citation: (Mohammed & Ab-Rahim, 2021) To Cite this Article: Mohammed, M., & Ab-Rahim, R. (2021). Determinants of Multidimensional Poverty Index of Niger State, Nigeria. International Journal of Academic Research in Business and Social Sciences, 11(14), 95– 108. Copyright: © 2021 The Author(s) Published by Human Resource Management Academic Research Society (www.hrmars.com) This article is published under the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY 4.0) license. Anyone may reproduce, distribute, translate and create derivative works of this article (for both commercial and non-commercial purposes), subject to full attribution to the original publication and authors. The full terms of this license may be seen at: http://creativecommons.org/licences/by/4.0/legalcode Special Issue: Contemporary Business and Humanities Landscape Towards Sustainability, 2021, Pg. 95 – 108 http://hrmars.com/index.php/pages/detail/IJARBSS JOURNAL HOMEPAGE Full Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at http://hrmars.com/index.php/pages/detail/publication-ethics 95 International Journal of Academic Research in Business and Social Sciences Vol. 1 1 , No. 14, Contemporary Business and Humanities Landscape Towards Sustainability.
    [Show full text]
  • Measuring the Inequality of Well-Being: the Myth Of
    Measuring the Inequality of Well-being: The Myth of “Going beyond GDP” By Lauri Peterson Submitted to Central European University Department of International Relations and European Studies In partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Arts Supervisor: Professor Thomas Fetzer Word count: 15,987 CEU eTD Collection Budapest, Hungary 2013 Abstract The last decades have seen a surge in the development of indices that aim to measure human well-being. Well-being indices (such as the Human Development Index, the Genuine Progress Indicator and the Happy Planet Index) aspire to go beyond the standard growth-based economic definitions of human development (“go beyond GDP”), however, this thesis demonstrates that this is not always the case. The thesis looks at the methods of measuring the distributional aspects of human well-being. Based on the literature five clusters of inequality are developed: economic inequality, educational inequality, health inequality, gender inequality and subjective inequality. These types of distribution have been recognized to receive the most attention in the scholarship of (in)equality measurement. The thesis has discovered that a large number of well-being indices are not distribution- sensitive (do not account for inequality) and indices which are distribution-sensitive primarily account for economic inequality. Only a few indices, such as the Inequality-adjusted Human Development Index, the Gender Inequality Index, the Global Gender Gap and the Legatum Prosperity Index are sensitive to non-economic inequality. The most comprehensive among the distribution-sensitive well-being indices that go beyond GDP is the Inequality Adjusted Human Development Index which accounts for the inequality of educational and health outcomes.
    [Show full text]
  • Measuring Human Development and Human Deprivations Suman
    Oxford Poverty & Human Development Initiative (OPHI) Oxford Department of International Development Queen Elizabeth House (QEH), University of Oxford OPHI WORKING PAPER NO. 110 Measuring Human Development and Human Deprivations Suman Seth* and Antonio Villar** March 2017 Abstract This paper is devoted to the discussion of the measurement of human development and poverty, especially in United Nations Development Program’s global Human Development Reports. We first outline the methodological evolution of different indices over the last two decades, focusing on the well-known Human Development Index (HDI) and the poverty indices. We then critically evaluate these measures and discuss possible improvements that could be made. Keywords: Human Development Report, Measurement of Human Development, Inequality- adjusted Human Development Index, Measurement of Multidimensional Poverty JEL classification: O15, D63, I3 * Economics Division, Leeds University Business School, University of Leeds, UK, and Oxford Poverty and Human Development Initiative (OPHI), University of Oxford, UK. Email: [email protected]. ** Department of Economics, University Pablo de Olavide and Ivie, Seville, Spain. Email: [email protected]. This study has been prepared within the OPHI theme on multidimensional measurement. ISSN 2040-8188 ISBN 978-19-0719-491-13 Seth and Villar Measuring Human Development and Human Deprivations Acknowledgements We are grateful to Sabina Alkire for valuable comments. This work was done while the second author was visiting the Department of Mathematics for Decisions at the University of Florence. Thanks are due to the hospitality and facilities provided there. Funders: The research is covered by the projects ECO2010-21706 and SEJ-6882/ECON with financial support from the Spanish Ministry of Science and Technology, the Junta de Andalucía and the FEDER funds.
