Search

This article contributes to the literature of pro-poor growth measurement by introducing and characterizing a growth-rate consistency axiom. The axiom states that if one growth pattern is judged to be more pro-poor than another growth pattern at a given growth rate, then the pro-poor ranking between the two growth patterns should remain the same at a higher growth rate. We show that summary pro-poor measures such as poverty-growth elasticities may violate this axiom. We then characterize a special dominance condition under which a given summary pro-poor measure will satisfy the growth-rate consistency axiom. Finally, we establish a general growth-rate dominance condition under which all summary pro-poor measures will respect the growth-rate consistency axiom. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The justification for using Lorenz dominance as an inequality ranking condition has been based on the aggregate social welfare comparison and the Pigou–Dalton principle of transfers. Since both the aggregating aspect of the social welfare function and certain implications of the principle of transfers are debatable, ordering conditions stronger than Lorenz dominance are worth exploring. A particularly interesting direction to pursue is to follow the frequently invoked notion that inequality is the “gap” between the rich and the poor. This paper follows this notion to formally propose a unified utility-gap concept and characterizes several utility-gap based conditions as general stronger-than-Lorenz-dominance ranking criteria. Specifically, we propose utility-gap dominance which requires all pair-wise utility-gaps in one distribution to be uniformly smaller than those of the other distribution. We then explore a conceptually weaker dominance concept – quasi dominance – which imposes conditions only on the gap between each person’s utility and some reference utility point of the distribution. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper comments on the work of Rector et al. (1999a, 1999b). The poverty lines implicit in their restrictive material deprivation approach are disputed and the claim that America has triumphed over poverty is rejected. Evidence is presented showing that poverty among the poorest Americans has significantly increased and is now near an all time high. The long economic expansion since the recession of 1990-1991 has left hardcore poverty essentially unchanged and relative deprivation among the poorest of the poor has increased. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper develops and applies new measures of poverty that overcome a number of specific methodological flaws in the official US poverty statistics. Sen's distribution sensitive index of poverty and each of its components are estimated at several distinct poverty thresholds for the period 1961-1996. Distribution sensitive measures of urban poverty are corrected for interarea differences in the cost of living and for comprehensive incomes. Recently developed statistical inference procedures are applied. Official poverty statistics are shown to be seriously misleading in some time periods and the choice of a poverty line affects conclusions concerning changes in poverty. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]