Rethinking Poverty Metrics: Constructing The Gear Model Indicators Through A Reflective-Critical Lens

The apparent success of many poverty reduction policies stands in sharp contrast to persistent experiences of dependency, clientelism, and structural vulnerability. This article argues that the gap arises from an epistemological crisis in poverty measurement. The domination of technocratic metrics prioritizes income, output, and cost-efficiency while ignoring power relations, voice, and legitimacy. As a response, this study operationalizes the GEAR (Growth, Empowerment, Adaptability, and Rationality) Model as a reflective-critical framework for evaluating social assistance. It uses a theoretical-derivation approach grounded in critical constructivism to deconstruct existing indicators such as the Multidimensional Poverty Index and Proxy Means Testing, then reconstructs four normative dimensions inspired by Sen, Habermas, Beck, and Freire. These dimensions are translated into 12 indicators and an exploratory dual-method measurement toolkit that combines Likert-type items with qualitative interview probes. The toolkit includes a structured item bank, field administration guidelines, and a diagnostic schema for interpreting patterns, including golden cage situations where material gains coexist with political silence. Critically, self-reported perceptual measures require robust validation protocols to address social desirability bias in patron-client contexts. While grounded in the Indonesian context, this article proposes a conceptually coherent framework of the GEAR Model, offering public administration scholars an evaluation framework that integrates legitimacy, voice, and implementation distortions by extending beyond technocratic metrics and proposing a validation program for empirical testing in social assistance governance.