    [Show full text]
  • Quantitative Comparisons of Economic Systems
    Lecture 3: Quantitative Comparisons of Economic Systems Prof. Paczkowski Rutgers University Fall, 2007 Prof. Paczkowski (Rutgers University) Lecture 3: Quantitative Comparisons of Economic Systems Fall, 2007 1 / 87 Part I Assignments Prof. Paczkowski (Rutgers University) Lecture 3: Quantitative Comparisons of Economic Systems Fall, 2007 2 / 87 Assignments W. Baumol, et al. Good Capitalism, Bad Capitalism Available at http://www.yalepresswiki.org/ Prof. Paczkowski (Rutgers University) Lecture 3: Quantitative Comparisons of Economic Systems Fall, 2007 3 / 87 Assignments Research and learn as much as you can about the following: Real GDP Human Development Index Gini Coefficient Corruption Index World Population Growth Human Poverty Index Quality of Life Index Reporters without Borders Be prepared for a second Group Teach on these after the midterm: October 24 Prof. Paczkowski (Rutgers University) Lecture 3: Quantitative Comparisons of Economic Systems Fall, 2007 4 / 87 Part II Introduction Prof. Paczkowski (Rutgers University) Lecture 3: Quantitative Comparisons of Economic Systems Fall, 2007 5 / 87 Comparing Economic Systems How do we compare economic systems? We previously noted the many qualitative ways of comparing economic systems { organization, incentives, etc What about the quantitative? Potential quantitative measures might include Real GDP level and growth Population level and growth Income and wealth distribution Major financial and industrial statistics Indexes of freedom and corruption These measures should tell a story The story is one of economic performance Prof. Paczkowski (Rutgers University) Lecture 3: Quantitative Comparisons of Economic Systems Fall, 2007 6 / 87 Comparing Economic Systems (Continued) Economic performance is multifaceted Judging how an economic system performs, we can look at broad topics or issues such as..
    [Show full text]
  • The Challenge of Measuring Poverty and Inequality: a Comparative Analysis of the Main Indicators
    A Service of Leibniz-Informationszentrum econstor Wirtschaft Leibniz Information Centre Make Your Publications Visible. zbw for Economics Martín-Legendre, Juan Ignacio Article The challenge of measuring poverty and inequality: a comparative analysis of the main indicators European Journal of Government and Economics (EJGE) Provided in Cooperation with: Universidade da Coruña Suggested Citation: Martín-Legendre, Juan Ignacio (2018) : The challenge of measuring poverty and inequality: a comparative analysis of the main indicators, European Journal of Government and Economics (EJGE), ISSN 2254-7088, Universidade da Coruña, A Coruña, Vol. 7, Iss. 1, pp. 24-43, http://dx.doi.org/10.17979/ejge.2018.7.1.4331 This Version is available at: http://hdl.handle.net/10419/217762 Standard-Nutzungsbedingungen: Terms of use: Die Dokumente auf EconStor dürfen zu eigenen wissenschaftlichen Documents in EconStor may be saved and copied for your Zwecken und zum Privatgebrauch gespeichert und kopiert werden. personal and scholarly purposes. Sie dürfen die Dokumente nicht für öffentliche oder kommerzielle You are not to copy documents for public or commercial Zwecke vervielfältigen, öffentlich ausstellen, öffentlich zugänglich purposes, to exhibit the documents publicly, to make them machen, vertreiben oder anderweitig nutzen. publicly available on the internet, or to distribute or otherwise use the documents in public. Sofern die Verfasser die Dokumente unter Open-Content-Lizenzen (insbesondere CC-Lizenzen) zur Verfügung gestellt haben sollten, If the documents have been made available under an Open gelten abweichend von diesen Nutzungsbedingungen die in der dort Content Licence (especially Creative Commons Licences), you genannten Lizenz gewährten Nutzungsrechte. may exercise further usage rights as specified in the indicated licence.
