Removing the anonymity axiom in assessing pro-poor growth

被引：5

作者：

Grimm M. ^{[1
,2
]}

机构：

[1] Department of Economics, University of Göttingen, DIAL Paris and DIW Berlin, 37073 Göttingen

[2] Department of Economics, University of Göttingen, 37073 Göttingen

来源：

The Journal of Economic Inequality | 2007年 / 5卷 / 2期

关键词：

Anonymity axiom; Convergence; Decomposition; Mobility; Pro-poor growth;

D O I：

10.1007/s10888-006-9038-4

中图分类号：

学科分类号：

摘要：

The recent focus on 'pro-poor growth' led also to an intense debate on how exactly to define and to measure pro-poor growth. All suggested measures have in common that they are based on the anonymity axiom. Such a perspective may provide a very incomplete picture given that the common objective of most studies investigating the pro-poorness of growth is to test whether specific policy reforms where beneficial to the initially poor or not. I suggest a new concept of pro-poor growth which removes the anonymity axiom, and, using an illustration based on data from Indonesia and Peru, I check whether the assessment of pro-poor growth is different when an anonymous and a non anonymous approach to pro-poor growth is used. I also suggest an original decomposition of poverty changes over time which links both concepts. The results show that the choice of the approach has a drastic impact on the interpretation of the data. © Springer Science+Business Media, Inc. 2006.

引用

页码：179 / 197

页数：18

共 24 条

[1] Atkinson A.B., On the measurement of inequality, J. Econ. Theory, 2, pp. 244-263, (1970)
[2] Bound J., Brown C., Mathiowetz N., Measurement error in survey data, Handbook of Econometrics, 5, pp. 3705-3843, (2001)
[3] Bourguignon F., Ferreira F.H.G., Ex ante evaluation of policy reforms using behavioral models, The Impact of Economic Policies on Poverty and Income Distribution, pp. 123-141, (2003)
[4] Cogneau D., Grimm M., Robilliard A.-S., Evaluating poverty reduction policies - The contribution of micro-simulation techniques, New International Poverty Reduction Strategies, pp. 340-370, (2003)
[5] Cowell F.A., Measurement of income inequality, Handbook of Income Distribution, pp. 87-166, (2000)
[6] Cunha F., Heckman J., Navarro S., Counterfactual analysis of inequality and social mobility, (2004)
[7] De Vreyer P., Mesple-Somps S., Herrera J., Consumption Growth and Spatial Poverty Traps: An Analysis of the Effects of Social Services and Community Infrastructures on Living Standards in Rural Peru, (2002)
[8] Duclos J.-Y., Wodon Q., What is "pro-poor?, (2004)
[9] Fields G.S., Cichello P.L., Freije S., Menendez M., Newhouse D., For richer or for poorer? evidence from Indonesia, South-Africa, Spain, and Venezuela, J. Econ. Inequality, 1, pp. 67-99, (2003)
[10] Fields G.S., Ok E.A., The meaning and measurement of income mobility, J. Econ. Theory, 71, 2, pp. 349-377, (1996)

← 1 2 3 →