A new tool, released as a DVD, allows the identification at municipal level of poverty incidence, the average distance of the poor population from the poverty threshold...

A new tool, released as a DVD, allows the identification at municipal level of poverty incidence, the average distance of the poor population from the poverty threshold (poverty gap) and the level of inequality among the poor population (poverty severity and depth), among other indicators. The map has been produced by IBGE in partnership with the World Bank. Based on data from the Consumer Expenditure Survey 2002-2003 and from the 2000 Census, it was possible to obtain 20 regional absolute and subjective poverty lines, and to detect their differences in regional and municipal terms. For example: in 77% of the municipalities in the Northeast over half of their population were living in poverty.

The Map of Poverty and Inequality is a DVD with an interactive system of consultation to digital maps and numerical data relative to the most often used indicators of poverty and inequality. It includes additional maps with social, economical and territory indicators related to the phenomenon of poverty, working as material for its study and contextualization.

The maps bring tools which are common to GIS systems, such as overlapping of layers (variables) or zoom for a more detailed visualization. Cartograms can be printed or recorded for the use in reports and in other environments. Numerical data can also be recorded in electronic worksheets.

The DVD also brings methodological texts which gave support to the production of the work, being the highlight the method for the combination of data of POF 2002-2003 with the Demographic Census, for the construction of the consumption aggregate and the absolute and subjective poverty lines.

Over half of the population of 32.6% Brazilian municipalities was living in poverty

Besides the spatial distribution of poverty in the country, represented in maps through the tables which form the system, it was possible to select municipalities which, in 2003, had over half of its population living in absolute poverty (32.6% of the municipalities).

In relation to inequality (measured by the Gini index) were selected the municipalities with the highest inequality levels (40.7% of them, which had estimates above 40% for this indicator.

The areas with the lowest proportions of municipalities with over 50% of poor people were the ones with the highest inequality indexes (Graph 1). The Northeast had 77.1% of municipalities with over half of their population living in poverty; inequality, however, was less severe.

Considering the same previous indicators (of municipalities with over 50% of poor people and Gini index above 40%) Graph 2 shows that there is a trend to concentration of a higher poverty incidence in smaller municipalities. Inequality is bigger in more populated municipalities. The extreme cases were the 13 Brazilian municipalities which had over one million inhabitants: there was no municipality with over 50% of poor people, but inequality above 40% reached the entire group.

The methodology used in the Map construction allows the calculation of poverty incidence and additional measures which qualify the understanding of the phenomenon, such as the average distance of poor people in relation to the threshold (gap) and the inequality among the poor people (severity or depth of poverty).

By analyzing the spatial distribution of inequality estimates, it is possible to notice that both in areas with high poverty incidence, and in others, with lower incidence, there can be, for example, low indexes of inequality. Similar figures, however, have different interpretations: in poorer areas people are equally poor, whereas in richer areas a low inequality index means a more equal distribution of wealth.

Perception of poverty has regional differences

Absolute poverty is measured based on criteria defined by specialists who analyze the capacity of consumption of people, being considered poor the person who cannot have access to a basic food basket and to essential goods for survival.  

The subjective measure of poverty comes from the opinion of interviwees, and is calculated considering the perception of persons about their life conditions. According to specialists, the a person’s perception of welfare is influenced by his position in relation to other individuals from a given group of reference. In theoretical terms, it is not expected that both indicators be coincident, but close results rea expected. 

In the North and in the Northeast, the perception of poverty was, in general, above the results observed by the absolute line. The opposite happended in the South; people considered themseles less poor than meausred by absolute poverty. In the Southeast and Central West, there was more proximity between both measures.

There can hardly be na explanation for the differences found between both measures, since several factors can influence the perception of people, such as: the characteristics of the places where they live; the perception of the level of inequality; and the effect of migration, which causes people to not to compare themselves with their current area of living, but with the place of origing; or even with a generational effect. 

Additional thematic maps can help in this search. The determining elements of poverty of inequality are many times told apart depending on the characterisitcs of the environment in which they occur. The economic production, the educational level of the population which prepares it for the opportunities in the labor market and health conditions are some of the indicators which affect welfare.

The DVD brings a vast collection of maps with several topics which can support poverty and inequality analyses: Economics, Population, Education, Health, Household and Basic Sanitation; Physical, Political and Natural resources and Environment, Industry and Services, Agriculture, Urbanization and Infrastructure. Each topic is subdivided, resulting in over 400 maps.

Investigation of poverty is a topic for international studies

In recent years, several experts on this issue have come to an agreement concerning a broad definition which considers poverty as deprivation of welfare, for the absence of essential elements leading to quality of life in society. In this respect, the absence of welfare is associated to insufficient income, nutrition, health, housing, consumer goods or the right to participate in the social and political life of the community in which they live.

Poverty is also characterized by the lack of opportunities and of power, and by the vulnerability of social groups with a higher probability of having their condition worsened and becoming impoverished. Economic growth, for example, is crucial to create opportunities. However, growth will not be enough if poor people are not capable of making use of their benefits due to lack of training, health or access to basic infrastructure. In this respect, the measurement of poverty must cover its different sides, which are, many times, a consequence of broad social relations, opposite to situations in which the treatment of poverty must be focused on the groups in need. It, is necessary, therefore, to make the difference between individual and structural aspects in such a way as to implement politic and programs which guarantee the improvement of the population welfare.

In terms of quantitative surveys, several methodologies have developed in the past few decades, but three were the highlights: the ones which measure absolute poverty by the identification of a threshold below which people would not have na acceptable standard of living; the ones which measure poverty through the recognition of persons who have a low standard of living in relation to other groups of society; and the ones which measure subjective poverty (perception of individual themselves about their minimal conditions of survival).

The three main approaches of measurement of poverty have several aspects in common, which must be evaluated before deciding which method will be used to define the line of poverty. These are non-consensual aspects, with pros and cons among the options available and which lead researchers to make choices, many times with a certain level of arbitrariness, either for lack of statistical information or for lack of more specific methodologies. Among these aspects it is possible to highlight the choice of a unit of analysis (household, family), of methods which make it possible to compare households of different sizes and demographic compositions (equivalent adult, per capita, scale economy) and the choice of an appropriate indicator to measure the standard of living of the household (income or consumption).

Therefore, the choice of approach and the evaluation of aspects to be considered in the measurement of poverty depend on the intended objective, once each decision has some impact on the final result of proportion of poor people. In this study, we use the approaches of absolute and subjective poverty.

Studies of the World Bank, developed by Chris Elbers, Jean O. Lanjouw and Peter Lanjouw (ELL), have adopted statistical procedures which match detailed information collected in household sample surveys with wide coverage of the Demographic Census. Based on this methodology, the objective of this work is to make the Map of Poverty using data from the Consumer Expenditure survey – POF 2002-2003 and, using the household expenditure per capita, to input data relative to households in the 2000 Census so as to estimate measures of poverty and inequality. The use of this methodology allows the calculation of poverty and inequality in small areas, and leads to the evaluation and precision of estimates. This work generates estimates of poverty and inequality for Brazilian municipalities, relative to 2003.