1 / 17

Poverty and Human Development Report Geographic Diversity of Poverty

Poverty and Human Development Report Geographic Diversity of Poverty. PHDR: Geographic Diversity of Poverty Professor Amani, ESRF. This presentation. Introduction Methodologies Single indicator approach Human Development Index (HDI) Human Poverty Index (HPI)

field
Download Presentation

Poverty and Human Development Report Geographic Diversity of Poverty

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Poverty and Human Development ReportGeographic Diversity of Poverty PHDR: Geographic Diversity of Poverty Professor Amani, ESRF

  2. This presentation • Introduction • Methodologies • Single indicator approach • Human Development Index (HDI) • Human Poverty Index (HPI) • Concluding remarks General Findings

  3. IntroductionWhy analysis of poverty status at sub-national level? • Increased awareness among stakeholders on sub-national differences • Contribution to better focused more effective policies and strategies • Guidance to resource allocation of resources to local authorities, contributing to improved planning at that level

  4. Methodology • Choice of methodology to assess regional differences in status of poverty depends on purposeof the assessment To raise awareness and advocate on the overall regional status of human development in a country To inform planning, policy or strategy development within a sector Single Indicator Approach Composite Index Approach

  5. Methodology Single Indicator Approach • Based on PRSP indicators • Total of 28 indicators from 4 clusters: • Performance by region and ranking included • Income poverty • Human capabilities • Survival • Nutrition

  6. Methodology • Human Development Index (HDI) • Summary measure of human development • It measures average (regional) achievements in three basic dimensions of human development • A long and healthy life (life expectancy at birth) • Knowledge (adult literacy rate, gross enrolment rate) • A decent standard of living (GDP per capita PPP)

  7. Methodology Human Development Index (HDI) PHDR: consumption expenditure (CE)per capita used in stead of GDP per capita PPP. • Data more reliable and more recent • CE direct measure of standard of living and reflects the situation at household level better than GDP

  8. Methodology Human Poverty Index (HPI) • Summary measure of deprivation in three basic dimensions of human development • Lack of a long and healthy life. Vulnerability to death at early age (probability of not surviving beyond 40 yrs) • Lack of knowledge. Exclusion from learning(adult illiteracy ) • Lack of a decent standard of living (population not using safe water, percentage of children <5 who are underweight)

  9. DSM Lindi Mara Iringa Pwani Mbeya Rukwa Kagera Arusha Mtwara Kigoma Mwanza Dodoma Morogoro Kilimanjaro TABLE 2: Income poverty indicators Basic needs poverty headcount ratio (%) 39 18 34 29 29 38 31 53 46 21 29 38 48 46 31 8 20 12 17 16 10 13 2 5 19 15 9 3 4 14 Rural Basic needs poverty headcount ratio (%) n.a. 43 36 30 19 43 32 57 44 22 32 39 47 48 35 8 n.a. 12 17 19 7 16 1 5 18 15 10 4 3 13 Food poverty headcount (%) 10 25 7 13 18 21 11 33 36 8 14 17 30 27 12 7 20 13 17 10 9 16 2 1 19 12 11 3 5 14 Rural food poverty headcount (%) 28 n.a. 14 11 5 25 11 36 35 9 15 17 23 30 15 5 n.a. 13 16 19 7 15 1 2 17 10 9 8 3 11 GeneralFindings Single Indicator Approach • Analysis • Interregional disparities • Performance of a region on a range of indicators • Identification of trends and patterns

  10. GeneralFindings Single Indicator Approach Analysis • Interregional disparities • Performance of a region on a range of indicators • Identification of trends and patterns • PNER Tanzania 57% • Kilimanjaro 80.5% • Lindi 43% • Iringa • Among best 5 on 12 indicators • Among worst 5 on 9 indicators • Dar es Salaam and Kilimanjaro region consistently among best 5 for PRSP indicators • Pwani, Lindi, Rukwa consistently among worst 5 for PRSP indicators

  11. GeneralFindings Single Indicator Approach

  12. GeneralFindings Marked gap between 1-2, 2-rest

  13. GeneralFindings Human Development Index

  14. GeneralFindings Human Poverty Index Marked gap between Kilimanjaro and Mbeya Regardless of Methodology Dar es Salaam, Kilimanjaro, Mbeya and Ruvuma consistently at top end of the ranking Lindi and Shinyanga consistently at bottom end of ranking

  15. GeneralFindings Human Poverty Index

  16. GeneralFindings Inconsistencies when comparing HDI and HPI HDI rank HPI rank 1 • Caused by different indicators used in HDI and HPI • Absence of expenditure component in HPI improves Rukwa’s ranking, but has a negative effect on Pwani’s Ranking • Introducing access to safe water in the equasion for HPI has a negative effect on the ranking of Pwani. Pwani (11) 10 13 18 20 Rukwa (20)

  17. Concluding remarks • This analysis provides further evidence on diversity of poverty in Tanzania • A national perspective alone obscures details important for informed decision making on poverty reduction • The methodologies used reveal both similarities in regional performance as well as differences • No single methodology will provide all answers • More in depth analysis required focusing on WHY some regions perform better than others • Future work may also include sub-regional analysis, using census data and poverty mapping

More Related