The poverty gap index is a measure of the degree of poverty. It is defined as extent to which individuals on average fall below the poverty line, and expresses it as a percentage of the poverty line. [1]
The poverty gap index is an improvement over the poverty measure head count ratio, which simply counts all the people below a poverty line in a given population and considers them equally poor. [2] Poverty gap index estimates the depth of poverty by considering how far the poor are from that poverty line on average. [3]
The poverty gap index sometimes referred to as poverty gap ratio or pg index is defined as average of the ratio of the poverty gap to the poverty line. [4] It is expressed as a percentage of the poverty line for a country or region. [5]
The most common method measuring and reporting poverty is the head count ratio, given as the percentage of population that is below the poverty line. For example, The New York Times in July 2012 reported the poverty head count ratio as 11.1% of American population in 1973, 15.2% in 1983 and 11.3% in 2000. [6] One of the undesirable features of the head count ratio is that it ignores the depth of poverty; if the poor become poorer, the head count index does not change. [7]
Poverty gap index provides a clearer perspective on the depth of poverty. It enables poverty comparisons. It also helps provide an overall assessment of a region's progress in poverty reduction and the evaluation of specific public policies or private initiatives. [8]
The poverty gap index (PGI) is calculated as, [5]
or
where is the total population, is the total population of poor who are living at or below the poverty line, is the poverty line, and is the income of the poor individual . In this calculation, individuals whose income is above the poverty line have a gap of zero.
By definition, the poverty gap index is a percentage between 0 and 100%. Sometimes it is reported as a fraction, between 0 and 1. A theoretical value of zero implies that no one in the population is below the poverty line. A theoretical value of 100% implies that everyone in the population has zero income. In some literature, poverty gap index is reported as while the head count ratio is reported as . [9]
The poverty gap index can be interpreted as the average percentage shortfall in income for the population, from the poverty line. [5]
If you multiply a country's poverty gap index by both the poverty line and the total number of individuals in the country you get the total amount of money needed to bring the poor in the population out of extreme poverty and up to the poverty line, assuming perfect targeting of transfers. For example, suppose a country has 10 million individuals, a poverty line of $500 per year and a poverty gap index of 5%. Then an average increase of $25 per individual per year would eliminate extreme poverty. Note that $25 is 5% of the poverty line. The total increase needed to eliminate poverty is US$250 million—$25 multiplied by 10 million individuals.
The poverty gap index is an important measure beyond the commonly used head count ratio. Two regions may have the similar head count ratio, but distinctly different poverty gap indices. A higher poverty gap index means that poverty is more severe.
The poverty gap index is additive. In other words, the index can be used as an aggregate poverty measure, as well as decomposed for various sub-groups of the population, such as by region, employment sector, education level, gender, age or ethnic group.
Poverty gap index ignores the effect of inequality between the poor. It does not capture differences in the severity of poverty amongst the poor. As a theoretical example, consider two small neighborhoods where just two households each are below the official poverty line of US$500 income per year. In one case, household 1 has an income of US$100 per year and household 2 has an income of US$300 per year. In second case, the two households both have annual income of US$200 per year. The poverty gap index for both cases is same (60%), even though the first case has one household, with US$100 per year income, experiencing a more severe state of poverty. Scholars, therefore, consider poverty gap index as a moderate but incomplete improvement over poverty head count ratio. [10]
Scholars such as Amartya Sen suggest poverty gap index offers quantitative improvement over simply counting the poor below the poverty line, but remains limited at the qualitative level. Focusing on precisely measuring income gap diverts the attention from qualitative aspects such as capabilities, skills and personal resources that may sustainably eradicate poverty. A better measure would focus on capabilities and consequent consumption side of impoverished households. [11] These suggestions were initially controversial, and have over time inspired scholars to propose numerous refinements. [2] [12] [13] [14]
The Foster–Greer–Thorbecke metric is the general form of the PGI. The formula raises the summands to the power alpha, so that FGT0 is the head count index, FGT1 the PGI and FGT2 the squared PGI.
