The Worlds Most Deprived The World s Most Deprived Characteristics - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

The World’s Most Deprived The World s Most Deprived

Characteristics and Causes of Extreme Poverty and Hunger

Akhter Ahmed, Ruth Vargas Hill, Lisa Smith, Doris Wiesmann, and Tim Frankenberger

Context

• Report was undertaken as part of a policy consultation process focusing on the

world’s poor and hungry people

• Consultation process undertaken to:
• Take stock of progress in achieving the first Millennium Development Goal and

those who would be left behind

• Understand why poverty persists in these groups
• Analyze successes and failure in reaching these groups
• Assess appropriate strategic approaches and their implementation
• Process was coordinated by IFPRI, culminated in the international conference on

“Taking Action for the World’s Poor and Hungry People” in Beijing organized jointly with the Government of China (State Council Leading Group Office on Poverty ( g p y Alleviation and Development)

Millennium Development Goals

• The first MDG: to halve the proportion of people living in extreme poverty and

hunger between 1990 and 2015

• Substantial progress in reducing poverty has been made since 1990, suggesting that

the first of the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) will be met at the global level

• If it is, at least 800 million people will still be trapped in poverty and hunger in 2015

, p p pp p y g

• Who will be likely to move out of poverty and hunger? Who will remain left

behind? Are development programs reaching those most in need or are they primarily

• Are development programs reaching those most in need, or are they primarily

benefiting those who are easier to reach, leaving the very poorest behind?

• This report addresses these questions by developing a better understanding of the

characteristics of the world’s poorest and hungry; and examining whether business as characteristics of the world s poorest and hungry; and examining whether business as usual is likely to improve their welfare

• The report uses global household poverty data from 1990 to 2004 to look below the

dollar-a-day poverty line, and conducts in-depth household survey analysis on a dollar a day poverty line, and conducts in depth household survey analysis on a subset of 20 countries from all major regions of the developing world

Who are the poorest?

• One billion people live on less than $1 a day: threshold defined by the international

community as constituting extreme poverty

• Number encompasses a multitude of people living in varying degrees of poverty, all

poor, but some more desperately poorer than others

• To better answer who are the poorest and whether they are being reached we

p y g divided this one billion into three categories according to the depth of their poverty:

Subjacent poor: 75 cents – one dollar 485 million people Medial poor: 50 cents – 75 cents 50 cents 75 cents 323 million people Ultra poor: Less than 50 cents 162 million people

Who are the poorest?

Ultra poor: Less than 50 cents 162 million people

A significant number: if all of the ultra poor were contained in a g p single region it would be the world’s seventh most populous country after China, India, the United States, Indonesia and Pakistan

The world’s ultra poor: Where do they live?

Latin America & th Europe & Middle East & North Af i

• Three-fourths of the

world’s ultra poor live in Sub-Saharan

East Asia & Pacific 8.8 million (5%) the Caribbean 11.5 million (7%) p Central Asia 0.4 million Africa 0.2 million

in Sub Saharan Africa, the only region where ultra poverty is more prevalent than subjacent and medial

South Asia 19.7 million (12%) ( )

subjacent and medial poverty

• Most of Asia’s poor

live just below the

( )

live just below the dollar a day line—

• nly a small minority

is ultra poor

Sub- Saharan Africa 121million (75%)

The world’s ultra poor: Where do they live?

• This reflects substantial changes in the location of the world’s ultra poor since 1990

Latin America & Europe & C t l Middle East & N th Latin America Europe & Central Middle East &

1990 2004

East Asia & Pacific 8.8 million (5%) the Caribbean 11.5 million (7%) Central Asia 0.4 million & North Africa 0.2 million % the Caribbean 7 million (4%) Asia 0.1 million East & North Africa 0.1 million South Asia 19.7 million (12%) East Asia & Pacific 47 million (24%) Sub- Saharan Sub- Saharan ( ) Africa 121million (75%) Saharan Africa 92 million (48%) South Asia 46 million (24%)

Changes in the number of poor, 1990 - 2004

• The number of poor fell in all categories in East Asia & the Pacific, and in nearly all

categories in South Asia

• Sub-Saharan Africa, in contrast, experienced increases in the number of poor people

South Sub- Sub Sub- Saharan

100

Sub Saharan Africa, in contrast, experienced increases in the number of poor people in each category, particularly in ultra poverty

South Asia 30 m Sub Saharan Africa 14 m Sub- Saharan Africa 15 m Saharan Africa 29 m

(millions)

East Asia & Pacific

• 38 m

South Asia

• 27 m

South Asia

• 37 m

ber of people

East Asia & Pacific East Asia & Pacific 37 m

• 100

ange in numb Subjacent poor ($0.75 and <$1): 485 million Ultra poor (<$0.50): 162 million Medial poor ($0.50 and <$0.75): 323 million

• 131 m

& Pacific

• 138 m
• 200

Cha

Poverty traps in Sub-Saharan Africa?

