The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Aggregate Poverty Measures
Abstract
The way poverty is measured is important for an understanding of what has happened to poverty as well as for anti‐poverty policy evaluation. Sen's (1976) pathfinding work has motivated many researchers to focus on the way poverty should be measured. A poverty measure, argued by Sen, should satisfy certain properties or axioms and the desirability of a poverty measure should be evaluated by these axioms. During the last two decades, many researchers have adopted the axiomatic approach pioneered by Sen to propose additional axioms and develop alternative poverty measures. The objective of this survey is to provide a clarification on the extensive literature of aggregate poverty measures. In this survey, we first examine the desirability of each axiom, the properties of each poverty measure, and the interrelationships among axioms. The desirability of an axiom cannot be evaluated in isolation, and some combination of axioms may make it impossible to devise a satisfactory poverty measure; some axioms can be implied by other axioms combined and so are not independent; some others are ad hoc and are disqualified as axioms for poverty measurement. Based on the interactions among axioms, we identify the ‘core’ axioms which together have a strong implication on the functional form of a poverty measure. We then review poverty measures that have appeared in the literature, evaluating the interrelationships among different measures, and examining the properties of each measure. The axioms each measure satisfies/violates are also summarized in a tabular form. Several ‘good’ poverty measures, which have not been documented by previous surveys, are also included.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cited by
Statistical Inference for Stochastic Dominance and for the Measurement of Poverty and Inequality
Davidson, R., & Duclos, J.-Y. (2000) · Econometrica · doi:10.1111/1468-0262.00167 · Cited by 870
Counting and multidimensional poverty measurement
Alkire, S., & Foster, J. (2011) · Journal of Public Economics · doi:10.1016/j.jpubeco.2010.11.006 · Cited by 684
Chapter 6 Income poverty in advanced countries
Jäntti, M., & Danziger, S. (2000) · Handbook of Income Distribution · doi:10.1016/s1574-0056(00)80009-3 · Cited by 75
Inequality and Poverty Measures
Cowell, F. (2016) · The Oxford Handbook of Well-Being and Public Policy · doi:10.1093/oxfordhb/9780199325818.013.4 · Cited by 14
Metadata
- Authors
- Zheng, B.
- Venue
- Journal of Economic Surveys
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 1997-06
- Volume
- 11
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 123-162
- ISSN
- 0950-0804 (ISSN-L)
- 1467-6419
- OpenAlex
- W2081441417
- Cited by
- 397
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 30.57
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Aggregate Poverty Measures. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1111/1467-6419.00028
- The paper
- Zheng, B. (1997). Aggregate Poverty Measures. Journal of Economic Surveys. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-6419.00028
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.