1. Conceptions of Poverty Comparing classifications of people Mariano Rojas FLACSO-México & UPAEP New Directions in Welfare Economics, Paris July 6-8, 2011

2. Concepts and Conceptions Concept – A vague and general idea – An umbrella concept Conception – Substance given to the concept – A specific understanding – Historical and regional – May change over time and across cultures

3. Concepts and Conceptions Conceptions and its measurement – Easy task for concrete single human attributes » Height, Weight, Hunger, Pain, Frustration, Failure – Difficult task for non-concrete and multiple human attributes – Constructed This is the case of poverty, as well as progress, democracy and others

4. The Poor: To Identify or to Classify? To identify: An incorrect approach – Suggests » A concrete human attribute » A true figure out there » An attribute which is independent of the researcher/classifier » Correct and incorrect measurements Measurements can be evaluated; How close is it to the true figure?

5. The Poor: To Identify or to Classify? To classify people as poor There is no true figure There is no concrete rate to contrast criteria to There is a classifier: classifying people as poor The classifier: selecting the conception » Constructed areas of social concern

6. Relevance of the Conception The relevance of the conception Who ends up being classified as poor? Who is subject or beneficiary of pubic policy What kind of public policy is required How achievements in public policy are assessed? – A different issue Does it matters to people?

7. Conceptions of Poverty The approach Presumption, Imputation, Subjective Theoretically driven (Presumption) Normatively driven (Imputation) Subjective well-being driven (People’s well-being report)

8. Conceptions of Poverty Income (Theory - Economic) Income, Assets Capabilities (Normative - Imputation) Instruments Multidimensional (Theory and Imputation) Housing condition, Hunger Experienced (Subjective well-being) Life satisfaction, life evaluation, affective state

9. Measurements of Poverty The measurement Variables chosen Risk: conceptualization must come first Avoid conceptualizing on the basis of measurement Defining thresholds Arbitrary, many options, robustness

10. Measurement of Poverty Mexican survey Representative 2000 observations 2 central states Income Household per capita income Threshold: US$ 2 dollars per day

11. Measurement of Poverty Capabilities Short version of CMP (Anand and colleagues’) instrument Principal components Threshold: one StdDev beneath mean Multidimensional Mexico’s definition » Housing condition, Hunger, working benefits Thresholds » As defined by Mexico’s social evaluation institute

12. Measurement of Poverty Experienced Based on subjective well-being Different understandings: substrate of information » Life satisfaction, life evaluation, affects Threshold: » Bottom of the scale

13. Comparing Conceptions of Poverty No time to argue in favor of a conception Just to show that the issue is of relevance Dissonances and consonances Do we end up classifying the same people as poor? – To Classify ≠ To identify

14. Consonances and dissonances Conception 2 PoorNon Poor Conception 1 Poor Consonance Dissonance Non Poor Dissonance Consonance

15. Dissonance in Classification

22. Conclusion The conception matters Great dissonances in the classification of people as poor – Conception precedes measurement Further discussion on the conception Poverty as low/lack of well-being – What is well-being? – How do we know it? – Who is the authority to assess it and on what basis?

23. Conclusion The classifier matters » We are not identifying the poor, we are classifying people as poor » Choosing and arguing about conceptions, methodologies and methods – Study of the classifier » Motivations » Selection of classification criteria: conception » Incentives » Biases: Disciplinary compartmentalization Perspectivism, ethnocentricism Focus of interest, attention Universalism

24. Thanks