Methodology that Counts in Poverty Alleviation

I was looking for methods of finding common indicators about poverty, and found this. I LOVE this article’ methodologies. If I was independently wealthy, I would just go around the US and do these for folks. But first I’d need some more statistics training and some GIS skills.

Developing a Regional Poverty Profile 

Poverty is relative to localities. We can tell when people are starving in other countries, but in America, poverty is hidden and part of perception. It is hard to measure something in peoples perceptions.  If we can’t measure this real poverty, how do we know our programs are going to be useful by those who they are intended for?

Here is an example of how to use this regional poverty profile in poverty alleviation. In their example study, they showed that being poor, not-so-poor, and not poor mean slightly different things in the three communities. In one places, not being poor was strongly statistically associated with being involved in a trade. They showed 83% of non-poor households were professionals or traders, whereas in the other comparative areas, only %52-53% of the not-poor were professionals or traders. In the other contrasting area, owning land and property was much more prominent means of acquiring “well-being.”  We would be able to see what the people who live in poverty think would work to make their lives better, not use the top-down method of the school, or IWD telling folks how get a “good job,” what that job is, and how to improve their lives.

“Different ethnic groups may have different value systems that, among other things, could influence their perceptions of well-being and poverty.” By building on their existing perceptions we can be sure to have programs that work for the people they are intended for.

Using their quantified knowledge WITH real measures of  industry/sector or work, hours, wage, property ownership, plus access to affordable food and public transportation we could see if something like having a bank account or a car is really a measurable asset to the relief of poverty. We could also know what types of employment would actually benefit folks – not make assumptions that all jobs are good for all populations. “Jobs” are good on the aggregate, but it isn’t “a rising tide floats all boats” for folks in poverty. This can help find the right river for them to put the boat into.

 I think this is especially great on a neighborhood level, both in the flatlands of DBQ and all the way out to Dyersville/Ashbury. How do they define well-being differently than the flatlands? What would benefit their economic success differently, and how do you quantify it? I just love this paper! I hope the ISU people can use it as a base and build policy ideas around it.

This method could also be used to include data that it leaves out, like the source of income for people in poverty, how they spend their money, or measuring the economic inequality of an area -which is a little controversial because Americans don’t really want to know this and feel bad about them doing well.