IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/pra/mprapa/55851.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Pro poor growth : a partial ordering approach

Author

Listed:
  • Sarkar, Sandip

Abstract

The paper examines the partial pro poor orderings for different growth curves and sets of Equally Distributed Equivalent growth rate dominance. A new pro poor growth curve as the of change of Gini social welfare function, based on the quantiles of logarithmic income, has been proposed. It has been established that the newly proposed growth curve including its relative version i.e its deviation from the growth rate of mean, is robust to other growth curves that has been proposed in the literature, in terms of conclusiveness. Empirical illustrations are provided using Monthly per capita expenditure data, for different states of India, officially collected by National Sample Survey Office. It has been observed that the absolute and relative versions provides conclusive result in many cases where other pro poor growth curves fails to do so. Growth in rural and urban India is pro poor in an absolute sense, since from the early 1990s. Although, relative pro poor growth has been achieved for some spells in rural India, but, in Urban India, it is in general biased to the non-poor in most of the spells.

Suggested Citation

  • Sarkar, Sandip, 2014. "Pro poor growth : a partial ordering approach," MPRA Paper 55851, University Library of Munich, Germany, revised 15 Jul 2013.
    • Handle: RePEc:pra:mprapa:55851
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://mpra.ub.uni-muenchen.de/55851/1/MPRA_paper_55851.pdf
    File Function: original version
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Pernia, Ernesto & Kakwani, Nanak, 2000. "What is Pro-poor Growth?," MPRA Paper 104987, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    2. Atkinson, A B, 1987. "On the Measurement of Poverty," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 55(4), pages 749-764, July.
    3. Claudio Zoli, 1999. "Intersecting generalized Lorenz curves and the Gini index," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 16(2), pages 183-196.
    4. Jean-Yves Duclos, 2009. "What is “Pro-Poor”?," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 32(1), pages 37-58, January.
    5. Ravallion, Martin & Chen, Shaohua, 2003. "Measuring pro-poor growth," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 78(1), pages 93-99, January.
    6. Kraay, Aart, 2006. "When is growth pro-poor? Evidence from a panel of countries," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 80(1), pages 198-227, June.
    7. Satya R. Chakravarty, 2009. "Inequality, Polarization and Poverty," Economic Studies in Inequality, Social Exclusion, and Well-Being, Springer, number 978-0-387-79253-8, July.
    8. Essama-Nssah, B., 2005. "A unified framework for pro-poor growth analysis," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 89(2), pages 216-221, November.
    9. Son, Hyun Hwa, 2004. "A note on pro-poor growth," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 82(3), pages 307-314, March.
    10. Siddiq Osmani, 2005. "Defining pro-poor growth," One Pager 9, International Policy Centre for Inclusive Growth.
    11. Atkinson, Anthony B., 1970. "On the measurement of inequality," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 2(3), pages 244-263, September.
    12. Angus Deaton & Valerie Kozel, 2005. "Data and Dogma: The Great Indian Poverty Debate," The World Bank Research Observer, World Bank, vol. 20(2), pages 177-199.
    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. 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.
    2. Sami Bibi, 2006. "Growth with Equity is Better for the Poor," Cahiers de recherche 0640, CIRPEE.
    3. Buhong Zheng, 2011. "Consistent comparison of pro-poor growth," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 37(1), pages 61-79, June.
    4. Sami Bibi, 2005. "When is Economic Growth Pro-Poor? Evidence from Tunisia," Cahiers de recherche 0522, CIRPEE.
    5. Higgins, Sean & Lustig, Nora, 2016. "Can a poverty-reducing and progressive tax and transfer system hurt the poor?," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 122(C), pages 63-75.
    6. 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.
    7. 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.
    8. Flaviana Palmisano & Dirk Van de gaer, 2016. "History-dependent growth incidence: a characterization and an application to the economic crisis in Italy," Oxford Economic Papers, Oxford University Press, vol. 68(2), pages 585-603.
    9. Francisco Azpitarte, 2014. "Was Pro-Poor Economic Growth in Australia for the Income-Poor? And for the Multidimensionally-Poor?," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 117(3), pages 871-905, July.
    10. Abdelkrim Araar & Jean‐Yves Duclos & Mathieu Audet & Paul Makdissi, 2009. "Testing For Pro‐Poorness Of Growth, With An Application To Mexico," Review of Income and Wealth, International Association for Research in Income and Wealth, vol. 55(4), pages 853-881, December.
    11. Sean Higgins & Nora Lustig, 2015. "Can Poverty-Reducing and Progressive Tax and Transfer System Hurt the Poor?," Commitment to Equity (CEQ) Working Paper Series 1333, Tulane University, Department of Economics.
    12. 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.
    13. 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.
    14. 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.
    15. Mwangi S. Kimenyi, 2006. "Economic Reforms and Pro-Poor Growth: Lessons for Africa and other Developing Regions and Economies in Transition," Working papers 2006-02, University of Connecticut, Department of Economics.
    16. Marek Kośny & Gastón Yalonetzky, 2015. "Relative income change and pro-poor growth," Economia Politica: Journal of Analytical and Institutional Economics, Springer;Fondazione Edison, vol. 32(3), pages 311-327, December.
    17. Marek Kosny, 2011. "Relative affluence measures and an identification of growth pattern," Working Papers 230, ECINEQ, Society for the Study of Economic Inequality.
    18. repec:aer:wpaper:339 is not listed on IDEAS
    19. Dorothée Boccanfuso & Jean Bosco Ki & Caroline Ménard, 2009. "Pro-Poor Growth Measurements in a Multidimensional Model: A Comparative Approach," Cahiers de recherche 09-22, Departement d'économique de l'École de gestion à l'Université de Sherbrooke.
    20. B. Essama-Nssah & Peter J. Lambert, 2013. "Counterfactual decomposition of pro-poorness using influence functions," Working Papers 309, ECINEQ, Society for the Study of Economic Inequality.
    21. Jean-Yves Duclos & Paul Makdissi & Abdelkrim Araar, 2014. "Pro-poor indirect tax reforms, with an application to Mexico," International Tax and Public Finance, Springer;International Institute of Public Finance, vol. 21(1), pages 87-118, February.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Pro Poor Growth; Stochastic dominance; Inequality; India;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • I3 - Health, Education, and Welfare - - Welfare, Well-Being, and Poverty
    • I30 - Health, Education, and Welfare - - Welfare, Well-Being, and Poverty - - - General
    • I32 - Health, Education, and Welfare - - Welfare, Well-Being, and Poverty - - - Measurement and Analysis of Poverty
    • I39 - Health, Education, and Welfare - - Welfare, Well-Being, and Poverty - - - Other

    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:pra:mprapa:55851. 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: Joachim Winter (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/vfmunde.html .

    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.