POVERTY CAN BE MEASURED IN TWO DISTINCT WAYS: ABSOLUTE AND RELATIVE.
ABSOLUTE POVERTY IS MEASURED BY COMPARING A PERSON’S TOTAL INCOME AGAINST THE TOTAL COST OF PURCHASING A SPECIFIC ‘BASKET’ OF GOODS AND SERVICES REPRESENTING THE ESSENTIALS OF DAILY LIFE. PEOPLE WITH INADEQUATE INCOME TO PURCHASE THIS BASKET OF ITEMS ARE CONSIDERED TO BE LIVING IN ABSOLUTE POVERTY.
RELATIVE POVERTY COMPARES A PERSON’S TOTAL INCOME AND SPENDING PATTERNS WITH THOSE OF THE GENERAL POPULATION. PEOPLE WITH LOWER INCOME WHO SPEND A LARGER PORTION OF THEIR INCOME ON A BASKET OF GOODS AND SERVICES, COMPARED WITH SOME THRESHOLD THAT IS MORE TYPICAL OF THE GENERAL POPULATION, ARE CONSIDERED TO BE LIVING IN RELATIVE POVERTY.
THE COMMON COMPONENT IN ANY MEASURE OF POVERTY IS THAT A PERSON’S INCOME AND CONSUMPTION LEVELS FALL BELOW A MINIMUM THRESHOLD NECESSARY TO MEET THEIR BASIC NEEDS. THE SPECIFIC DEFINITION OF POVERTY, HOWEVER, VARIES FROM COUNTRY TO COUNTRY.
HOW DOES IT AFFECT CANADIANS?
CANADA HAS ONE OF THE HIGHEST STANDARDS OF LIVING AMONG DEVELOPED NATIONS. IN 1992 AND FROM 1994 TO 2000, CANADA WAS VOTED THE BEST COUNTRY IN THE WORLD IN WHICH TO LIVE, ACCORDING TO THE UNITED NATIONS HUMAN DEVELOPMENT INDEX. DESPITE THIS, POVERTY IS A REALITY IN CANADA TODAY.
THERE IS NO SINGLE, UNIVERSALLY ACCEPTED STANDARD DEFINITION OF POVERTY. PEOPLE LIVING IN AND OUT OF POVERTY, COMMUNITY GROUPS AND POLICY MAKERS HOLD MANY DIFFERENT VIEWS ON THE DEFINITION OF POVERTY, ITS CAUSES AND POSSIBLE SOLUTIONS.
POVERTY (PATTERNED-CONTEXT OF SOCIAL INEQUALITY)
ABSOLUTE --- REFLECTS A CHRONIC ABSENCE OF THE FUNDAMENTAL NECESSITIES OF LIFE (NEEDS) PERTAINING TO FOOD SHELTER AND CLOTHING ===> ABSOLUTE MEASURES LOOK AT WHAT IT TAKES TO SURVIVE IN CANADA BY EXAMINING A BASKET OF GOODS FOR PHYSICAL SURVIVAL.
{I.E., MBM [MARKET BASKET MEASURE] A BASKET OF NECESSITIES AND PRICE THE BASKET ACCORDING TO LOCATION}
RELATIVE --- REFLECTS THE FACT THAT POVERTY VARIES OVER TIME AND PLACE. POVERTY IS A KIND OF RELATIONSHIP SINE PEOPLE TEND TO THINK OF THEMSELVES AS POOR ONLY IF OTHERS ARE RICH AND A PERSON’S POVERTY IS COMPARED WITH SOMEONE ELSES AFFLUENCE.
LOW INCOME MEASURE (LIM) --- DRAWS THE LINE AT HALF THE MEDIAN INCOME OF THE AVERAGE CANADIAN FAMILY.
“LOW-INCOME CUT-OFF” LINE --- COMPARES THE SPENDING ON NECESSITIES BY LOW-INCOME FAMILIES WITH THE SPENDING OF TYPICAL FAMILIES ==è STATS CANADA HAS CONSISTENTLY EMPHASIZED THAT THE LICO IS NOT A MEASURE OF POVERTY BUT A YARDSTICK THAT SIMPLY IDENTIFIES THOSE WHO ARE SUBSTANTIALLY WORSE OF THAN THE AVERAGE ==è POVERTY IS DEFINED AS IMPLICIT IN ANY HOUSEHOLD THAT SPENDS MORE THAN 55 PERCENT OF ITS INCOME ON FOOD, SHELTER, OR CLOTHING {BASED ON THREE BEDROOM APARTMENT, FAMILY OF FOUR?}
DIMENSIONS OF POVERTY:
I) HUMAN POVERTY – THE LACK OF ESSENTIAL HUMAN CAPABILITIES SUCH AS LITERACY OR NOURISHMENT.
II) INCOME POVERTY – THELACK OF MINIMAL ADEQUATE INCOME.
III) EXTREME POVERTY – DESTITUTION FROM AN ABILITY TO SATISFY MINIMUM FOOD NEEDS
IV) OVERALL POVERTY – INABILITY TO SATISFY BOTH FOOD AND NON-FOOD REQUIRMENTS.
