4.2 Article

A global count of the extreme poor in 2012: data issues, methodology and initial results

期刊

JOURNAL OF ECONOMIC INEQUALITY
卷 14, 期 2, 页码 141-172

出版社

SPRINGERNATURE
DOI: 10.1007/s10888-016-9326-6

关键词

Global poverty; Poverty measurement; Purchasing power parity

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The 2014 release of a new set of purchasing power parity (PPP) conversion factors (PPPs) for 2011 has prompted a revision of the World Bank's international poverty line. In revising the line, we have sought to minimize changes to the real purchasing power of the earlier $1.25 line (in 2005 PPPs), so as to preserve the integrity of the goalposts for international targets such as the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) and the World Bank's twin goals - which were set with respect to that line. In particular, the new line was obtained by inflating the same fifteen national poverty lines - originally used by Ravallion et al. (World Bank Econ. Rev. 23(2): 163-184 2009) to construct the $1.25 line - to 2011 prices in local currency units, and then converting them to US dollars using 2011 PPP conversion factors. With a small approximation, this procedure yields a new international poverty line of $1.90 per person per day. In combination with other changes described in the paper, this revision leads to relatively small changes in global poverty incidence for 2011: from 14.5 % using the old method to 14.1 % using the new method. In 2012, the new reference year for the global count, we find 12.7 % of the world's population, or 897 million people, are living in extreme poverty. There are changes in the regional composition of poverty, but they are also relatively small. This paper documents methodological decisions taken in the process of updating both the poverty line and the consumption and income distributions at the country level, including issues of inter-temporal and spatial price adjustments. It also describes various caveats and limitations of the approach taken.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.2
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据