Advertisement

The Annals of Regional Science

, Volume 46, Issue 2, pp 349–368 | Cite as

How remote are Vietnam’s ethnic minorities? An analysis of spatial patterns of poverty and inequality

  • Michael EpprechtEmail author
  • Daniel Müller
  • Nicholas Minot
Original Paper

Abstract

This paper investigates whether physical accessibility or ethnicity is a stronger determinant of poverty in Vietnam. Spatially disaggregated welfare indexes for population subgroups show that overall inequality is shaped by an urban–rural welfare divide, closely followed in importance by sharp welfare differences between ethnic groups. Accessibility to urban areas is a weaker determinant of poverty. The findings have important implications for the targeting of rural development investments. Addressing the factors isolating ethnic minorities from the mainstream economy is likely to be a more useful strategy in reducing rural poverty and inequality than simple geographic targeting.

JEL Classification

R200 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Akerlof AG (1997) Social distance and social decisions. Econometrica 65(5): 1005–1028CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Anand S (1983) Inequality and poverty in Malaysia. Oxford University Press, OxfordGoogle Scholar
  3. Anh DN (1999) Rural-urban transition and the impacts of migration. Vietnam’s Socio-economic Dev 20: 63–72Google Scholar
  4. Anh DN, Tacoli C, Thanh HX (2003) Migration in Vietnam: a review of information on current trends and patterns, and their policy implications. In: Paper presented at the regional conference on migration, development and pro-poor policy choices in Asia, 22–24 June 2003 in Dhaka, BangladeshGoogle Scholar
  5. Anselin L (1988a) Lagrange multiplier test diagnostics for spatial dependence and spatial heterogeneity. Geogr Anal 20: 1–17CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Anselin L (1988b) Spatial econometrics: methods and models. Kluwer Academic Publishers, DordrechtGoogle Scholar
  7. Baulch B, Chuyen TTK, Haughton D, Haughton J (2007) Ethnic minority development in Vietnam. J Dev Stud 43(7): 1151–1176CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Bell KP, Bockstael NE (2000) Applying the generalized moments estimation approach to spatial problems involving microlevel data. Rev Econ Stat 82(1): 72–82CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Bigman D, Deichmann U (2000) Spatial indicators of access and fairness for the location of public facilities. In: Bigman D, Fofack H (eds) Geographical targeting for poverty alleviation: methodology and applications. The World Bank, Washington, DC, pp 181–206Google Scholar
  10. Buckland ST, Burnham KP, Augustin NH (1997) Model selection: an integral part of inference. Biometrics 53(2): 603–618CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. (2002) Vietnam poverty analysis. Prepared for the Australian Agency for International Development (AUSAID), Canberra and SydneyGoogle Scholar
  12. Chomitz KM (2007) At loggerheads? Agricultural expansion, poverty reduction, and environment in the tropical forests. The World Bank, Washington, DCGoogle Scholar
  13. Cohen JP, Paul CM (2007) The impacts of transportation infrastructure on property values: a higher-order spatial econometrics approach. J Reg Sci 47(3): 457–478CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Conley TG, Topa G (2002) Socio-economic distance and spatial patterns in unemployment. J Appl Econom 17(4): 303–327CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Cowell FA, Jenkins SP (1995) How much inequality can we explain? A methodology and an application to the United States. Econ J 105(429): 421–430CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Deichmann U (1997) Accessibility indicators in GIS. United Nations Statistics Division, Department for Economic and Policy Analysis, United Nations, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  17. Elbers C, Lanjouw P, Mistiaen JA, Özler B (2005) Re-interpreting sub-group inequality decompositions. The World Bank, Washington, DCCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Farrow A, Larrea C, Hyman G, Lema G (2005) Exploring the spatial variation of food poverty in Ecuador. Food Policy 30: 510–531CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Foster J, Greer J, Thorbecke E (1984) A class of decomposable poverty measures. Econometrica 52: 761–766CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Fritzen S (2002) Growth, inequality and the future of poverty reduction in Vietnam. J Asian Econ 13: 635–657CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Gallup JL (2004) The wage labour market and inequality in Vietnam. In: Glewwe P, Agarwal N, Dollar D (eds) Economic growth, poverty, and household welfare in Vietnam. The World Bank, Washington, DC, pp 53–93Google Scholar
