IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/mon/ceddtr/122.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

La mesure de la croissance pro-pauvres en Afrique : espace de l’utilité ou des capacités ? Analyse comparative appliquée au Burkina Faso

Author

Listed:
  • Jean-Pierre Lachaud

    (GED, Université Montesquieu Bordeaux IV)

Abstract

La recherche propose de contribuer au débat sur la croissance pro-pauvres, et présente une nouvelle évidence empirique pour le Burkina Faso, fondée à la fois sur l’espace de l’utilité et celui des capacités. Dans un premier temps, l’analyse comparative de la croissance pro-pauvres montre que les dimensions monétaire et non monétaire produisent des résultats très similaires, indépendamment des mesures « globales » ou « partielles » mises en oeuvre. Ainsi, au cours de la période 1994-2003, malgré une légère progression des privations en termes d’utilité et des capacités, la croissance économique nationale a été pro-pauvres, dans la mesure où les pauvres ont été proportionnellement moins affectés que les non pauvres par la baisse des dépenses et des capacités – une conclusion à nuancer selon le milieu. Corrélativement, au niveau national et dans le secteur rural, l’hypothèse d’une croissance monétaire pro-pauvres en termes absolus n’est pas vérifiée – contrairement à ce qu’indiquent d’autres études –, alors qu’un consensus semble prévaloir quant au caractère anti-pauvres de la croissance monétaire dans les villes, en termes absolus et relatifs. Ces divergences s’expliquent par des options méthodologiques différentes. Dans ces conditions, l’approche de la croissance pro-pauvres, à la fois par les capacités et l’utilité, peut susciter des questionnements additionnels quant aux méthodologies utilisées lors de la quête de la dynamique du progrès social, et relativiser les conclusions de certaines études. Dans un second temps, cette approche duale de la croissance pro-pauvres permet de tester la robustesse de quelques relations postulées entre la pauvreté, la croissance économique et l’inégalité. A cet égard, l’analyse comparative, mobilisant l’économétrie spatiale, vérifie deux faits stylisés. D’une part, l’élasticité provinciale de la pauvreté monétaire ou des capacités, par rapport à l’indicateur de bien-être approprié, est d’autant plus faible que l’indice de Gini initial (monétaire ou non monétaire) est élevé. De plus, la relative faiblesse des élasticités de pauvreté monétaire et non monétaire, dans les provinces relativement sensibles aux conditions climatiques ou les plus urbanisées, est susceptible de réduire les risques de l’environnement macro-économique instable. D’autre part, alors que l’évolution de l’indicateur de bien-être est un déterminant décisif de la variation de la pauvreté au cours de la période, les changements de la distribution des dépenses et des capacités constituent également un facteur important. Par ailleurs, l’analyse comparative montre que l’effet de la croissance sur la réduction de la pauvreté, monétaire ou non monétaire, est plus fort lorsque le niveau initial de développement est élevé. En définitive, l’approche de la croissance pro-pauvres en termes des capacités peut concourir non seulement à vérifier la robustesse de la dynamique stipulée du processus de croissance économique monétaire, mais également à appréhender ce dernier en l’absence d’informations fiables sur les conditions de vie monétaires des ménages. The research proposes to contribute to the debate on pro-poor growth, and presents a new empirical evidence for Burkina Faso, based at the same time on the spaces of utility and capabilities. Firstly, the comparative analysis of pro-poor growth shows that the monetary and non-monetary dimensions produce very similar results, independently of the implementations of « partial » or « full approach » measures. Thus, over the period 1994-2003, in spite of a small increase of poverty in terms of utility and capabilities, the national economic growth was pro-poor, insofar as the poor were proportionally less affected than the non-poor by the fall of the expenditures and capabilities – a conclusion to be moderated according to areas. Correlatively, at the national level and in the rural sector, the assumption of a monetary pro-poor growth in absolute terms is not checked – contrary to what certain studies have indicated –-, whereas a consensus seems to prevail as for the anti-poor monetary growth in the cities, in absolute and relative terms. These divergences are explained by different methodological options. In this context, the approach of pro-poor growth, at the same time by the capabilities and utility, can cause additional °questioning° as for the methodologies implemented at the time of the quest of the dynamics of social progress, and relativize the conclusions of some studies. Secondly, this dual approach of pro-poor growth makes it possible to test the robustness of certain postulated relations between poverty, economic growth and inequality. In this respect, the comparative analysis, mobilizing spatial econometrics, confirms two stylized facts. On the one hand, the provincial growth-elasticity of monetary or capabilities poverty is much lower when the initial index |Gini| (monetary or non-monetary) is high. Moreover, the relative lowness of growth-elasticities of monetary and non-monetary poverty, in the provinces relatively sensitive to climatic conditions or the most urbanized, is likely to reduce the risks of the unstable macroeconomic environment. In addition, whereas the evolution of the welfare indicator is an important determinant of the variation of poverty during the period, the changes of the expenditures and capacities’ distribution also constitute a significant factor. Moreover, the comparative analysis shows that the effect of the growth on monetary or non-monetary poverty reduction, is stronger when the initial level of development is high. Ultimately, the approach of pro-poor growth in terms of capabilities can contribute not only to check the robustness of the stipulated dynamics of the process of monetary economic growth, but also to have a good proxy of this last in the absence of reliable information on the monetary living standard of households. (Full text in french)