Squared poverty gap index, also known poverty severity index or , is related to poverty gap index. It is calculated by averaging the square of the poverty gap ratio. By squaring each poverty gap data, the measure puts more weight the further a poor person's observed income falls below the poverty line. The squared poverty gap index is one form of a weighted sum of poverty gaps, with the weight proportionate to the poverty gap. [9]
Sen index, sometimes referred to , is related to poverty gap index (PGI). [2] [15] It is calculated as follows:
where, is the head count ratio and is the income Gini coefficient of only the people below the poverty line.
Watts index, sometimes referred to , is related to poverty gap index (PGI). [15] It is calculated as follows:
The terms used to calculate are same as in poverty gap index (see the calculation section in this article).
This section needs to be updated.(November 2020) |
The following table summarizes the poverty gap index for developed and developing countries across the world.
Country | Poverty line ($/month) [lower-alpha 1] | Head count ratio (%) | Poverty gap index (%) | Year |
---|---|---|---|---|
Albania | 38 | 0.62 | 0.19 | 2008 |
Angola | 38 | 54.31 | 29.94 | 2000 |
Argentina [lower-alpha 2] | 38 | 0.92 | 0.65 | 2010 |
Armenia | 38 | 1.28 | 0.25 | 2008 |
Australia | 959 | 12.4 | 2.93 | 2010 |
Austria | 1024 | 6.6 | 1.81 | 2010 |
Azerbaijan | 38 | 0.43 | 0.14 | 2008 |
Bangladesh | 38 | 43.25 | 11.17 | 2010 |
Belarus | 38 | 0.1 | 0.1 | 2008 |
Belgium | 930 | 8.8 | 1.80 | 2010 |
Belize | 38 | 12.21 | 5.52 | 1999 |
Benin | 38 | 47.33 | 15.73 | 2003 |
Bhutan | 38 | 10.22 | 1.81 | 2007 |
Bolivia | 38 | 15.61 | 8.64 | 2008 |
Bosnia and Herzegovina | 38 | 0.04 | 0.02 | 2007 |
Botswana | 38 | 31.23 | 11.04 | 1993 |
Brazil | 350 | 3.91 | 3.62 | 2015 |
Burkina Faso | 38 | 44.6 | 14.66 | 2009 |
Burundi | 38 | 81.32 | 36.39 | 2006 |
Cambodia | 38 | 22.75 | 4.87 | 2008 |
Cameroon | 38 | 9.56 | 1.2 | 2007 |
Canada | 1056 | 12.1 | 2.96 | 2010 |
Cape Verde | 38 | 21.02 | 6.05 | 2001 |
Central African Republic | 38 | 62.83 | 31.26 | 2008 |
Chad | 38 | 61.94 | 25.64 | 2002 |
Chile | 38 | 1.35 | 0.69 | 2009 |
China [lower-alpha 3] | 38 | 16.25 | 4.03 | 2005 |
Colombia | 38 | 8.16 | 3.78 | 2010 |
Comoros | 38 | 46.11 | 20.82 | 2004 |
Costa Rica | 38 | 3.12 | 1.79 | 2009 |
Cote d'Ivoire | 38 | 23.75 | 7.5 | 2008 |
Czech Republic | 515 | 5.8 | 1.37 | 2010 |
Denmark | 955 | 5.3 | 1.29 | 2010 |
Djibouti | 38 | 18.84 | 5.29 | 2002 |
Dominican Republic | 38 | 2.24 | 0.52 | 2010 |
Congo, Dem. Rep. | 38 | 87.72 | 52.8 | 2005 |
Congo, Rep. | 38 | 54.1 | 22.8 | 2005 |
Ecuador | 38 | 4.6 | 2.1 | 2010 |
Egypt | 38 | 1.69 | 0.4 | 2008 |
Estonia | 38 | 8.9 | 4.4 | 2009 |
Ethiopia | 38 | 39 | 9.6 | 2005 |
Fiji | 38 | 5.9 | 1.1 | 2009 |
Finland | 875 | 7.3 | 1.48 | 2010 |
France | 861 | 7.1 | 1.44 | 2010 |
Gabon | 38 | 4.8 | .9 | 2005 |
Gambia | 38 | 33.6 | 11.7 | 2003 |
Germany | 918 | 11 | 3.67 | 2010 |
Georgia | 38 | 15.3 | 4.6 | 2008 |
Ghana | 38 | 28.6 | 9.9 | 2006 |
Greece | 720 | 12.6 | 3.36 | 2010 |
Guatemala | 38 | 13.5 | 4.7 | 2006 |
Guinea | 38 | 43.3 | 15. | 2007 |
Guinea-Bissau | 38 | 48.9 | 16.6 | 2002 |
Guyana | 38 | 8.7 | 2.8 | 1998 |
