DIRECT AND INDIRECT EFFECTS OF PRO-POOR GROWTH
Abstract
Balancing sustainable growth requires poverty to be reduced. The paper is aimed at determining under which conditions growth can be considered pro-poor. Own approaching to the definition of pro-poor growth is suggested. It allows identifying the growth factors, which directly reduce poverty. Furthermore, it analyses two transmission mechanisms through which growth can reduce poverty; a labor market and local redistribution. It reveals barriers in poverty reduction thus pointing at necessary state intervention. It also helps to evaluate if the sectors of strongest foreign direct investments contribute to poverty reduction. The hypotheses suggested in the paper are verified on a base of data from two sources: the Polish Household Budget Surveys and Local Data Bank offered by the Central Statistical Office of Poland for a period of 2005-2011. To identify the direct effects of growth on poverty reduction through labor market and local redistribution, we apply mediation models. Estimations of panel data models are used to assess dependence of poverty on economic growth and its factors, and relationships in the mediation models.
Downloads
References
Deniszczuk L., Sajkiewicz B. (1997), Kategoria minimum socjalnego, in: Golinowska (1997), Polska bieda II. Kryteria – Ocena – Przeciwdzialanie, IPiSS, Warszawa.
Dollar D., Kraay A. (2002), Growth is Good for the Poor, Journal of Economic Growth, 7, 195-225
Essama-Nssah B. (2005), A unified framework for pro-poor growth analysis, Economics Letters, 89, 216-221
Kakwani N., Pernia E.M. (2000), What is Pro-poor Growth?, Asian Development Review, 18(1), 1-16
Khandker S., Haughton J. (2009), Handbook on Poverty and Inequality, World Bank, Washington DC
Klasen S. Lamanna F., (2009), The Impact of Gender Inequality in Education and Employment on Economic Growth: New Evidence for a Panel of Countries, Feminist Economics, Vol.
15, Issue 3
Kraay A. (2006), When is growth pro-poor? Evidence from a panel of countries, Journal of Development Economics, 80(1), 198-227
Kurowski P. (2001), Rola kategorii minimum socjalnego i minimum egzystencji w kształtowaniu kategorii dochodowych, Polityka Spoleczna, 5/6.
Lambert P.J. (2009), Pro-poor growth and the lognormal income distribution, ECINEQ Working Paper, 2009-130
Lipton, M., Eastwood, R., Kirsten, J. F., 2003. “Land And Asset Size, Structure And Distribution And The Links To Income In Three Drylands, Working Papers 18051, University of Pretoria,
Department of Agricultural Economics, Extension and Rural Development.
Lopez J. H. (2004), Pro-Poor Growth: A review of What We Know (and of What We Don’t), www.eldis.org/vfile/upload/1/document/0708/DOC17880.pdf, 15.07.2010
Morduch, J. (1998) Does microfinance really help the poor? New evidence from flagship programs in Bangladesh. New York University. j.mp/bC3Tge
Morris, M., Bernhardt, AD., Handcock, MS., (1994), Economic inequality: New methods for new trends. American Sociological Review, 59, 205-219
Ravallion M. (2004), Pro-Poor Growth: A Primer, World Bank Policy Research Working Paper, 3242
Ravallion M., Chen S. (2003), Measuring pro-poor growth, Economics Letters, 78, 93–99
Ravallion M., Datt G. (2002), Why has economic growth been more pro-poor in some states of India than others?, Journal of Development Economics, 68(2), 381-400
Buletin Ekonomi Moneter dan Perbankan / Bulletin of Monetary Economics and Banking is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.