Suggested Citation

  • Jean-Pierre Lachaud, 2006. "La mesure de la croissance pro-pauvres en Afrique : espace de l’utilité ou des capacités ? Analyse comparative appliquée au Burkina Faso," Documents de travail 122, Groupe d'Economie du Développement de l'Université Montesquieu Bordeaux IV.
  • Handle: RePEc:mon:ceddtr:122
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    To our knowledge, this item is not available for download. To find whether it is available, there are three options:
    1. Check below whether another version of this item is available online.
    2. Check on the provider's web page whether it is in fact available.
    3. Perform a search for a similarly titled item that would be available.

    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. Ravallion, Martin, 1997. "Can high-inequality developing countries escape absolute poverty?," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 56(1), pages 51-57, September.
    3. Michael Grimm & Isabel Günther, 2007. "Growth and Poverty in Burkina Faso: A Reassessment of the Paradox," Journal of African Economies, Centre for the Study of African Economies, vol. 16(1), pages 70-101, January.
    4. Nanak Kakwani & Shahid Khandker & Hyun H. Son, 2004. "Pro-poor growth: concepts and measurement with country case studies," Working Papers 1, International Policy Centre for Inclusive Growth.
    5. Pernia, Ernesto & Kakwani, Nanak, 2000. "What is Pro-poor Growth?," MPRA Paper 104987, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    6. Atkinson, A B, 1987. "On the Measurement of Poverty," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 55(4), pages 749-764, July.
    7. Kraay, Aart, 2004. "When is growth pro-poor? Cross-country evidence," Policy Research Working Paper Series 3225, The World Bank.
    8. Surjit Bhalla, 2002. "Imagine There's No Country: Poverty, Inequality, and Growth in the Era of Globalization," Peterson Institute Press: All Books, Peterson Institute for International Economics, number 348, October.
    9. Aart Kraay, 2004. "When is Growth Pro-Poor? Cross-Country Evidence," IMF Working Papers 2004/047, International Monetary Fund.
    10. Kakwani, N., 1990. "Testing For Significance Of Poverty Differences ; With Application To Cote D'Ivoire," Papers 90-3, New South Wales - School of Economics.
    11. Alejandro Ginspun, 2004. "Pro-poor growth: finding the Holy Grail," One Pager 6, International Policy Centre for Inclusive Growth.
    12. Ravallion, Martin & Chen, Shaohua, 2003. "Measuring pro-poor growth," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 78(1), pages 93-99, January.
    13. Theo S Eicher & Cecilia Garcia Penalosa, "undated". "Inequality and Growth," Working Papers 0083, University of Washington, Department of Economics.
    14. Stephan Klasen, 2005. "Economic Growth and Poverty Reduction: Measurement and Policy Issues," OECD Development Centre Working Papers 246, OECD Publishing.
    15. Hyun H. Son & Nanak Kakwani, 2004. "Economic growth and poverty reduction: initial conditions matter," Working Papers 2, International Policy Centre for Inclusive Growth.
    16. Bhagwati, Jagdish N., 1988. "Poverty and public policy," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 16(5), pages 539-555, May.
    17. Martin Ravallion, 2004. "The Debate on Globalization, Poverty and Inequality: why Measurement Matters," QA - Rivista dell'Associazione Rossi-Doria, Associazione Rossi Doria, issue 1, March.
    18. Son, Hyun Hwa, 2004. "A note on pro-poor growth," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 82(3), pages 307-314, March.
    19. Arne Bigsten & Abebe Shimeles, 2004. "Prospects for 'Pro-Poor' Growth in Africa," WIDER Working Paper Series RP2004-42, World Institute for Development Economic Research (UNU-WIDER).
    20. Siddiq Osmani, 2005. "Defining pro-poor growth," One Pager 9, International Policy Centre for Inclusive Growth.
    21. Stewart, Frances & Streeten, Paul, 1971. "Conflicts between Output and Employment Objectives in Developing Countries," Oxford Economic Papers, Oxford University Press, vol. 23(2), pages 145-168, July.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Nouve, Kofi & Bambio, Yiriyibin & Kabore, Samuel & Wodon, Quentin, 2010. "Risque et mesures de la pauvreté rurale au Burkina Faso [Risk and Measures of Rural Poverty in Burkina Faso]," MPRA Paper 34374, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    2. Konde, Konde, 2016. "Analyse de la pauvreté multidimensionnelle en République Démocratique du Congo : une approche non monétaire par les capabilités [Analysis of multidimensional poverty in Democratic Republic of Congo," MPRA Paper 74993, University Library of Munich, Germany.

