IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/
MyIDEAS: Log in (now much improved!) to save this article

The relationship between growth–inequality–poverty triangle and pro-poor growth policies in Pakistan: The twin disappointments

  • Zaman, Khalid
  • Khilji, Bashir Ahmad
Registered author(s):

    The objective of the study is to examine the relationship between growth, inequality and poverty in the context of rural, urban and national levels. Further, this study evaluates pro-poor growth policies in Pakistan during the period of 1964–2011. The regression model encompassing the impact of economic growth and inequality on poverty reflects that a 1% increase in income while keeping the distribution constant reduces poverty around 0.162% in rural, 0.256% in urban, 0.471% in national pooled and 0.276% in national weighted regression. An increase in Gini coefficient while holding the income constant tends to increase poverty in the national weighted by 2.641%, and in the national pooled around 1.721% respectively. Subsequently, at urban and rural regions, it creates proportionally more poor households in the urban areas (elasticity 1.231) than in the rural areas (elasticity 0.928). The study measures pro-poor growth index that captures gains and losses of growth rates due to changes in the distribution of consumption. The gains imply pro-poor growth, while the losses imply anti-poor growth. Total growth spells in this study are 180 including 20 surveys for rural, 20 surveys for urban and 20 surveys for overall Pakistan. However, the study used three different poverty measures i.e., household count (HHC), poverty gap (PG) and squared poverty gap (SPG), evaluating 60 surveys for each poverty measure. The results conclude that out of the 180 growth spells, 63 growth spells had negative growth rates and 117 spells had positive growth rates. Of the 117 spells when growth rates were positive, growth was pro-poor in 64 cases and anti-poor in 53 cases. In 25 out of 63 spells of negative growth rates, the poor suffered proportionally a greater decline in their consumption compared to the non-poor. Thus, growth processes have not generally been favorable to the poor.

    If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. 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://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0264999312002982
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version under "Related research" (further below) or search for a different version of it.

    Article provided by Elsevier in its journal Economic Modelling.

    Volume (Year): 30 (2013)
    Issue (Month): C ()
    Pages: 375-393

    as
    in new window

    Handle: RePEc:eee:ecmode:v:30:y:2013:i:c:p:375-393
    Contact details of provider: Web page: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/inca/30411

    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.:

    as in new window
    1. Amjad,Rashid, 2008. "Private Industrial Investment in Pakistan," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521053617, November.
    2. Vincenzo Lombardo, 2008. "Growth and inequality effects on poverty reduction in Italy," Discussion Papers 9_2008, D.E.S. (Department of Economic Studies), University of Naples "Parthenope", Italy.
    3. Anand, Sudhir & Kanbur, S. M. R., 1993. "Inequality and development A critique," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 41(1), pages 19-43, June.
    4. Ravallion, Martin & Chen, Shaohua, 2003. "Measuring pro-poor growth," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 78(1), pages 93-99, January.
    5. Khalid Zaman & Iqtidar Ali Shah & Muhammad Mushtaq Khan & Mehboob Ahmad, 2012. "The growth, inequality and poverty triangle: new evidence from a panel of SAARC countries," International Journal of Economics and Business Research, Inderscience Enterprises Ltd, vol. 4(5), pages 485-500.
    6. Chani, Muhammad Irfan & Pervaiz, Zahid & Jan, Sajjad Ahmad & Ali, Amjad & Chaudhary, Amatul R., 2011. "Poverty, inflation and economic growth: empirical evidence from Pakistan," MPRA Paper 34290, University Library of Munich, Germany, revised 2011.
    7. Nicole Grunewald & Stephan Klasen & Inmaculada Martínez-Zarzoso & Chris Muris, 2011. "Income inequality and carbon emissions," Courant Research Centre: Poverty, Equity and Growth - Discussion Papers 92, Courant Research Centre PEG.
    8. Zaman, Khalid & Khan, Muhammad Mushtaq & Ahmad, Mehboob, 2012. "The relationship between foreign direct investment and pro-poor growth policies in Pakistan: The new interface," Economic Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 29(4), pages 1220-1227.
    9. Son, Hyun Hwa, 2004. "A note on pro-poor growth," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 82(3), pages 307-314, March.
    10. Bhagwati, Jagdish N., 1988. "Poverty and public policy," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 16(5), pages 539-555, May.
    11. Khalid Zaman & Waseem Ikram & Iqtidar Ali Shah, 2010. "Bivariate cointegration between poverty and environment: a case study of Pakistan (1980-2009)," Journal of Environmental Planning and Management, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 53(8), pages 977-989.
    12. Foster, James & Greer, Joel & Thorbecke, Erik, 1984. "A Class of Decomposable Poverty Measures," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 52(3), pages 761-66, May.
    13. Muhammad Omer & Sarah Jafri, 2008. "Pro-Poor Growth in Pakistan," South Asia Economic Journal, Institute of Policy Studies of Sri Lanka, vol. 9(1), pages 51-68, June.
    14. Atkinson, Anthony B., 1970. "On the measurement of inequality," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 2(3), pages 244-263, September.
    15. Nanak Kakwani & Shahid Khandker & Hyun H. Son, 2004. "Pro-poor growth: concepts and measurement with country case studies," Working Papers 1, International Policy Centre for Inclusive Growth.
    16. Hongyi Li & Lyn Squire & Tao Zhang & Heng-fu Zou, 1999. "A Data Set on Income Distribution," CEMA Working Papers 575, China Economics and Management Academy, Central University of Finance and Economics.
    17. Klaus Deininger & Lyn Squire, 1996. "A New Data Set Measuring Income Inequality," CEMA Working Papers 512, China Economics and Management Academy, Central University of Finance and Economics.
    18. Hyun H. Son & Nanak Kakwani, 2006. "Global Estimates of Pro-Poor Growth," Working Papers 31, International Policy Centre for Inclusive Growth.
    19. Kakwani, Nanak, 1993. "Poverty and Economic Growth with Application to Cote d'Ivoire," Review of Income and Wealth, International Association for Research in Income and Wealth, vol. 39(2), pages 121-39, June.
    20. Nanak Kakwani & Hyun H. Son, 2008. "Poverty Equivalent Growth Rate," Review of Income and Wealth, International Association for Research in Income and Wealth, vol. 54(4), pages 643-655, December.
    21. Datt, Gaurav & Ravallion, Martin, 1992. "Growth and redistribution components of changes in poverty measures : A decomposition with applications to Brazil and India in the 1980s," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 38(2), pages 275-295, April.
    22. Sen, Amartya, 1973. "On Economic Inequality," OUP Catalogue, Oxford University Press, number 9780198281931, December.
    23. Ravallion, Martin, 1995. "Growth and poverty: Evidence for developing countries in the 1980s," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 48(3-4), pages 411-417, June.
    24. Rodriguez, Edgard R, 1998. "International Migration and Income Distribution in the Philippines," Economic Development and Cultural Change, University of Chicago Press, vol. 46(2), pages 329-50, January.
    25. Hari Ram Lohano, 2009. "Poverty Dynamics in Rural Sindh, Pakistan," Working Papers id:2334, eSocialSciences.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    This item is featured on the following reading lists or Wikipedia pages:

    1. Recognized plagiarism

    When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:ecmode:v:30:y:2013:i:c:p:375-393. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Shamier, Wendy)

    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.

    If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.

    If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link to it, you can help with 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 profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

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

    This information is provided to you by IDEAS at the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis using RePEc data.