IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/ecolet/v78y2003i1p93-99.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Measuring pro-poor growth

Author

Listed:
  • Ravallion, Martin
  • Chen, Shaohua

Abstract

It is important to know how aggregate economic growth or contraction was distributed according to initial levels of living. In particular, to what extent can it be said that growth was"pro-poor?"There are problems with past methods of addressing this question, notably that the measures used are inconsistent with the properties that are considered desirable for a measure of the level of poverty. The authors provide some new tools for assessing to what extent the aggregate growth process in an economy is pro-poor. The key measurement tools is the"growth incidence curve,"which gives growth rates by quantiles (such as percentiles) ranked by income. Taking the area under this curve up to the headcount index of poverty gives a measure of the rate of pro-poor growth consistent with the Watts index for the level of poverty. The authors give examples using survey data for China during the 1990s. Over 1990-99, the ordinary growth rate of household income per capita in China was 7 percent a year. The growth rate by quantile varied from 3 percent for the poorest percentile to 11 percent for the richest, while the rate of pro-poor growth was around 4 percent. The pattern was reversed for a few years in the mid-1990s, when the rate of pro-poor growth rose to 10 percent a year--above the ordinary growth rate of 8 percent.
(This abstract was borrowed from another version of this item.)

Suggested Citation

  • Ravallion, Martin & Chen, Shaohua, 2003. "Measuring pro-poor growth," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 78(1), pages 93-99, January.
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:ecolet:v:78:y:2003:i:1:p:93-99
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0165-1765(02)00205-7
    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 below or search for a different version of it.

