Gender and multidimensional poverty in Nicaragua: an individual based approach
Most existing multidimensional poverty measures, such as the global-MPI and the MPI-LA, use the household as the unit of analysis, which means that the multidimensional poverty condition of the household is equated with the multidimensional poverty condition of all its members; accordingly, these me...
| Autores: | , |
|---|---|
| Tipo de recurso: | artículo |
| Fecha de publicación: | 2018 |
| País: | España |
| Institución: | Universidad Nacional de Educación a Distancia |
| Repositorio: | e-spacio. Repositorio Institucional de la UNED |
| Idioma: | inglés |
| OAI Identifier: | oai:e-spacio.uned.es:20.500.14468/25360 |
| Acceso en línea: | https://hdl.handle.net/20.500.14468/25360 |
| Access Level: | acceso abierto |
| Palabra clave: | 53 Ciencias Económicas 59 Ciencia Política::5909 Administración pública::5909.01 Gestión administrativa multidimensional poverty intra-household inequality gender gaps in poverty Latin America Nicaragua |
| Sumario: | Most existing multidimensional poverty measures, such as the global-MPI and the MPI-LA, use the household as the unit of analysis, which means that the multidimensional poverty condition of the household is equated with the multidimensional poverty condition of all its members; accordingly, these measures ignore the intra-household inequalities and are gender-insensitive. Gender equality is, however, at the center of the sustainable development, as emphasized by Goal 5 of the SDGs; therefore, individual-based measures are indispensable to track progress in reaching this Goal. We contribute to the literature on multidimensional poverty and gender inequality by proposing an individual-based multidimensional poverty measure for Nicaragua and estimate the gender gaps in the three I’s of multidimensional poverty (incidence, intensity, and inequality). Overall, we find that in Nicaragua, the gender gaps in multidimensional poverty are lower than 5%, and poverty does not seem to be feminized. However, the inequality among the multidimensionally poor is clearly feminized, especially among adults, and women are living in very intense poverty when compared to men. We also find that adding a dimension (employment, domestic work, and social protection) under which women face higher deprivation into the analysis leads to larger estimates of the incidence, intensity, and inequality of women’s poverty. Finally, we find evidence that supports earlier studies that challenge the notion that female-headed households are worse off than those led by males in terms of poverty. |
|---|