Measuring the Multiple
Dimensions of Poverty:
a way forward
The Way Forward in Poverty Measurement Seminar
Geneva, 2-4 December 2013
OPHI – MPI Team
OPHI Research Team: Sabina Alkire (Director), James Foster (Research Fellow), John Hammock (Co-Founder
and Research Associate), José Manuel Roche (coordination MPI 2011), Adriana Conconi (coordination MPI 2013),
Maria Emma Santos (coordination MPI 2010), Suman Seth, Paola Ballon, Gaston Yalonetzky, Diego Zavaleta,
Mauricio Apablaza
Data analysts and MPI calculation 2013: Akmal Abdurazakov, Cecilia Calderon, Iván Gonzalez De Alba, Usha
Kanagaratnam, Gisela Robles Aguilar, Juan Pablo Ocampo Sheen, Christian Oldiges and Ana Vaz.
Special contributions: Heidi Fletcher (preparation of the maps), Esther Kwan and Garima Sahai (research
assistance and preparation of graphs), Christian Oldiges (research assistance for regional decomposition and
standard error), John Hammock (new Ground Reality Check field material), Yadira Diaz (helping in map
preparation).
Communication Team: Paddy Coulter (Director of Communications), Emmy Feena (Research Communications
Officer), Heidi Fletcher (Web Manager), Moizza B Sarwar (Research Communications Assistant), Cameron Thibos
(Design Assistant), Joanne Tomkinson.
Administrative Support: Laura O'Mahony (Project Coordinator)
OPHI prepare the MPI for publication in the UNDP Human Development Report and we are grateful to
our colleagues in HDRO for their support.
Outline
• Motivations to consider a multidimensional approach
for measuring poverty
• The Alkire Foster (AF) methodology
 Global Multidimensional Poverty Index (MPI)
• Properties of the AF method
 Illustrations
• MPI 2015+ and the post-2015 development agenda
Why Multidimensional
Poverty Measures?
Poor people’s lives can be battered by multiple
deprivations that are each of independent
importance.
(Amartya Sen, 1992)
Motivations for moving towards
multidimensional poverty measure
What we have:
• Increasing data
• Improving methodologies
Technical
What we need:
Policy
• Income poverty is important but insufficient
• Growth has not been inclusive
• Go beyond dazzlingly complex dashboards of indicators
• Emphasising the joint distribution across deprivations
Path ahead:
Ethical and Political
• Political critique of current metrics
• Measures in 2010 HDR sparked interest and debate
• MPI 2015+ for the post-2015 MDGs
Increasing Data
Income Poverty is Important, but not Sufficient
(Global Monitoring Report Progress Status, 2013)
144
Number of Countries
128
112
96
80
64
48
32
16
0
Extreme Poverty
Improved Water
Target Met
Moderately Off Target
Primary
Completion
Undernourishment
Sufficient Progress
Seriously Off Target
Sanitation
Infant Mortality
Insufficient Progress
Insufficient Data
Reduction in income poverty does NOT reduce other MDG deprivations automatically.
Source of data: World Bank Data; computed by Suman Seth
Economic Growth is Important, but Not Always Inclusive
Indicators
Gross National Income per
Capita (in International $)
Under-5 Mortality
DPT Immunization Rate
Adult Pop. with no Education
Access to Improved Sanitation
(rural pop)
Year
India Bangladesh
1990
2011
Growth (p.a.)
1990
2011
Change
1990
2010
Change
1990
2010
Change
1990
2010
Change
860
3620
6.8%
114.2
61.3
-52.9
70
72
2
51.6
32.7
-18.9
7
23
16
550
1940
5.9%
138.8
46.0
-92.8
69
95
26
55.5
31.9
-23.6
34
55
21
Nepal
510
1260
4.2%
134.6
48.0
-86.6
43
82
39
65.8
37.2
-28.6
7
27
20
Source: Alkire and Seth (2013). The table is inspired by Drèze and Sen (2011), with minor additions.