Haiti | 38 | 61.7 | 32.3 | 2001 |
Honduras | 38 | 17.9 | 9.4 | 2009 |
Hungary | 407 | 7.1 | 1.66 | 2010 |
Iceland | 942 | 7.1 | 2.55 | 2010 |
Ireland | 934 | 14.8 | 3.08 | 2010 |
India | 38 | 32.7 | 7.5 | 2010 |
Indonesia | 38 | 18.1 | 3.3 | 2010 |
Iran | 38 | 1.45 | 0.34 | 2005 |
Iraq | 38 | 2.8 | 0.42 | 2007 |
Italy | 700 | 11.4 | 3.08 | 2010 |
Jamaica | 38 | 0.21 | 0.02 | 2004 |
Japan | 950 | 14.9 | 5.17 | 2010 |
Jordan | 38 | 0.12 | 0.03 | 2010 |
Kazakhstan | 38 | 0.11 | 0.03 | 2009 |
Kenya | 38 | 43.4 | 16.9 | 2005 |
Kyrgyzstan | 38 | 6.4 | 1.5 | 2008 |
Laos | 38 | 44 | 12.1 | 2002 |
Latvia | 38 | 0.14 | 0.1 | 2008 |
Lesotho | 38 | 43.4 | 20.8 | 2003 |
Liberia | 38 | 83.8 | 40.9 | 2007 |
Lithuania | 38 | 0.16 | 0.1 | 2008 |
Luxembourg | 1511 | 8.1 | 1.62 | 2010 |
Macedonia | 38 | 0.29 | 0.04 | 2008 |
Madagascar | 38 | 81.3 | 43.3 | 2010 |
Malawi | 38 | 73.9 | 32.3 | 2004 |
Maldives | 38 | 1.48 | 0.14 | 2008 |
Mali | 38 | 50.4 | 16.4 | 2010 |
Mauritania | 38 | 23.4 | 6.8 | 2008 |
Mexico | 192 | 18.4 | 6.97 | 2010 |
Micronesia | 38 | 31.2 | 16.3 | 2000 |
Moldova | 38 | 0.39 | 0.08 | 2010 |
Montenegro | 38 | 0.12 | 0.08 | 2008 |
Morocco | 38 | 2.5 | .54 | 2007 |
Mozambique | 38 | 59.6 | 25.1 | 2008 |
Namibia | 38 | 31.9 | 9.5 | 2004 |
Nepal | 38 | 24.8 | 5.6 | 2010 |
Netherlands | 1168 | 7.7 | 1.61 | 2010 |
New Zealand | 803 | 10.8 | 3.63 | 2010 |
Nicaragua | 38 | 11.9 | 2.4 | 2005 |
Niger | 38 | 43.6 | 12.4 | 2008 |
Nigeria | 38 | 68 | 33.7 | 2010 |
Norway | 1109 | 6.8 | 2.00 | 2010 |
Pakistan | 38 | 21 | 3.5 | 2008 |
Panama | 38 | 6.6 | 2.1 | 2010 |
Papua | 38 | 35.8 | 12.3 | 1996 |
Paraguay | 38 | 7.2 | 3. | 2010 |
Peru | 38 | 4.9 | 1.3 | 2010 |
Philippines | 38 | 18.4 | 3.7 | 2009 |
Poland | 338 | 14.6 | 5.20 | 2010 |
Portugal | 512 | 12.9 | 3.74 | 2010 |
Romania | 38 | 0.41 | 0.19 | 2009 |
Russia [16] | 61 | 14.3 | 5.09 | 2006 |
Rwanda | 38 | 63.2 | 26.6 | 2011 |
São Tomé and Príncipe | 38 | 28.2 | 7.9 | 2001 |
Senegal | 38 | 33.5 | 10.8 | 2005 |
Serbia | 38 | 0.26 | 0.17 | 2009 |
Sierra Leone | 38 | 53.4 | 20.3 | 2003 |
Slovakia | 368 | 8.1 | 2.07 | 2010 |
South Africa | 38 | 13.8 | 2.3 | 2009 |
South Korea | 809 | 14.6 | 5.26 | 2010 |
Spain | 749 | 14.1 | 4.51 | 2010 |
Sri Lanka | 38 | 7 | 1 | 2007 |
Sudan | 38 | 19.8 | 5.5 | 2009 |
Suriname | 38 | 15.5 | 5.9 | 1999 |
Swaziland | 38 | 40.6 | 16. | 2010 |
Sweden | 863 | 5.3 | 1.31 | 2010 |
Syria | 38 | 1.71 | 0.2 | 2004 |
Switzerland | 1148 | 8.7 | 3.37 | 2010 |
Tajikistan | 38 | 6.6 | 1.2 | 2009 |
Tanzania | 38 | 67.9 | 28.1 | 2007 |
Thailand | 38 | 0.37 | 0.05 | 2009 |
East Timor | 38 | 37.4 | 8.9 | 2007 |
Togo | 38 | 38.7 | 11.4 | 2006 |
Trinidad and Tobago | 38 | 4.2 | 1.1 | 2008 |
Tunisia | 38 | 1.35 | 0.28 | 2005 |
Turkey | 211 | 17.5 | 5.76 | 2010 |
Turkmenistan | 38 | 24.8 | 7 | 1998 |
Uganda | 38 | 38.01 | 12.2 | 2009 |
Ukraine | 38 | 0.06 | 0.04 | 2009 |
United Kingdom | 1027 | 8.3 | 2.06 | 2010 |
United States [lower-alpha 4] | 1232 | 17.1 | 6.55 | 2010 |
Uruguay | 38 | 0.2 | 0.07 | 2008 |
Venezuela | 38 | 6.6 | 3.7 | 2006 |
Vietnam | 38 | 16.9 | 3.8 | 2008 |
Yemen | 38 | 17.5 | 4.2 | 2005 |
Zambia | 38 | 68.5 | 37 | 2006 |
