Evaluating the Performance of Five Asset-based Wealth Indices in Predicting Socioeconomic Position in Rural Bangladesh

IF 1.1 3区社会学 Q2 ANTHROPOLOGY

Field Methods Pub Date : 2021-06-08 DOI:10.1177/1525822X211020650

K. Woolard, S. Munira, Khaleda Jesmin, D. Hruschka

引用次数: 3

Abstract

Social scientists have developed numerous asset-based wealth indices to assess and target socioeconomic inequalities globally. However, there are no systematic studies of the relative performance of these different measures as proxies for socioeconomic position. In this study, we compare how five asset-based wealth indices—the International Wealth Index (IWI), the Standard of Living portion of the Multi-Dimensional Poverty Index (MPI-SL), the Poverty Probability Index (PPI), the Absolute Wealth Estimate (AWE), and the DHS Wealth Index (DHS)—predict benchmarks of socioeconomic position across 11 communities in rural Bangladesh. All indices were highly correlated. The IWI best explained variation in individual and community ranking of economic well-being, while the PPI best explained variation both between and within communities for total household wealth and a general measure of subjective social status.

查看原文本刊更多论文

评估五个基于资产的财富指数在预测孟加拉国农村社会经济地位方面的表现

社会科学家开发了许多基于资产的财富指数，以评估和针对全球社会经济不平等。然而，目前还没有系统地研究这些不同指标作为社会经济地位指标的相对表现。在这项研究中，我们比较了五个基于资产的财富指数——国际财富指数（IWI）、多维贫困指数的生活水平部分（MPI-SL）、贫困概率指数（PPI）、绝对财富估计（AWE）和国土安全部财富指数（DHS）——如何预测孟加拉国农村11个社区的社会经济地位基准。所有指标高度相关。IWI最能解释个人和社区经济福祉排名的变化，而PPI最能解释社区之间和社区内部家庭总财富和主观社会地位的一般衡量标准的变化。

本文章由计算机程序翻译，如有差异，请以英文原文为准。

求助全文

约1分钟内获得全文求助全文

来源期刊

Field Methods Multiple-

CiteScore

2.70

自引率

5.90%

发文量

期刊介绍： Field Methods (formerly Cultural Anthropology Methods) is devoted to articles about the methods used by field wzorkers in the social and behavioral sciences and humanities for the collection, management, and analysis data about human thought and/or human behavior in the natural world. Articles should focus on innovations and issues in the methods used, rather than on the reporting of research or theoretical/epistemological questions about research. High-quality articles using qualitative and quantitative methods-- from scientific or interpretative traditions-- dealing with data collection and analysis in applied and scholarly research from writers in the social sciences, humanities, and related professions are all welcome in the pages of the journal.