EconStor >
United Nations University (UNU) >
World Institute for Development Economics Research (UNU-WIDER), United Nations University >
WIDER Working Papers, United Nations University (UNU) >

Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item:

http://hdl.handle.net/10419/54058
  
Title:Another mere addition paradox? Some reflections on variable population poverty measurement PDF Logo
Authors:Hassoun, Nicole
Issue Date:2010
Series/Report no.:Working paper // World Institute for Development Economics Research 2010,120
Abstract:Debates about poverty relief and foreign aid often hinge on claims about how many poor people there are in the world and what constitutes poverty. Good measures of poverty are essential for addressing the world poverty problem. Measures of poverty require a basis for determining who is poor and a method of aggregation. Historically, the methods of aggregation were quite simple. The headcount index (H), for instance, measures the number of poor people as a percentage of the total population. The poverty gap index for the whole population (I) takes the total aggregate shortfall from the poverty line divided by the number of people and the poverty line itself. Recently, however, economists have suggested several more complicated alternatives including Sen's index, the Sen-Shorrocks-Thon (SST) index, and the Foster-Greer-Thorbecke (FGT) index (which, under some parameterizations is equivalent to H and I). This paper critiques several of the main poverty indexes in the literature by setting out and defending its 'axiom' (intuition or desiderata) for any good poverty measure. It argues that if Sen's index, the SST, and the FGT indexes do not satisfy this 'no mere addition axiom', they do not provide compelling measures of anything that can intuitively be considered poverty. Next, it illustrates how these poverty indexes violate this no mere addition axiom. Finally, the paper illustrates one way of modifying the indexes to satisfy the no mere addition axiom with the FGT. It notes, however, that these alternatives will not do for all policy purposes. So, it is important to consider further how poverty indexes and axioms fare in variable population contexts.
Subjects:poverty
measurement
indices
philosophy
population
axiomatic
JEL:I32
I30
D63
ISBN:978-92-9230-358-7
Document Type:Working Paper
Appears in Collections:WIDER Working Papers, United Nations University (UNU)

Files in This Item:
File Description SizeFormat
640337082.pdf132.72 kBAdobe PDF
No. of Downloads: Counter Stats
Download bibliographical data as: BibTeX
Share on:http://hdl.handle.net/10419/54058

Items in EconStor are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.