Contents
Executive summary 1
Introduction 1
Aims and objectives 1
Background to study 2
Methodology 2
Presentation of results 2
Analysis and discussion of results 2
Conclusion 4
Bibliography 4
Appendix 1 4
Executive summary
The purpose of this report is to conduct poverty indicator research so as to solve the problem how to solve the measure the poverty and development. In order to achieve this, this report select 10 countries from Asia, Europe, Africa, North America, and Latin America as the subjective to conduct simple data analysis and rank analysis to justify whether is consistent with actual situation. Firstly, it is to determine the 5 relevant indicators which prefer to justify the poverty, covering urban population, life expectancy, population growth, PC expenditure on health, improved water; Secondly, through reviewing literature, it tries to find data about those 5 indicators from UNDP to fill in the corresponding blank; Thirdly, it is to conduct ranking for each indicator; Finally, it is to make relevant analysis to justify whether to keep consistent with actual situation. The results of this report are shown in appendix1.
Introduction
This body of this report mainly contain aims and objectives, background, methodology, result presentation, discussion. For aims and objectives part, it is to conduct 7 questions:Question1, Question2, Question3, Question4, Question5, Question6, Question7. In the background part, it argues why to conduct research for this report; In the methodology part, it is to discuss how to conduct research for this report; In result presentation part, it is to show the results in table(appendix 1). In discussion part, it pay more attention to analyze to answer the research questions.
Aims and objectives
The aims of this report is to explore poverty indicator to measure the poverty and development. In order to achieve aims, the objectives are shown with following Questions as follows:
Question 1: What is the definition of poverty indicator?
Question 2: How do we select poverty indicator?
Question 3: Does it have a great difference between the final ranking and intuitive ranking for 10 countries selected in this report?
Question 4: Can we take GDP as a kind of excellent indicator? Whether the rank of GDP is consistent with final ranking for 10 countries selected in this report?
Question 5: Have the results of 10 countries in this report been in accordance with actual situation?
Question 6: Can you find what anormal points from the data in appendix 1 and how can we well interpret?
Question 7: Are the poverty indicators selected reasonable in this report?
Background to study
Anderson(1991)explored poverty tended to be a kind of social phenomenon and were paid more attention to by government of each counties as well as international organizations just like UNDP, WB and so on. However, how to make poverty standard and measure poverty and development requires to further explore. And poverty indicator can be generally considered as a kind of effective measurement way to justify poverty in spite of some limitation of each different indicator(Adams, 1993). For example, the indicator GNP is a kind of average value which does not reflect regional poverty. In order to make the indicator to be more scientific, some scholars put forward that the design of indicator should be considered from multi- dimension(Maxwell, 1999). For example, a kind of indicator classification is from 4 perspectives: economy indicator, statistical indicator, social indicator and environmental indicator.
Methodology
We select 5 indicators urban population, life expectancy, population growth, PC expenditure on health, improved water. Why to select those 5 indicators in this report? It is according to the standard mentioned in background part. PC expenditure on health stands for economy indicator; urban population and population growth stands for statistical indicator; life expectancy stands for social indicator; improved water stands for environmental indicator. Based on those indicator, it is to find some relevant data from the authority UNDP. Why to select UNDP as the data source? Because UNDP is a kind of international organization with higher position in poverty and poverty indicator research. And the data reliability is relatively higher compared with other data sources. So, it is wise to select UNDP for this report. Finally, it ranks each indicator for 10 countries and it is to put ranking of each indicator for 10 countries to be with average value as the final result. Why to adopt the average value of ranking of each indicator? It tends to be more reasonable.
Presentation of Results
To see appendix 1
Analysis and Discussion of Results
Form the final result to see, it does not have a great difference between the final ranking and intuitive ranking for 10 countries selected in this report except China due to some personal emotion. The rank of GDP is great consistent with final ranking for 10 countries selected. So, GDP can be a good indicator to measure poverty in some extent. The results of 10 countries in this report have been in accordance with actual situation. In addition, some abnormal points exist. For example, for China, the population growth indicator has been obviously better than other 4 indicators. Because, it has been with more than 1.3 billion people and too many people will bring serious pressure for China. And the government has greatly advocated family planning policy so as to reduce the pressure which much population brings.
