พลวัตความยากจน Dynamics of poverty

  • Published on
    18-Dec-2014

  • View
    347

  • Download
    0

Embed Size (px)

DESCRIPTION

 

Transcript

  • 1. : : 200 ISBN : 978-616-202-577-8 : : 1 : 2555 : 1,000 : (.) 22 539/2 10400 (.) 14 979/17-21 10400 (.) : () 72 1 ( 42) 10310 : 0 2938-3306-8 : 0 2938-0188 : 3
  • 2. 2531 2552 : (.) RDG5320046 2555
  • 3. ... ... (.) . . . . ..
  • 4. 1. 14 16 21 2. 24 32 38 42 3. 56 57 58 79
  • 5. 4. 82 83 95 98 104 116 5.: 120 121 127 147 6.: 150 152 153
  • 6. 159 173 180 183 7. 186 187 190 193 193
  • 7. 2.1 27 2.2 30 2.3 49 2.4 49 2.5 52 2.6 53 3.1 60 3.2 () 64 3.3 () 65 2531-2552 3.4 () 67 2547-2552 3.5 68 () 2550 2552 3.6 72 () 2550 3.7 76 3.8 2550 78 (% ) 4.1 84
  • 8. 4.2 86 4.3 88 4.4 89 2531/2552 4.5 90 4.6 91 4.7 92 4.8 92 4.9 93 (mobility of landholding) (%) 4.10 94 4.11 95 4.12 97 4.13 101 4.14 2531 2552 103 4.15 105 4.16 107 4.17 109
  • 9. 4.18 111 4.19 113 4.20 115 5.1 132 (multinomial logit regression model) 5.2 136 (multinomial logit regression model) 5.3 (probit 141 regression model) 2531/2552 marginal effects 5.4 144 (change in log per capita income) 6.1 158 6.2 2531 163 2552 6.3 Correlation matrix 164 6.4 165 6.5 171
  • 10. 2.1 (sustainable livelihoods 36 approach) 2.2: Have-Do-Be Approach 38 3.1() () 57 3.2() () 59 2531-2552 3.2() () 60 2531-2552 3.3 () 2523-2549 61 ( 2 //) 3.4 62 () 2531 3.5 62 () 2552 3.6 () 62 3.7 () 63 3.8 () 66 3.9 66 () 2552 3.10 () 2550 69
  • 11. 3.11 () 69 2550 3.12 () 2539-2550 71 3.13 () 2539-2550 71 3.14 72 2550 3.15 74 2550 3.16 74 2531 2550 3.17 75 6.1 174
  • 12. 1
  • 13. 14 2520 2530 (United Nations, 2003; Warr, 1993) 2540 2540 (Kakwani et al., 2004; Jitsuchon, 2006; Krongkaew et al., 2006) (Ravillion, 2001) (cross sectional data) (poverty incidence rate) 1.1
  • 14. 15 1 (Grootaert et al., 1995) (McKay and Lawson, 2002) (panel survey data) (Deaton, 1997) (correlates) (Dercon and Shapiro, 2007) (McKay and Lawson, 2002; Hulme, 2007; Davis and Baulch, 2009) (Lawson et al., 2007)
  • 15. 16 2531 2552 240 panel (rural livelihood framework) 1.2 (static) (dynamics)
  • 16. 17 1 (dynamics) (multi-dimensions) 1.2.1 2533 3 (1) (metric dimension) (income/ expenditure approach)
  • 17. 18 (capability approach) Amartya Sen (subjective approach) (2) (temporal dimension) (static analysis) (trend analysis) (dynamics of poverty) (Yaqub, 2000) panel survey (3) (methods used) (mixed-methods approach) (quantitative) (qualitative) (Narayan and Petesch, 2007) (poverty transition) (poverty persistence)
  • 18. 19 1 panel data 2543 panel data panel (Baulch and Hoddinott, 2000; Yaqub, 2000; Lawson et al., 2006; Dercon and Shapiro, 2007; Addison et al., 2009) 1.2.2 (1) 7 2543-2551 2540 30,000 2531 100,000 2551 8,000 2531 18,600 2550 (poverty incidence rate) 40 2531 8 2550 22 5
  • 19. 20 52 88 40 9 Gini 0.4 2530 0.5 2550 (Siriprachai, 2009) (vulnerabilities) (2) panel data panel 2543 panel
  • 20. 21 1 (cross-sectional data) 1.3
  • 21. 22 (panel data) .. 2531 2552 2531 1 2552 panel 7 2 3 4 5 6 1 (IRRI) Differential Impacts of Modern Rice Technology across Production Environment in Thailand KNIT
  • 22. 2
  • 23. 24 2.1.1 1900s (subsistence level) (Booth, 1889: Rowntree, 1901) Booth (1889) Booth Rowntree (1901) Rowntree Rowntree 1970 (basic needs) 1990 (UNDP, 1991 World Bank 2000) 2.1
  • 24. 25 2 Amartya Sen 1999 .. 2542 (capabilities) (functions) (freedom) (Sen, 1993) (UNDP) 1997 2.1.2 (Yaqub, 2000) 4 (Hulme et al, 2007) (never poor) (transient poor/ sometimes poor) ( (moving out of poverty) (moving into poverty) (always poor/ Chronic poor)
