On the Choice of a Policy-oriented Poverty Measure: The Case of Israel 1997-2002

Gottlieb, Daniel and Manor, Roy (2005): On the Choice of a Policy-oriented Poverty Measure: The Case of Israel 1997-2002.

Abstract

Poverty is easily recognized when encountered "face to face," but when measured for a society as a whole it becomes evasive and ambiguous, raising fundamental and practical issues. In this paper we examine several poverty measures from the aspect of how well they can serve as policy targets and to what extent they can be used to monitor the effect of social and economic policy on poverty. A rational poverty-reduction policy requires a quantifiable poverty target which has a sufficiently long time horizon and which enables shorter term policy monitoring. The measure should also reflect poverty intensity, as does the distribution-sensitive Sen poverty measure. Definitions of poverty often reflect a lack of basic needs. The vital food component can be objectively determined by physicians, but other components of the essential basket of goods and services, such as clothing, shelter, health services and education require a public consensus. We suggest a policy-oriented choice based on various poverty definitions. We argue that the measure should be based on basic needs rather than the relative approach. The poverty threshold should be based on an absolute gender- and age-determined food component, derived from an objective, medically-determined dietary reference intake (DRI) that fosters sustained health, thus resembling the Canadian Market Basket Measure (MBM). In the other components our proposal follows the methodology of a relative-needs-based approach recommended by the American National Research Council (NRC). We follow NRC methodology concerning the treatment of income resources by taking into account the relatively widespread incidence of owner occupancy in Israel, even among the poor. Unlike the NRC we deduct only interest payments on mortgages and housing loans. However, we deviate from that approach with respect to health and education: We reflect health services twice in our poverty measure: (1) we include average out-of-pocket health expenditure in the threshold, and (2) we deduct health expenditure in excess of this average in our calculation of income resources. While the suggested measure is a significant improvement on the official half-median poverty measure, there remain important shortcomings that need to be addressed in the future: these include the need for improved knowledge about geographic differences in the quality and quantity of essential public services such as health, education, social services, housing, infrastructure. It is important to include such information in a policy-oriented poverty measure in order to get a full account of the poverty situation and of the effect of the government's and other institutions' policies on poverty. Nevertheless, we believe that the proposed measure provides a basis for immediate implementation of anti-poverty policy.

• Item Type: MPRA Paper
• Institution: Bank of Israel
• Language: Hebrew
• Keywords: Poverty definition; Basic Needs; MBM; Israel; Poverty reduction
• Subjects: I - Health, Education, and Welfare > I3 - Welfare, Well-Being, and Poverty > I32 - Measurement and Analysis of Poverty; I - Health, Education, and Welfare > I3 - Welfare, Well-Being, and Poverty > I31 - General Welfare, Well-Being

References

Bigman, D. and H. Fofack, 2000, Geographical Targeting for Poverty Alleviation. The World Bank Sectoral and Sectoral Studies. Buhmann B., L. Rainwater, G. Schmaus and T. Smeeding, 1988, “Equivalence scales, well-being, inequality and poverty: sensitivity estimates across ten countries using the Luxembourg Income Study (LIS) database”, Review of Income and Wealth, Vol. 34, 115-142. Center for Nutrition Policy, 1999, "The Thrifty Food Plan", United States Department of Agriculture, CNPP-7A, 1-15. Citro Constance F. and Robert T. Michael, eds., 1995, “Measuring Poverty: A New Approach”, National Research Council, N.A.P., Washington DC. Fisher Gordon, 1997, "From Hunter to Orshansky: An Overview of (Unofficial) Poverty Lines in the United States from 1904 to 1965"; revised paper of 1993. Hatfield, Michael (2002), "Constructing the Revised Market Basket Mechanism, T-01-1E, April, Applied Research Branch, Strategic Policy, Human Resources Development, Canada. Haveman, Robert and Andrew Bershadker, 1998, "The 'Inability to be Self-Reliant' as an Indicator of Poverty: Trends for the U.S. 1975-1995." Discussion Paper no. 1171-98, Institute for Research on Poverty, University of Wisconsin-Madison. Hentschel, J., Lanjouw, J., Lanjouw, P. and J. Poggi, 2000, Combining Census and Survey Data to Study Spatial Dimensions of Poverty: A case study for Ecuador.” The World Bank Economic Review, 14(1), 147-166. Human Resources Development Canada, 2003, "Understanding the 2000 Low Income Statistics Based on the Market Basket Measure", May, Applied Research Branch, Strategic Policy, SP-569-03-03E, Canada, 1-66. Institute of Medicine, 2005, "Dietary Reference Intakes, Applications in Dietary Planning", Subcommittee on Interpretation and Uses of Dietary Reference Intakes, Standing Committee on the Scientific Evaluation of Dietary Reference Intakes, The National Academies Press, Washington, D.C. Jaentti Markus and Sheldon Danziger, 2000, “Income Poverty in Advanced Countries”, Chapter 6 in Handbook of Income Distribution, Vol. 1, eds. Atkinson and Bourguinion, 309-378. Ravallion Martin, 1994, Poverty Comparisons, Harwood Academic Publishers, Chur, Switzerland. Renwick, Trudi J. and Barbara R. Bergmann, 1993, “A Budget-Based Definition of Poverty With an Application to Single-Parent Families”, The Journal of Human Resources, Volume 28, No.1, Winter, University of Wisconsin, Madison, WI, USA, 1-24. Sen, Amartya K., 1985, Commodities and Capabilities, Amsterdam: North Holland, 1-130. Sen, Amartya K. and James E. Foster, 1997, On Economic Inequality, Enlarged edition, Clarendon Press, Oxford, UK. Zaidi Asghar and Tania Burchardt, 2003, "Comparing Incomes when Needs Differ: Equivalisation of the Extra Costs of Disability in the UK", Discussion Paper, Center for Analysis of Social Exclusion, February, 1-39.