Impact of household size and family composition on poverty in rural India

被引:48
作者
Meenakshi, JV [1 ]
Ray, R
机构
[1] Univ Delhi, Delhi Sch Econ, Ctr Dev Econ, Delhi 110007, India
[2] Univ Tasmania, Sch Econ, Hobart, Tas 7001, Australia
基金
澳大利亚研究理事会;
关键词
economies of household size; adult equivalence scales; head count poverty rate; land deprivation; female headed households; scheduled castes and scheduled tribes;
D O I
10.1016/S0161-8938(02)00129-1
中图分类号
F [经济];
学科分类号
02 ;
摘要
This paper utilises micro data on consumption, family composition and land ownership of nearly 70,000 rural Indian households to analyse poverty in rural India. The study, conducted at the disaggregated level of individual States, examines the impact of household size and composition, caste, gender of household head, and size of land ownership on a household's poverty status. The introduction of consumption economies of household size and of adult/child consumption relativities affect the poverty estimates but not the State poverty rankings. Scheduled castes/tribes are more vulnerable to poverty than others. In contrast, female headed households display, in many States, higher poverty only in the presence of size economies and adult/child relativities. However, the latter result is not always true. On this and in several other respects, the study finds sharp differences between the constituent States of the Indian Union. (C) 2002 Society for Policy Modelling. Published by Elsevier Science Inc. All rights reserved.
引用
收藏
页码:539 / 559
页数:21
相关论文
共 22 条
[1]  
BUHMANN B, 1988, REV INCOME WEALTH, P115
[2]   Female-headed households and female-maintained families: Are they worth targeting to reduce poverty in developing countries? [J].
Buvinic, M ;
Gupta, GR .
ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AND CULTURAL CHANGE, 1997, 45 (02) :259-280
[3]   HOW WELL DO STATIC INDICATORS IDENTIFY THE CHRONICALLY POOR [J].
CHAUDHURI, S ;
RAVALLION, M .
JOURNAL OF PUBLIC ECONOMICS, 1994, 53 (03) :367-394
[4]   EQUIVALENCE SCALE RELATIVITIES AND THE EXTENT OF INEQUALITY AND POVERTY [J].
COULTER, FAE ;
COWELL, FA ;
JENKINS, SP .
ECONOMIC JOURNAL, 1992, 102 (414) :1067-1082
[5]   Why have some Indian states done better than others at reducing rural poverty? [J].
Datt, G ;
Ravallion, M .
ECONOMICA, 1998, 65 (257) :17-38
[6]   Widowhood and poverty in rural India: Some inferences from household survey data [J].
Dreze, J ;
Srinivasan, PV .
JOURNAL OF DEVELOPMENT ECONOMICS, 1997, 54 (02) :217-234
[7]  
DREZE J, 1996, 70 STICERD LOND SCH
[8]  
DUBEY A, 1998, 1 GOV IND DEP STAT
[9]  
Galbraith J.K., 1979, NATURE MASS POVERTY
[10]   A cross-country study of household poverty and inequality on unit record household budget data [J].
Lancaster, G ;
Ray, R ;
Valenzuela, MR .
ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AND CULTURAL CHANGE, 1999, 48 (01) :177-208