Multidimensional Poverty in the Philippines, 2004-13 : Do Choices for Weighting, Identification and Aggregation Matter?
Multidimensional poverty comparisons can be sensitive to the choice of welfare indicators, the weights assigned to the indicators, as well as the aggregate poverty measure used. This paper examines the robustness of trends in multidimensional pover...
| Main Author: | |
|---|---|
| Format: | Working Paper |
| Language: | English en_US |
| Published: |
World Bank, Washington, DC
2017
|
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | http://documents.worldbank.org/curated/en/478951497014709315/Multidimensional-poverty-in-the-Philippines-2004-13-do-choices-for-weighting-identification-and-aggregation-matter http://hdl.handle.net/10986/27298 |
| Summary: | Multidimensional poverty comparisons can
be sensitive to the choice of welfare indicators, the
weights assigned to the indicators, as well as the aggregate
poverty measure used. This paper examines the robustness of
trends in multidimensional poverty in the Philippines to
these choices by presenting estimates for three alternative
weighting schemes and three measures of multidimensional
poverty. The weighting schemes range from uniform weights
similar to those used in the global multidimensional poverty
indexes produced by the United Nations Development
Programme, to weights based on inverse incidence of
different deprivations and those derived from the estimated
relationship of deprivations to a survey-based measure of
subjective welfare. The multidimensional poverty measures
similarly range from the "dual cut-off" indexes
analogous to the United Nations Development Programme's
global Multidimensional Poverty Index, to “union-based”
indexes that count all deprivations, to indexes that are
also responsive to the distribution of deprivations. Using
data for 2004-13, the paper finds evidence of a significant
decline in multidimensional poverty that is robust to these
alternatives, although the magnitude of the decline in, and
especially the dimensional contributions to, aggregate
multidimensional poverty are quite sensitive to the
alternatives considered. |
|---|