Showing 5 results for Poverty
Dr Parviz Mohamadzadeh, Dr Firouz Fallahi, Samad Hekmati Farid ,
Volume 1, Issue 2 (12-2010)
Abstract
The Poverty measurement and its determinants are the most important factors in poverty alleviation programs. In this paper, we estimate poverty line and its dimensions by using Linear Expenditure System. To that end, we use household level data from the Statistics Center of Iran during the period of 1994-2008. We examine the main determinants of poverty for urban households using a probit model. In this model, we assess the impact of key household characteristics on poverty.
The results show that the poverty likelihood decreases if the educational level of the head of the household increases. In addition, the chance of being poor declines in a household headed by a male. The age of the head of the household, the ratio of income earners in the household, and the household size are other factors that have a significant role in the probability of being poor.
Hamid Zamanzadeh, Dr Asghar Shahmoradi,
Volume 2, Issue 6 (12-2011)
Abstract
The effect of equivalence scale on poverty line has been considered as a predetermined parameter in all previous studies about the estimation of poverty lines in Iran. As household’s members can benefit from economies of scale in consumption, the cost of reaching to a given level of welfare does not increase one to one in household scale. So the effect of household scale on poverty line as a predetermined parameter creates bias. The main purpose of this study is to estimate the poverty line regarding the household scale. The utility function and the indirect household expenditures under consumption behavior approach are estimated based on income-expenditure data for 204464 Iranian urban households during2001-2007. Then poverty lines (in nominal and real units) per household scale (1to 10 members) are calculated based on indirect household expenditures.
Sepideh Yasharel, Magid Habibian Naghibi,
Volume 7, Issue 23 (3-2016)
Abstract
Targeted subsidies plan affects income distribution and poverty through several channels. On most of the analyzies, changes on labor supply are not considered. Increasing nominal income alone after paying cash subsidy rule can reduce labor supply in targeted subsidies. This issue may decrease effect of targeted subsidies. In this research by CGE we calculate the result of impact of energy price increase and direct cash subsidy transfer with considering labor supply decrease in the first phase of this plan. Then we use this CGE data to calculate the poverty index and income distribution. The model is calibrated based on 2001 Micro Consistent Matrix (MCM) designed by Research Institute of Planning and Management Deputy Strategic Planning and Control. The results of the model show that while the plan reduce supply of labor, it improve income distribution and poverty in Iran. The results also reveal that the percentage of improvement in purchasing power of rural deciles is more than the percentage of improvement in purchasing power of urban deciles.
Shahryar Zaroki, Mastaneh Yadolahi Otaghsara, Arman Yousefi Barfurushi,
Volume 11, Issue 42 (12-2020)
Abstract
The lack of social security supports and labor market laws in informal employment has strengthened the expectation that poverty in a family in which the head of the household chooses informal employment is greater than in a family in which the head of the household works in the formal sector. Hence, this study attempts to investigate the effect of informal employment with other factors affecting household’s poverty. To this aim, by using the microdata plan of costs and incomes of urban and rural households in 2018, first, the poverty line was calculated based on 66% of the average annual household expenditures by provincial division for urban and rural areas; and poor households were identified as well. Then, according to the presented index in this study, heads of households' employment types were formally and informally determined. In the primary data processing, a comparison between households with employed heads showed that the highest poverty rates were for households whose heads work in informal employment. Next, the estimation of the research model with the dependent variable limited to the basis of pseudo-panel data and random effects in logistic regression was performed in a separate format for 13248 urban households and 13115 rural households in 31 provinces. The results showed that the informal employment of the head of the households has a direct effect on the possibility of household poverty and the rate of influence in urban areas is higher than in rural areas. Furthermore, the head of the household's education, age, and gender have an indirect effect; and the square number of age and size of the household variables have a direct effect on the probability of household poverty. In such a way that the desired effect of education and age, and the undesired effect of the household dimension on the probability of household poverty in urban areas is greater than in rural areas.
Dr. Shahryar Zaroki, Dr. Mani Motameni, Mis. Niloofar Gorgani Firoozjah,
Volume 13, Issue 48 (9-2022)
Abstract
The aim of this study was to analyze the effect of commodity group expenditures on the probability of urban and rural household poverty in Iran. First, using household expenditure-income data in 1399, the poverty line was calculated based on the method of 66% of the average per capita expenditure, which is higher than urban households than rural households. In the following, the research model is limited by a dependent variable and is estimated based on pseudo-panel data in logistic regression by random effects method. The results showed that the expenditures of the communication group have the greatest impact on the probability of household poverty in urban and rural areas and the impact of this group of goods in urban areas is greater than rural areas. In contrast, hotel and restaurant costs in urban areas have a greater positive effect on reducing the likelihood of household poverty than in rural areas. But the cost of durable goods in urban areas, transportation in rural areas, and the cost of recreation and cultural affairs do not have a significant effect on the likelihood of household poverty. There is also no significant difference between the impact of furniture and household appliances, clothing and footwear and health care in urban and rural areas. Between social characteristics of the household, variables of gender and education have a negative effect on the probability of poverty and variables of household dimension and marital status have a direct effect on the probability of poverty of urban households, but these variables have no significant effect on the probability of poverty of rural households.
