When Do the Poor Benefit From Growth, and Why?
This paper summarizes and synthesizes some literature that picks up and extends the discussion of Dollar and Kraay (2000). While most of the theory has been known for a long time, the empirical material that has gradually become available in the past decade or so in the form of household budget surveys has made it possible to paint a more detailed and nuanced picture than the one usually available. Here, three major arguments are developed. First, the poverty reduction (PR) impact of a certain rate of growth depends crucially on the pattern of that growth, with rural growth usually being more efficient than urban growth, and agricultural growth more efficient than manufacturing growth. Second, poverty reduction in agriculture is much stronger in the medium run than in the short run. This is because the indirect PR effect – a multiplier effect – is typically much stronger than the direct one. Third, there is much that both governments and donors can do to improve the rate of PR, including appropriate targeting of public expenditure, increased provision of primary education to address growth-hampering income inequality, and better focus onb gender issues.
|Date of creation:||22 Aug 2001|
|Date of revision:|
|Publication status:||Forthcoming in Tanzania Economic Trends.|
|Contact details of provider:|| Postal: Department of Economics, School of Economics and Management, Lund University, Box 7082, S-220 07 Lund,Sweden|
Phone: +46 +46 222 0000
Fax: +46 +46 2224613
Web page: http://www.nek.lu.se/en
More information through EDIRC
When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:hhs:lunewp:2001_012. 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: (David Edgerton)
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.