• The severity of poverty in Sub-Saharan Africa and the limited progress in reducing it

indicates that:

• if current trends continue, global reductions in poverty may continue to exclude

a large share of the world’s absolute poorest

• the poorest in Sub-Saharan Africa may be trapped in poverty (or at least are

p y pp p y ( experiencing a much slower growth out of poverty than others)

• To better understand this dynamic we

calculated the amount poverty would have been reduced in each category if

• calculated the amount poverty would have been reduced in each category if

everyone’s income had grown by the same amount between 1990 and 2004: the “equal growth scenario”

• Compared this with the actual amount of poverty reduction that took place
• Compared this with the actual amount of poverty reduction that took place

during this period

Progress has been slowest for the poorest

• Comparing the “equal growth” scenario with the actual changes in poverty:
• progress against poverty has been slower for people living well below $1-a-day
• There are marked regional differences: in East Asia and the Pacific all groups

Subjacent Poverty Medial Poverty Ultra Poverty

• There are marked regional differences: in East Asia and the Pacific all groups

benefited nearly equally, in Sub-Saharan Africa those in ultra poverty are being substantially left behind the little progress that has been achieved

Subjacent Poverty Medial Poverty Ultra Poverty

• 1
• 3.1
• 1.4
• 3
• 2

3.1

• 3.9
• 3.6
• 4.1
• 5 1
• 5
• 4

% point decline in poverty, 1990 2004 5.1

• 6

Equal growth scenario Actual change 1990 – 2004:

The world’s most food insecure

• IFPRI’s Global Hunger Index:
• Innovative tool—measures hunger and under-nutrition in developing and

g p g transitional countries. Combines three indicators into one index: (i) proportion of people who are calorie deficient; (ii) child underweight prevalence, (iii) child mortality

• Hot spots of hunger are Sub-Saharan Africa and South Asia: South Asia has a
• Hot spots of hunger are Sub-Saharan Africa and South Asia: South Asia has a

similar GHI score to Sub-Saharan Africa despite dollar a day poverty rates 10 percentage points lower 40

• Sub-Saharan Africa has experienced

little progress against hunger since 1990

• South Asia made substantial progress

27.3 32.1 27.0 26.6 25.4 25.1 20 30 core South Asia made substantial progress in reducing hunger since 1990 by improving child nutrition (although South Asia still has the highest rate of underweight children in the world) 10 20 GHI s underweight children in the world) Sub-Saharan Africa South Asia 1992 1997 2003

The world’s most food insecure

• To obtain a more in-depth look at hunger, we analyzed household survey data in 15
• countries. Again we separated the hungry into three categories:

S bj h h i b 800 d 2 200 l i d

• Subjacent hungry: those consuming between 1,800 and 2,200 calories per day
• Medial hungry: those consuming between 1,600 and 1,800 calories per day
• Ultra hungry: those consuming less than 1,600 calories per day

[2 200 a e age ene g eq i ement fo ad lts nde taking light acti it 1 800 people ho do not cons me eno gh

80

[2,200=average energy requirement for adults undertaking light activity, 1,800=people who do not consume enough to meet the energy requirement for light activity (FAO), 1,600=at risk of dying from extreme hunger or starvation]

In Sub-Saharan Africa, most of those defined

20 40 60

cent In Sub Saharan Africa, most of those defined as hungry live in ultra hunger and are at risk of dying from extreme hunger or starvation

20 urundi ambia Malawi hiopia wanda bique enegal Ghana Kenya

• Leste

Lanka ragua kistan India adesh Laos emala kistan

Per

Bu Za M Eth Rw Mozam Se G K Timor- Sri L Nica Pak Bangla Guate Tajik Subjacent hungry Medial hungry Ultra hungry

Characteristics of the poorest and hungry

• To better understand the characteristics of the world’s poorest and hungry, we

analyzed household data and reviewed empirical research in 20 countries in Sub- Saharan Africa Asia and Latin America Saharan Africa, Asia and Latin America

• We found that the poorest households are:
• In remote rural areas, located furthest from roads, markets, schools, and health

services Poverty rates tend to be 2.5 times higher in rural areas, ultra poverty rates are four times higher in rural areas than in urban areas Nicaragua: the incidence of extreme poverty is 20 percent higher in the central rural region where people travel twice as long to reach the closest healthcare service and primary school Zambia: poor are more likely to be located more than 20km from the nearest market than those who are not poor

