Assessing Alternative Poverty Proxy Methods in Rural Vietnam
This paper compares and contrasts the use of four “short-cut” methods for identifying poor households: the poverty probability method; ordinary least squares regressions; principal components analysis; and quantile regressions. After evaluating these four methods using two alternative criteria (total and balanced poverty accuracy) and representative household survey data from rural Vietnam, it is concluded that the poverty probability method—which can correctly identify around four-fifths of poor and non-poor households—is the most accurate “short-cut” method for measuring poverty for specific subpopulations, or in years when household surveys are not available. The performance of the poverty probability method was then tested with different poverty lines and using an alternative household survey, and found to be robust.
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.
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.
Volume (Year): 39 (2011)
Issue (Month): 3 (September)
|Contact details of provider:|| Web page: http://www.tandfonline.com/CODS20|
|Order Information:||Web: http://www.tandfonline.com/pricing/journal/CODS20|
When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:taf:oxdevs:v:39:y:2011:i:3:p:339-367. 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: (Michael McNulty)
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.