How to Assess Urban Poverty

Income (or consumption) is the most frequently used proxy for poverty. Money-based poverty definitions and assessments provide a standard scale so that different population groups can be compared. For comparisons across very different types of settlements (such as between rural and urban areas), it is important that quantitative measures take adequate account of major differences in the minimum essential "consumption basket" and the differential prices faced for goods and services. Social indicators, such as life expectancy and infant mortality, are also important. Definitions and benchmarks should allow the living conditions of different population groups to be compared with others.

Poverty diagnostics and monitoring of results require appropriate indicators. The Indicators of Urban Poverty suggests a menu of indicators that can be used to assess and monitor both "visible causes" and "policy-related causes" of the various dimensions of poverty. Selecting indicators is an important basic task in strategy formulation. The chosen indicators can then be used to assess the depth of problems over time and in relation to external benchmarks. Indicators need to be developed to facilitate stakeholder participation; indeed, the selection of indicators can be an essential focus of participation. The indicators thus validated can then be used for increasing the accountability of the public and private sectors to poor people.

Disaggregating the Data

Assessing urban poverty nationwide is necessary to ascertain the overall level of poverty as well as to understand differences in poverty trends within regions and within urban areas. Identifying such locational variations would help to target interventions to cities or regions with the greatest levels of deprivation.

For assessing urban (and rural) poverty, and especially to identify policy interventions, it is desirable to have indicators collected at the lowest practical level of aggregation. The indicators that derive from household survey data (such as data on expenditures and access to services) are often produced as averages for all urban areas of a country. However, this degree of aggregation often masks important differences among types of urban areas (e.g., small or newly growing cities compared with large and well-established cities).

Constructing Poverty Profiles

 

Local authorities need to assess the causes, characteristics, and location of poverty within their city in order to design poverty strategies and to make appropriate regulatory changes. A city poverty assessment is a tool for acquiring up-to-date information on a city's poverty and social development. Constructing a poverty profile at the city level will provide a snapshot showing who is poor, where they live in the city, their access to services, their living standards, and so forth, thereby contributing to the targeting of poverty measures.

In addition to a snapshot of poverty, it is important to see how city living conditions change. This will give feedback on whether the city is moving in the right direction. For example, even if poverty in the city is low relative to other areas, an increase in poverty over time will alert policymakers and enable them to take preventative actions. Changes over time can also provide insights into the factors that help people grow out of poverty or fall into it. Measuring changes over time requires consistent definitions and measurement of poverty indicators. For further details, see the web page on monitoring and evaluation.

Participatory Approaches; Techniques & Qualitative assessments

Experience has proven that participation of stakeholders in project preparation and implementation, including data collection and formulating indicators, helps to improve project impacts, enhance accountability and lessen corruption. Soliciting participation from beneficiaries in assessing poverty help to understand the poverty and thus promote sustainability of poverty alleviation programs. Participatory Poverty Assessments (PPAs) have been used to provide clearer insight into the perception of the poor on the key issues related to poverty reduction. They are contributing to a greater understanding of the processes by which people fall into and get out of poverty, the complex coping and survival strategies adopted by the poor, and the major priorities and solutions found by the poor, all within regional and local contexts. By combining PPA with the quantitative analyses (household surveys, etc), the final poverty assessment is able to more fully analyze the various dimensions of poverty and make more informed and appropriate policy recommendations.

What is a Participatory Poverty Assessment (PPA)?

A participatory poverty assessment is typically one of many inputs into a poverty assessment. Unlike household surveys, which collect statistical data on the extent of poverty through standardized methods and rules, PPAs focus on processes and explanations of poverty as defined by individuals and communities. PPAs are sometimes referred to as qualitative surveys.

What are the Policy Issues

the different dimensions of poverty and their causal factors underscore the need for policy and institutional reforms at the national as well as the city level, in order to achieve sustainable and replicable improvements in the conditions facing the poor. As shown in the Understanding Different Dimensions of Poverty matrix, policy actions need to be structured to enhance the poor assets to decrease their vulnerability and capacity to manage their assets.

Policy and institutional reform include:

Land, housing and urban services. The vulnerability of the urban poor is exacerbated by the inadequate provision of basic public services, as well as by policy and regulatory frameworks that govern land and housing supply and property rights. Policy reforms are required in the areas of: tenure security, property rights and land development regulations, housing finance, service provision.  more

Financial markets.  Lack of access to credit increases the vulnerability of the urban poor by constraining their ability to improve their homes, their work, and to start new businesses. Credit underwriting is a major problem since the poor do not have property to use as collateral and often lack regular incomes. Supporting micro-finance programs and provision of tenure security to support underwriting are possible policy actions at local levels.   more

Labor markets and employment.  Employment opportunities for the urban poor are affected by diverse factors including macroeconomic conditions, regulatory constraints on small businesses, lack of access to job market opportunities, infrastructure, education and training, and bad health. A range of issues concerning labor market regulations and legislation, e.g., employment protection rules such as minimum wage, hiring and firing regulations, etc., can also have counterproductive effects on the poor by increasing labor costs and thus constraining job opportunities.  more

Social protection and social services (health, nutrition, education and security). Social insurance benefits include unemployment insurance and assistance and pensions. Safety nets/social assistance interventions include various cash and in-kind transfers programs such as child feeding, vouchers for schooling and housing, etc., that supplement income.  more

Environment.  Environmental problems exacerbate urban poverty. Poor cities and poor neighborhoods suffer disproportionately from inadequate water and sanitation facilities and indoor air pollution. Poor people are often forced to live in environmentally unsafe areas, steep hillsides and flood plains or polluted sites near solid waste dumps, open drains and sewers, and polluting industries

