{"title":"Multidimensional Child Poverty Measurement in Sierra Leone and Lao PDR: Contrasting Individual- and Household-Based Approaches","authors":"Alessandro Carraro, Yekaterina Chzhen","doi":"10.1007/s11205-024-03323-w","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>This article compares the properties of individual- and household-based multidimensional child poverty approaches. Specifically, it contrasts UNICEF’s multiple overlapping deprivation analysis (MODA) with the Global Multidimensional Poverty Index (MPI) developed by the Oxford Poverty and Human Development Initiative. MODA focuses on children and is rooted in the child rights approach, while MPI has been developed for households and follows Sen’s (1985) capabilities approach. We demonstrate their similarities and differences using two recent multiple indicator cluster surveys: Sierra Leone and Lao People’s Democratic Republic. The analysis suggests that MODA tends to produce higher multidimensional child poverty headcount rates than MPI, both because of the differences in the survey items used to construct the indicators of deprivation and because of how the indicators are aggregated and weighted. The study also shows that both MODA and MPI are highly sensitive to the exclusion of any one indicator from the analysis. Thus it is crucial to have valid information on the same indicators when tracking multidimensional poverty over time, e.g. for monitoring progress towards the sustainable development goals. Yet they are both robust to reductions in deprivation on just one indicator, suggesting that policies targeting only one component of the overall index would have a limited impact on the MD deprivation rate.</p>","PeriodicalId":21943,"journal":{"name":"Social Indicators Research","volume":"230 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.8000,"publicationDate":"2024-03-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Social Indicators Research","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s11205-024-03323-w","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"SOCIAL SCIENCES, INTERDISCIPLINARY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
This article compares the properties of individual- and household-based multidimensional child poverty approaches. Specifically, it contrasts UNICEF’s multiple overlapping deprivation analysis (MODA) with the Global Multidimensional Poverty Index (MPI) developed by the Oxford Poverty and Human Development Initiative. MODA focuses on children and is rooted in the child rights approach, while MPI has been developed for households and follows Sen’s (1985) capabilities approach. We demonstrate their similarities and differences using two recent multiple indicator cluster surveys: Sierra Leone and Lao People’s Democratic Republic. The analysis suggests that MODA tends to produce higher multidimensional child poverty headcount rates than MPI, both because of the differences in the survey items used to construct the indicators of deprivation and because of how the indicators are aggregated and weighted. The study also shows that both MODA and MPI are highly sensitive to the exclusion of any one indicator from the analysis. Thus it is crucial to have valid information on the same indicators when tracking multidimensional poverty over time, e.g. for monitoring progress towards the sustainable development goals. Yet they are both robust to reductions in deprivation on just one indicator, suggesting that policies targeting only one component of the overall index would have a limited impact on the MD deprivation rate.
期刊介绍:
Since its foundation in 1974, Social Indicators Research has become the leading journal on problems related to the measurement of all aspects of the quality of life. The journal continues to publish results of research on all aspects of the quality of life and includes studies that reflect developments in the field. It devotes special attention to studies on such topics as sustainability of quality of life, sustainable development, and the relationship between quality of life and sustainability. The topics represented in the journal cover and involve a variety of segmentations, such as social groups, spatial and temporal coordinates, population composition, and life domains. The journal presents empirical, philosophical and methodological studies that cover the entire spectrum of society and are devoted to giving evidences through indicators. It considers indicators in their different typologies, and gives special attention to indicators that are able to meet the need of understanding social realities and phenomena that are increasingly more complex, interrelated, interacted and dynamical. In addition, it presents studies aimed at defining new approaches in constructing indicators.