QUESTIONS – TRUE OR FALSE
1) INDIVIDUALS OVER THE AGE OF 65 HAVE THE HIGHEST RATE OF POVERTY?
2) MEN ACCOUNT FOR TWO OUT OF EVERY THREE IMPOVERISHED ADULTS IN CANADA.
3) MOST POOR CHILDREN LIVE IN FEMALE-HEADED, SINGLE-PARENT HOUSHOLDS.
4) THE CANADIAN CITIES WITH THE HIGHEST RATES OF CHILD POVERTY ARE WINNIPEG, MONTRAL AND SASKATOON.
5) POVERTY IS PREDOMINATLY A RURAL PHENOMENON
6) A LARGE PROPORTION OF PEOPLE RECEIVING SOCIAL ASSISTANCE ARE ABLE TO WORK.
7) CHILDREN LIVING IN POVERTY ARE MORE LIKELY TO BE ABUSED AND/OR NEGLECTED.
8) A NUMBER
OF PEOPLE LIVING BELOW THE OFFICIAL POVERTY LINE HAVE FULL-TIME JOBS.
9) WELFARE
BENEFITS PROVIDE ENOUGH INCOME FOR RECIPENTS TO LIVE COMFORTABLY.
1) ABOUT ONE HALF OF NATIVE PEOPLE LIVE BELOW THE
POVERTY LINE, AND SOME LIVE IN CONDITIONS OF EXTREME
POVERTY.
***IN 1997, THE INCOME CUT-OFFS FOR A FAMILY OF FOUR RANGED FROM $22,639 IN RURAL AREAS TO $32,759 IN CITIES OF MORE THAN 500,000. BASED ON THESE LOW-INCOME CUT-OFFS, NEARLY 5.2 MILLION - ONE IN SIX - WERE LIVING IN POVERTY (NATIONAL COUNCIL OF WELFARE, 1998)]
THE AVERAGE INCOME FOR ABORIGINAL PERSONS IS JUST OVER $17,000 - 34% BELOW THE NATIONAL AVERAGE INCOME OF $26,000 (STATS CAN, 1998).
UNEMPLOYMENT RATE FOR ABORIGINAL PERSON IN CANADA RANGE FROM 40 TO 60 PERCENT, WHILE THE NATIONAL AVERAGE IS ABOUT 10 PERCENT.]]
2) FALSE è AS A GROUP, CHILDREN HAVE A HIGHER RATE OF POVERTY THAN THE ELDERLY. GOVERNMENT PROGRAMS SUCH AS OLD AGE SECURIY ARE INDEXED TO INFLATION, WHILE MANY OF THE PROGRAMS FOR THE YOUNG HAVE BEEN SCALED BACK OR ELIMINATED. HOWEVER, MANY ELDERLY INDIVIDUALS DO LIVE IN POVERTY.
3) FALSE è WOMEN, NOT MEN, ACCOUNT FOR TWO OUT OF THREE IMPOVERISHED ADULTS IN CANADA. REASONS FOR THIS INCLUDE THE LACK OF JOB OPPORTUNITIES FOR WOMEN, LOWER PAY FOR WOMEN THAN MEN FOR COMPARABLE JOBS, LACK OF AFFORDABLE DAYCARE FOR CHILDREN, SEXISM IN THE WORKPLACE, AND A NUMBER OF OTHER JOB FACTORS.
4) FALSE è IN 1996, 730,000 POOR CHILDREN WERE LIVING IN TWO-PARENT FAMILIES, COMPARED WITH 673,000 IN FEMALE-HEADED HOUSEHOLDS. HOWEVER, THE RATE OF POVERTY IS HIHEST FOR FEMALE-HEADED SINGLE-PARENT HOUSEHOLDS.
5) TRUE è IN THESE THREE CITIES, ONE-QUARTER OF PRESCHOOL-AGED CHILDREN ARE POOR
6) FALSE èIMAGES OF POVERTY AS A RURAL PHENOMENON ARE OUT OF DATE. IN 1996, 57 PERCENT OF ALL POOR FAMILIES IN CANADA LIVED IN A CITY WITH A POPULATION OF 500,000 OR MORE.
7) FALSE è ACCORDING TO ONE WIDELY HELD STEREOTYPE, THE POOR ARE LAZY AND DO NOT WANT TO WORK. IN REALITY ONLY A FRACTION OF WELFARE RECIPENTS ARE ABLE-BODIED ADULTS WHO ARE CAPABLE OF WORKING. RATHER THAN LOOKING AT THE STRUCTURAL CHARACTERISTICS OF SOCIETY, PEOPLE CITE THE ALLEGED PERSONAL ATTRIBUTES OF THE POOR AS THE REASON FOR THEIR PLIGHT – THE MENTALITY OF ASSIGNING PRIMACY TO PERSONAL RESPONSIBILITY IS CONSISTENT WITH A CONSERVATIVE AND MARKET-ORIENTED MINDSET – IT IS ALSO A MINDSET THAT INHIBITS FINDIN SOLUTIONS.
