Sequential procedures for poverty gap dominance (original) (raw)

Abstract

Poverty evaluations differ from welfare evaluations in one significant aspect, the existence of a threshold or reference point, the poverty line. We build up normative evaluation models in which comparisons are made taking distances from this reference point rather than from the origin to be ethically relevant, by focussing upon poverty gaps and not incomes. When poverty lines differ for different groups in a socially heterogeneous population, choosing poverty gaps instead of incomes as the relevant indicator brings in normatively appealing classes of poverty indices not previously accommodated, for which poverty comparisons are implemented through sequential poverty gap curves (or poverty gap distributions) dominance. These conditions are logically related to those suggested by Atkinson and Bourguignon (Arrow and the foundations of the theory of economic policy, Macmillan, London, 1987) and Bourguignon (J Econom 42:67–80, 1989) for welfare comparisons. However, the proportion of poor individuals in the society and their average poverty gap play a role in our comparisons, though they do not in the existing poverty dominance criteria for heterogeneous populations.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Subscribe and save

• Starting from 10 chapters or articles per month
• Access and download chapters and articles from more than 300k books and 2,500 journals
• Cancel anytime View plans

Buy Now

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

Generalized Poverty-gap Orderings

Article Open access 07 June 2022

References

• Atkinson AB (1970) On the measurement of inequality. J Econ Theory 2: 244–263
  Article Google Scholar
• Atkinson AB (1987) On the measurement of poverty. Econometrica 55: 749–764
  Article Google Scholar
• Atkinson AB (1992) Measuring poverty and differences in family composition. Economica 59: 1–16
  Article Google Scholar
• Atkinson AB, Bourguignon F (1987) Income distribution and differences in needs. In: Feiwel (ed) Arrow and the foundations of the theory of economic policy. Macmillan, London, pp 350–370
  Google Scholar
• Bazen S, Moyes P (2003) International comparisons of income distributions when population structures differ. Res Econ Inequal 9: 85–104
  Article Google Scholar
• Bosmans K, Lauwers L, Ooghe E (2009) A consistent multidimensional Pigou-Dalton transfer principle. J Econ Theory 144: 1351–1358
  Article Google Scholar
• Bourguignon F (1989) Family size and social utility: income distribution dominance criteria. J Econom 42: 67–80
  Article Google Scholar
• Bourguignon F, Fields G (1997) Discontinuous losses from poverty, generalized P measures and optimal transfers to the poor. J Public Econ 63: 155–175
  Article Google Scholar
• Chakravarty SR (1983) Ethically flexible measures of poverty. Can J Econ 16: 74–85
  Article Google Scholar
• Chakravarty SR (1983) Measures of poverty based on the representative income gap. Sankya 45B: 69–74
  Google Scholar
• Chambaz C, Maurin E (1998) Atkinson and Bourguignon’s dominance criteria: extended and applied to the measurement of poverty in France. Rev Income Wealth 44: 497–515
  Article Google Scholar
• Davidson R, Duclos JY (2000) Statistical inference for stochastic dominance and for the measurement of poverty and inequality. Econometrica 68: 1435–1465
  Article Google Scholar
• Donaldson D, Pendakur K (2004) Equivalent-expenditure functions and expenditure-dependent equivalence scales. J Public Econ 88: 175–208
  Article Google Scholar
• Duclos JY, Makdissi P (2005) Sequential stochastic dominance and the robustness of poverty orderings. Rev Income Wealth 51: 63–88
  Article Google Scholar
• Duclos JY, Sahn D, Younger SD (2006) Robust multidimensional poverty comparisons. Econ J 116: 943–968
  Article Google Scholar
• Ebert U, Moyes P (2003) Equivalence scales reexamined. Econometrica 71: 319–343
  Article Google Scholar
• Fishburn PC, Vickson RG (1978) Theoretical foundations of stochastic dominance. In: Whitmore GA, Findlay MC (eds) Stochastic dominance. Lexington Books, Lexington, MA, pp 39–113
  Google Scholar
• Fleurbaey M, Hagneré C, Trannoy A (2003) Welfare comparisons with bounded equivalence scales. J Econ Theory 110: 309–336
  Article Google Scholar
• Foster J, Shorrocks AF (1988a) Poverty orderings. Econometrica 56: 173–177
  Article Google Scholar
• Foster J, Shorrocks AF (1988b) Poverty orderings and welfare dominance. Soc Choice Welf 5: 179–198
  Article Google Scholar
• Foster J, Greer J, Thorbecke D (1984) A class of decomposable poverty measures. Econometrica 52: 761–766
  Article Google Scholar
• Gravel N, Moyes P (2006) Ethically robust comparisons of distributions with two individual attributes. WP 0605 IDEP
• Jenkins S, Lambert PJ (1993) Ranking income distributions when needs differ. Rev Income Wealth 39: 337–356
  Article Google Scholar
• Jenkins S, Lambert PJ (1997) Three I’s of poverty curves, with an analysis of UK poverty trends. Oxf Econ Pap 49: 317–327
  Article Google Scholar
• Lambert P, Ramos X (2002) Welfare comparisons: sequential procedures for heterogeneous populations. Economica 69: 549–562
  Article Google Scholar
• Ooghe E, Lambert PJ (2006) Bounded sequential dominance criteria. Math Soc Sci 52: 15–30
  Article Google Scholar
• Saposnik R (1981) Rank-dominance in income distributions. Public Choice 36: 51–147
  Article Google Scholar
• Shorrocks AF (1995) Revisiting the Sen poverty index. Econometrica 63: 1225–1230
  Article Google Scholar
• Shorrocks AF (1998) Deprivation profiles and deprivation indices. In: Jenkins SA, Kaptein SA, Praag B (eds) The distribution of welfare and household production: international perspectives. Cambridge University Press, London, pp 250–267
  Google Scholar
• Spencer BD, Fisher S (1992) On comparing distributions of poverty gaps. Sankya 54B: 114–126
  Google Scholar
• Thistle P (1989) Ranking distributions with generalized Lorenz curves. South Econ J 56: 1–12
  Article Google Scholar
• Weir AJ (1991) Lebesgue integration and measure. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge
  Google Scholar
• Zheng B (1999) On the power of poverty orderings. Soc Choice Welf 16: 349–371
  Article Google Scholar
• Zoli C (2000) Inverse sequential stochastic dominance: rank-dependent welfare, deprivation and poverty measurement. University of Nottingham, Discussion Paper in Economics 00/11
• Zoli C, Lambert PJ (2005) Sequential procedures for poverty gap dominance. University of Oregon Economics Discussion Paper No. 2005/1

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

1. Dipartimento di Scienze Economiche, Università di Verona, Via dell’Artigliere, 19, 37129, Verona, Italy
   Claudio Zoli
2. Department of Economics, University of Oregon, Eugene, OR, 97403-1285, USA
   Peter J. Lambert

Authors

1. Claudio Zoli
2. Peter J. Lambert

Corresponding author

Correspondence toPeter J. Lambert.

Rights and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Zoli, C., Lambert, P.J. Sequential procedures for poverty gap dominance.Soc Choice Welf 39, 649–673 (2012). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00355-011-0601-y

Download citation

• Received: 12 September 2011
• Accepted: 14 September 2011
• Published: 11 October 2011
• Issue date: July 2012
• DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00355-011-0601-y

Keywords