Quantitative Methods

Quantitative vs. Qualitative Approach

Qualitative & Quantitative methods are used for poverty measurements under various conditions desired. Both have wider difference in their perspective and can’t result in the same analysis always. The most appropriate way is to consider importance for both approaches in order to identify & improvise poverty reduction measures.

Various aspects of both the methods have been described below:

• Both the methods are used for data collection. Household surveys on large scales are done under quantitative survey which produce qualitative data & vice versa.

• Random sample surveys are conducted & structured interviews are done under quantitative method which collects quantifiable data. Statistical methods are employed

• It gives more insight into any analysis.

• Qualitative approach gives more depth in research & information wherever required.

Global versus local approach in measuring poverty

Whether measured in a global benchmark, or a benchmark which has been tweaked according to local context, both global and local approach has their pros and cons.

Advantages of a global approach

• Provides a global scale to compare with other countries and asses the position and condition at a global level.

• Comparison with countries of similar condition, what approaches they have taken to alleviate poverty, and whether those approaches have been effective or not – thus they can be applied in similar countries and conditions.

• Access to new, out of the box ideas.

Disadvantages of a global approach

• Solution based on condition of other countries may not be suitable for a certain countries or may produce adverse results.

• Compared on a global scale, the difference in poverty or inequality may be too high, which may discourage the lower ranked countries to participate in such measurement approaches as it may portray an unfavourable image of the country in the global market.

Advantages of a local

But a major drawback of estimating poverty in terms of households occurs when comparing the needs of individuals living in households of varying size and composition. In order to do this comparison there is a need of an equivalence scale based on a set of comparable indicators of well-being. Another problem arises when the allocation of resources within the household members can vary greatly based on the intra-household decision making process, thus giving a wrong picture of the comparative needs of the individuals. This is also seen when there is a gender bias involved, and the girls or women in the household are allocated lesser resources compared to their male counterparts. Thus this is one of the major drawback of surveys done for households rather than individuals as the intra-household inequality is not taken care of, and it is falsely assumed that the resources are allocated equally amongst all the members of the household. This also has a major impact on the profiling of the poor, designing appropriate public policies and providing targeted delivery of resources to the deserving candidates. Hence it is necessary to identify the least privileged individual in the household and target them first (Duclos, 2002).

Multidimensional measures of poverty, thus conceptualize poverty along an array of deprivations