IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/vrs/ceuecj/v9y2022i56p76-92n5.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Has Economic Growth in Balkan Countries Been Pro-Poor in the 2012–2017 period?

Author

Listed:
  • Zwierzchowski Jan

    (Warsaw School of Economics, Collegium of Economic Analysis, Al. Niepodległości 162, 02-554 Warsaw, Poland)

  • Panek Tomasz

    (Warsaw School of Economics, Collegium of Economic Analysis, Al. Niepodległości 162, 02-554 Warsaw, Poland)

Abstract

The study investigates whether economic growth in the Balkan countries was pro-poor in the most recent period. We also try to establish to what extent various measures of pro-poorness of economic growth produce consistent and comparable results. Firstly, concepts of pro-poor growth are defined and corresponding approaches toward measuring pro-poor growth are presented. We distinguish between measures based on a general class of pro-poor indices and a dominance-based techniques. In the empirical part of the study, we verified whether economic growth in six Balkan countries (Greece, Bulgaria, Romania, Slovenia, Croatia and Serbia) was pro-poor in the 2012–2017 period. The analyses is based on the latest available panel data of the European Union Survey on Income and Living Conditions (EU-SILC). Growth was pro-poor in Croatia, Romania and Slovenia during the whole analysed period. The growth pattern was non pro-poor in Bulgaria, Greece and Serbia in certain years, mainly during periods of economic downfall. Various measures of pro-poor growth patterns do not produce consistent results in all instances. The results of the conducted comparative analysis suggest that the level of social benefits does not directly influence the pro-poor nature of the economic growth.