8) TRUE è A LITERATURE REVIEW ON POVERTY AND CHILD ABUSE CONCLUDED THAT POVERTY DEBILITATES FAMILIES AND CAN BE A “CATALYST AND INTENSIFIER OF CHILD MALTREATEMENT.” [VOLPE, 1989:12].
9) TRUE è MANY OF THOSE WHO FALL BELOW THE OFFICIAL POVERTY LINE ARE REFERRED TO AS THE “WORKING POOR” BECAUSE THEY WORK FULL TIME BUT EARN SUCH LOW WAGES THAT THEY ARE CONSIDERED TO BE IMPOVERISHED.
10) FALSE è WELFARE PAYMENTS ACROSS CANADA FALL FAR BELOW THE LOW-INCOME CUT-OFFS.
HUMAN POVERTY INDEX (HPI-1 / UNDP)
SOURCES OF DEFINITION:
UNDP, HUMAN DEVELOPMENT REPORT, WWW.UNDP.ORG
POVERTY HAS TRADITIONALLY BEEN MEASURED AS A LACK OF INCOME - BUT THIS IS FAR TOO NARROW A DEFINITION. HUMAN POVERTY IS A FAR MORE CURRENT CONCEPT THAT CAPTURES THE MANY DIMENSIONS OF POVERTY THAT EXIST IN BOTH POOR AND RICH COUNTRIES. THE HPI-1 (HUMAN POVERTY INDEX FOR DEVELOPING COUNTRIES) MEASURES DEPRIVATIONS IN THE SAME THREE ASPECTS OF HUMAN DEVELOPMENT AS THE HDI (LONGEVITY, LIFE EXPECTANCY, AND A DECENT STANDARD OF LIVING). HPI-2 (HUMAN POVERTY INDEX FOR INDUSTRIALIZED COUNTRIES) INCLUDES, IN ADDITION TO THESE DIMENSIONS, SOCIAL EXCLUSION.
HPI-1 (DEVELOPING COUNTRIES): DEPRIVATIONS IN LONGEVITY ARE MEASURED BY THE PERCENTAGE OF NEWBORNS NOT EXPECTED TO SURVIVE TO AGE 40. DEPRIVATIONS IN KNOWLEDGE ARE MEASURED BY THE PERCENTAGE OF ADULTS WHO ARE ILLITERATE. DEPRIVATIONS IN A DECENT STANDARD OF LIVING ARE MEASURED BY THREE VARIABLES: THE PERCENTAGE OF PEOPLE WITHOUT ACCESS TO SAFE WATER, THE PERCENTAGE OF PEOPLE WITHOUT ACCESS TO HEALTH SERVICES, AND THE PERCENTAGE OF MODERATELY AND SEVERELY UNDERWEIGHT CHILDREN BELOW THE AGE OF FIVE.
USE OF THE HUMAN POVERTY INDEX
THE HPI IS USED:
TO FOCUS ATTENTION ON THE MOST DEPRIVED PEOPLE IN A COUNTRY, NOT ON AVERAGE NATIONAL ACHIEVEMENT.
THE HUMAN POVERTY INDICES FOCUS DIRECTLY ON THE NUMBER OF PEOPLE LIVING IN DEPRIVATION - PRESENTING A VERY DIFFERENT PICTURE FROM AVERAGE NATIONAL ACHIEVEMENT. IT ALSO MOVES THE FOCUS OF POVERTY DEBATES AWAY FROM CONCERN ABOUT INCOME POVERTY ALONE.
TO HIGHLIGHT THE PRESENCE OF HUMAN POVERTY IN EVERY SINGLE COUNTRY. HIGH INCOME PER PERSON IS NO GUARANTEE OF A POVERTY-FREE COUNTRY. EVEN AMONG THE RICHEST INDUSTRIAL COUNTRIES, THERE IS HUMAN POVERTY.
TO GUIDE NATIONAL PLANNING FOR POVERTY ALLEVIATION. MANY NATIONAL HUMAN DEVELOPMENT REPORTS NOW BREAK DOWN THE HPI BY DISTRICT LEVEL OR LANGUAGE GROUP TO IDENTIFY THE AREAS OR SOCIAL GROUPS WITHIN THE COUNTRY MOST DEPRIVED IN TERMS OF HUMAN POVERTY. THE RESULTS CAN BE DRAMATIC, CREATING NATIONAL DEBATE AND HELPING TO RESHAPE POLICIES.
COVERAGE
NOT ALL UN MEMBER COUNTRIES HAVE SUFFICIENT DATA AVAILABLE TO CALCULATE THE INDICES. COVERAGE OF THE GDI IS LIMITED TO 143 COUNTRIES, GEM TO 70 COUNTRIES, AND THE HPI-1 AND HPI-2 TO 103 COUNTRIES.
SOURCE OF DATA
UNDP DOES NOT PRODUCE ITS OWN DATA. THE DATA PRODUCED IN THE HUMAN DEVELOPMENT REPORT ARE FROM A VARIETY OF ORGANIZATIONS AND STATISTICAL AGENCIES. (MINOR CALCULATIONS ARE OCCASIONALLY PERFORMED TO MAKE THE DATA COMPARABLE WITH THE INDICATORS PRESENTED IN THE TABLES.) (UNDP, 2000)