From the indicator urban population to see, Latin America countries Brazil and Chile have been with highest value with highest rank. Norther America countries just like America has ranked 4 place with value of 80.8. European countries just like Sweden has ranked 2 place with value of 84.2. Asian countries just like Japan, Malaysia, China, Bangladesh has separately ranked 7, 6, 8, 10 with value of 65.8, 67.3, 40.4 and 25.1. Africa countries just like Tunisia and Zimbabwe have ranked 5, 9 with the value of 74.3, 35.9. It is not hard to see that Latin America Countries, European countries have high urban population. For Asian countries, China has been with weakest performance. For Africa countries, Tunisia presents well and Zimbabwe has been with weakest level.
From the indicator life expectancy to see, Japan, Sweden, Chile have been with highest value with highest rank. Latin America countries Chile has ranked 3 place with value of 78.3. Norther America countries just like America has ranked 4 place with value of 77.9. European countries just like Sweden has ranked 2 place with value of 80.5. Asian countries just like Japan, Malaysia, China, Bangladesh has separately ranked 1, 5, 7, 9 with value of 82.3, 73.7, 72.5 and 63.1. Africa countries just like Tunisia and Zimbabwe have ranked 6, 10 with the value of 73.5, 40.9. It is not hard to see that Latin America Countries have high life expectancy. European countries also have high life expectancy. For Asian countries,Japan has been with best performance. For Africa countries, Tunisia presents normal level and Zimbabwe has been with weakest level.
From the indicator population growth to see, Sweden, Japan, USA, China have been with lowest value separately of 0.3,0.5,1,1.4 with highest rank. Latin America countries Brazil and Chile has ranked 5 and 6 place with value of 1.5 and 1.8. Norther America countries just like America has ranked 3 place with value of 1. European countries just like Sweden has ranked 1 place with value of 0.3. Asian countries just like Japan, Malaysia, China, Bangladesh has separately ranked 2, 9, 4, 8 with value of 0.5, 2.5, 1.2 and 2.2. Africa countries just like Tunisia and Zimbabwe have ranked 7, 9 with the value of 1.5, 2.5. It is not hard to see that North America and European Countries have low population growth. For Asian countries,Japan has been with best performance. For Africa countries, Tunisia presents normal level and Zimbabwe has been with weakest level.
From the indicator PC expenditure on health to see, USA, Sweden, Japan have been with highest value with highest rank. Latin America countries Brazil and Chile has ranked 4 and 5 place with value of 1520 and 720. Norther America countries just like America has ranked 1 place with value of 6096. European countries just like Sweden has ranked 2 place with value of 2828. Asian countries just like Japan, Malaysia, China, Bangladesh has separately ranked 3, 7, 8, 10 with value of 2293, 402, 277 and 64. Africa countries just like Tunisia and Zimbabwe have ranked 6, 9 with the value of 502, 139. It is not hard to see that North America and European Countries have low high PC expenditure on health. For Asian countries,Japan has been with best performance. For Africa countries, Tunisia presents normal level and Zimbabwe has been with weakest level.
From the indicator improved water to see, Sweden, Japan, USA,have been with highest value with highest rank. From whole to survey, the all value tends to be excellent except Tunisia.
Conclusion
In conclusion, the results of data analysis have kept consistent with the actual situation. The European countries just like Sweden, North American countries just like USA, Asian countries just like Japan have been with fast development and excellent life level. Some Asian countries just like China, Bangladesh have been with normal development level with poverty in some extent. Some Africa countries has been with low development and bad life level with serious poverty.
Bibliography
Anderson, V. (1991). Alternative Economic Indicator'. Routledge, London.
Adams, N.A. (1993). Worlds Apart. Zed Books, London.
Maxwell, S.(1999). The Meaning and Measurement of Poverty. Overseas Development Institute. UK.
Untied Nations Human Development Report. (2006). Human Development Index and Its Components. Available from<http://hdr.undp.org/en/data>