This file is part of IDEAS, which uses RePEc data


[ Papers | Articles | Software | Books | Chapters | Authors | Institutions | JEL Classification | NEP reports | Search | New papers by email | Author registration | Rankings | Volunteers | FAQ | Blog | Help! ]

Does it matter that we don't agree on the definition of poverty? A comparison of four approaches

Author info | Abstract | Publisher info | Download info | Related research | Statistics
Author Info
Caterina Ruggeri Laderchi, Ruhi Saith and Frances Stewart
Abstract

While there is worldwide agreement on poverty reduction as an overriding goal of development policy, there is little agreement on the definition of poverty. The paper reviews four approaches to the definition and measurement of poverty - the monetary, capability, social exclusion and participatory approaches. It points out the theoretical underpinnings of the various measures, and problems of operationalising them. It argues that each is a construction of reality, involving numerous judgements, which are often not transparent. The different methods have different implications for policy, and also, to the extent that they point to different people as being poor, for targeting. Empirical work in Peru and India shows that there is significant lack of overlap between the methods with, for example, nearly half the population identified as in poverty according to monetary poverty not in capability poverty, and conversely. This confirms similar findings elsewhere. Hence the definition of poverty does matter for poverty eradication strategies.

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.

File URL: http://www3.qeh.ox.ac.uk/RePEc/qeh/qehwps/qehwps107.pdf
File Format: application/pdf
File Function:
Download Restriction: no

Publisher Info
Paper provided by Queen Elizabeth House, University of Oxford in its series QEH Working Papers with number qehwps107.

Download reference. The following formats are available: HTML (with abstract), plain text (with abstract), BibTeX, RIS (EndNote, RefMan, ProCite), ReDIF
Length:
Date of creation:
Date of revision:
Handle: RePEc:qeh:qehwps:qehwps107

Contact details of provider:
Postal: Queen Elizabeth House 3 Mansfield Road, Oxford, OX1 3TB United Kingdom
Phone: +44 (1865) 281800
Fax: +44 (1865) 281801
Email:
Web page: http://www.qeh.ox.ac.uk/
More information through EDIRC

For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its listing, contact: (Rachel Crawford).

Related research
Keywords:

Other versions of this item:

This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports: References listed on IDEAS
Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:
  1. John Micklewright, 2002. "Social Exclusion and Children: A European View for a US Debate," Innocenti Working Papers inwopa02/19, UNICEF Innocenti Research Centre. [Downloadable!]
  2. Caterina Ruggeri Laderchi, . "The Monetary Approach to Poverty: A Survey of Concepts and Methods," QEH Working Papers qehwps58, Queen Elizabeth House, University of Oxford. [Downloadable!]
  3. repec:cep:sticas:051 is not listed on IDEAS
  4. Dollar, David & Kraay, Aart, 2001. "Growth is good for the poor," Policy Research Working Paper Series 2587, The World Bank. [Downloadable!]
    Other versions:
  5. Ravallion, M., 1998. "Poverty Lines in Theory and Practice," Papers 133, World Bank - Living Standards Measurement.
  6. Caterina Ruggeri Laderchi, 1997. "Poverty and its many dimensions: The role of income as an indicator," Oxford Development Studies, Taylor and Francis Journals, vol. 25(3), pages 345-360. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
  7. Miguel Szekely & Nora Lustig & Martin Cumpa & Jose Antonio Mejia, 2004. "Do we know how much poverty there is?," Oxford Development Studies, Taylor and Francis Journals, vol. 32(4), pages 523-558. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
    Other versions:
  8. Datt, Gaurav & Ravallion, Martin, 1998. "Why Have Some Indian States Done Better Than Others at Reducing Rural Poverty?," Economica, London School of Economics and Political Science, vol. 65(257), pages 17-38, February. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
    Other versions:
  9. Sen, Amartya K, 1976. "Poverty: An Ordinal Approach to Measurement," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 44(2), pages 219-31, March. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
  10. Foster, James & Greer, Joel & Thorbecke, Erik, 1984. "A Class of Decomposable Poverty Measures," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 52(3), pages 761-66, May. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
  11. Lipton, M., 1988. "The Poor And The Poorest," World Bank - Discussion Papers 25, World Bank.
Full references

Statistics
Access and download statistics

Did you know? You can use convenient plug-ins to search directly IDEAS from your browser.

This page was last updated on 2009-12-6.


This information is provided to you by IDEAS at the Department of Economics, College of Liberal Arts and Sciences, University of Connecticut using RePEc data on a server sponsored by the Society for Economic Dynamics.