The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
MEASURING POVERTY AND DEPRIVATION IN SOUTH AFRICA
Abstract
This paper compares a standard expenditure‐based poverty measure with a specifically created composite measure of deprivation using household survey data from South Africa. While there is a strong overall correlation between expenditures and levels of deprivation, the correlation is much weaker among the worst‐off South Africans. In addition, the two measures differ considerably in the impact of race, headship, location (urban, rural), and household size on expenditure poverty versus deprivation. In general, the deprivation measure finds more Africans, rural dwellers, members of de facto female‐headed households, and members of smaller households deprived than expenditure poor. Only the differences in the effect of household size on poverty are sensitive to assumptions about equivalence scales. As a result, the two measures diverge greatly in identifying the poorest and most deprived sections of the population, which may have considerable consequences for targeting.
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
Cites
The analysis of household surveys: A microeconometric approach to development policy
Deaton, A. (1997) · doi:10.1596/0-8018-5254-4 · Cited by 4,877
Cited by
Greco, S., Ishizaka, A., Tasiou, M., & Torrisi, G. (2019) · Social Indicators Research · doi:10.1007/s11205-017-1832-9 · Cited by 1,325
“Naturally, further applications follow suit both in the literature (Klasen 2000; McGillivray 2005; Dreher 2006) and in official indicators provided by large organisations (e.g. the Internal Market Index, Science and Technology Indicator, and Business Climate Indicator, see Saisana and Tarantola…”
BackgroundWeights in Multidimensional Indices of Wellbeing: An Overview
Decancq, K., & Lugo, M. A. (2013) · Econometric Reviews · doi:10.1080/07474938.2012.690641 · Cited by 850
The Capability Approach in Practice*
Robeyns, I. (2006) · Journal of Political Philosophy · doi:10.1111/j.1467-9760.2006.00263.x · Cited by 836
Towards New Indicators of Disadvantage: Deprivation and Social Exclusion in Australia
Saunders, P., Naidoo, Y., & Griffiths, M. (2008) · Australian Journal of Social Issues · doi:10.1002/j.1839-4655.2008.tb00097.x · Cited by 296
Construction and Analysis of a Composite Quality of Life Index for a Region of South Africa
Greyling, T., & Tregenna, F. (2017) · Social Indicators Research · doi:10.1007/s11205-016-1294-5 · Cited by 93
Metadata
- Authors
- Klasen, S.
- Venue
- Review of Income and Wealth
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2000-03
- Volume
- 46
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 33-58
- ISSN
- 0034-6586 (ISSN-L)
- 1475-4991
- OpenAlex
- W2134750726
- Cited by
- 534
- References
- 1
- FWCI
- 30.75
- 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: MEASURING POVERTY AND DEPRIVATION IN SOUTH AFRICA. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1111/j.1475-4991.2000.tb00390.x
- The paper
- Klasen, S. (2000). MEASURING POVERTY AND DEPRIVATION IN SOUTH AFRICA. Review of Income and Wealth. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1475-4991.2000.tb00390.x
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.