IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/csa/wpaper/2017-12.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Breaking Up The Relationship: Dichotomous Effects of Positive and Negative Growth on the Income of the Poor

Author

Listed:
  • Moritz Poll

Abstract

Much influential research on the relation between economic growth and the income of the poor has relied on the unstated assumption that positive and negative growth rates are equivalent in their effect on the poor. The most notable paper based on this assumption is “Growth is Good for the Poor” by Dollar and Kraay (2002), which has established a one-to-one relationship between economic growth and the income growth of the poor implying that every part of society benefits in the same way from economic growth. The notion of growth benefiting the poor like all other parts of society quickly gained traction and remains influential to this day. This paper argues that a homogeneous effect of positive and negative growth rates is neither reconcilable with economic intuition nor supported by the authors’ own data. A breakpoint between positive and negative growth rates is identified and shown to be both statistically and economically significant. The effect of positive growth is estimated to be around 0.75% income growth for the poor for every 1% economic growth, while the effect of negative growth is found to be as high as 1.6%. A one-to-one relation could only be obtained by averaging these two effects. The bottom line is that the poor do not seem to profit from growth like everyone else – a one-to-one relationship does not exist.

Suggested Citation

  • Moritz Poll, 2017. "Breaking Up The Relationship: Dichotomous Effects of Positive and Negative Growth on the Income of the Poor," CSAE Working Paper Series 2017-12, Centre for the Study of African Economies, University of Oxford.
  • Handle: RePEc:csa:wpaper:2017-12
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://ora.ox.ac.uk/objects/uuid:d0c91310-84f2-4763-8c17-a247c2a2040a
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:csa:wpaper:2017-12. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Julia Coffey (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/csaoxuk.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.