Suggested Citation

  • Zwierzchowski Jan & Panek Tomasz, 2022. "Has Economic Growth in Balkan Countries Been Pro-Poor in the 2012–2017 period?," Central European Economic Journal, Sciendo, vol. 9(56), pages 76-92, January.
    • Handle: RePEc:vrs:ceuecj:v:9:y:2022:i:56:p:76-92:n:5
    DOI: 10.2478/ceej-2022-0006
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.2478/ceej-2022-0006
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.2478/ceej-2022-0006?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Ravallion, Martin & Chen, Shaohua, 2003. "Measuring pro-poor growth," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 78(1), pages 93-99, January.
    2. Son, Hyun Hwa, 2004. "A note on pro-poor growth," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 82(3), pages 307-314, March.
    3. Edinaldo Tebaldi & Jongsung Kim, 2015. "Is Income Growth in the United States Pro-Poor? A State-Level Analysis," Eastern Economic Journal, Palgrave Macmillan;Eastern Economic Association, vol. 41(2), pages 251-272, March.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Takahiro Akita & Sachiko Miyata, 2020. "Assessing Pro-poorness of Regional Economic Growth: Evidence from Indonesia, 2004-2014," Working Papers EMS_2020_03, Research Institute, International University of Japan.
    2. B. Essama‐Nssah & Peter J. Lambert, 2009. "Measuring Pro‐Poorness: A Unifying Approach With New Results," Review of Income and Wealth, International Association for Research in Income and Wealth, vol. 55(3), pages 752-778, September.
    3. Flaviana Palmisano, 2018. "Evaluating Patterns of Income Growth when Status Matters: A Robust Approach," Review of Income and Wealth, International Association for Research in Income and Wealth, vol. 64(1), pages 147-169, March.
    4. Jean-Pierre Lachaud, 2006. "La croissance pro-pauvres au Burkina Faso. L’éviction partielle de l’axiome d’anonymat en présence de données transversales," Documents de travail 126, Groupe d'Economie du Développement de l'Université Montesquieu Bordeaux IV.
    5. Kacem, Rami Ben Haj, 2013. "Monetary versus non-monetary pro-poor growth: Evidence from rural Ethiopia between 2004 and 2009," Economics - The Open-Access, Open-Assessment E-Journal (2007-2020), Kiel Institute for the World Economy (IfW Kiel), vol. 7, pages 1-22.
    6. Klasen, Stephan & Reimers, Malte, 2017. "Looking at Pro-Poor Growth from an Agricultural Perspective," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 90(C), pages 147-168.
    7. Michael Savage, 2016. "Poorest Made Poorer? Decomposing income losses at the bottom of the income distribution during the Great Recession," Papers WP528, Economic and Social Research Institute (ESRI).
    8. Florent Bresson & Jean-Yves Duclos & Flaviana Palmisano, 2019. "Intertemporal pro-poorness," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 52(1), pages 65-96, January.
    9. Vito Peragine & Flaviana Palmisano & Paolo Brunori, 2014. "Economic Growth and Equality of Opportunity," The World Bank Economic Review, World Bank, vol. 28(2), pages 247-281.
    10. Jean-Yves Duclos & Paul Makdissi & Abdelkrim Araar, 2009. "Pro-Poor Tax reforms, with an Application to Mexico," Working Papers 0907E, University of Ottawa, Department of Economics.
    11. Aadil Hameed Shah & Atta Ullah Khan & Liurong Pan & Asad Amin & Abbas Ali Chandio, 2022. "Reflections of Pro-Poor Growth across Agro-Climatic Zones for Farming and Non-Farming Communities: Evidence from Punjab, Pakistan," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(9), pages 1-16, May.
    12. Loesse Jacques Esso, 2012. "Is Economic Growth In Cote D'Ivoire Pro-Poor? Evidence From Lsms Data: A Note," Bulletin of Economic Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 64(4), pages 575-580, October.
    13. Dirk Van de gaer & Flaviana Palmisano, 2018. "Growth, Mobility and Social Welfare," SOEPpapers on Multidisciplinary Panel Data Research 988, DIW Berlin, The German Socio-Economic Panel (SOEP).
    14. Walter Bossert & Bhaskar Dutta, 2019. "The measurement of welfare change," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 53(4), pages 603-619, December.
    15. Edwin Fourrier-Nicolai & Michel Lubrano, 2019. "The Effect of Aspirations on Inequality: Evidence from the German Reunification using Bayesian Growth Incidence Curves," Working Papers halshs-02122371, HAL.
    16. Klasen, Stephan, 2008. "Economic Growth and Poverty Reduction: Measurement Issues using Income and Non-Income Indicators," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 36(3), pages 420-445, March.
    17. Ismael Ahamdanech & Carmelo García-Pérez & Mercedes Prieto-Alaiz, 2020. "A Stochastic Dominance Approach to Evaluating Pro-Poor Growth—An Application to the Spanish Case," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(5), pages 1-16, February.
    18. Flaviana Palmisano & Vito Peragine, 2015. "The Distributional Incidence of Growth: A Social Welfare Approach," Review of Income and Wealth, International Association for Research in Income and Wealth, vol. 61(3), pages 440-464, September.
    19. Atindra Dahal, 2020. "Re-defining Modernity and Development Dimension in Quest of Indigenous and Ingenuous Prosperity of Himalayan Region," Technium Social Sciences Journal, Technium Science, vol. 3(1), pages 11-25, February.
    20. Hyacinth Eme Ichoku & Chukwuma Agu & John Ele-Ojo Ataguba, 2012. "What do we know about pro-poor growth and regional poverty in Nigeria?," International Journal of Business and Economic Sciences Applied Research (IJBESAR), International Hellenic University (IHU), Kavala Campus, Greece (formerly Eastern Macedonia and Thrace Institute of Technology - EMaTTech), vol. 5(3), pages 147-172, December.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    economic growth; poverty; inequality;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • D31 - Microeconomics - - Distribution - - - Personal Income and Wealth Distribution
    • D63 - Microeconomics - - Welfare Economics - - - Equity, Justice, Inequality, and Other Normative Criteria and Measurement
    • I32 - Health, Education, and Welfare - - Welfare, Well-Being, and Poverty - - - Measurement and Analysis of Poverty

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:vrs:ceuecj:v:9:y:2022:i:56:p:76-92:n:5. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Peter Golla (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.sciendo.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.