dc.contributor.author | Muller, Adrian | swe |
dc.date.accessioned | 2006-09-04 | swe |
dc.date.accessioned | 2007-02-09T11:14:34Z | |
dc.date.available | 2007-02-09T11:14:34Z | |
dc.date.issued | 2006 | swe |
dc.identifier.issn | 1403-2465 | swe |
dc.identifier.uri | http://hdl.handle.net/2077/2698 | |
dc.description.abstract | I discuss how poverty decomposition methods relate to integral
approximation, which is the foundation of decomposition of the temporal
change of a quantity into key drivers. This offers a common framework for
the different decomposition methods used in the literature, clarifies their
often somewhat unclear theoretical underpinning and identifies the methods'
shortcomings. In light of integral approximation, many methods actually lack
a sound theoretical basis and they usually have an ad-hoc character in
assigning the residual terms to the different key effects. I illustrate
these claims for the Shapley-value decomposition and methods related to the
Datt-Ravallion approach and point out difficulties in axiomatic approaches
to poverty decomposition. Recent developments in energy and pollutant
decomposition offer some promising methods, but ultimately, further
development of poverty decomposition should account for the basis in
integral approximation. | swe |
dc.format.extent | 18 pages | swe |
dc.format.extent | 173948 bytes | |
dc.format.mimetype | application/pdf | |
dc.language.iso | en | swe |
dc.relation.ispartofseries | Working Papers in Economics, nr 217 | swe |
dc.subject | poverty analysis; poverty measures; decomposition; Shapleyvalue; inequality | swe |
dc.title | Clarifying Poverty Decomposition | swe |
dc.type.svep | Report | swe |
dc.contributor.department | Department of Economics | swe |
dc.gup.origin | Göteborg University. School of Business, Economics and Law | swe |
dc.gup.epcid | 4988 | swe |
dc.subject.svep | Economics | swe |