Suchergebnisse

In an effort to disentangle the theoretical & empirical distinctness of poverty from constructs of extreme concentrated poverty, the differential impact of these measures on black & white homicide rates is assessed. Data are derived from the Urban Underclass Database, & the race-specific homicide rates are computed from information compiled in the Uniform Crime Report. Race-specific measures of poverty & poverty concentration are found to be highly correlated, challenging claims of their empirical distinctness. A closer inspection of the data, however, reveals that while poverty & poverty concentration affect the white homicide rate, only the traditional measure of poverty impacts black homicide. It is concluded that the finding of differential impacts of poverty & poverty concentration on black & white homicide rates is reflective of works by William J. Wilson (eg, 1987), Douglas S. Massey & colleagues (eg, 1994), as well as of criminological writings. Future research is needed to extend the study of poverty concentration in the area of measurement & the potential impact concentrated poverty may have on various types of crime & victimization. 3 Tables, 44 References. Adapted from the source document.

Social, political, and economic factors contributing to poverty; how population control was implemented in China, need for adequate freshwater supplies, and other issues; developing countries, chiefly; 10 articles.

The conventional approach of economists to the measurement of poverty is to use measures of income or consumption. This has been challenged by those who favour broader criteria, such as fulfillment of 'basic needs' and the 'capabilities' to be and to do things of intrinsic worth. This paper asks: to what extent are these different concepts measurable, to what extent are they competing or complementary, and is it possible for them to be accommodated within an encompassing framework? We conclude that it is possible to view subjective well-being as an encompassing concept, which permits us to quantify the relevance and importance of the other approaches and of their component variables. Any attempt to define poverty involves a value judgment as to what constitutes a good quality of life or a bad one. We argue that an approach which examines the individual's own perception of well-being is less imperfect, or more quantifiable, or both, as a guide to forming that value judgement than are the other potential approaches. The argument is illustrated using a South African household survey. Adapted from the source document.

AbstractUsing data from the Consumer Expenditure Survey and the March Current Population Survey, we provide poverty estimates for 1967 to 2012 based on a historical supplemental poverty measure (SPM). During this period, poverty, as officially measured, has stagnated. However, the official poverty measure (OPM) does not account for the effect of near‐cash transfers on the financial resources available to families, an important omission since such transfers have become an increasingly important part of government antipoverty policy. Applying the historical SPM, which does count such transfers, we find that trends in poverty have been more favorable than the OPM suggests and that government policies have played an important and growing role in reducing poverty—a role that is not evident when the OPM is used to assess poverty. We also find that government programs have played a particularly important role in alleviating child poverty and deep poverty, especially during economic downturns.

AbstractPoverty can be an ephemeral life stage of a young person whose skill sets will become more valuable with training and experience, a personal setback such as losing a job, or a systemic affliction that puts a whole community in danger of widespread famine. A common theme of this volume's essays is that we cannot understand poverty and famine unless we acknowledge that poor people are not mouths to be fed but agents. Amartya Sen got this right, crediting Adam Smith for the seeds of his insight. What has been enabling people by the billions since Smith's time to work their way out of poverty?

AbstractThis article examines the effect of poverty volatility on poverty in developing countries. Poverty volatility refers to the amplitude of the change in poverty rates over a given period of time. Variations in poverty rates can potentially arise from countries' vulnerability to a variety of shocks that induce greater macroeconomic volatility, including economic growth volatility. The empirical analysis shows that poverty volatility consistently induces a rise in poverty rates, and this positive poverty effect of poverty volatility increases as the degree of poverty volatility rises. Policies that help reduce poverty volatility (including by dampening economic growth volatility) would contribute to poverty reduction.

Two questions basic to welfare policy are examined: (1) whether the amount of poverty-related transfers is sufficient to fill the poverty gap; & (2) which families actually get benefits & how much of their income deficit is filled by those benefits. Transfers are seen to be sufficient. The post-Social Security poverty gap is $74 billion, while poverty-related programs total $198 billion. Further, 86% of current income-conditioned benefits go to the pretransfer poor & 89% of those are used to alleviate poverty (fill the poverty gap). Thus, if a substantial fraction of total federal & state expenditures on poverty-related programs could be targeted more toward the poor, the poverty gap would be eliminated. The current programs, however, would have to be changed substantially to achieve the necessary retargeting. 3 Tables, 1 Appendix. HA