Quality & Quantity

, Volume 53, Issue 1, pp 513–527 | Cite as

Drawing the optimal monetary poverty lines based on empirical data: an application to Spain

  • Antonio M. Salcedo
  • Gregorio Izquierdo Llanes


This study incorporates revealed severe material deprivation in the determination of the at-risk-of monetary poverty lines from the perspective of equivalent income. In this way, two poverty perspectives which were previously seen as independent, and to some extent mutually exclusive, are brought together. A harmonized procedure based on receiver operating curves to determine the percentage p in relation to the median is applied; this percentage determines whether or not a person is at-risk-of poverty − 60% in the EU but 50% in the UN and OECD. In these two cases the percentage is always constant in all countries over the time by convention. Unlike the classical approach, our study identifies different thresholds for each reality (space and time), that are checked firstly using criteria for sensitivity, specificity, accuracy and the predictive values, secondly, by correlation between the improved indicator and the severe material deprivation rate, and finally, using an exogenous contrast variable.


At-risk-of monetary poverty Monetary poverty line Receiver operating characteristic curves Severe material deprivation Unemployment 


  1. Agarwal, V., Taffler, R.: Comparing the performance of market-based and accounting-based bankruptcy prediction models. J. Bank. Finance 32, 1541–1551 (2008). CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Alkire, S., Foster, J., Seth, S., Santos, M.E., Roche, J.M., Ballon, P.: Multidimensional Poverty Measurement and Analysis. Oxford University Press, Oxford (2015). CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Atkinson, A.B., Marlier, E., Kommission, Europäische, Amt, Statistisches: Income and Living Conditions in Europe. Publications Office of the European Union, Luxembourg (2010)Google Scholar
  4. Battiston, D., Cruces, G., López-Calva, L.F.L., Ana Lugo, M.A., Santos, M.E.: Income and beyond: multidimensional poverty in six Latin American countries. Soc. Indic. Res. (2013). Google Scholar
  5. Dür, A., Baccini, L., Elsig, M.: The design of international trade agreements: introducing a new dataset. Rev. Int. Organ. 9, 353–375 (2014). CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Eurostat: Towards a Harmonised Methodology for Statistical Indicators—Part 2: Communicating Through Indicators. (2017a).
  7. Eurostat: Sustainable Development in the European Union. Monitoring Report on Progress Towards the SDGs in an EU Context. (2017b).
  8. Fawcett, T.: An introduction to ROC analysis. Pattern Recognit. Lett. 27, 861–874 (2006). CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Fusco, A., Guio, A., Marlier, E.: Income poverty and material deprivation in European countries. Eurostat (2010). Google Scholar
  10. Gillie, A.: Identifying the poor in the 1870s and 1880s1. Econ. Hist. Rev. 61, 302–325 (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Hand, D.J., Till, R.J.: A simple generalisation of the area under the ROC curve for multiple class classification problems. Mach. Learn. 45, 171–186 (2001). CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. INE: Censo de población de la Corona de Castilla “Marqués de la Ensenada”. 1752 (1991).
  13. Lang, V.F., Lingnau, H.: Defining and measuring poverty and inequality post-2015: poverty and inequality post-2015. J. Int. Dev. 27, 399–414 (2015). CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. López-Ratón, M., Rodríguez-Álvarez, M.X., Cadarso-Suárez, C., Gude-Sampedro, F.: OptimalCutpoints: an R package for selecting optimal cutpoints in diagnostic tests. J. Stat. Softw. 61, 1–36 (2014). CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Moatsos, M.: Global absolute poverty: behind the veil of dollars. J. Glob. Dev. (2016). Google Scholar
  16. Moisio, P.: Poverty dynamics according to direct, indirect and subjective measures: modelling Markovian processes in a discrete time and space with error. Stakes (2004).
  17. OECD: OECD Framework for Statistics on the Distribution of Household Income, Consumption and Wealth. OECD Publishing, Paris (2013). Google Scholar
  18. Osier, G., Berger, Y., Goedemé, T., European Commission, Eurostat: Standard Error Estimation for the EU-SILC Indicators of Poverty and Social Exclusion, 2013th edn. Publications Office, Luxembourg (2013)Google Scholar
  19. Ravallion, M., Himelein, K., Beegle, K.: Can subjective questions on economic welfare be trusted? Econ. Dev. Cult. Change 64, 697–726 (2016)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Salcedo, A.M., Izquierdo Llanes, G.: An Empirical Approach to the Poverty Indicators Based on Revealed Parameters: The Case of Spain. Soc. Indic. Res. (2017). Google Scholar
  21. Shiu, S.-Y., Gatsonis, C.: The predictive receiver operating characteristic curve for the joint assessment of the positive and negative predictive values. Philos. Trans. R. Soc. Math. Phys. Eng. Sci. 366, 2313–2333 (2008). CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Thorat, A., Vanneman, R., Desai, S., Dubey, A.: Escaping and falling into poverty in India today. World Dev. 93, 413–426 (2017). CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Ukpere, W.I., Slabbert, A.D.: A relationship between current globalisation, unemployment, inequality and poverty. Int. J. Soc. Econ. (2009). Google Scholar
  24. United Nations: The Sustainable Development Goals Report 2017, UN, New York. (2017).
  25. World Bank: Global Monitoring Report 2015/2016: Development Goals in an Era of Demographic Change. The World Bank, Washington DC (2015)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V., part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Universidad Complutense de MadridMadridSpain
  2. 2.Universidad Nacional de Educación a Distancia (UNED)MadridSpain

Personalised recommendations