Abstract
Adoption of a multidimensional approach to deprivation poses the challenge of understanding the interaction between different dimensions. Are we concerned with the union of all those deprived on at least one dimension or with the intersection of those deprived on all dimensions? How does the approach of counting deprivations relate to approaches based on social welfare? The paper brings out key features of different approaches and sets them in a common framework.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Anand, S. and Sen, A.K.: Concepts of human development and poverty: a multidimensional perspective, Human Development Papers, United Nations Development Programme, New York, 1997.
Atkinson, A.B. and Bourguignon, F.: The comparison of multi-dimensioned distributions of economic status, Rev. Econom. Stud. 49 (1982), 183–201.
Atkinson, T., Cantillon, B., Marlier, E. and Nolan, B.: Social Indicators: The EU and Social Inclusion, Oxford University Press, Oxford, 2002.
Bourguignon, F. and Chakravarty, S.R.: Themeasurement of multidimensional poverty, DELTA Document 98–12, Paris, 1998.
Bourguignon, F. and Chakravarty, S.R.: A family of multidimensional poverty measures, DELTA Document 98–03, Paris, 1998.
Bourguignon, F. and Chakravarty, S.R.: Multi-dimensional poverty orderings, DELTA, Paris, 2002.
Brandolini, A. and D'Alessio, G.:Measuring well-being in the functioning space, Bank of Italy, Rome, 1998.
Callan, T., Layte, R., Nolan, B., Watson, D., Whelan, C.T., Williams, J. and Maî tre, B.: Monitoring Poverty Trends, ESRI, Dublin, 1999.
Desai, M. and Shah, A.: An econometric approach to the measurement of poverty, Oxford Economic Papers 40 (1988), 505–534.
Duclos, J.-Y., Sahn, D. and Younger S.D.: Robust multidimensional poverty comparisons, Université Laval, Canada, 2001.
Erikson, R.: Descriptions of inequality: the Swedish approach to welfare research, In: M.C. Nussbaum and A. Sen (eds), The Quality of Life, Clarendon Press, Oxford, 1993.
Foster, J.E., Greer, J. and Thorbecke, E.: A class of decomposable poverty measures, Econometrica 52 (1984), 761–766.
Kannai, Y.: The ALEP definition of complementarity and least concave utility functions, J. Econom. Theory 22 (1980), 115–117.
Kihlstrom, R.E. and Mirman, L.J.: Constant, increasing and decreasing risk: A version with many commodities, Rev. Econom. Stud. 48 (1981), 271–280.
Layte, R., Nolan, B. and Whelan, C.T.: Targeting poverty: lessons from monitoring Ireland's national anti-poverty strategy, J. Social Policy 29 (2000), 553–575.
Micklewright, J.: Should the UK Government measure poverty and social exclusion with a composite index?, In: CASE, 2001, Indicators of Progress: A Discussion of Approaches to Monitor the Government's Strategy to Tackle Poverty and Social Exclusion, CASE Report 13, LSE, 2001.
Ravallion, M.: Issues in measuring and modelling poverty, Economic J. 106 (1996), 1328–1343.
Sen, A.K.: Poverty: an ordinal approach to measurement, Econometrica 44 (1976), 219–231.
Sen, A.K.: The Standard of Living, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 1987.
Sen, A.K.: Development as Freedom, Oxford University Press, Oxford, 1999.
Social Protection Committee: Indicators sub-group: report from the Chairman to the SPC, Brussels, 2001.
Townsend, P.: Poverty in the United Kingdom, Allen Lane, Harmondsworth, 1979.
Tsui, K.: Multidimensional poverty indices, Social Choice and Welfare 19 (2002), 69–93.
Vranken, J.: Belgian reports on poverty, Paper presented at the conference “Reporting on Income Distribution and Poverty - Perspectives from a German and an European Point of View” organized by the Hans Böckler Stiftung, Berlin, February 2002.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Atkinson, A.B. Multidimensional Deprivation: Contrasting Social Welfare and Counting Approaches. The Journal of Economic Inequality 1, 51–65 (2003). https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1023903525276
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1023903525276