Measuring the Multiple Dimensions of Poverty:
a way forward
The Way Forward in Poverty Measurement Seminar
Geneva, 2-4 December 2013
OPHI – MPI TeamOPHI Research Team: Sabina Alkire (Director), James Foster (Research Fellow), John Hammock (Co-Founder and Research Associate), José Manuel Roche (coordination MPI 2011), Adriana Conconi (coordination MPI 2013), Maria Emma Santos (coordination MPI 2010), Suman Seth, Paola Ballon, Gaston Yalonetzky, Diego Zavaleta, Mauricio Apablaza
Data analysts and MPI calculation 2013: Akmal Abdurazakov, Cecilia Calderon, Iván Gonzalez De Alba, UshaKanagaratnam, Gisela Robles Aguilar, Juan Pablo Ocampo Sheen, Christian Oldiges and Ana Vaz.
Special contributions: Heidi Fletcher (preparation of the maps), Esther Kwan and Garima Sahai (research assistance and preparation of graphs), Christian Oldiges (research assistance for regional decomposition and standard error), John Hammock (new Ground Reality Check field material), Yadira Diaz (helping in map preparation).
Communication Team: Paddy Coulter (Director of Communications), Emmy Feena (Research Communications Officer), Heidi Fletcher (Web Manager), Moizza B Sarwar (Research Communications Assistant), Cameron Thibos (Design Assistant), Joanne Tomkinson.
Administrative Support: Laura O'Mahony (Project Coordinator)
OPHI prepare the MPI for publication in the UNDP Human Development Report and we are grateful to our colleagues in HDRO for their support.
Outline• Motivations to consider a
multidimensional approach for measuring poverty
• The Alkire Foster (AF) methodology Global Multidimensional Poverty Index
(MPI)
• Properties of the AF method Illustrations
• MPI 2015+ and the post-2015 development agenda
Why
MultidimensionalPoverty Measures?
Poor people’s lives can be battered by multiple deprivations that are each of independent importance.
(Amartya Sen, 1992)
What we have: Technical• Increasing data• Improving methodologies
What we need: Policy• Income poverty is important but insufficient• Growth has not been inclusive• Go beyond dazzlingly complex dashboards of
indicators• Emphasising the joint distribution across
deprivations Path ahead: Ethical and Political• Political critique of current metrics• Measures in 2010 HDR sparked interest and
debate• MPI 2015+ for the post-2015 MDGs
Motivations for moving towards multidimensional poverty measure
Increasing Data
Income Poverty is Important, but not Sufficient
(Global Monitoring Report Progress Status, 2013)
Reduction in income poverty does NOT reduce other MDG deprivations automatically.
0
16
32
48
64
80
96
112
128
144
Extreme Poverty Improved Water Primary Completion
Undernourishment Sanitation Infant Mortality
Num
ber o
f Cou
ntrie
s
Target Met Sufficient Progress Insufficient ProgressModerately Off Target Seriously Off Target Insufficient Data
Source of data: World Bank Data; computed by Suman Seth
Economic Growth is Important, but Not Always Inclusive
Indicators Year India Bangladesh Nepal
Gross National Income per Capita (in International $)
1990 860 550 510 2011 3620 1940 1260Growth (p.a.) 6.8% 5.9% 4.2%
Under-5 Mortality1990 114.2 138.8 134.62011 61.3 46.0 48.0Change -52.9 -92.8 -86.6
DPT Immunization Rate1990 70 69 432010 72 95 82Change 2 26 39
Adult Pop. with no Education
1990 51.6 55.5 65.82010 32.7 31.9 37.2Change -18.9 -23.6 -28.6
Access to Improved Sanitation (rural pop)
1990 7 34 72010 23 55 27Change 16 21 20
Source: Alkire and Seth (2013). The table is inspired by Drèze and Sen (2011), with minor additions.
