Multidimensional poverty measurement in Europe:An application of the adjusted headcount approach

As awareness of the limitations of relying solely on income to measure poverty has become more widespread, attention has been increasingly focused on multi-dimensional approaches, to the point where the EU has adopted a multidimensional poverty and social exclusion target for 2020. The rationale advanced is that the computation of a multidimensional poverty index is an effective way of communicating in a political environment, and a necessary tool in order to monitor 27 different national situations. By contrast with the rather ad hoc way in which the EU 2020 poverty target has been framed and rationalised, the adjusted head count ratio applied here has a number of desirable axiomatic properties. It constitutes a significant improvement on union and intersection approaches and allows for the decomposition of multidimensional poverty in terms of dimensions of deprivation and socio-economic attributes. Since understanding poverty as multidimensional does not necessarily require constructing a multidimensional poverty index, on the basis of our analysis we provide a more general consideration of the value of developing a multidimensional index of poverty for the European Union.

Poverty measurement: present status of concepts and methods

Includes bibliography

Poverty measurement in Botswana

Includes bibliography

Poverty measurement and poverty statistics in Australia

Includes bibliography

Poverty measurement in Australia: the effect of government non-cash benefits and location

Includes bibliography

Poverty measurement in Indonesia

Includes bibliography

Poverty measurement in France

Includes bibliography

Poverty measurement as an instrument to design, monitor and evaluate health policy in Chile

Includes bibliography

Population Ethics, Social Choice Theory, and Two problems in the Measurement of Economic Poverty

Full Text / Article complet

Evaluation report of the regional workshop on the measurement of poverty in the Caribbean

1. The member and associate member countries of the Economic Commission for Latin America and the Caribbean/Caribbean Development and Cooperation Committee (ECLAC/CDCC) have committed to pursuing and achieving the Millennium Development Goals, a common set of goals and targets to bring all people up to minimum acceptable standards of human development by 2015. 2. However, in spite of various capacity-building initiatives, Caribbean countries continued to experience difficulties in addressing additional demands of monitoring and measuring progress created by the Millennium Development Goals and other Internationally Agreed Development Goals. Therefore, it was necessary to implement activities to ensure the further building/strengthening of institutional capabilities for generating reliable social, economic and environmental statistics among Caribbean States. 3. The ECLAC project entitled “Strengthening the Capacity of National Statistical Offices in the Caribbean Small Island Developing States to fulfil the Millennium Development Goals and other Internationally Agreed Development Goals” sought to build and strengthen institutional capabilities for generating and compiling reliable social, economic and environmental statistics in the Caribbean subregion, through the provision of technical support, as well as the conduct of training workshops for statisticians and policymakers. 4. Within the objectives of that project, ECLAC Subregional Headquarters for the Caribbean convened a regional training workshop on the measurement of poverty in the Caribbean in Port of Spain, to build the capacity of government officials and other relevant stakeholders. 5. The overall objective of the workshop was to develop and strengthen the national technical capacity of public officials in data processing, systematization and dissemination of poverty indicators and measurement in the Caribbean subregion. The workshop further sought to review and discuss the current approaches to poverty measurement and monitoring in an effort to identify methods to ensure that monitoring and reporting of the Millennium Development Goals were conducted according to internationally agreed upon methodologies. Furthermore, the workshop also intended to review different methods of poverty measurements, including the multidimensional methodology for the measurement of poverty. 6. Participants were introduced to different methods of poverty measurements and other aggregation proposals which would enable countries to better measure progress towards Goal 1 on poverty, report on it and apply evidence-based approaches to national policymaking and planning.

Welfare Effort and Poverty from the Monetary and Capabilities Approach: A Cross-Country Analysis in Latin American and the Caribbean (1990-2010)

There is abundant empirical evidence on the negative relationship between welfare effort and poverty. However, poverty indicators traditionally used have been representative of the monetary approach, excluding its multidimensional reality from the analysis. Using three regression techniques for the period 1990-2010 and controlling for demographic and cyclical factors, this paper examines the relationship between social spending per capita —as the indicator of welfare effort— and poverty in up to 21 countries of the region. The proportion of the population with an income below its national basic basket of goods and services (PM1) and the proportion of population with an income below 50% of the median income per capita (PM2) were the two poverty indicators considered from the monetarist approach to measure poverty. From the capability approach the proportion of the population with food inadequacy (PC1) and the proportion of the population without access to improved water sources or sanitation facilities (PC2) were used. The fi ndings confi rm that social spending is actually useful to explain changes in poverty (PM1, PC1 and PC2), as there is a high negative and signifi cant correlation between the variables before and after controlling for demographic and cyclical factors. In two regression techniques, social spending per capita did not show a negative relationship with the PM2. Countries with greater welfare effort for the period 1990-2010 were not necessarily those with the lowest level of poverty. Ultimately social spending per capita was more useful to explain changes in poverty from the capability approach.