Search Results

You are looking at 1 - 10 of 13 items for :

  • "poverty convergence" x
Clear All
International Monetary Fund

). Ndulu , B. J. 2008 . The Political Economy of Economic Growth in Africa, 1960–2000 . Cambridge, U.K. : Cambridge University Press . Ravallion , M. 2009 . “Why Don’t We See Poverty Convergence?” Policy Research Working Paper 4974 . World Bank , Washington, DC . Rodrik , D. 2009 . “Growth after the Crisis.” Paper prepared for the Commission on Growth and Development , Harvard Kennedy School, Cambridge, MA . Sachs , J. 2005 . The End of Poverty . New York : Penguin Books . UNICEF 2007 . Progress for Children, A World

Mr. Jahangir Aziz

Dynamics, 1978–97 4. Poverty Dynamics Between 1988–97 5. Poverty Convergence Across India’s States, 1978–97 6. Interstate Distribution of Conditioned Poverty, 1978–97 7. Intradistribution Dynamics of Residual Poverty, 1978–97 8. Poverty Dynamics in the Early and Late Reform Years 9. Poverty Convergence During the 1990s 10. Conditioned Poverty Dynamics in the Early and Late Reform Years Table 1. Panel Regressions, 1978–97

International Monetary Fund

-97 Charts VII.1. Incidence of Rural Poverty in India’s States VII.2. Estimated Interstate Distribution of Poverty, 1978-97 VII.3. Intradistribution Dynamics, 1978-97 VII.4. Poverty Dynamics Between 1988–97 VII.5. Poverty Convergence Across India’s States, 1978-97 VII.6. Interstate Distribution of Conditioned Poverty, 1978-97 VII.7. Intradistribution Dynamics of Residual Poverty, 1978-97 VII.8. Poverty Dynamics in the Early and Late Reform Years VII.9. Poverty Convergence During the 1990s VII.10. Conditioned Poverty Dynamics in the Early and Late

Mr. Jahangir Aziz
India’s progress in reducing poverty at the national level masks substantial disparity in the incidence of poverty at the state level. This paper provides a description of the trends in interstate differences in rural poverty for the period 1978–97. Key findings are that poverty generally declined in most states over the last twenty years. However, poverty increased during the early years of the 1990s reform period before decline again in the later years. Relative differences in poverty narrowed during the 1980s but widened somewhat during the next decade. The better success rate of some states in reducing poverty in the 1990s was, in part, due to higher growth and lower inflation.
Mr. Jahangir Aziz

ordinary least-squares (OLS) and nonparametric estimates indicate that almost uniformly the rate of poverty reduction was faster the higher the initial level of poverty was in the period 1978-88. Put differently, the further away a state was from Punjab’s 1997 headcount ratio, the faster was the rate of poverty reduction. However, during the period 1988-97, both the OLS and nonparametric estimates indicate that convergence was weak. For the period as whole, the two methods Chart 5. India: Poverty Convergence Across India’s States, 1978-97 (Annual rate of poverty

International Monetary Fund

1978, which comprises roughly 40 percent of the sample), and none among states with higher initial poverty. Chart VII.5 . India: Poverty Convergence Across India’s States, 1978-97 (Annual rate of poverty reduction in percent) Sources: NSS (various rounds), staff estimates. C. Has Growth Been Pro Poor? 21. This section focuses on the role played by growth in the intradistribution dynamics and whether it has been poverty reducing . Studies addressing this question in the context of Indian states have generally used panel regressions to estimate

Ms. Valerie Cerra, Mr. Ruy Lama, and Norman Loayza

“Did Higher In equality Impede Growth in Rural China?” The Economic Journal 121 (557, December 1): 128 1–1 309 31 2011 Jaejoon Woo “Growth, Income Distribution, and Fiscal Policy Volatility” Journal of Development Economics 96 (2):289–313 32 2012 Martin Ravallion “ Why Don’t We See Poverty Convergence?” American Economic Review 102 (1, February): 504–23 33 2013 Florence Jaumotte, Subir Lall, and Chris Papageorgiou “Rising Income Inequality : Technology , or Trade and Financial Globalization?” IMF Economic Review 61 (2): 271

Mr. Robert Blotevogel, Eslem Imamoglu, Mr. Kenji Moriyama, and Mr. Babacar Sarr

Estimates for the United States .” The Quarterly Journal of Economics , 133 ( 2 ): 553 – 609 . 10.1093/qje/qjx043 Raftery , Adrian , 1995 , “ Bayesian Model Selection in Social Research ,” Sociological Methodology 25 : 111 – 163 . Ravallion , Martin , 2012 . “ Why Don’t We See Poverty Convergence? ,” American Economic Review , Vol. 102 ( 1 ), pp. 504 – 523 . 10.1257/aer.102.1.504 Ravallion , Martin , 2014 . “ Income Inequality in the Developing World,” Science , Vol. 102 ( 1 ), pp. 504 – 523 . Ravallion , Martin , 2018

Ms. Valerie Cerra, Mr. Ruy Lama, and Norman Loayza
Is there a tradeoff between raising growth and reducing inequality and poverty? This paper reviews the theoretical and empirical literature on the complex links between growth, inequality, and poverty, with causation going in both directions. The evidence suggests that growth can be effective in reducing poverty, but its impact on inequality is ambiguous and depends on the underlying sources of growth. The impact of poverty and inequality on growth is likewise ambiguous, as several channels mediate the relationship. But most plausible mechanisms suggest that poverty and inequality reduce growth, at least in the long run. Policies play a role in shaping these relationships and those designed to improve equality of opportunity can simultaneously improve inclusiveness and growth.
International Monetary Fund
Depuis plusieurs années, le FMI publie un nombre croissant de rapports et autres documents couvrant l'évolution et les tendances économiques et financières dans les pays membres. Chaque rapport, rédigé par une équipe des services du FMI à la suite d'entretiens avec des représentants des autorités, est publié avec l'accord du pays concerné.