1 / 22

Multidimensional poverty measurement with individual preferences

Multidimensional poverty measurement with individual preferences. Koen Decancq – Marc Fleurbaey – François Maniquet UNDP – March 2014. 1. Motivation. Poverty is multidimensional Who is poor?. 1. Motivation. Poverty is multidimensional Who is poor?. 1. Motivation.

uriah-wright
Download Presentation

Multidimensional poverty measurement with individual preferences

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. Multidimensional poverty measurementwith individual preferences Koen Decancq – Marc Fleurbaey – François Maniquet UNDP – March 2014

  2. 1. Motivation • Poverty is multidimensional • Who is poor?

  3. 1. Motivation • Poverty is multidimensional • Who is poor?

  4. 1. Motivation • Poverty is multidimensional • Who is poor?

  5. 1. Motivation • Poverty is multidimensional • Who is poor?

  6. 1. Motivation • Poverty is multidimensional • Who is poor?

  7. 1. Motivation • Poverty is multidimensional • Who is poor?

  8. 1. Motivation • Poverty is multidimensional • Who is poor?

  9. 1. Motivation • Poverty is multidimensional • Who is poor?

  10. 1. Motivation • Poverty is multidimensional • Who is poor?

  11. 1. Motivation • Poverty is multidimensional • Who is poor?

  12. 1. Motivation • Multidimensional poverty measurement without paternalism? • Let agents aggregate the dimensions themselves “... those with a stake in the outcomes will almost certainly be in a better position to determine what weights to apply than the analyst calibrating a measure of poverty.” (Ravallion, 2011) • Acknowledge the heterogeneity in the “opinions on the good life”

  13. 2. Multidimensional poverty measure We axiomatically derive the following procedure

  14. 2. Multidimensional poverty measure We axiomatically derive the following procedure

  15. 2. Multidimensional poverty measure We axiomatically derive the following procedure … and apply it to real-world data (from Russia)

  16. 3. Estimating preferences • We use RLMS-HSE (1995-2005) • We consider four dimensions of life • Equivalized expenditures • Objective (constructed) health index • Constructed house quality index • Unemploment (binary) • Deprivation thresholds: 60% of median value in each continuous dimension

  17. 3. Estimating preferences • Problem: we don’t observe “opinions on the good life” • We estimate them based on life satisfaction data • We run a simple life satisfaction regression, • with some econometric sophistications, • Heterogeneity in β coefficients • Decreasing marginal returns • Control for personality traits (in α) • And then plot indifference maps based on β’s

  18. 3. Estimating preferences

  19. 4. Results: headcounts

  20. 4. Results: overlap of bottom 16,1 % 1,6% 4,1% 3,6% 2,9% 3,5% 2,4%

  21. 5. Conclusion • Multidimensional poverty analysis with respect for preferences … • … is ethically attractive • … is theoretically possible • … is empirically implementable

  22. Life satisfaction regression

More Related