    [Show full text]
  • Lecture 1: Measuring Poverty, Slide 0
    AREC 345: Global Poverty & Economic Development Lecture 1: Measuring Poverty and Inequality Professor: Pamela Jakiela Department of Agricultural and Resource Economics University of Maryland, College Park TheGoodNews Worldwide, the total number of people living in extreme poverty has been declining at an increasing rate since the 1970s Source: Max Roser, Our World in Data (2016) AREC 345: Global Poverty & Economic Development Lecture 1: Measuring Poverty, Slide 2 TheGoodNews Three Questions: 1. How did we arrive at this number? 2. What do we mean by extreme poverty? 3. Where would we find the people living in extreme poverty? Oxford English Dictionary definition of poverty: “lacking sufficient money to live at a standard considered comfortable or normal in society” • Until recently, the poorest people in every country lived in absolute poverty, unable to afford basic necessities like food, shelter, etc. • Now we are lucky enough that this is no longer the case (OED example: “people who were too poor to afford a telephone”) AREC 345: Global Poverty & Economic Development Lecture 1: Measuring Poverty, Slide 3 Measuring Inequality Measuring Inequality Standard approach to measuring income inequality: examine the share of total income received by each quintile (or fifth of the population) Inequality in the U.S. Quintile Income Share 13.8 29.3 3 15.1 4 23.0 5 48.8 Source: 2013 data from US Census Bureau AREC 345: Global Poverty & Economic Development Lecture 1: Measuring Poverty, Slide 5 Measuring Inequality We can present the same information graphically
    [Show full text]
  • CHAPTER 02 LITERATURE REVIEW on PROSPERITY INDICATORS 2.1 Introduction a Healthy, Wealthy and Happy People Constitute a Prospero
    CHAPTER 02 LITERATURE REVIEW ON PROSPERITY INDICATORS 2.1 Introduction A healthy, wealthy and happy people constitute a prosperous nation. The term prosperity has a wider meaning: enhancement of the quality of life of people through sustainable wealth creation and inclusion of all segments of the society in enjoying the benefits of development for which an inalienable pre requisite is the balanced regional development (Somapala, 2008). Accurately assessing the wellbeing of an entire society is no simple matter, as tempting to focus on purely financial measures, which have become easily available in recent years. But if we take the life satisfaction into account, we should consider a broader concept, which is known as prosperity (Legatum Institute, 2011). Many countries have developed prosperity indicators specific to their social, political and economical context. 2.1.1 Principles of prosperity According to the Legatum Institute (2011) there are general principles relevant to the promotion of national prosperity. These are: • Freedom of choice is crucial • For very poor countries, raising incomes is the first priority • Money matters to people, but only up to a point • Growth in invested capital is the strongest driver of long term economic growth 6 • Dependence on foreign development aid reduces long term growth rates • Open economies in which foreign direct investment and international trade play larger roles have higher long term growth rates • Lower costs of bureaucracy increase economic growth rates (Legatum Institute, 2011) 2.2 Economic Development. Economic development is defined as the development of economy of countries or regions for the well-being of their inhabitants. It is the process by which a nation improves the economic, political, and social well being of its people.