Characteristics of the poorest and hungry

• The poorest households:
• Have little education or assets

Nearly all study countries, the proportion of adult males without schooling is almost double or more among the ultra poor than the non-poor. Similarly for

• women. In Bangladesh nearly all women in ultra poor households (92%) are

unschooled In all study countries, children from poorer families are less likely to go to

• school. In India, 48 percent of children living in ultra poverty attend school,

d t 81 t f hild li i b th d ll d t li compared to 81 percent of children living above the dollar-a-day poverty line In all parts of Asia, those who are landless are the poorest. In Sub-Saharan Africa the poorest often own some land (usually very small plots), but lack access to markets and other key resources such as credit and agricultural access to markets and other key resources such as credit and agricultural inputs.

• Face exclusion because of their ethnicity

Each of the 20 countries has minority and other subgroups that have a consistently higher prevalence of poverty and hunger, especially in Asia.

Exclusion

Figure 1—India: Proportion of Scheduled C t d S h d l d T ib i th Figure 2—Guatemala and Peru: P ti f I di i N ti l Castes and Scheduled Tribes in the National Population and Living in Subjacent, Medial, and Ultra Poverty Proportion of Indigenous in National Population and Living in Subjacent, Medial, and Ultra Poverty

100 20 40 60 80 20 national population subjacent poor medial poor ultra poor Peru Guatemala

Source: Authors calculation from National Sample Survey 55th Round Socio-Economic Survey, National Sample Survey Organization, India Source: Authors calculation from Encovi 2000, Instituto Nacional de Estadistica-Guatemala and Peru Living Standards Measurement Survey 1994, Encuesta Nacional de Hogares Sobre Medicion de Vida, Peru

Why those in ultra poverty stay poor?

• As a result of remoteness, limited assets and exclusion the ultra poor are often

unable to take advantage of opportunities that growth provides.

• The daily challenges faced by the ultra poor can lead to conditions in which it is

difficult to emerge without outside assistance. For example we see that the ultra poor: poor:

• have little energy to undertake productive activities as a result of malnutrition
• have limited access to cash or credit with which to undertake high-return income

activities bl h d d f h h ld h

• are unable to invest in the education and nutrition of their children causing their

children to more likely be poor.

• The very poverty of the ultra poor keeps them poor. As a result there are persistent

The very poverty of the ultra poor keeps them poor. As a result there are persistent impacts of:

• poverty and hunger inherited at birth
• poverty and hunger resulting from unfortunate and unexpected events. These

conditions or events in the life of a household particularly serious illness conditions or events in the life of a household—particularly serious illness— explain the descent of many households into ultra poverty.

Addressing ultra poverty

• The dismally slow progress in reaching the poorest people – those living in ultra

poverty and hunger - shows that “business as usual” will not be good enough to see welfare improvements for this group in the next few years welfare improvements for this group in the next few years.

• We need to do a better job of targeting policies and programs to the ultra poor.
• Knowing who the ultra poor are, where they live and the unique challenges they face is

an essential first step in doing this. The report begins to do this, but it also highlights quite a lot of what we don’t know.

• It is only with more context-specific and time-relevant information that it is possible for

policy makers to make informed choices and to correctly design and learn from policies and interventions for improving the welfare of the most deprived.

Addressing ultra poverty

• There are four areas of action that this work suggests are particularly important in

improving the welfare of the ultra poor:

• addressing remoteness: improving access to markets, health care and education

for those in the most remote rural areas, thinking creatively about how to improve access to services even for those who are remote

• investing in education and assets of the poorest: both through expanding

programmes that have worked, but also through working out how to make programmes work particularly for the poorest – for example how do we really make micro credit work for the very poorest people in the village make micro-credit work for the very poorest people in the village

• protecting the assets of the poorest: our research shows that catastrophic events

in lifetime of a household, such as health crises, that cause households to fall into ultra poverty can have persistent effects Social protection and innovations into ultra poverty can have persistent effects. Social protection and innovations in insurance for the poorest can help protect households as they try and move

• ut of ultra poverty.
• addressing the exclusion of disadvantaged groups: the prevalence and

addressing the exclusion of disadvantaged groups: the prevalence and persistence of ultra poverty among excluded groups such as ethnic minorities in SE Asia, indigenous in LAC—shows the importance of addressing this through affirmative action, addressing aspiration failures.

Thank you!