Lucio Esposito (University of East Anglia) Peter J. Lambert () (University of Oregon Economics Department)
Abstract
Current poverty measurement methodology does not allow a definitive analysis of changes in distribution, through time or between countries, which involve changes in the number or proportion of poor people. By re-opening some of the discussion which has taken place around the incidence, intensity and inequality aspects of poverty, and by revisiting the continuity and transfer axioms, we show that the Bourguignon and Fields poverty index allows considerable ethical flexibility when its parameters are used to full advantage. Significantly, a fourth dimension of poverty, the injustice of it, corresponding closely with RawlsÂ’s concern for the least advantaged, can also be admitted into the picture once the poverty aversion parameter in the Bourguignon and Fields index is fully understood and used appropriately. A novel application leads to a perspective upon the entire class of relative poverty indices which has not been seen before, and also generates both potentially interesting new poverty indices and wider scope for cogent measurement.
Download Info
To download:
If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the
proper application to
view it first. Information about this may be contained
in the File-Format links below. In case of further problems read
the IDEAS help
page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS
site. Please be patient as the files may be large.