Economic Growth and Its Pro-Poorness in Zambia 2006-2015: To What Extent?
- 1 University of Zambia, Lusaka, Zambia
Abstract
Economic growth and its impact on economies and citizens has been widely debated by economists for some time with its key attributes including the fact that the benefits of such growth trickle down to all sections of society, especially the poor. This trickle-down hypothesis has come into question in recent times with prominent authors proposing a pro-poor measure of economic growth. Using the methodology developed by Kakwani et al. (2004) applied to the Zambia Living Conditions. Monitoring Surveys of 2006, 2010 and 2015, this paper empirically executes the measurement of the pro-poorness of economic growth in Zambia in the period 2006-2015. We find that economic growth in Zambia has not been pro-poor based on the poverty equivalent growth rate criteria. Despite positive economic growth being recorded over this period and the poverty rates declining slowly, the poor in Zambia derived pro-portionally less benefits from such growth than the non-poor. Growth has not impacted the poor in a significant way, a situation which calls for a robust assessment of the composition of the poor and their potential roles in the economic growth process to appropriately design interventions which yield dividends for this group of people in as far as poverty reduction is concerned.
- Adams, R. H. (2004). Economic Growth, Inequality and Poverty: Estimating the Growth Elasticity of Poverty. World Development, 32, 1989-2014. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.worlddev.2004.08.006
- African Union Commission (2015). Agenda 2063: The Africa We Want. Addis Ababa.
- Ansoms, A. (2010). Views from Below on the Pro-Poor Growth Challenge: The Case of Rural Rwanda. African Studies Review, 53, 97-123. https://doi.org/10.1353/arw.2010.0037
- Araar, A., & Duclos, J.-Y. (2013). User Manual DASP Version 2.3. DASP: Distributive Analysis Stata Package, Université Laval PEP, CIRPéE and World Bank.
- Araar, A., Duclos, J.-Y., Audet, M., & Makdissi, P. (2009). Testing for Pro-Poorness of Growth, with an Application to Mexico. Review of Income and Wealth, 55, 853-881. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1475-4991.2009.00357.x
- Berg, A., & Ostry, J. D. (2011). Inequality and Unsustainable Growth: Two Sides of the Same Coin? IMF Staff Discussion Note 11/08. https://doi.org/10.5089/9781463926564.006
- Central Statistical Office Zambia (2006-2019). Various Reports. Lusaka.
- Chemli, L., & Smida, M. (2013). Interaction between Poverty, Growth, and Inequality during the Crisis: A Panel Data Study. International Journal of Economics and Finance, 5, 120. https://doi.org/10.5539/ijef.v5n5p120
- Deaton, A., & Zaidi, S. (2002). Guidelines for Constructing Consumption Aggregates for Welfare Analysis. LSMS Working Paper No. 135, The World Bank.
- Dollar, D., & Kraay, A. (2002). Growth Is Good for the Poor. Journal of Economic Growth, 7, 195-225. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1020139631000
- Duclos, J.-Y. (2009). What Is “Pro-Poor”? Social Choice and Welfare, 32, 37-58.
- Duclos, J.-Y., & Araar, A. (2006). Poverty and Equity Measurement, Policy, and Estimation with DAD. Springer and IDRC. https://doi.org/10.1007/0-387-33318-5
- Foster, J. E., Greer, J., & Thorbecke, E. (1984). A Class of Decomposable Poverty Measures. Econometrica, 52, 761-776. https://doi.org/10.2307/1913475
- Government of Zambia (2002). Poverty Reduction Strategy Paper 2002-2004. Ministry of Finance and National Planning.
- Government of Zambia (2006a). A Prosperous Middle-Income Nation by 2030. Vision 2030.
- Government of Zambia (2006b). Annual Economic Reports. 2006-2015, Lusaka.