Going Beyond Dazzlingly
Dashboards of Indicators
Proportion of
population
below $1 (PPP)/day
Share of women in
wage employment
in the nonagricultural sector
Net enrolment ratio
in primary education
Prevalence of
underweight children
under 5 years of age
Literacy rate of 15-24
years-old
Prevalence of
deaths associated
with malaria
Proportion of
tuberculosis cases
detected and cured
under DOTS
Maternal
mortality ratio
Proportion of seats held by
women in national
parliament
Identifying Joint Distribution of Deprivations
deprived=1; non-deprived=0
Case 1
Abby
Jane
Jon
Tania
Illiterate
Undernourished
No safe water
Low income
1
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
1
Illiterate
Undernourished
No safe water
Low income
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
1
Case 2
Abby
Jane
Jon
Tania
In both cases, 25% deprived in each MDG indicator
BUT, in Case 2, one person is severely deprived
Political recognition
• “MDGs did not focus enough on reaching the very poorest” High-Level Panel on the Post-2015 Development Agenda (2013)
 Should be able to distinguish poorest from the less poor
• “Acceleration in one goal often speeds up progress in others;
to meet MDGs strategically we need to see them together” What Will It Take to Achieve the Millennium Development Goals? (2010)
 Emphasis on joint distribution and synergies
• “While assessing quality-of-life requires a plurality of
indicators, there are strong demands to develop a single
summary measure” - Stiglitz Sen Fitoussi Commission Report (2009)
 One summary index is more powerful in drawing policy attention
Value-added of a Multidimensional Approach
What can a meaningful multidimensional measure do?
•
•
•
•
•
•
Provide an overview of multiple indicators at-a-glance
Show progress quickly and directly (Monitoring/Evaluation)
Inform planning and policy design
Target poor people and communities
Reflect people’s own understandings (Flexible)
High Resolution
– zoom in for details by regions, groups, or dimensions
The Global Multidimensional
Poverty Index (MPI)
- applying Alkire Foster (AF) method
AF Method: An Overview
• Identification of poor – Dual cutoffs
 Deprivation cutoffs - each deprivation counts
 Poverty cutoff - in terms of aggregate deprivation values
• Aggregation across the poor – Adjusted FGT
• Adjusted Headcount Ratio (Mο):
Formula: Mο = H × A
H: The percent of people identified as poor, the incidence of multidimensional poverty
A: The average proportion of deprivations people suffer at the same time; intensity of
people’s poverty
Source: Alkire & Foster, 2011, J. of Public Economics
Application of the AF Method:
Global MPI
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
Select dimensions
Select indicators, unit of analysis & weights (Flexible)
Set deprivation cutoffs for each indicator (Flexible)
Set a poverty cutoff, (k) to identify who is poor (Flexible)
Calculate Adjusted Headcount Ratio (M0)
– Reflects incidence (H), intensity (A)
Note: The AF methodology does not specify dimensions, indicators,
weights, or cutoffs; it is flexible and can be adapted to many contexts.
(Source: Alkire, S & Santos, M.E., 2010)
One implementation of the AF Method
Global MPI
(1/6)
(1/6)
(1/6)
Education (1/3)
Deprived if no
household member
has completed five
years of schooling
Health (1/3)
Asset Ownership
(1/6)
Floor
Nutrition
Electricity
Child
Mortality
Water
School
Attendance
Sanitation
Years of
Schooling
Cooking Fuel
10 Indicators
(1/18 Each)
Standard of Living (1/3)
3 Dimensions
Dimensions are equally weighted, and each
indicator within a dimension is equally weighted
Identify Who is Poor
A person is multidimensionally poor if she is
deprived in 1/3 of the weighted indicators.
