OPHI lauds the release of the Atkinson Commission’s Report on Global Poverty Measurement and the World Bank’s response
Yesterday the World Bank launched Monitoring Global Poverty the report of the Atkinson Commission. At the same time, Chief Economist Paul Romer, together with Ana Revenga Senior Director, Poverty and Equity Global Practice , and Francisco H.G. Ferreira, Senior Advisor, Development Research Group, published their response to each recommendation. It is a very rich read which we highly recommend. How do we reliably measure the worst forms of poverty that people suffer the world over – so we can do something about it? This was the subject of this high profile, thorough, and innovative Commission set up to advise the World Bank’s Chief Economist. Masterfully led by Sir Tony Atkinson, and involving diverse commissioners, Monitoring Global Poverty set out an ambitious set of recommendations. Here are a few highlights from its 229 pages and 21 hard hitting recommendations. First, Details matter in poverty measurement, and some standard practices need changing – for example about purchasing power parity (use the 2011 rates to update $1.90 til 2030), and the total data error (report it systematically – for the first time); disaggregate by gender and age. It covered communications (report global poverty in each national currency not only US dollars) and procedure (set up a joint statistical working group and engage national statistics offices). Measure monetary poverty in different ways too – by consumption poverty and a basic-needs-based poverty line, and societal poverty including relative poverty – and include poor people’s own views on poverty. Also, poverty is more than money. Part 2 of the landmark report advised that the World Bank should report and fight other forms of poverty with the same enthusiasm as $1.90/day – six deprivations in particular – health, nutrition, work, education, living standards, and physical security – and report a global multi-dimensioned measure that identifies as poor, people who experience overlapping deprivations. Because these are poverty too. These complementary indicators should be reported for each country in a high profile way, to spur committed action. And naturally, the report suggested how to ensure better data quality and frequency, more transparency, and a more collaborative approach that engages national as well as international actors and experts. This is just a taste of the many substantive, recommendations of this document. The document does not feel like it was written by committee, because it was not. There was a ‘core’ set of Commissioners plus non-core Commissioners who gave written input at the start, and comments on a draft. But the intellectual exercise of integrating these many disparate and probably somewhat contradictory inputs, and judging what to recommend, lay with the chair, Sir Tony Atkinson. The World Bank response is welcome for its clarity. Taking each of the 21 recommendations, it spells out either an immediate plan of action, an ‘eventual’ workplan, or – in the case of four recommendations – a different view. OPHI are particularly delighted that the recommendations 18 and 19 pertaining to the integration of non-monetary poverty measures are both accepted, including a multidimensioned measure of overlapping dimensions using the AF methodology. Like many others, we will be carefully reading and digesting this work for some time to come. We invite all Oxford-based readers to come to our local Launch of the Commission Report, which will be held on 4 November from 3pm at the Oxford Martin School which is co-hosting the event with OPHI. For details and to register please kindly visit the event website.