  22. Gallup JL, Sachs JD, Mellinger AD (1999) Geography and economic development. Int Reg Sci Rev 22: 179–232CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Geertman SCM, Reitsema van Eck JR (1995) GIS and models of accessibility potential: an application in planning. Int J Geogr Inf Syst 9: 67–80CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Glewwe P (2004) An overview of economic growth and household welfare in Vietnam in the 1990s. In: Glewwe P, Agarwal N, Dollar D Economic growth, poverty, and household welfare in Vietnam. The World Bank, Washington, DC pp 1–26Google Scholar
  25. Haughton, D, Haughton, J, Phong, N (eds) (2001) Living standards during an economic boom. Statistical Publishing House, HanoiGoogle Scholar
  26. IFAD [International Fund for Agricultural Development] (2005) IFAD in Vietnam. Rome, ItalyGoogle Scholar
  27. Jacoby HG (2000) Access to markets and the benefits of rural roads. Econ J 110(456): 713–737CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Jalan J, Ravallion M (1997) Spatial poverty traps. Policy Research Working Paper Series 1862. The World Bank, Washington, DCGoogle Scholar
  29. Jalan J, Ravallion M (2002) Geographic poverty traps? A micro model of consumption growth in rural China. J Appl Econom 17: 329–346CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Kanbur R (2000) Income distribution and development. In: Atkinson AB, Bourguignon F (eds) Handbook of income distribution. Elsevier, Amsterdam, pp 791–842Google Scholar
  31. Kanbur R (2002) Notes of the policy significance of inequality decompositions. Cornell University, IthacaGoogle Scholar
  32. Liu AYC (2002) Markets, inequality and poverty in Vietnam. Asian Econ J 15: 217–235CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Minot N, Baulch B, Epprecht M (2006) Poverty and inequality in Vietnam—spatial patterns and geographic determinants. IFPRI Research Report #148. International Food Policy Research Institute, Washington, DCGoogle Scholar
  34. Ravallion M, Jalan J (1997) Spatial poverty traps? The World Bank, Policy Research Working Paper Series No. 1862Google Scholar
  35. Socialist Republic of Vietnam (2003) The Comprehensive Poverty Reduction and Growth Strategy (CPRGS). Hanoi, VietnamGoogle Scholar
  36. Swinkels R, Turk C (2004) Poverty and remote areas: evidence from new data and questions for the future. Background paper for the PAC conference, 24–26 November 2004. Hanoi, VietnamGoogle Scholar
  37. Theil H (1967) Economic and information theory. North Holland, AmsterdamGoogle Scholar
  38. van de Walle D (2002) Choosing rural road investments to help reduce poverty. World Dev 30(4): 575–589CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. van de Walle D, Gunewardena D (2001) Sources of ethnic inequality in Vietnam. J Dev Econ 65: 177–207CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Vietnam Development Report 2004 (2003) Poverty, Joint Donor Report to the Vietnam Consultative Group Meeting. Hanoi, 2–3 December 2003Google Scholar
  41. Waddington C (2003) National policy and internal migration. In: Paper presented at the regional conference on migration, development and pro-poor policy choices in Asia. 22–24 June 2003 in Dhaka, BangladeshGoogle Scholar
  42. Zucchini W (2000) An introduction to model selection. J Math Psychol 44(1): 41–61CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 2009

Authors and Affiliations

  • Michael Epprecht
    • 1
    Email author
  • Daniel Müller
    • 2
    • 3
  • Nicholas Minot
    • 4
  1. 1.Swiss National Centre of Competence in Research (NCCR) “North-South”, Centre for Development and Environment, Institute of GeographyUniversity of BerneBerneSwitzerland
  2. 2.Leibniz Institute of Agricultural Development in Central and Eastern Europe (IAMO)Halle (Saale)Germany
  3. 3.Geomatics Lab, Geography InstituteHumboldt-Universität zu BerlinBerlinGermany
  4. 4.Markets, Trade, and Institutions DivisionInternational Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI)Washington, DCUSA

Personalised recommendations