Going Beyond Dazzlingly Dashboards of Indicators
Proportion of population below $1 (PPP)/day Share of women in wage employment in the non-agricultural sector Net enrolment ratio in primary education Prevalence of
underweight children under 5 years of age
Maternal mortality ratio
Prevalence of deaths associated with malaria Proportion of tuberculosis cases detected and cured under DOTS
Proportion of seats held by women in national parliament
Literacy rate of 15-24 years-old
Identifying Joint Distribution of Deprivations
deprived=1; non-deprived=0
In both cases, 25% deprived in each MDG indicator
BUT, in Case 2, one person is severely deprived
Case 1 Illiterate Undernourished No safe water Low income
Abby 1 0 0 0Jane 0 1 0 0Jon 0 0 1 0Tania 0 0 0 1
Case 2 Illiterate Undernourished No safe water Low income
Abby 0 0 0 0Jane 0 0 0 0Jon 0 0 0 0Tania 1 1 1 1
Political recognition• “MDGs did not focus enough on reaching the
very poorest” - High-Level Panel on the Post-2015 Development Agenda (2013)
Should be able to distinguish poorest from the less poor
• “Acceleration in one goal often speeds up progress in others; to meet MDGs strategically we need to see them together” - What Will It Take to Achieve the Millennium Development Goals? (2010)
Emphasis on joint distribution and synergies
• “While assessing quality-of-life requires a plurality of indicators, there are strong demands to develop a single summary measure” - Stiglitz Sen Fitoussi Commission Report (2009)
One summary index is more powerful in drawing policy attention
Value-added of a Multidimensional Approach
What can a meaningful multidimensional measure do?
• Provide an overview of multiple indicators at-a-glance
• Show progress quickly and directly (Monitoring/Evaluation)
• Inform planning and policy design• Target poor people and communities• Reflect people’s own understandings
(Flexible)• High Resolution
– zoom in for details by regions, groups, or dimensions
The Global
Multidimensional Poverty Index (MPI)
- applying Alkire Foster (AF) method
AF Method: An Overview• Identification of poor – Dual cutoffs
Deprivation cutoffs - each deprivation counts Poverty cutoff - in terms of aggregate deprivation
values• Aggregation across the poor – Adjusted FGT• Adjusted Headcount Ratio (Mο):
H: The percent of people identified as poor, the incidence of multidimensional poverty
A: The average proportion of deprivations people suffer at the same time; intensity of people’s poverty
Source: Alkire & Foster, 2011, J. of Public Economics
.
Formula: Mο = H × A
Application of the AF Method: Global MPI
1. Select dimensions 2. Select indicators, unit of analysis & weights
(Flexible)3. Set deprivation cutoffs for each indicator
(Flexible) 4. Set a poverty cutoff, (k) to identify who is
poor (Flexible)5. Calculate Adjusted Headcount Ratio (M0)
– Reflects incidence (H), intensity (A)Note: The AF methodology does not specify dimensions, indicators, weights, or cutoffs; it is flexible and can be adapted to many contexts.
(Source: Alkire, S & Santos, M.E., 2010)
One implementation of the AF Method Global MPI
3 Dimensions
10 Indicators
Years of Schooling
(1/6)
School Attendance
(1/6)Education (1/ 3)
Child Mortality
(1/6)
Nutrition
(1/6)Health (1/ 3) Standard of Living (1/ 3)
Cook
ing F
uel
Sani
tatio
n
Wat
erEl
ectri
city
Floo
r
Asse
t Own
ersh
ip
(1/ 18 Each)
Dimensions are equally weighted, and each
indicator within a dimension is equally weighted
Deprived if no household member has completed five years of schooling
Identify Who is PoorA person is multidimensionally poor
if she is deprived in 1/3 of the weighted indicators.
(censor the deprivations of the non-poor)
33.3%
39%
Properties of the
AF method-An illustration using
findings from MPI 2013
Properties of AF method: an overview
20
• Can be broken down into incidence (H) and the intensity (A)
• Is decomposable across population subgroups– Overall poverty is population-share weighted average of
subgroup poverty
• Overall poverty can be broken down by dimensions & indicators to understand their contribution
Country A:
Country B: Incidence (H) vs. Intensity (A)
50.00
55.00
60.00
65.00
70.00
75.00
50.00
51.00
52.00
53.00
54.00
55.00
56.00
57.00
58.00
59.00
60.00
0.30
0.31
0.32
0.33
0.34
0.35
0.36
0.37
0.38
0.39
0.40
0.41
0.42
Before
MultidimensionalHeadcount
(H)
Intensity of Deprivations
(A)
Multidimensional Poverty Index(MPI = H * A)
50.00
55.00
60.00
65.00
70.00
75.00
50.00
51.00
52.00
53.00
54.00
55.00
56.00
57.00
58.00
59.00
60.00
0.30
0.31
0.32
0.33
0.34
0.35
0.36
0.37
0.38
0.39
0.40
0.41
0.42
Before
MultidimensionalHeadcount
(H)
Intensityof Deprivations
(A)
Multidimensional Poverty Index(MPI = H * A)
50.00
55.00
60.00
65.00
70.00
75.00
50.00
51.00
52.00
53.00
54.00
55.00
56.00
57.00
58.00
59.00
60.00
0.30
0.31
0.32
0.33
0.34
0.35
0.36
0.37
0.38
0.39
0.40
0.41
0.42
After
Before
MultidimensionalHeadcount
(H)
Intensity of Deprivations
(A)
Multidimensional Poverty Index(MPI = H * A)
50.00
55.00
60.00
65.00
70.00
75.00
50.00
51.00
52.00
53.00
54.00
55.00
56.00
57.00
58.00
59.00
60.00
0.30
0.31
0.32
0.33
0.34
0.35
0.36
0.37
0.38
0.39
0.40
0.41
0.42
After
Before
MultidimensionalHeadcount
(H)
Intensity of Deprivations
(A)
Multidimensional Poverty Index(MPI = H * A)
Policy oriented to the poorest of the poorPoverty reduction policy (without inequaliy focus)
Source: Roche (2013)Country B reduced the intensity of
deprivation among the poor more. The final index reflects this.