(censor the deprivations of the non-poor)
39%
33.3%
Properties of the
AF method
-An illustration using findings from
MPI 2013
Properties of AF method:
an overview
• Can be broken down into incidence (H) and the intensity (A)
• Is decomposable across population subgroups
– Overall poverty is population-share weighted average of subgroup poverty
• Overall poverty can be broken down by dimensions &
indicators to understand their contribution
20
Incidence (H) vs. Intensity (A)
Country A:
Country B:
Poverty reduction policy
(without inequaliy focus)
Multidimensional
Headcount
(H)
75.00
70.00
Intensity
Intensity of
Deprivations
(A)
Multidimensional
Multidimensional
Headcount
Headcount
(H)
(H)
Multidimensional
Poverty Index
(MPI = H * A)
60.00
0.42
59.00
0.41
58.00
Policy oriented to the poorest of the poor
0.40
75.00
75.00
Before
70.00
70.00
Intensity
of
Intensityof
Deprivations
Deprivations
(A)
(A)
60.00
60.00
0.42
0.42
59.00
59.00
0.41
0.41
58.00
58.00
57.00
57.00
0.38
60.00
56.00
0.36
54.00
0.35
53.00
55.00
65.00
65.00
0.37
55.00
After
60.00
60.00
0.34
0.33
52.00
56.00
56.00
50.00
50.00
55.00
55.00
0.37
0.37
0.36
0.36
54.00
54.00
0.35
0.35
53.00
53.00
0.34
0.34
0.33
0.33
52.00
52.00
0.32
0.32
51.00
51.00
0.31
0.30
Before
Before
0.38
0.38
55.00
55.00
0.32
51.00
0.40
0.40
0.39
0.39
0.39
57.00
65.00
Multidimensional
Multidimensional
Poverty
Poverty Index
Index
(MPI
(MPI =
=H
H ** A)
A)
50.00
50.00
50.00
50.00
0.31
0.31
0.30
0.30
Country B reduced the intensity of deprivation
Roche
(2013)
among the poor more. The Source:
final index
reflects
this.
After
Uneven Reduction in MPI across Population Subgroups:
India (1999-2006)
Muslim () [0.32]
Hindu (*) [0.306]
Christian () [0.196]
Religion
Sikh (*) [0.115]
ST (*) [0.458]
SC (*) [0.378]
OBC (*) [0.301]
Caste
General (*) [0.229]
Rural (*) [0.368]
Urban (*) [0.116]
-0.110
22
-0.090
-0.070
-0.050
-0.030
Absolute Change (99-06) in MPI-I
-0.010
Source: Alkire and Seth (2013)
States (Significance) [MPI-I in 1999]
Slower progress
for Scheduled
Tribes (ST) and
Muslims
Dimensional Breakdown Nationally
Absolute Change in CH Ratio
India (1999-2006)
23
0.0%
-2.0%
-4.0%
-6.0%
-8.0%
-10.0%
-12.0%
Indicator (Statistical Significance) [1999 CH Ratio]
Source: Alkire and Seth (2013)
Dimensional Breakdown in Six States
India (1999-2006)
24
Source: Alkire and Seth (2013)
Distribution of Intensities among the Poor
Madagascar (2009)
MPI = 0.357
H = 67%
Rwanda (2010)
MPI = 0.350
H = 69%
Source: Alkire , Roche &Seth (2013)
The Global MPI 2015+
In the Post 2015 MDG
Development Agenda
Moving towards a MPI 2015+
Findings from Global MPI:
- $1.25/poverty and MPI do not move together
- MPI reduction is often faster than $1.25/day poverty
- Political incentives from MPI are more direct
Niger
Ethiopia
Mali
Burundi
Burkina Faso
Liberia
Guinea
Somalia
Mozambique
Sierra Leone
Senegal
DR Congo
Benin
Uganda
Rwanda
Timor-Leste
Madagascar
Malawi
Tanzania
Zambia
Chad
Mauritania
Cote d'Ivoire
Gambia
Bangladesh
Haiti
Togo
Nigeria
India
Cameroon
Yemen
Pakistan
Kenya
Lao
Cambodia
Nepal
Republic of Congo
Namibia
Zimbabwe
Lesotho
Sao Tome and Principe
Honduras
Ghana
Vanuatu
Djibouti
Nicaragua
Bhutan
Guatemala
Indonesia
Bolivia
Swaziland
Tajikistan
Mongolia
Peru
Iraq
Philippines
South Africa
Paraguay
China
Morocco
Suriname
Guyana
Estonia
Turkey
Egypt
Trinidad and Tobago
Belize
Syrian Arab Republic
Colombia
Sri Lanka
Azerbaijan
Maldives
Kyrgyzstan
Dominican Republic
Hungary
Croatia
Viet Nam
Mexico
Czech Republic
Argentina
Tunisia
Brazil
Jordan
Uzbekistan
Ecuador
Ukraine
Macedonia
Moldova
Uruguay
Thailand
Latvia
Montenegro
Palestinian Territories
Albania
Russian Federation
Serbia
Bosnia and Herzegovina
Georgia
Kazakhstan
United Arab Emirates
Armenia
Belarus
Slovenia
Slovakia
Comparing the Headcount Ratios of MPI Poor and $1.25/day Poor
