Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
Reassessment of poverty status and performance of poverty alleviation
measures in China
Funing Zhong, Hua Liu & Qi Miao
College of Economics & ManagementNanjing Agricultural University
The Fourth International October 22-24, 2007Conference on Agricultural Statistics Beijing, China
Achievement and Challenges
Poverty incidence reduced from 30.7% to 2.5% between 1978 and 2005 (250 millions down to 23.65 millions)
But, still a large number of the poor; poverty eradication more difficult; disadvantageous position prominent
--Liu Jian
Outline
I. Achievement & Challenges in China
II. Measurements and Implications
III. Evidence from Chinese Experience
IV. Summary & Conclusions
Measurements and Its Implication
Measurements
Poverty Incidence
Poverty Depth
Poverty Severity
m
zHCP i
1
2
n
HCP 1
m
zHCP i
2
31
Measurements and Its Implication
Different Effects with Measurements--Base line
Figure 1 Impact on Income Distribution, baseline
Population %
Poverty line
Per capita income
50% of poverty line
60% of poverty line
Income distribution curve 1
Income distribution curve 2
40% 50%
Measurements and Its Implication
Different Effects with Measurements--Base line
Before After Change
Poverty Incidence 0.5 0.4 -20%
Poverty Depth 0.25 0.2 -20%
Poverty Severity 0.0833 0.0533 -36%
Measurements and Its Implication
Different Effects with Measurements--Policy Options I & II
Figure 2 Impact on Income Distribution, Options 1 & 2
Population %
Poverty line
50% of poverty line
68% of poverty line
Income distribution curve
Policy option 1
32% 50%
Policy option 2
Per capita income
Measurements and Its ImplicationDifferent Effects with Measurements--Policy Options III & IV
Figure 2 Impact on Income Distribution, Options 3 & 4
Population %
Poverty line
Per capita income
50% poverty
80% poverty
Income distribution curve
30% 50%20%
A
B
C
D E
G
F
SDEF indicates option 3, public resources allocated to the less poor;SBGC indicates option 4, public resources allocated to the most poor
Table 1 Comparison of Alternative Policies Options
MeasuresBase line
Policy option 1 Policy option 2 Policy option 3 Policy option 4
value Δ% value Δ% value Δ% value Δ%
P1 0.4 0.32 -20 0.5 +25 0.2 -50 0.5 +25
P2 0.2 0.25 +20 0.16 -20 0.4 +100 0.16 -20
P3 0.053 0.13 +145 0.0341 -32 0.208 +293 0.029 -45
Measurements and Its Implication
Different Effects with Measurements
Evidence from China
Changing Poverty StatusTable 2 Proportion of Population in Different Income Groups (Yuan, %)
1985 1990 1995 2000 2004
income (%) income (%) income (%) income (%) income (%)
<61 0.3 <34 0.21 <32 0.31 <30 0.04
<100 0.95 61-121 1.78 34-69 0.36 32-64 0.20 30-61 0.13
69-103 0.78 64-96 0.43 61-91 0.21
103-137 1.47 96-127 0.69 91-121 0.31
100-200 11.2 121-182 6.56 137-172 2.3 127-159 1.01 121-151 0.53
159-191 1.37 151-182 0.85
200-300 25.64 182-242 12.04 172-275 9.54 191-255 4.44 182-242 2.43
Income is adjusted by CPI with 1985 as the base year
Evidence from China
Changing Poverty Status
Figure 4 Changing Income Distribution of the Poor
0
100
200
300
0 5 10 15 20 %人口比重（ ）
收入
（元
）
19851990199520002004206元贫困线
Year P1 P2 P3 Z (yuan)
1985 13.84 23.89 13.05 206
1990 13.39 23.52 8.92 340
1995 9.08 27.76 12.61 600
2000 5.46 30.53 15.65 647
2005 4.01 38.16 24.94 707
Evidence from China
Changing Poverty Status
Table 3 Poverty by different measurements
Income is adjusted by CPI with 1985 as the base year
00. 050. 1
0. 150. 2
0. 250. 3
0. 350. 4
0. 45
1985
1987
1989
1991
1993
1995
1997
1999
2001
2003
2005
year
rati o
PI PD PS
v
Evidence from China
Changing Poverty Status
Figure 5 Trends of Poverty under Different Measurements
0200400600800
1000120014001600
1985
1987
1989
1991
1993
1995
1997
1999
2001
2003
2005
year
i ncome
farm i ncome non- farm i ncome
Evidence from China
Changing Rural Income, per capita
Figure 6 Trends of Farm and Non-farm Income in Rural China
P1 P2 P3
Ln farm income
-0.0998 -0.2009 -0.5507
(-0.38) (-2.22) (-2.76)
Ln non-Farm income -0.4711 0.2308 0.5424
(-2.95) (4.19) (4.48)
R-squared 0.90 0.79 0.76
Evidence from China
Table 4 Effects of Income Growth on Poverty Measures
Income Effects vary on poverty Status
Summaries & Conclusions1. Effects of poverty reduction policies could be
assessed by different measurements, policy options could be selected based on different objectives under different situations.
2. The significant achievement in Chinese poverty reduction has been benefited by general economic growth, especially the fast urbanization & industrialization.
3. Yet, the situations of the remaining poor have been worsened with lower average income & even more uneven distribution.
Summaries & Conclusions4. After significant reduction of poverty
population & with harmonious society being top policy objective, more attention should be paid to the poorest.
2. Specific poverty reduction measures are required as general growth may not benefit the poorest.
3. Changing of poverty measurement may facilitate reallocation of poverty reduction funds, as public efforts influenced by the measurements in assessment.
谢谢各位 !