Uneven Reduction in MPI across Population Subgroups:
India (1999-2006)
22-0.110 -0.090 -0.070 -0.050 -0.030 -0.010
Urban (*) [0.116]Rural (*) [0.368]
General (*) [0.229]OBC (*) [0.301]SC (*) [0.378]ST (*) [0.458]
Sikh (*) [0.115]Christian () [0.196]Hindu (*) [0.306]Muslim () [0.32]
Absolute Change (99-06) in MPI-I
State
s (Si
gnifi
canc
e) [M
PI-I
in 19
99]Religio
n
Caste
Slower progress for Scheduled Tribes (ST)
and Muslims
Source: Alkire and Seth (2013)
Dimensional Breakdown NationallyIndia (1999-2006)
23
-12.0%
-10.0%
-8.0%
-6.0%
-4.0%
-2.0%
0.0%
Abso
lute C
hang
e in
CH
Rati
o
Indicator (Statistical Significance) [1999 CH Ratio]
Source: Alkire and Seth (2013)
Dimensional Breakdown in Six States
India (1999-2006)
24Source: Alkire and Seth (2013)
Distribution of Intensities among the Poor
Madagascar (2009)MPI = 0.357
H = 67%
Rwanda (2010)MPI = 0.350
H = 69%Source: Alkire , Roche &Seth (2013)
The Global MPI
2015+In the Post 2015 MDGDevelopment Agenda
Moving towards a MPI 2015+
Findings from Global MPI:
- $1.25/poverty and MPI do not move together
- MPI reduction is often faster than $1.25/day poverty
- Political incentives from MPI are more direct
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%Ni
ger
Ethi
opia
Mali
Burun
diBu
rkina
Fas
oLi
beria
Guin
eaSo
malia
Moz
ambi
que
Sierra
Leo
neSe
nega
lDR
Con
goBe
nin
Ugan
daRw
anda
Timo
r-Le
steM
adag
asca
rM
alawi
Tanz
ania
Zamb
iaCh
adM
aurit
ania
Cote
d'Ivo
ireGa
mbia
Bang
lades
hHa
itiTo
goNi
geria
Indi
aCa
mero
onYe
men
Pakis
tanKe
nya
Lao
Camb
odia
Nepa
lRe
publ
ic of
Con
goNa
mibi
aZi
mbab
weLe
soth
oSa
o To
me a
nd P
rincip
eHo
ndur
asGh
ana
Vanu
atuDj
ibou
tiNi
carag
uaBh
utan
Guate
mala
Indo
nesi
aBo
livia
Swaz
iland
Tajik
istan
Mon
golia Peru Iraq
Phili
ppin
esSo
uth
Afric
aPa
ragua
yCh
ina
Mor
occo
Surin
ame
Guya
naEs
toni
aTu
rkey
Egyp
tTr
inid
ad an
d To
bago
Beliz
eSy
rian
Arab
Rep
ublic
Colo
mbia
Sri L
anka
Azerb
aijan
Mal
dive
sKy
rgyzs
tanDo
mini
can
Repu
blic
Hung
aryCr
oatia
Viet
Nam
Mex
icoCz
ech
Repu
blic
Arge
ntin
aTu
nisia
Braz
ilJo
rdan
Uzbe
kistan
Ecua
dor
Ukrai
neM
aced
onia
Mol
dova
Urug
uay
Thail
and
Latvi
aM
onten
egro
Pales
tinian
Ter
ritor
iesAl
bani
aRu
ssian
Fed
eratio
nSe
rbia
Bosn
ia an
d He
rzego
vina
Geor
giaKa
zakh
stan
Unite
d Ar
ab E
mirat
esAr
meni
aBe
larus
Slove
nia
Slova
kia
Comparing the Headcount Ratios of MPI Poor and $1.25/day Poor
Intensity 69.4% & More Intensity 50-69.4% Intensity 44.4-50% Intensity 33.3-44.4% $1.25 a day
Height of the bar: MPI Headcount RatioHeight at ‘•’ : $1.25-a-day Headcount Ratio
Source: Alkire , Roche &Seth (2013)
MPI 2015+ for the Post-2015 MDGs
(Alkire and Sumner 2013)
- To complement $1.25/day poverty
- To reflect interconnections between deprivations: how people are poor
- Emphasis on participatory discussions & expert views
- National MPI should be recognised and reported internationally
The Global Multidimensionl Poverty
Peer Network (MPPN)
