The Journal of Economic Inequality

, Volume 10, Issue 2, pp 267–297 | Cite as

Small area estimation-based prediction methods to track poverty: validation and applications

  • Luc Christiaensen
  • Peter Lanjouw
  • Jill Luoto
  • David Stifel
Article

Abstract

Tracking poverty is predicated on the availability of comparable consumption data and reliable price deflators. However, regular series of strictly comparable data are only rarely available. Price deflators are also often missing or disputed. In response, poverty prediction methods that track consumption correlates as opposed to consumption itself have been developed. These methods typically assume that the estimated relation between consumption and its predictors is stable over time—assumptions that cannot usually be tested directly. This study analyzes the performance of poverty prediction models based on small area estimation (SAE) techniques. Predicted poverty estimates are compared with directly observed levels in two country settings where data comparability over time is not a problem. Prediction models that employ either non-staple food or non-food expenditures or a full set of assets as predictors are found to yield poverty estimates that match observed poverty well. This offers some support to the use of such methods to approximate the evolution of poverty. Two further country examples illustrate how an application of the method employing models based on household assets can help to adjudicate between alternative price deflators.

Keywords

Consumption prediction Price deflator Poverty dynamics Small area estimation China Kenya Russia Vietnam 

JEL Classification

D12 D63 I32 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Agarwal, N., Dollar, D., Glewwe, P. (eds): Economic Growth, Poverty and Household Welfare in Vietnam. World Bank, Washington DC (2004)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Azzarri, C., Carletto, G., Davis, B., Zezza, A.: Monitoring poverty without consumption data: an application using the Albania panel survey. East. Eur. Econ. 44(1), 59–82 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Beegle, K., De Weerdt, J., Friedman, J., Gibson, J.: Methods of household consumption measurement through surveys: experimental results from Tanzania. Policy Research Working Paper Series, 5101. World Bank, Washington DC (2010)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Deaton, A.: Adjusted Indian poverty estimates for 1999–2000. Econ. Polit. Wkly 25, 322–326 (2003)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Deaton, A.: Price trends in India and their implications for measuring poverty. Econ. Polit. Wkly 7, 3729–3748 (2008)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Deaton, A., Zaidi, S.: Guidelines for constructing consumption aggregates for welfare analysis. Living Standards Measurement Study Working Paper 135. World Bank, Washington DC (2002)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Deaton, A., Kozel, V.: Data and dogma: the great Indian poverty debate. World Bank Res. Obs. 20(2), 177–199 (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Demombynes, G., Elbers, C., Lanjouw, J., Lanjouw, P.: How good a map? Putting small area estimation to the test. Revista Internazionale di Scienze Sociali 4, 465–493 (2008)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Elbers C., Pouw, N.: Modelling sequencing patterns in asset acquisition: the case of smallholder farmers in three rural districts of Uganda, mimeo. Amsterdam Institute of International Development (2009)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Elbers, C., Lanjouw, J.O., Lanjouw, P.: Micro-level estimation of welfare. Policy Research Working Paper 2911. World Bank, Washington DC (2002)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Elbers, C., Lanjouw, J.O., Lanjouw, P.: Micro-level estimation of poverty and inequality. Econometrica 71(1), 355–364 (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Elbers, C., Lanjouw, P., Leite, P.: Brazil within Brazil: testing the poverty map methodology in minas Gerais. World Bank Policy Research Working Paper 4513. World Bank, Washington DC (2008)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Filmer, D., Scott, K.: Assessing asset indices. World Bank Policy Research Working Paper 4605. Washington DC, World Bank (2008)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Gibson, J., Huang, J., Rozelle, S.: Improving estimates of inequality and poverty from Urban China’s household income and expenditure survey. Rev. Income Wealth 49(1), 53–68 (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Gibson, J., Stillman, S., Le, T.: CPI bias and real living standards in Russia during the transition. J. Dev. Econ. 87(1), 140–160 (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Grimm, M., Günther, I.: Growth and poverty in Burkina Faso – a reassessment of the paradox. J. Afr. Econ. 16(1), 70–101 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Grosse, M., Klasen, S., Spatz, J.: Matching household surveys with DHS data to create nationally representative time series of poverty: an application to Bolivia. Courant Research Centre Discussion Paper 21. Georg-August-Universität Göttingen, Göttingen, Germany (2009)Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Harrower, S., Hoddinott, J.: Consumption smoothing in the Zone Lacustre, Mali. J. Afr. Econ. 14(4), 489–519 (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Hoogeveen, J., Ruhinduka, R.: Lost in transition? Income poverty reduction in Tanzania since 2001. Background Paper to the Tanzanian Population and Human Development Report 2009 (2009)Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Kijima, Y., Lanjouw, P.: Poverty in India during the 1990s: a regional perspective. Policy Research Department Working Paper 3141. World Bank, Washington DC (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Lanjouw, J.O., Lanjouw, P.: How to compare apples and oranges: poverty measurement based on different definitions of consumption. Rev. Income Wealth 47(1), 25–42 (2001)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Luttmer, E.: Measuring poverty dynamics and inequality in transition economies – disentangling real events from noisy data. World Bank Policy Research Working Paper 2549. World Bank, Washington DC (2001)Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Mathiassen, A.: A model based approach for predicting annual poverty rates without expenditure data. J. Econ. Inequal 7(2), 117–135 (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Ravallion, M.: How well can method substitute for data? Five experiments in poverty analysis. World Bank Res. Obs. 11(2), 199–221 (1996)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Sahn, D., Stifel, D.: Poverty comparisons over time and across countries in Africa. World Dev. 28(12), 2123–55 (2000)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Sen, A., Himanshu: Poverty and inequality in India-I. Econ. Polit. Wkly 8, 4247–4263 (2004)Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Stifel, D., Christiaensen, L.: Tracking poverty over time in the absence of comparable consumption data. World Bank Econ. Rev. 21(2), 317–341 (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Stillman, S., Thomas, D.: Nutritional status during an economic crisis: evidence from Russia. Econ. J. 118–531, 1385–1417 (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Tarozzi, A.: Calculating comparable statistics from incomparable surveys, with an application to poverty in India. J. Bus. Econ. Stat. 25(3), 314–336 (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Tarozzi, A.: Can census data alone signal heterogeneity in the estimation of poverty maps? J. Dev. Econ. 95(2), 170–185 (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Tarozzi, A., Deaton, A.: Using census and survey data to estimate poverty and inequality for small areas. Rev. Econ. Stat. 91(4), 773–792 (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Wall, M., Johnston, D.: Counting heads or counting televisions: can asset-based measures of welfare assist policy-makers in Russia? J. Hum. Dev. Capabilities 9(1), 131–147 (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    World Bank: Kenya poverty and inequality assessment: volume I: synthesis report. Report No. 44190-Ke, Poverty Reduction and Economic Management Unit, Africa Region. World Bank, Washington DC (2008)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC. 2011

Authors and Affiliations

  • Luc Christiaensen
    • 1
  • Peter Lanjouw
    • 1
  • Jill Luoto
    • 2
  • David Stifel
    • 3
  1. 1.Development Economics Research GroupWorld BankWashingtonUSA
  2. 2.Rand CorporationSanta MonicaUSA
  3. 3.Lafayette CollegeEastonUSA

Personalised recommendations