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
Height of the bar: MPI Headcount Ratio
Height at ‘•’ : $1.25-a-day Headcount Ratio
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
Intensity 69.4% & More
Intensity 50-69.4%
Intensity 44.4-50%
Intensity 33.3-44.4%
$1.25 a day
Source: Alkire , Roche &Seth (2013)
MPI 2015+ for the Post-2015 MDGs
(Alkire and Sumner 2013)
- To complement $1.25/day poverty
- To reflect interconnections between deprivations: how
people are poor
- Emphasis on participatory discussions & expert views
- National MPI should be recognised and reported
internationally
The Global Multidimensionl Poverty
Peer Network (MPPN)
Angola, Bhutan, Brazil, Chile, China, Colombia, Dominican
Republic, ECLAC, Ecuador, El Salvador, Germany, India, Iraq,
Malaysia, Mexico, Morocco, Mozambique, Nigeria, OECD, the
Organization of Caribbean States, OPHI, Peru, Philippines, SADC,
Tunisia, Uruguay and Vietnam
Launch of Global MPPN, June 2013
• Founded by OPHI with Mexico’s CONEVAL and
Colombia’s DNP & financial support from BMZ
• Launched by President Santos of Colombia
• Roundtable discussion on the MPPN by Ministers
• Amartya Sen Lecture on “Discovering Women”
The MPPN Moving Forward
• Expansion of Multidimensional Poverty Index
 Official national poverty measures
 Subnational Pilots (China, Brazil)
• An Effective and Informed Voice in the Post
2015 Discussions
 Colombia, Mexico, Germany, OPHI and the MPPN host
a side event at the UN General Assembly 2013
• The Promotion of Joint Research and
Development of Practical Tools
Summary
•
Emphasizes on joint distribution of deprivations
•
Decompositions by subpopulation - policy relevance
•
Flexible and can be adapted to national contexts
•
MPI 2015+: comparable across countries
•
National MPI and Global MPI 2015+ can be reported
like national income poverty and $1.25/day
References:
Alkire, S. and Santos, M.E. 2010. Acute multidimensional poverty: a new index for developing countries. OPHI
Working Paper 38, Oxford Poverty and Human Development Initiative, University of Oxford.
Alkire, S. and Foster, J.E. 2011. Counting and multidimensional poverty measurement. Journal of Public Economics,
95 (7-8): 476-487.
Alkire, S. and Sumner, A. 2013. Multidimensional Poverty and the Post-2015 MDGs. OPHI Briefing Note.
http://www.ophi.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/MPI-post-2015-MDGs-FINAL.pdf?cda6c1
Alkire, S. and Seth, S. 2013. “Multidimensional Poverty Reduction in India 1999 and 2006: Slowest Progress for
the Poorest Groups”, Research Brief, Oxford Poverty & Human Development Initiative, Oxford University.
http://www.ophi.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/Multidimensional-Poverty-Reduction-in-India-199920061.pdf?3f40f1
Alkire, S. and Roche, J.M. 2013. ‘Multidimensional Poverty Index 2013’, Research Brief, Oxford Poverty &
Human Development Initiative, Oxford University.
http://www.ophi.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/Multidimensional-Poverty-Index-2013-Alkire-Roche-and-Seth.pdf
Drèze J and Sen, A.K. 2011. “Putting Growth In Its Place”, Outlookindia.com Magazine, November 2011,
accessed at www.outlookindia.com/article.aspx?278843 on January 11, 2013.
Weblinks:
High-Level Panel on the Post-2015 Development Agenda (2013)
http://www.post2015hlp.org/the-report/
Stiglitz Sen Fitoussi Commission Report (2009)
http://stiglitz-sen-fitoussi.fr/documents/rapport_anglais.pdf
What Will It Take to Achieve the Millennium Development Goals? (2010)
http://www.undp.org/content/undp/en/home/librarypage/mdg/international-assessment---english-fullversion.html
Thank You
More information:
The Global MPI is published annually in the Human Development Report of UNDP
Working Papers and resources available on www.ophi.org.uk