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Dollar, David & Kraay, Aart, 2002. "Growth Is Good for the Poor," Journal of Economic Growth, Springer, vol. 7(3), pages 195-225, September.
    2. Atkinson, A B, 1987. "On the Measurement of Poverty," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 55(4), pages 749-764, July.
    3. Martin Ravallion & Shaohua Chen, 1999. "When Economic Reform is Faster Then Statistical Reform: Measuring and Explaining Income Inequality in Rural China," Oxford Bulletin of Economics and Statistics, Department of Economics, University of Oxford, vol. 61(1), pages 33-56, February.
    4. Nanak Kakwani, 1997. "Growth Rates Of Per-Capita Income And Aggregate Welfare: An International Comparison," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 79(2), pages 201-211, May.
    5. Foster, James E. & Shorrocks, Anthony F., 1988. "Inequality and poverty orderings," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 32(2-3), pages 654-661, March.
    6. Gastwirth, Joseph L, 1971. "A General Definition of the Lorenz Curve," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 39(6), pages 1037-1039, November.
    7. Foster, James E & Shorrocks, Anthony F, 1991. "Subgroup Consistent Poverty Indices," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 59(3), pages 687-709, May.
    8. Shorrocks, Anthony F, 1983. "Ranking Income Distributions," Economica, London School of Economics and Political Science, vol. 50(197), pages 3-17, February.
    9. Foster, James E & Shorrocks, Anthony F, 1988. "Poverty Orderings," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 56(1), pages 173-177, January.
    10. Sen, Amartya K, 1976. "Poverty: An Ordinal Approach to Measurement," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 44(2), pages 219-231, March.
    11. Eichhorn, Wolfgang & Funke, Helmut & Richter, Wolfram F., 1984. "Tax progression and inequality of income distribution," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 13(2), pages 127-131, October.
    12. Ravallion, Martin & Shaohua Chen, 1998. "When economic reform is faster than statistical reform - measuring and explaining inequality in rural China," Policy Research Working Paper Series 1902, The World Bank.
    13. 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.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Higgins, Sean & Lustig, Nora, 2016. "Can a poverty-reducing and progressive tax and transfer system hurt the poor?," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 122(C), pages 63-75.
    2. Edwin Fourrier-Nicolaï & Michel Lubrano, 2020. "Bayesian inference for TIP curves: an application to child poverty in Germany," The Journal of Economic Inequality, Springer;Society for the Study of Economic Inequality, vol. 18(1), pages 91-111, March.
    3. Zheng, Buhong, 2000. "Minimum Distribution-Sensitivity, Poverty Aversion, and Poverty Orderings," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 95(1), pages 116-137, November.
    4. LABAR, Kelly & BRESSON, Florent, 2011. "A multidimensional analysis of poverty in China from 1991 to 2006," China Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 22(4), pages 646-668.
    5. James E. Foster & Joel Greer & Erik Thorbecke, 2010. "The Foster-Greer-Thorbecke (FGT) Poverty Measures: Twenty-Five Years Later," Working Papers 2010-14, The George Washington University, Institute for International Economic Policy.
    6. Sean Higgins & Nora Lustig, 2015. "Can Poverty-Reducing and Progressive Tax and Transfer System Hurt the Poor?," Commitment to Equity (CEQ) Working Paper Series 1333, Tulane University, Department of Economics.
    7. Jean-Pierre Lachaud, 1999. "Les différences spatiales de pauvreté en Mauritanie : un test de dominance," Documents de travail 35, Groupe d'Economie du Développement de l'Université Montesquieu Bordeaux IV.
    8. Sami Bibi, 2006. "Growth with Equity is Better for the Poor," Cahiers de recherche 0640, CIRPEE.
    9. Tomasz Panek, 2019. "Czy wzrost gospodarczy w Polsce w latach 2005 -2015 był korzystny dla ubogich?," Gospodarka Narodowa. The Polish Journal of Economics, Warsaw School of Economics, issue 2, pages 5-39.
    10. Duclos, Jean-Yves & Sahn, David E. & Younger, Stephen D., 2011. "Partial multidimensional inequality orderings," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 95(3), pages 225-238.
    11. Yitzhaki, Shlomo, 2002. "Do we need a separate poverty measurement?," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 18(1), pages 61-85, March.
    12. Miguel Szekely & Nora Lustig & Martin Cumpa & Jose Antonio Mejia, 2004. "Do we know how much poverty there is?," Oxford Development Studies, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 32(4), pages 523-558.
    13. Gordon Anderson, 2003. "Poverty in America 1970-1990: who did gain ground? An application of stochastic dominance criteria employing simultaneous inequality tests in a partial panel," Journal of Applied Econometrics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 18(6), pages 621-640.
    14. Coral del Río & Javier Ruiz-Castillo, 2001. "TIPs for poverty analysis. The case of Spain, 1980-81 to 1990-91," Investigaciones Economicas, Fundación SEPI, vol. 25(1), pages 63-91, January.
    15. Duclos, Jean-Yves & Makdissi, Paul & Wodon, Quentin, 2005. "Poverty-dominant program reforms: the role of targeting and allocation rules," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 77(1), pages 53-73, June.
    16. Jean‐Yves Duclos & Paul Makdissi, 2004. "Restricted and Unrestricted Dominance for Welfare, Inequality, and Poverty Orderings," Journal of Public Economic Theory, Association for Public Economic Theory, vol. 6(1), pages 145-164, February.
    17. Jean–Yves Duclos & Phillipe Grégoire, 2002. "Absolute and Relative Deprivation and the Measurement of Poverty," Review of Income and Wealth, International Association for Research in Income and Wealth, vol. 48(4), pages 471-492, December.
    18. Zheng, Buhong, 2001. "Statistical inference for poverty measures with relative poverty lines," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 101(2), pages 337-356, April.
    19. Branko Milanovic & Mauricio Apablaza & Florent Bresson & Gaston Yalonetzky, 2016. "When More Does Not Necessarily Mean Better: Health-Related Illfare Comparisons with Non-Monotone Well-Being Relationships," Review of Income and Wealth, International Association for Research in Income and Wealth, vol. 62, pages 145-178, August.
    20. Sreenivasan Subramanian, 2004. "Indicators of Inequality and Poverty," WIDER Working Paper Series RP2004-25, World Institute for Development Economic Research (UNU-WIDER).

    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:eee:ecolet:v:78:y:2003:i:1:p:93-99. 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.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc 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 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: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/ecolet .

    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.