How to Make Poverty Alleviation Strategies Participatory Planning Techniques and Strategies City stakeholders, whether in industrial, transition, or developing countries, should take proactive roles in defining a shared vision of their city's future and improving residents' quality of life, particularly for the urban poor. A city development strategy (CDS) is a process devised and owned by local stakeholders to formulate a holistic vision for their city. The process involves analysis of the city's prospects for economic and social development, identification of priorities for investment and development assistance, and implementation through partnership-based actions. To learn more about city experiences with city development strategies, see City Development Strategies of the Cities Alliance. Strategic planning" (or action planning) method is one way cities can proceed in the development of poverty reduction strategies. It should be noted that strategic planning is not an attempt to blueprint the future. Strategic planning looks at the chain of cause-and-effect consequences over time of an actual or intended decision. Nor is it a set of wishful thoughts; it should relate the actions to resources available or that can be mobilized realistically. Finally, like a national poverty reduction strategy, it should not involve the preparation of massive, detailed and interrelated sets of plans. It concentrates on a few issues on which there is consensus regarding priority. What are the Steps of the Strategic Planning Process? Identification of the problem(s), its causes and consequences, and relations to other problems. For example, this can involve designing a problem tree with stakeholders to identify multiple problems and how they are linked. Problem identification requires collection and analysis of data. Information gathering (i.e., encompassing factual and quantitative data as well as observations/qualitative analysis) for a rapid assessment of the poverty situation and an overview of policies and programs addressing poverty are best initiated before problem analyses with the stakeholders. Formulating objectives, which should be specific, measurable, realistic, and time bound. It may be necessary to return to step one and reanalyze the problem. The objectives have to be appraised against the constraints and opportunities that would work against and in favor of achieving objectives. This analysis (which is also called as SWOT, i.e., analyzing Strengths, Weaknesses, Opportunities, and Threats) is the basis for determining options for actions. Again it may be necessary to go back to the problem and analyze further the causes (visible and policy-related causes). Developing strategies and formulating options for influencing the key forces. Coordination and integration to avoid overlaps and waste of resources is necessary. The chosen options should be compatible. Consensus building is needed to (i) define shared goals, priorities, and strategies over a medium-term horizon; and (ii) mobilize resources. A broad range of stakeholders should be represented, including regional authorities and local representatives of central governments (as they can play important roles in creating conducive conditions and providing support for city strategies), citizens, civil associations, and private sector. Flow of clear, correct, and complete information among the stakeholders should be a part of the strategy from the beginning. City consultations are a primary means of reaching consensus among the stakeholders.  Back to top Principles of Supporting a Sustainable and Effective Participation in Project Preparation and Implementation Facilitate community access to information -- transparency. The lack of information is often the most significant limitation on CBOs capacity to play a part in the development venture. Community organizations need information on market opportunities, on what support resources are available and how to use these resources productively and efficiently. A variety of media may be used to facilitate access to and stimulate flows of information. Information technology and the internet, adapted to community needs, are playing a growing role in this process and can dramatically accelerate local learning and connections with a wide range of opportunities (see CDD web-site). Communities should also be informed about local plans, costs and alternative costs. Be accountable. Policy actions for good urban governance include accountability and responsiveness to the public, anticorruption policies and practices, and capacity building. Local as well as central authorities should be accountable to the general public. Authorities must consult with the general public about their needs, requirements, preferences, and satisfaction with services. The city of Seoul, South Korea, for example, operates "citizen complaint centers" every Saturday when the mayor and other top administrative staff make themselves available for a "day of dialog with the citizens." This can help governments prioritize public expenditures. Invest in capacity building of community-based organizations (CBOs) and municipalities. Capacity building of CBOs and strengthening their linkages with formal institutions is a critical area of investment. Experience and studies have shown that those CBOs with clear lines of responsibility, open decision making processes, and direct accountability to the community improve service provision, make more effective use of resources, and are more sustainable. CBOs need to have managerial and technical skills to undertake tasks. Training and capacity building through learning by doing should thus be an important component of Community Driven Development programs. Where appropriate, capacity building should build on existing community strengths, including local organizations, traditional knowledge, and culture-based skills so that existing capacity is strengthened rather than undermined. Because community-based organizations rely on volunteer efforts, which can dissipate at critical stages or can lack continuity, an important component of any capacity building activity is to institutionalize the leadership function in CBOs (see CDD web site). It should also be indicated that municipalities have relatively little experience with participatory planning. Ensure social and gender inclusion. Community driven development and participatory planning have the potential to increase the power of poor communities to negotiate with public authorities, the private sector, and civil society. But to fulfill this potential, participatory planning (or community driven development) needs to be responsive to the priorities of all poor groups. Urban poor particularly is not a homogeneous group. Thus, planning at the local level needs to be designed to be socially inclusive, giving voice and decision making responsibility to women, the elderly, youth, and minorities. The urban poor are not given rights and responsibilities that go with being citizens. They are often assumed to be passive consumers rather than active participants with something to contribute. Even being asked to express needs and demands, without accepting responsibilities that go with being citizens, does not really empower people. In various countries, slum residents express their needs for infrastructure and urban services in particular, and they may get what they want in return for their votes. Such populist policies, however, often do not require them to pay the costs of such services or land that they occupy even at a subsidized level. Public authorities in such cases retain the political advantage of being the sole decision makers in allocating resources.