Measuring Child Poverty in South Africa: Sensitivity to the Choice of Equivalence Scale and an Updated Profile
Measuring Child Poverty in South Africa: Sensitivity to the Choice of Equivalence Scale and an Updated Profile
复制标题
衡量南非儿童贫困：对等值量表选择和更新概况的敏感性
DOI：
--
复制
发表时间：
2009
期刊：
影响因子：
--
通讯作者：
S. van der Berg
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
J. Streak;D. Yu;S. van der Berg
本文提供了南非儿童贫困对成人等效量表（AES）变化的敏感性的证据，并根据2005/06年度收入和支出调查更新了儿童贫困概况。将贫困线设为以不同AESs计算的家庭的第40百分位，发现儿童贫困的范围和构成对所使用的规模相对不敏感。不同年龄的儿童、女孩与男孩、种族群体以及生活在农村与城市地区的儿童的排名不受AES选择的影响，尽管一些省级贫困人口衡量标准的排名不受影响。儿童和家庭被“正确”认定为全范围贫困的比例非常高。这些调查结果支持这样一种论点，即使用以人均福利措施为基础的贫穷线对南非的贫困状况进行分析可能是适当的。在儿童贫困概况的构建中，我们使用人均收入作为福利指标，将贫困线设定在家庭的第40百分位。该概况表明，即使通过儿童抚养补助金向有贫困儿童的家庭大量注入资金，儿童中的贫困问题仍比人口或成年人中的贫困问题更为普遍。儿童贫困人数、深度和严重程度在0-4岁儿童中最高，在15-17岁儿童中最低，他们尚未成为补助金的受益人。在非洲和有色人种儿童中，这一比例也最高。各省之间的差异仍然很大。该分析强调了在消除贫困的斗争中优先考虑儿童的重要性，特别是在他们最初的几年。
This paper offers evidence on the sensitivity of child poverty in South Africa to changes in the adult equivalence scale (AES) and updates the child poverty profile based on the Income and Expenditure Survey 2005/06. Setting the poverty line at the 40th percentile of households calculated with different AESs the scope and composition of child poverty are found to be relatively insensitive to the scale used. The rankings of children of different ages, girls versus boys, racial groupings and children living in rural versus urban areas are unaffected by choice of AES, although some provincial rankings on the poverty headcount measure are. The proportions of children and households ‘correctly’ identified as poor for the full range of scales is extremely high. These findings support the argument that it may be appropriate for profiling poverty in South Africa to use a poverty line based on a per capita welfare measure. For the construction of the child poverty profile, per capita income is used as the welfare indicator with the poverty line set at the 40th percentile of household. The profile suggests that poverty amongst children is more extensive than amongst the population or adults even after the massive injection of transfers into households with poor children through the child support grant. The child poverty headcount, depth and severity are all highest amongst children age 0–4 and lowest amongst those aged 15–17, who are not yet beneficiaries of the grants. They are also highest amongst African and Coloured children. Large variations across provinces remain. The analysis underlines the importance of prioritising children in the fight against poverty, particularly in their earliest years.