    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. Sami Bibi, 2006. "Growth with Equity is Better for the Poor," Cahiers de recherche 0640, CIRPEE.
    2. Jean-Pierre Lachaud, 2006. "La croissance pro-pauvres au Burkina Faso. L’éviction partielle de l’axiome d’anonymat en présence de données transversales," Documents de travail 126, Groupe d'Economie du Développement de l'Université Montesquieu Bordeaux IV.
    3. Jean-Pierre Lachaud, 2003. "La croissance économique en Afrique sub-saharienne est-elle "pro-pauvres" ? Une investigation appliquée au Burkina Faso," Documents de travail 83, Groupe d'Economie du Développement de l'Université Montesquieu Bordeaux IV.
    4. Jmurova, Aliona, 2017. "Pro-Poor Growth: Definition, Measurement and Policy Issues," MPRA Paper 85397, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    5. Vincenzo Lombardo, 2011. "Growth and Inequality Effects on Poverty Reduction in Italy," Rivista italiana degli economisti, Società editrice il Mulino, issue 2, pages 241-280.
    6. 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.
    7. Nanak Kakwani & Hyun H. Son, 2006. "Pro-Poor Growth: The Asian Experience," WIDER Working Paper Series RP2006-56, World Institute for Development Economic Research (UNU-WIDER).
    8. B. Essama‐Nssah & Peter J. Lambert, 2009. "Measuring Pro‐Poorness: A Unifying Approach With New Results," Review of Income and Wealth, International Association for Research in Income and Wealth, vol. 55(3), pages 752-778, September.
    9. Simplice A. Asongu & Oasis Kodila-Tedika, 2015. "On the Empirics of Institutions and Quality of Growth: Evidence for Developing Countries," Research Africa Network Working Papers 15/041, Research Africa Network (RAN).
    10. Hyacinth Eme Ichoku & Chukwuma Agu & John Ele-Ojo Ataguba, 2012. "What do we know about pro-poor growth and regional poverty in Nigeria?," International Journal of Business and Economic Sciences Applied Research (IJBESAR), International Hellenic University (IHU), Kavala Campus, Greece (formerly Eastern Macedonia and Thrace Institute of Technology - EMaTTech), vol. 5(3), pages 147-172, December.
    11. Rashida Haq & Uzma Zia, 2006. "Governance and Pro-poor Growth: Evidence from Pakistan," The Pakistan Development Review, Pakistan Institute of Development Economics, vol. 45(4), pages 761-776.
    12. Mwangi S. Kimenyi, 2006. "Economic Reforms and Pro-Poor Growth: Lessons for Africa and other Developing Regions and Economies in Transition," Working papers 2006-02, University of Connecticut, Department of Economics.
    13. Tomasz Panek, 2018. "Wzrost sprzyjaj¹cy ubogim: koncepcje i pomiar dla polski w latach 2005-2015," Working Papers 80, Institute of Statistics and Demography, Warsaw School of Economics.
    14. Lahimer, Noomen, 2009. "La contribution des investissements directs étrangers à la réduction de la pauvreté en Afrique subsaharienne," Economics Thesis from University Paris Dauphine, Paris Dauphine University, number 123456789/1167 edited by Goaied, Mohamed & Bienaymé, Alain.
    15. Rashida Haq & Uzma Zia, 2009. "Does Governance Contribute to Pro-poor Growth? Evidence from Pakistan," Governance Working Papers 22980, East Asian Bureau of Economic Research.
    16. Essama-Nssah, B., 2004. "A unified framework for pro-poor growth analysis," Policy Research Working Paper Series 3397, The World Bank.
    17. Deutsch, Joseph & Silber, Jacques, 2011. "On various ways of measuring pro-poor growth," Economics - The Open-Access, Open-Assessment E-Journal (2007-2020), Kiel Institute for the World Economy (IfW Kiel), vol. 5, pages 1-57.
    18. Zaman, Khalid & Khilji, Bashir Ahmad, 2013. "The relationship between growth–inequality–poverty triangle and pro-poor growth policies in Pakistan: The twin disappointments," Economic Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 30(C), pages 375-393.
    19. Ali Hashemi, 2016. "Measuring Pro-Poor Growth in Egypt, Jordan, and Palestine," Working Papers 1008, Economic Research Forum, revised Jun 2016.
    20. Resnick, Danielle & Birner, Regina, 2006. "Does good governance contribute to pro-poor growth?: a review of the evidence from cross-country studies," DSGD discussion papers 30, International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI).

    More about this item

    JEL classification:

    • I12 - Health, Education, and Welfare - - Health - - - Health Behavior
    • I32 - Health, Education, and Welfare - - Welfare, Well-Being, and Poverty - - - Measurement and Analysis of Poverty

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    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:mon:ceddtr:122. 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: the person in charge (email available below). General contact details of provider: .

    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.