In economics, the Gini coefficient, also known as the Gini index or Gini ratio, is a measure of statistical dispersion intended to represent the income inequality, the wealth inequality, or the consumption inequality within a nation or a social group. It was developed by Italian statistician and sociologist Corrado Gini.
In economics, the Lorenz curve is a graphical representation of the distribution of income or of wealth. It was developed by Max O. Lorenz in 1905 for representing inequality of the wealth distribution.
The standard of living in the United States is high by the standards that most economists use, and for most of the 20th century, the United States was widely recognized as having the highest standard of living in the world. Per capita income is high but also less evenly distributed than in most other developed countries; as a result, the United States fares particularly well in measures of average material well being that do not place weight on equality aspects.
The poverty threshold, poverty limit, poverty line, or breadline is the minimum level of income deemed adequate in a particular country. The poverty line is usually calculated by estimating the total cost of one year's worth of necessities for the average adult. The cost of housing, such as the rent for an apartment, usually makes up the largest proportion of this estimate, so economists track the real estate market and other housing cost indicators as a major influence on the poverty line. Individual factors are often used to account for various circumstances, such as whether one is a parent, elderly, a child, married, etc. The poverty threshold may be adjusted annually. In practice, like the definition of poverty, the official or common understanding of the poverty line is significantly higher in developed countries than in developing countries.
The Human Development Index (HDI) is a statistical composite index of life expectancy, education, and per capita income indicators, which is used to rank countries into four tiers of human development. A country scores a higher level of HDI when the lifespan is higher, the education level is higher, and the gross national income GNI (PPP) per capita is higher. It was developed by Pakistani economist Mahbub ul-Haq and was further used to measure a country's development by the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP)'s Human Development Report Office.
In economics, income distribution covers how a country's total GDP is distributed amongst its population. Economic theory and economic policy have long seen income and its distribution as a central concern. Unequal distribution of income causes economic inequality which is a concern in almost all countries around the world.
Income inequality metrics or income distribution metrics are used by social scientists to measure the distribution of income and economic inequality among the participants in a particular economy, such as that of a specific country or of the world in general. While different theories may try to explain how income inequality comes about, income inequality metrics simply provide a system of measurement used to determine the dispersion of incomes. The concept of inequality is distinct from poverty and fairness.
