Skip to main content

A Comparison of Poverty According to Primary Goods, Capabilities and Outcomes. Evidence from French School Leavers’ Surveys

  • Chapter

Part of the Economic Studies in Inequality, Social Exclusion and Well-Being book series (EIAP,volume 3)

Conclusion

In this conclusion we propose to return to the essential features of our work. Our initial motivation proceeded an examination of the question of the recovery between three forms of poverty. The concept of poverty was considered under three different ethical styles privileging first of all primary goods, secondly social outcomes and lastly basic capabilities. The most important finding to emerge from our research is that the use of a specific concept of poverty would alter the ranking of people in a poverty scale: It has been particularly confirmed when one compares primary goods with social outcomes or functionings. Therefore one must first choose the objects of value in accordance with the value judgments involved (Veto 2004). It means that one is forced to ask over which kind of variable individuals must have control and for what sort of variable society is responsible. So the first relevant question for measuring poverty is, as Sen mentioned: “Equality of what?” This question is likely to return to very pressing problems about such things as real interests. But of course this is an open question.

Keywords

  • Membership Function
  • Social Outcome
  • Capability Approach
  • Informational Base
  • Primary Good

These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.

Buying options

Chapter
USD   29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • DOI: 10.1007/978-0-387-34251-1_12
  • Chapter length: 21 pages
  • Instant PDF download
  • Readable on all devices
  • Own it forever
  • Exclusive offer for individuals only
  • Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout
eBook
USD   139.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • ISBN: 978-0-387-34251-1
  • Instant PDF download
  • Readable on all devices
  • Own it forever
  • Exclusive offer for individuals only
  • Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout
Softcover Book
USD   179.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
Hardcover Book
USD   179.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  • Cerioli A, Zani S (1990) A Fuzzy Approach to The Measurement of Poverty. In: Dagum C, Zenga M (eds) Income and Wealth Distribution, Inequality and Poverty. Springer Verlag, Berlin, pp 272–284.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cheli B, Ghellini G, Lemmi A, Pannuzi N (1994) Measuring Poverty in the Countries in Transition via TFR Method: The case of Poland in 1990–1991. Statistics in Transition 5:585–636.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cheli B, Lemmi A (1995) A “Totally” Fuzzy and Relative Approach to the Multidi-mensional Analysis of Poverty. Economic Notes 24:115–134.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dubois D, Prade H (1980) Fuzzy Sets and Systems Theory and Applications. Academic Press

    Google Scholar 

  • Fleurbaey M (1995) Equal Opportunity or Equal Social Outcome? Economics and Philosophy 11:25–55.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Fleurbaey M (1998) Equality among responsible individuals. In: Laslier JF, Fleurbaey M, Gravel N, Trannoy A (eds) Freedom in Economics. Routledge, London, pp 206–234.

    Google Scholar 

  • Muellbauer J (1987) Professor Sen on the Standard of Living. In: Hawthorn G (ed) The Standard of Living, pp 39–58.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rawls J (1971) A Theory of Justice. Harvard University Press

    Google Scholar 

  • Sen AK (1980) Equality of What? In: McMurrin SM (ed) Tanner Lectures on Human Values. Cambridge University Press

    Google Scholar 

  • Sen AK (1985) Commodities and Capabilities. North Holland

    Google Scholar 

  • Sen AK (1987a) The Standard of living. Cambridge University Press

    Google Scholar 

  • Sen AK (1987b) On Ethics and Economics. Oxford Blackwell Publishers

    Google Scholar 

  • Sen AK (1992) Inequality Reexamined. Clarendon Press

    Google Scholar 

  • Vero J, Werquin P (1997) Un réexamen de la mesure de la pauvreté. Comment s’en sortent les jeunes en phase d’insertion professionnelle? Economic et Statistique 308–309–310:143–148

    Google Scholar 

  • Vero J (2002) Mesurer la pauvreté à partir des concepts de biens premiers de réalisations primaires et de capabilités de base. Le rô1e de l’espace d’information dans l’identification de la pauvreté des jeunes en phase d’insertion profes-sionnelle. Ph.D. thesis, EHESS

    Google Scholar 

  • Vero J (2003) A la recherche d’un concept de pauvreté: les théories économiques de la justice en héritage. Revue de l’Economie Méridionale 201–202:35–45.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zadeh LA (1965) Fuzzy Sets. Information and Control 8:338–352.

    MATH  CrossRef  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Zadeh LA (1970) Decision making in a fuzzy environment. Management Science 17:141–164.

    MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

Copyright information

© 2006 Springer Science+Business Media, LLC

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Vero, J. (2006). A Comparison of Poverty According to Primary Goods, Capabilities and Outcomes. Evidence from French School Leavers’ Surveys. In: Lemmi, A., Betti, G. (eds) Fuzzy Set Approach to Multidimensional Poverty Measurement. Economic Studies in Inequality, Social Exclusion and Well-Being, vol 3. Springer, Boston, MA . https://doi.org/10.1007/978-0-387-34251-1_12

Download citation