Population growth and poverty measurement

2000

Global Justice Theory Practice Rhetoric, 2013

Introducing the Volume The volume Debates on the Measurement of Global Poverty, edited by Anand, Segal and Stiglitz, is an impressive collection of essays that captures the most important methodological aspects of global poverty measurement. With a range of approaches to measurement, it assesses whether poverty has declined in the course of the last decade's efforts towards achieving the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs). In the introduction, the editors emphasize that global poverty is not only higher on the political agenda now, but that we also know more about it than ever before, due to intensified collection and analysis of data. Their motivation for collecting the 15 essays, which discuss the ins and outs of poverty measurement, goes beyond academic interest: With the introduction of the MDGs, it matters tremendously, from a policy perspective, whether or not we are likely to reach the first MDG of halving poverty by 2015 (in comparison to 1990 levels). To address this and other questions, the volume includes essays by scholars and policy researchers within international organizations (IOs), who have developed a range of methodological conceptions on the measurement of global poverty. Poverty measurement is not merely a technical matter, and the volume addresses the major disagreements and contentions surrounding it. The debate focuses primarily on whether poverty has indeed been decreasing to the extent that World Bank studies suggest. The World Bank's policy researchers assert that more than half a billion people have escaped at least the most miserable state of absolute poverty, which they define as an income at or below 1.25 US$ a day in 2005 prices. 1 Reddy and Pogge (chapter 3) have strong doubts that such a positive scenario is justified, whereas Bhalla (chapter 4) argues in favor of a different measurement method, according to which poverty has never been as

RePEc: Research Papers in Economics, 2012

The emerging scope of international development has seen an increased focus since the Cold War, on poverty reduction across developing countries. With this, newly formed concepts of poverty have entered the discourse alongside attempts to produce statistical results using measurements of poverty, to contextualize new definitions, goals and designated outcomes. Conventional methods of poverty have thus arisen and produced varied methodologies, results and implications. This essay explores some of these main methods, analysing their weaknesses and resulting biases. Throughout the essay, a running critique will emphasise the foundational problem familiar to a range of development areas, indeed not just poverty reduction. Namely that analysts all too often assume, simplify and homogenise key concepts at the root of developmental issues, in particular poverty, those affected by poverty and its causes. A caution toward categorization will propose a lens of critique over many poverty measurements, suggesting that by creating simplistic structures of which to categorize people and poverty within, we risk reducing and homogenising complex, relative and rooted realities behind why poverty exists and who these people are. A critique within itself, this also sources the common problems found in our ability to measure poverty. These discourses surrounding poverty and its measurement are vital to development, as attempts to define and measure poverty have policy implications such as resource allocation, which can greatly affect people – from the marginalised to those inflicted by any form of inequality, communities, politics, local and global interests and likewise media portrayals.

2008

I am submitting comments on behalf of the National Center for Children in Poverty (NCCP) to express support for the ideas presented in the draft legislation, the "Measuring American Poverty Act." The proposal addresses a number of issues I raised in testimony given a year ago at this subcommittee's hearing on "Measuring Poverty in America" (Cauthen 2007). In brief, I argued that: n Because poverty exacts such a high toll on our society, it is critical that we measure it in a meaningful way so that we can address it and measure the degree to which our anti-poverty policies are successful. n The National Academy of Sciences' (NAS) 1995 recommendations for improving the official poverty measure offer the most promising-and efficacious-approach to creating a more accurate measure of income poverty. n In a wealthy, advanced industrial society such as ours, it is imperative that we supplement measures of income poverty with additional indicators of the health and well-being of our nation's citizens, especially our youngest.