The Jaccard index, also known as the Jaccard similarity coefficient, is a statistic used for gauging the similarity and diversity of sample sets.
The Theil index is a statistic primarily used to measure economic inequality and other economic phenomena, though it has also been used to measure racial segregation.
The Hoover index, also known as the Robin Hood index or the Schutz index, is a measure of income inequality. It is equal to the percentage of the total population's income that would have to be redistributed to make all the incomes equal.
The Atkinson index is a measure of income inequality developed by British economist Anthony Barnes Atkinson. The measure is useful in determining which end of the distribution contributed most to the observed inequality.
Poverty in India remains a major challenge despite overall reductions in the last several decades as its economy grows. According to an International Monetary Fund paper, extreme poverty, defined by the World Bank as living on US$1.9 or less in purchasing power parity (PPP) terms, in India was as low as 0.8% in 2019, and the country managed to keep it at that level in 2020 despite the unprecedented COVID-19 outbreak. According to the World Bank, India experienced a significant decline in the prevalence of extreme poverty from 22.5% in 2011 to 10.2% in 2019. A working paper of the bank said rural poverty declined from 26.3% in 2011 to 11.6% in 2019. The decline in urban areas was from 14.2% to 6.3% in the same period. The poverty level in rural and urban areas went down by 14.7 and 7.9 percentage points, respectively. According to United Nations Development Programme administrator Achim Steiner, India lifted 271 million people out of extreme poverty in a 10-year time period from 2005–2006 to 2015–2016. A 2020 study from the World Economic Forum found "Some 220 million Indians sustained on an expenditure level of less than Rs 32 / day—the poverty line for rural India—by the last headcount of the poor in India in 2013."
Poverty is measured in different ways by different bodies, both governmental and nongovernmental. Measurements can be absolute, which references a single standard, or relative, which is dependent on context. Poverty is widely understood to be multidimensional, comprising social, natural and economic factors situated within wider socio-political processes.
In China today, poverty refers mainly to the rural poor. Decades of economic development has reduced urban extreme poverty. According to the World Bank, more than 850 million Chinese people have been lifted out of extreme poverty; China's poverty rate fell from 88 percent in 1981 to 0.7 percent in 2015, as measured by the percentage of people living on the equivalent of US$1.90 or less per day in 2011 purchasing price parity terms, which still stands in 2022.
The Foster–Greer–Thorbeckeindices are a family ofpoverty metrics. The most commonly used index from the family, FGT2, puts higher weight on the poverty of the poorest individuals, making it a combined measure of poverty and income inequality and a popular choice within development economics. The indices were introduced in a 1984 paper by economists Erik Thorbecke, Joel Greer, and James Foster.
Growth elasticity of poverty (GEP) is the percentage reduction in poverty rates associated with a percentage change in mean (per capita) income.
Multidimensional Poverty Indices use a range of indicators to calculate a summary poverty figure for a given population, in which a larger figure indicates a higher level of poverty. This figure considers both the proportion of the population that is deemed poor, and the 'breadth' of poverty experienced by these 'poor' households, following the Alkire & Foster 'counting method'. The method was developed following increased criticism of monetary and consumption based poverty measures, seeking to capture the deprivations in non-monetary factors that contribute towards well-being. While there is a standard set of indicators, dimensions, cutoffs and thresholds used for a 'Global MPI', the method is flexible and there are many examples of poverty studies that modify it to best suit their environment. The methodology has been mainly, but not exclusively, applied to developing countries.
The Oxford Poverty and Human Development Initiative (OPHI) is an economic research centre within the Oxford Department of International Development at the University of Oxford, England, that was established in 2007.
The generalized entropy index has been proposed as a measure of income inequality in a population. It is derived from information theory as a measure of redundancy in data. In information theory a measure of redundancy can be interpreted as non-randomness or data compression; thus this interpretation also applies to this index. In addition, interpretation of biodiversity as entropy has also been proposed leading to uses of generalized entropy to quantify biodiversity.
Poverty in Poland has been relatively stable in the past decades, affecting about 6.5% of the society. In the last decade there has been a lowering trend, as in general Polish society is becoming wealthier and the economy is enjoying one of the highest growth rates in Europe. There have been noticeable increases in poverty around the turns of the decades, offset by decreases in poverty in the years following those periods.