Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item:
|Longitudinal Study:||HILDA||Title:||Was Economic Growth in Australia Pro-Poor?||Authors:||Azpitarte, Francisco
|Issue Date:||2013||Publisher:||Allen & Unwin||Keywords:||Poverty
|Abstract:||We investigate the pro-poorness of Australia’s strong economic growth in the first decade of the twenty-first century using anonymous and non-anonymous approaches to the measurement of pro-poor growth. The sensitivity of pro-poor growth evaluations to the definition of poverty is evaluated by comparing the results for the standard income-poverty measure with those based on a multidimensional definition of poverty. We find that Australian growth in this period can be only categorized as pro-poor according to the weakest concept of pro-poorness that does not require any bias of growth towards the poor. In addition, our results indicate that growth was clearly more pro-income poor than pro-multidimensionally poor. Counterfactual distribution analysis reveals that differences in the distribution of health between these two groups is the non-income factor that most contributes to explain this result.||URL:||http://www.allenandunwin.com/default.aspx?page=305&book=9781743311301||ISBN:||97817433101||Keywords:||Disadvantage; Income & Finance -- Poverty and disadvantage||Research collection:||Book Chapters|
|Appears in Collections:||Book Chapters|
Show full item record
checked on Oct 19, 2021
Items in DSpace are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.