Sensitivity Analyses in Poverty Measurement feat. Nicolai Suppa скачать в хорошем качестве

Sensitivity Analyses in Poverty Measurement feat. Nicolai Suppa

This joint seminar with the Oxford Poverty and Human Development Initiative (OPHI) and the United Nations Development Program (UNDP) Human Development Report Office (HDRO) virtual event took place on Monday, January 18th, 2021. This event featured Nicolai Suppa of OPHI to discuss his paper "Sensitivity Analyses in Poverty Measurement: The Case of the Global Multidimensional Poverty Index", with Monica Pinilla-Roncancio and Suman Seth of OPHI as discussants. Nicolai Suppa's presentation of his paper provides an extensive sensitivity analyses of the global multidimensional poverty index (MPI), a counting-based measure of acute poverty covering over 100 developing countries. Empirically, the paper probes the sensitivity of poverty measures and comparisons to modifications in key parameters. Outcomes studied include the adjusted headcount and headcount ratios and their subnational rankings, as well as the exact set of people who are identified as poor. The parameters that are adjusted include the poverty cutoff, weights or deprivation values, and indicators. Multidimensional poverty measures are generated using 10 alternative poverty cutoffs, 231 alternative weighting schemes, and six alternative indicator selections, in addition to the global MPI baseline specifications. The present paper also suggests ‘second-order’ sensitivity analyses to deepen the understanding of the underlying methods by varying poverty cutoffs and indicators simultaneously. Broadly speaking, the results suggest that parameter choices can make a difference, which is consistent with the fact that often dominance results may not emerge. Specifically, the evidence suggests that fundamentally different parameters may substantially change the performance of the entire poverty measure or even its very nature (e.g., for a union cutoff or extreme weighting schemes). However, the results also suggest little sensitivity of outcomes when changing parameters within plausible ranges. One implication of these results is that sensitivity analyses in poverty measurement have a central role in the initial process fixing the parameters, in which usually numerous stakeholders participate, including policymakers and experts alike. The reason is that an agreement on a range of values is easier to achieve than on one particular number. An important technical insight is that union-based measures are more sensitive than the base-line measure, e.g., with respect to indicator selections. These seminars are organised jointly with the Oxford Poverty and Human Development Initiative at Oxford University and the UNDP Human Development Report Office. They are hosted by IIEP Co-Director James Foster, GWU. Sign up for the IIEP mailing list here: http://bit.ly/IIEPsignup