Methods of Development | A Move Towards Holistic Poverty Evaluations

We all know that nations cannot be defined purely by their GDP. And so we know that poverty, also, cannot solely be defined by income. Rather, there is a move to include a variety of indicators within the discussion of poverty, allowing new ideas and new objectives to influence action and policy. The Hudson Institute hosted an event this week entitled Latin America: Poverty, Radicalism, Market Economy? Moderated by Ambassador Jaime Daremblum, the speakers included Mauricio Rodas, John Hammock, and Andrew Natsios, and the event focused on new poverty indices. The Ethos Poverty Index (which we previously blogged about here) and the Oxford Poverty and Human Development Initiative (OPHI) focus on different poverty indicators than the most commonly used indicator of changes in income levels. They also demonstrate an effort to address Amartya Sen’s idea of capabilitiesContinue reading


Round One: MPI-0, MPI critics-1


The Oxford Poverty and Human Development Initiative just released its Multidimensional Poverty Index (MPI) as an innovative approach to poverty measurement.

The MPI certainly shakes up conventional wisdom. For example, according to the MPI, 51% of the world’s poor live in South Asia and 28% live in Africa. The MPI also asserts that roughly 1.7 billion people live in poverty, compared to previously held statistic of 1.3 billion. Furthermore, countries previously categorized as poor score higher on the MPI, whereas other countries that were considered relatively developed scored lower.

Continue reading