By: Endih Herawandih
Redefine poverty system, IMHO There Should be a change ....
Many articles, books, papers, and research reports, defines poverty according to the context which is adopted from the experience of the study according to its purpose. Usually the definition of poverty by this group is more practical and operational. In addition, the definition set forth more specific, and can be used directly for the determination of policies, programs, activities and action plan. Because it has specific properties and micro structure, the unit of analysis is the individual household. The consequence is, we will very hard to obtain the average level of poverty because it will vary from one region typology to the other. Thus it is impossible to determine the level of poverty by administrative region border. If we wish to obtain a national picture of poverty level will be very difficult to realize them and require huge costs and long periods of time.
Besides these groups there is still another group, which defines poverty globally and on macro perspective. This group set the limitation in absolute poverty, and applied nationally. Usually the rate of poverty limit is determined based on statistics obtained from the calculation of household expenditure. This approach is employed to facilitate/simplify data collection, especially in the interview process. In reality, this approach often encounter problems because, unable to reflect the actual family income. The unit of analysis in this group is the state administration. Because the unit of analysis is uniform from one area to another, then the determination of criteria of poor people and poor families to be uniform as well.
Maybe we can combine both above the perception, in order to achieve poverty reduction goals, objectives, and benefits. Combining both perceptions (or perhaps the method), is done through a technique that can involve specifics variables that is needed to evaluate the specific conditions of poverty at the micro level and the poverty line at the macro level. In addition to the combination of methods, for low cost implementation there should be a dramatic change in the method of data collection.
After such combining both methods, there should be on another question: how to define poverty line.
Again, IMHO, there should be a dramatic changes, regarding the perspective of poverty alleviation. I would like to say, we have to use three groups of variables to the measurement set-up, which consists of groups of measurements: (1) economic poverty, (2) Financial poverty, and (3) physical poverty. Which one would we choose? Whether the three, only two, or only one? Back again the answer; it depends on the purpose, objectives, targets, and benefits, what should we obtain ....
Thank you
Many articles, books, papers, and research reports, defines poverty according to the context which is adopted from the experience of the study according to its purpose. Usually the definition of poverty by this group is more practical and operational. In addition, the definition set forth more specific, and can be used directly for the determination of policies, programs, activities and action plan. Because it has specific properties and micro structure, the unit of analysis is the individual household. The consequence is, we will very hard to obtain the average level of poverty because it will vary from one region typology to the other. Thus it is impossible to determine the level of poverty by administrative region border. If we wish to obtain a national picture of poverty level will be very difficult to realize them and require huge costs and long periods of time.
Besides these groups there is still another group, which defines poverty globally and on macro perspective. This group set the limitation in absolute poverty, and applied nationally. Usually the rate of poverty limit is determined based on statistics obtained from the calculation of household expenditure. This approach is employed to facilitate/simplify data collection, especially in the interview process. In reality, this approach often encounter problems because, unable to reflect the actual family income. The unit of analysis in this group is the state administration. Because the unit of analysis is uniform from one area to another, then the determination of criteria of poor people and poor families to be uniform as well.
Maybe we can combine both above the perception, in order to achieve poverty reduction goals, objectives, and benefits. Combining both perceptions (or perhaps the method), is done through a technique that can involve specifics variables that is needed to evaluate the specific conditions of poverty at the micro level and the poverty line at the macro level. In addition to the combination of methods, for low cost implementation there should be a dramatic change in the method of data collection.
After such combining both methods, there should be on another question: how to define poverty line.
Again, IMHO, there should be a dramatic changes, regarding the perspective of poverty alleviation. I would like to say, we have to use three groups of variables to the measurement set-up, which consists of groups of measurements: (1) economic poverty, (2) Financial poverty, and (3) physical poverty. Which one would we choose? Whether the three, only two, or only one? Back again the answer; it depends on the purpose, objectives, targets, and benefits, what should we obtain ....
Thank you
Best and warm regards,
Endih Herawandih