    [Show full text]
  • Measuring Progress on Hunger and Extreme Poverty
    BRIEFING PAPER AUGUST 2016 Measuring Progress on Hunger and Extreme Poverty by Lauren Toppenberg What is the 2030 Agenda for FIGURE 1: Sustainable Development Goals Sustainable Development? Bread for the World’s mission is to build the political will to end hunger both in the United States and around the world. From 2000 to 2015, an essential part of fulfilling our mission at the global level was supporting the eight Millennium Development Goals (MDGs)—the first-ever worldwide effort to make progress on human problems such as hunger, extreme poverty, and maternal/child mortality. The hunger target, part of MDG1, was to cut in half the proportion of people who are chronically hungry or malnourished. of course, these efforts continue today. There are groups and The MDGs spurred unprecedented improvements. The individuals working on all 17 SDGs scattered throughout U.S. goal of cutting the global hunger rate in half was nearly government and civil society. These initiatives aren’t (yet) con- reached, and more than a billion people escaped from extreme sidered actions toward meeting the SDGs, but that is what they poverty. Building on these successes, the United States and are. The SDGs offer an opportunity to articulate a common 192 other countries agreed to a new set of global develop- vision and to tailor a framework for action to the work of the ment goals in September 2015, ahead of the MDG end date of various stakeholders. December 31, 2015. Among the new Sustainable Development Once achieved, the SDGs will make an enormous difference Goals (SDGs) are ending hunger and malnutrition in all its to this country, to humanity, and to the planet.
    [Show full text]
  • Multidimensional Poverty Index Sen, A
    Development Strategy and Policy Analysis Unit w Development Policy and Analysis Division Department of Economic and Social Affairs Multidimensional Poverty Development Issues No. 3 21 October 2015 The measurement of poverty is composed of two fundamental steps, according to Amartya Sen (1976): determining who is Summary poor (identification) and building an index to reflect the extent of poverty (aggregation). Both steps have been sources of debate Measuring poverty with a single income or expenditure over time among academics and practitioners. For a long time, measure is an imperfect way to understand the deprivations unidimensional measures were used to distinguish poor from of the poor since, for example, markets for basic needs and non-poor. More recently, new measures have been proposed to public goods may not exist. Complementing monetary enrich the understanding of socio-economic conditions and to with non-monetary information provides a more complete better reflect the evolving concept of poverty. picture of poverty. From unidimensional to multi- dimensional poverty assesses human deprivation in terms of shortfalls from minimum Poverty measurement has primarily used income for the iden- levels of basic needs per se, instead of using income as an interme- tification of the poor since the early twentieth century. In the diary of basic needs satisfaction. The reasoning for this relies on 1950s, economic growth and macroeconomic policies domi- the argument that, while an increase in purchasing power allows nated the development discourse, which meant little attention the poor to better achieve their basic needs, markets for all basic was paid to the difficulties faced by poor people (ODI, 1978).
    [Show full text]
  • Beyond Monetary Poverty 4
    Beyond Monetary Poverty 4 This chapter reports on the results of the World Bank’s first exercise of multidimensional global poverty measurement. Information on income or consumption is the traditional basis for the World Bank’s poverty estimates, including the estimates reported in chapters 1–3. However, in many settings, important aspects of well-being, such as access to quality health care or a secure community, are not captured by standard monetary measures. To address this concern, an established tradition of multidimensional poverty measurement measures these nonmone- tary dimensions directly and aggregates them into an index. The United Nations Development Programme’s Multidimensional Poverty Index (Global MPI), produced in conjunction with the Oxford Poverty and Human Development Initiative, is a foremost example of such a multi- dimensional poverty measure. The analysis in this chapter complements the Global MPI by placing the monetary measure of well-being alongside nonmonetary dimensions. By doing so, this chapter explores the share of the deprived population that is missed by a sole reliance on monetary poverty as well as the extent to which monetary and nonmonetary deprivations are jointly presented across different contexts. The first exercise provides a global picture using comparable data across 119 countries for circa 2013 (representing 45 percent of the world’s population) combining consumption or income with measures of education and access to basic infrastructure services. Accounting for these aspects of well-being alters the perception of global poverty. The share of poor increases by 50 percent—from 12 percent living below the international poverty line to 18 percent deprived in at least one of the three dimensions of well-being.
    [Show full text]