  • 25. 26 (Grootaert et al, 1995; McCulloch and Baulch, 2000) (chronic poor) (transient poor) (shocks) Baulch Hoddinott (2000) 10 (panel data) McKay Lawson (2002) McCulloch Baulch (2000) 30 3 Justino Litchfield (2004) 1992 1997 60 37 32 27 5 30 Dercon Shapiro (2007) 15
  • 26. 27 2 ( 2.1) 1987-2000 31.4 43.4 25.7 17.7 25.1 58 Sen (2003) 1994-2001 11.7 30.6 18.7 11.9 57.8 72 Kabeer (2004) 1994-2006 16.0 49.0 44.0 5.0 35.0 75 Davis and Baulch (2009) 1985-1990 6.2 47.8 - - 46.0 88 Jalan and Ravillion (2000) 1991-1995 9.6 22.5 15.3 7.2 67.8 70 McCulloch and Calandrino (2002) 1970-1982 25.5 35.7 22.6 13.1 38.8 58 Bhide and Mehta (2004) 1993-1997 7.8 19.0 7.4 11.6 73.2 71 Alisjabahna and Yusuf (2003) 1986-1991 3.0 55.0 - - 42.0 94 McCulloch and Baulch (2000) 1992-1997 28.7 32.0 27.3 4.7 39.2 56 Justino and Litchfield (2004) 2.1 :
  • 27. 28 2.1.3 (1) (chronic poverty) (transient poverty) (Baulch and Hoddinott, 2000; McKay and Lawson, 2002) (economic mobility) (changing livelihoods) Baulch Hoddinott (2000) 4 (1) (2) (3) (4) (shocks) shocks Jalan Ravillion (2000) shocks McKay Lawson (2002)
  • 28. 29 2 (1) () () (2) (3) (4) (2) (move into poverty) (move out of poverty) Krishna (2006) Narayan Petesch (2007) panel data Dercon Shapiro (2007) panel data 30 shocks Sen (2003) 1987 2000 panel data
  • 29. 30 2008 3 (World Bank, 2008) ( 5 ) ( 2.2) 2.2 Scott and 1968- Ordered Litchfield 1986 logit model Probit regression model
  • 30. 31 2 Sen (2003) 1987- Descriptive 2000 analysis Panel data (life cycle) analysis (structural) ( ( Qualitative method by using semi- ) structured interviews (idiosyncratic) ( - ) ) Bhide and 1970- Probit - Mehta 1981 regression (2004) model - Krishna 1980- Stage-of- (2007) 2004 progress method (based on participatory approach) by inter- viewing households directly 2.2()
  • 31. 32 2.2 2.2.1 (sustainable livelihoods framework) (poverty profiles) 80 ( , 2551) (sustainable livelihoods framework) Kristjanson 1997- Stage-of- et al. 2005 progress (2009) method : 2.2()
  • 32. 33 2 (multi-dimensional poverty approach) (strength) 6 (people-center) (holistic) (dynamic) (building on strengths) (macro-micro links) (sustainability) 4
  • 33. 34 5 (livelihoods assets) (human capital) (natural capital) (financial capital) (physical capital) (social capital) (transforming structures and processes) 2 (structures) 2 (processes) (vulnerability context) (shocks) (trends) (seasonality)
  • 34. 35 2 (livelihoods strategies) (diversity) (dynamic) (straddling) (linkage) (livelihood outcome) (more income) (increased well-being) (reduced vulnerability) (improved food security) (sustainable use of natural resource based) 2.1 (livelihoods assets) (transforming structures and processes) (vulnerability context) (livelihoods strategies) (livelihood outcome)
  • 35. 36 2.2.2 (resource profile) : Carney, DFID (1991) 2.1 (sustainable livelihoods approach)
  • 36. 37 2 3 (1) () Have (2) (/ ) Do (3) ( ) Be Have-Do-Be approach (Have) (Do) (1) (2) (3) (Be) 2531 2553 4 (1) (Non-poor Non-poor) (2) (Non-poor Poor) (3) (Poor Non-poor) (4) (Poor Poor)
  • 37. 38 2.3 2 2531 2552 : sustainable livelihoods approach 2.2 : Have-Do-Be Approach
  • 38. 39 2 (1) (agricultural household model) (2) (income determination function) 2.3.1 (agricultural household model) (Chayanov) 2460 (Ellis, 1988) (semi-commercial rural context) (Singh et al., 1986) (Singh et al., 1986; Ellis, 1988) (2.1) U = U(Xa, Xm, Xl) (2.1) Xa Xm Xl
  • 39....