Dépenses des ménages, développement humain et pauvreté au Burkina Faso : substitution ou complémentarité ?

The study proposes econometric tests for examining whether the theoretical divergences between the space of «capabilities» and that of the «utility» have, in practice, some importance. Based on the household survey of Burkina Faso carried out by 1994-95, the empiricalanalysis arrives at three conclusions. Firstly, a measure of poverty based on the monetaryexpenditures has, to a certain extent, the capacity to capture important dimensions of thewellbeing suggested by the approach of the rights, in particular, access to adapted educationaland health levels, and to adequate conditions of housing and sanitary environment. Secondly, thestudy shows the opportunity of a micro-multidimensionalmeasure of the deprivation of certainrights as an approximation of monetary poverty. On the one hand, the approach of the rightssuggests a proximity of situations between the configuration of the non-monetary poverty,apprehended by the micro-multidimensional index, and the profile of monetary poverty. On theother hand, the binary Probit, Tobit and ordered Probit estimates show that the role of theattributes related to housing, sanitary environment and instruction is essential in theexplanation, not only of the ratio and the monetary poverty gap, but also of the classificationof the households according to the per capita expenditures. However, taking into considerationof the nutrition leads to more contrasted conclusions. Thirdly, the empirical tests tend,nevertheless, to support the idea – and the theoretical argumentation – that the coexistence oftwo «spaces» introduces essential additional information in terms of evaluation of poverty andpromotion of human development. Three principal effects explain this conclusion: (i) an effectof level – the sensibility of the access to capabilities is related to the level of householdexpenditures ; (ii) an effect of structure – the relation between the standard of living of thehouseholds and the access to the capabilities is complicated by the heterogeneity of the ruraland urban sectors, and the social institutions; (iii) an effect of eviction – for example, therelative non-access of girls to education or to an adequate nutrition grows with the per capitadepenses, especially in the rural sector. Consequently, if the increasing availability of themonetary resources of the households are a major determinant of human development, theapproaches of the capabilities and utility are more complementary than opposed, and it would beprobably economically and socially ineffective to want to completely substitute one for theother.(Full text in French)