Poverty Multidimensional Poverty Measurement New York March 2013 Second Conference On Measuring Human Progress United Nations Development Program Gonzalo Hernández Licona Importance of multidimensional poverty measures ID: 661745
Download Presentation The PPT/PDF document "www. coneval .gob.mx Measuring The Many ..." is the property of its rightful owner. Permission is granted to download and print the materials on this web site for personal, non-commercial use only, and to display it on your personal computer provided you do not modify the materials and that you retain all copyright notices contained in the materials. By downloading content from our website, you accept the terms of this agreement.
Slide1
www.
coneval.gob.mx
Measuring The Many Faces Of Poverty: Multidimensional Poverty Measurement
New York. March, 2013
Second Conference On Measuring Human ProgressUnited Nations Development Program
Gonzalo Hernández
LiconaSlide2
Importance of multidimensional poverty measures
Must be part of the measurement of progress/development, along with GDP and inequality:
Social contract of countries. Income is important, but other
dimensions are important for their own sake. Access to education, health, housing, food are social rights.
These measures link measurement to public policyOne of the motivations for the MPI was the importance for
public policy in Mexico
(2007-8)
Unlike
the income
measure,
with a multidimensional approach, various public programs/actions can be reflected directly in
poverty.Slide3
Achievements
of MPI
Because of the previous reasons, MPI and similar methods are VERY IMPORTANT TO MEASURE HUMAN PROGRESS. They are here to stay!
MPI competes well with the income indicator. We suggest that HDRO continues to use an MPI-type indicator.
MPI based on household survey information,
microdata
and reliable surveys. Based on household data.
It is
decomposable
.Slide4
Using
the
Mexican experience
Union or Intersection. Intersection
. Union leads to 90%; thus it is not useful to prioritize public policy; all those in poverty are in fact very different form each other.H ior
M0.
Both
! For communications H, but M0
i
s a neat indicatos. We use both separately: H and Nr. of average deprivations.
Include inequality.
This is trickier (but Sabina and James may have an idea),
I would introduce it by focusing on extreme poverty explicitly. Slide5
Vulnerable
due toincome
Social
Rights
Deprivations
EWL
0
3
5
2
4
1
6
Wellbeing
Income
POVERTY
46.2 %, 2.5
deprivations
on
average
Non
poor
and non vulnerable
Poverty identification
Educational
gap
Access
to
Health
Access to
Social Security
Quality of Housing
Basic services in dwelling
Access
to
Food
Vulnerable
due
to
social
deprivationsSlide6
Moderate poverty
Social Rights
Deprivations
EWL
EXTREME poverty
10.4%; 3.7 deprivations
0
3
Vulnerable people by social deprivations
Vulnerable
due to
income
5
2
4
1
6
Non
poor
and non vulnerable
MWL
Public policy
Extreme Poverty
Wellbeing
IncomeSlide7
The
paper
. Specific comments
Cooking fuel indicator IN or OUT. IN
. I would not take it out; I accept sometimes is difficult to measure, but this indicator is important for poverty, especially in rural areas.
Households with non-eligible individuals and economies of scale.
Kalsen’s
suggestion might be interesting, but since education, health, food are social rights, we suggest to measure poverty at the
individual
level. I would use individual access to education, health, food. Slide8
Go
local
MPI is a global measure; it is important to have global measures for poverty. But there are some difficulties with being global (data, comparability, specific country needs and values..). We also need countries to engage in local measures
; countries have always something to say about the way they see themselves.And they should have also poverty measures at
subnational level!I would suggest to look at the specific Mexican (and Colombian
) case. The measure was thought for
public policy
purposes and the governments, federal and local, are using it for many purposes