Strategic And General Equilibrium Models In Poverty Measurement Studies
Incentive compatibility in poverty alleviation game for the most efficient and just allocation of resources and maximisation of social welfare requires cooperation from both rich and poor households, governments and the global community. Noncooperation among them only deepens poverty with socially, economically and morally unacceptable magnitudes of malnutrition, hunger-disease-illness, tensions and conflicts, illiteracy and lack of education and skills. Scientific analyses and systematic implementation of poverty reduction initiatives require strategic and multihousehold general equilibrium models to compliment standard Booth-Rowntree, Sen- Atkinson and FGT or Jenkins-Lambert type absolute, relative, chronic or intensity measures of poverty in order to evaluate dynamic impacts actions taken for alleviation of poverty. Bad game results in poverty and good game results in prosperity. No analyses of poverty can be considered complete without evaluating income and substitution effects on welfare of these households based on the price mechanism and allocation of resources in the wider economy.
Volume (Year): (2010)
Issue (Month): 1 (March)
|Contact details of provider:|| Postal: Casa Academiei, Calea 13, Septembrie nr.13, sector 5, Bucureşti 761172|
Phone: 004 021 3188148
Fax: 004 021 3188148
Web page: http://www.ipe.ro/
More information through EDIRC
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.:
- Basu, Kaushik, 1985. "Poverty Measurement: A Decomposition of the Normalization Axion [Cardinal Utility, Utilitarianism and a Class of Invariance Axioms in Welfare Analysis] [Poverty: An Ordinal Approach to Measurement]," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 53(6), pages 1439-1443, November.
- Russell Davidson & Jean-Yves Duclos, 2000.
"Statistical Inference for Stochastic Dominance and for the Measurement of Poverty and Inequality,"
Econometric Society, vol. 68(6), pages 1435-1464, November.
- Davidson, Russell & Duclos, Jean-Yves, 1998. "Statistical Inference for Stochastic Dominance and for the Measurement of Poverty and Inequality," Cahiers de recherche 9805, Université Laval - Département d'économique.
- Russell Davidson & Jean-Yves Duclos, 1998. "Statistical Inference for Stochastic Dominance and for the Measurement of Poverty and Inequality," LIS Working papers 181, LIS Cross-National Data Center in Luxembourg.
- Davidson, R. & Duclos, J.-Y., 1998. "Statistical Inference for Stochastic Dominance and for the Measurement of Poverty and Inequality," G.R.E.Q.A.M. 98a14, Universite Aix-Marseille III.
- Shorrocks, Anthony F, 1995. "Revisiting the Sen Poverty Index," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 63(5), pages 1225-1230, September.
- Vaughan, R N, 1987. "Welfare Approaches to the Measurement of Poverty," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 97(388a), pages 160-170, Supplemen.
- Desai, Meghnad & Shah, Anup, 1988. "An Econometric Approach to the Measurement of Poverty," Oxford Economic Papers, Oxford University Press, vol. 40(3), pages 505-522, September.
- Sen, Amartya K, 1976. "Poverty: An Ordinal Approach to Measurement," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 44(2), pages 219-231, March.
- Slesnick, Daniel T, 1996. "Consumption and Poverty: How Effective Are In-Kind Transfers?," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 106(439), pages 1527-1545, November.
- Ravallion, Martin, 1996.
"Issues in Measuring and Modelling Poverty,"
Royal Economic Society, vol. 106(438), pages 1328-1343, September.
- Foster, James & Greer, Joel & Thorbecke, Erik, 1984. "A Class of Decomposable Poverty Measures," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 52(3), pages 761-766, May.
- Atkinson, Anthony B., 1970. "On the measurement of inequality," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 2(3), pages 244-263, September.
- Besley, Timothy J & Kanbur, S M Ravi, 1988. "Food Subsidies and Poverty Alleviation," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 98(392), pages 701-719, September.
When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:rjr:romjef:v::y:2010:i:1:p:137-150. 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: (Corina Saman)
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.