The policy relevance of absolute and relative poverty headcounts: What's in a number?

Notten, Geranda and de Neubourg, Chris (2007): The policy relevance of absolute and relative poverty headcounts: What's in a number?

Abstract

Financial poverty indicators still play an important role in policymaking and evaluation. Countries such as the USA and the EU member states use one or several ‘official’ poverty indicators on which success of poverty reduction policy is regularly monitored. Whereas the US poverty indicator is based on an absolute concept of poverty, the EU Laeken indicator is based on a relative concept. But the consequences of such a decision are considerable. As absolute and relative poverty indicators reflect related but conceptually distinct approaches to determining insufficient levels of well-being; they can yield very different poverty statistics, particularly over time. In this paper, we use the official EU and US poverty indicators to study the policy relevance of using either an absolute or a relative indicator. We find significant differences between the poverty estimates in poverty rates as well as in the poverty profiles. Benefit incidence- and adequacy rates are equally estimated and compared. The paper concludes that the differences between the two poverty concepts is more than important enough to support monitoring poverty and the related social and economic policies, using both relative and absolute poverty indicators.

• Item Type: MPRA Paper
• Institution: Maastricht Graduate School of Governance, Maastricht University
• Language: English
• Keywords: poverty; absolute; relative; social policy; United States; European Union
• Subjects: H - Public Economics > H5 - National Government Expenditures and Related Policies > H55 - Social Security and Public Pensions; I - Health, Education, and Welfare > I3 - Welfare, Well-Being, and Poverty > I30 - General; H - Public Economics > H5 - National Government Expenditures and Related Policies > H53 - Government Expenditures and Welfare Programs

References

Atkinson, A. B., Cantillon, B., Marlier, E., & Nolan, B. (2002). Social indicators: the EU and social inclusion. Oxford; New York: Oxford University Press. International Social Security Association. (2002). Social security programmes throughout the world [Electronic Version]. Retrieved May 2007 from http://www.ssa.gov/policy/docs/progdesc/ssptw/. International Social Security Association. (2003). Social security programmes throughout the world: The Americas 2003 [Electronic Version]. Retrieved April 2007 from http://www.ssa.gov/policy/docs/progdesc/ssptw/. Marlier, E., Atkinson, A. B., Cantillon, B., & Nolan, B. (2007). The EU and social inclusion: Facing the challenges. Bristol: The Policy Press. Neubourg de, C., Castonguay, J., & Roelen, K. (2007). Social safety nets and targeted social assistance: Lessons from the European experience. World Bank Social Protection working Papers, forthcoming, Washington DC, The World Bank Notten, G., & Neubourg de, C. (2007a). Poverty in Europe and the USA: Exchanging official measurement methods. MGSoG Working Paper, 2007/005, Maastricht Graduate School of Governance, Maastricht University, Maastricht. Notten, G., & Neubourg de, C. (2007b). Relative or absolute poverty in the US and EU? The battle of the rates. MGSoG Working Paper, 2007/001, Maastricht Graduate School of Governance, Maastricht University, Maastricht. US Census Bureau. (June 2005). Alternative poverty estimates in the United States: 2003 [Electronic Version], US Department of Commerce, Economics and Statistics Administration, Washington D.C. Retrieved April 2007 from http://www.census.gov/prod/2005pubs/p60-227.pdf.