Angola, Bhutan, Brazil, Chile, China, Colombia, Dominican Republic, ECLAC, Ecuador, El Salvador, Germany, India, Iraq, Malaysia, Mexico, Morocco, Mozambique, Nigeria, OECD, the Organization of Caribbean States, OPHI, Peru, Philippines, SADC, Tunisia, Uruguay and Vietnam
Launch of Global MPPN, June 2013
• Founded by OPHI with Mexico’s CONEVAL and Colombia’s DNP & financial support from BMZ
• Launched by President Santos of Colombia
• Roundtable discussion on the MPPN by Ministers
• Amartya Sen Lecture on “Discovering Women”
The MPPN Moving Forward
• Expansion of Multidimensional Poverty Index Official national poverty measures Subnational Pilots (China, Brazil)
• An Effective and Informed Voice in the Post 2015 Discussions Colombia, Mexico, Germany, OPHI and the
MPPN host a side event at the UN General Assembly 2013
• The Promotion of Joint Research and Development of Practical Tools
•
Summary• Emphasizes on joint distribution of
deprivations
• Decompositions by subpopulation - policy relevance
• Flexible and can be adapted to national
contexts
• MPI 2015+: comparable across countries
• National MPI and Global MPI 2015+ can be reported like national income poverty and $1.25/day
References: Alkire, S. and Santos, M.E. 2010. Acute multidimensional poverty: a new index for developing countries. OPHI Working Paper 38, Oxford Poverty and Human Development Initiative, University of Oxford. Alkire, S. and Foster, J.E. 2011. Counting and multidimensional poverty measurement. Journal of Public Economics, 95 (7-8): 476-487.Alkire, S. and Sumner, A. 2013. Multidimensional Poverty and the Post-2015 MDGs. OPHI Briefing Note. http://www.ophi.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/MPI-post-2015-MDGs-FINAL.pdf?cda6c1Alkire, S. and Seth, S. 2013. “Multidimensional Poverty Reduction in India 1999 and 2006: Slowest Progress for the Poorest Groups”, Research Brief, Oxford Poverty & Human Development Initiative, Oxford University.http://www.ophi.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/Multidimensional-Poverty-Reduction-in-India-1999-20061.pdf?3f40f1
Alkire, S. and Roche, J.M. 2013. ‘Multidimensional Poverty Index 2013’, Research Brief, Oxford Poverty & Human Development Initiative, Oxford University.http://www.ophi.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/Multidimensional-Poverty-Index-2013-Alkire-Roche-and-Seth.pdf
Drèze J and Sen, A.K. 2011. “Putting Growth In Its Place”, Outlookindia.com Magazine, November 2011, accessed at www.outlookindia.com/article.aspx?278843 on January 11, 2013.
Weblinks:
High-Level Panel on the Post-2015 Development Agenda (2013)http://www.post2015hlp.org/the-report/Stiglitz Sen Fitoussi Commission Report (2009) http://stiglitz-sen-fitoussi.fr/documents/rapport_anglais.pdfWhat Will It Take to Achieve the Millennium Development Goals? (2010)http://www.undp.org/content/undp/en/home/librarypage/mdg/international-assessment---english-full-version.html
Thank You
More information: The Global MPI is published annually in the Human Development
Report of UNDPWorking Papers and resources available on www.ophi.org.uk
Top Related