Analisis de La Capacidad de Proceso

Argentina
50 25 60
45 55
40 20
50
35
45
30 15
25 40
20 10 35
15
30
10 5
25
5
0 0 20
2004 2006 2008 2010 2012 2014 2016 2004 2006 2008 2010 2012 2014 2016
Poverty International Poverty Line Lower Middle IC Line GDP per capita
rate (Thousand)
(%) Upper Middle IC Line National Poverty Line
GDP per capita (US$2011 PPP)
Upper Middle Income Class Poverty

KEY INDICATORS (distribution among groups) Line (%)
Relative Group (%)
Year
Poor Non-Poor Bottom 40 Top 60
Urban population 8 92 40 60 2016

Rural population N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
Males 8 92 40 60 2016
Females 8 92 40 60 2016
0 to 14 years old 14 86 62 38 2016
15 to 64 years old 7 93 38 62 2016
65 and older 1 99 10 90 2016
Without education (age 16 and older) 9 91 48 52 2016
Primary education (age 16 and older) 10 90 44 56 2016
Secondary education (age 16 and older) 7 93 40 60 2016
Tertiary/post-secondary education (age 16 and older) 2 98 15 85 2016
World Bank poverty estimates rely on a harmonized version of the urban-only household survey data from the Encuesta Permanente de Hogares-
Continua (EPHC). All monetary measures, including poverty rates, are adjusted to US dollars in 2011 PPP using private estimates of inflation from 2007
to 2015 and official sources afterward. Poverty is reported using international poverty lines. In addition, the harmonization process results in an income
aggregate that undergoes specific imputations to make it comparable across countries. This process makes it different from the official income
aggregate. Other methodological differences include the value of the poverty lines in LCU, and the fact that the official methodology is based on adult
equivalent, which adjusts by differing caloric needs per gender and age composition of household members, while World Bank estimates are based on a
per capita approach. Therefore, estimates based on harmonized data are not strictly comparable to official poverty rates, and might follow different
trends and levels. While the international poverty line methodology should be used for cross-country comparisons, national official methodology is used
for country-specific analyses. The harmonized microdata for Argentina are part of the SEDLAC project (CEDLAS and World Bank), whereas official
microdata are available through Argentina’s National Statistical Office (INDEC).
The numbers presented in the brief are based on the regional data harmonization effort known as the Socio-economic Database for Latin America and
the Caribbean (SEDLAC) - a joint effort of the World Bank and CEDLAS from the National University of La Plata (Argentina). SEDLAC includes 18
countries and more than 300 household surveys since the 80s. Several Caribbean countries have not been included in the SEDLAC project due to lack of
data. Since an income-based welfare aggregate is widely used in the region for official poverty estimates, income-based microdata is used for the Global
Monitoring Database (GMD) and Global Poverty Monitoring. SEDLAC covers demographics, income, employment, and education. Terms of use of the
data adhere to agreements with the original data producers.
Bolivia
70 8 65
7 60
60
55
6
50
50
5
40 45
4
40
30
3
35
20
2 30
10 1 25
0 0 20
2005 2007 2009 2011 2013 2015 2005 2007 2009 2011 2013 2015
rate (Thousand)
KEY INDICATORS (distribution among groups) International Poverty Line (%) Relative Group (%)
Year

Rural population 19 81 65 35 2016
Males 7 93 41 59 2016
Females 7 93 39 61 2016
0 to 14 years old 11 89 51 49 2016
15 to 64 years old 6 94 35 65 2016
65 and older 2 98 40 60 2016
Official poverty estimates in Bolivia are produced by the Ministerio de Planificación del Desarrollo, Unidad de Análisis de Políticas Sociales y Económicas
(UDAPE), and the National Statistics Office (INE) based on data from the Encuesta de Hogares (EH) and are available to the public. Bolivia estimates
poverty using an income-based measure that relies on an absolute poverty line representing the minimum cost of purchasing a basket of goods and
services necessary to achieve adequate living conditions. The most recent monetary poverty numbers in Bolivia correspond to 2016, and the official
national poverty rate was 39.5 percent. The poverty line in local currency units in 2016 was 800.6 bolivianos for urban areas and 559 bolivianos for rural
areas.
The international dollar a day methodology is based on the $1.90 (2011 PPP), using income per capita as the welfare aggregate measure. However, by
this definition, most Latin American countries have low extreme poverty rates. For this reason, higher poverty lines that are more coherent with the
region’s reality are used: $3.20 and $5.50 (2011 PPP). In Bolivia, using the $1.90 poverty line shows a non-negligible poverty level of 7.6 percent for
2016, among the highest in South America. Both the national and international poverty measures have a similar downward trend, only diverging in
magnitude due to different values in the local currency unit.
Brazil
45 18 65
40 16 60
35 14 55
30 12 50
25 10 45
20 8 40
15 6 35
10 4 30
5 2 25
0 0 20
2001 2003 2005 2007 2009 2011 2013 2015 2001 2003 2005 2007 2009 2011 2013 2015
rate (Thousand)
Year

Males 3 97 40 60 2015
Females 3 97 40 60 2015
0 to 14 years old 7 93 62 38 2015
15 to 64 years old 3 97 37 63 2015
65 and older 0 100 16 84 2015
To make meaningful international comparisons, poverty is calculated using the same methodology across countries, that is, the same consumption
aggregate and poverty line. For this purpose, the World Bank publishes poverty rates calculated using three poverty lines: $1.90, $3.20, and $5.50 per
person per day, in 2011 PPP terms. For Brazil, we report only the latter. National poverty rates are estimated using the unofficial poverty lines of R$70
and R$140 per capita per month (in June 2011 prices), based on the thresholds used to determine eligibility in the Brasil Sem Miséria Plan and the Bolsa
Família Program.
The household survey traditionally used to calculate poverty, the PNAD, was completely replaced in 2016 by the PNAD-C. The PNAD-C has a larger
sample and has richer information on employment. However, at this moment, the two series cannot be fully compared. Thus, any detailed analysis of
the determinants of the poverty and inequality dynamics cannot be undertaken.
Chile
35 25 55
30 50
20
25 45
15 40
20
15 35
10
10 30
5
5 25
0 0 20
2000 2002 2004 2006 2008 2010 2012 2014 2000 2002 2004 2006 2008 2010 2012 2014
rate (Thousand)
Year

Males 1 99 41 59 2015
Females 1 99 39 61 2015
0 to 14 years old 1 99 55 45 2015
15 to 64 years old 1 99 38 62 2015
65 and older 0 100 24 76 2015
Despite Chile's recent economic slowdown, strong economic growth in the past two decades enabled it to reduce poverty and become one of the
countries in the region with the lowest poverty rates. Using the international poverty line, which captures those living on less than 2011 PPP $1.90 per
day, poverty stands at around 1.3 percent. Using the poverty line of $5.50 per day, poverty fell between 2006 and 2015 from 22.8 percent to 10.1
percent. Poverty reduction has been primarily driven by income growth, particularly growth in labor incomes, and to a lesser extent by changes in the
distribution of income. Income growth also shifted Chile’s income distribution to the right, making the middle class the largest socioeconomic group,
though most of it is close to the vulnerable population limit. Chile has also made considerable progress on shared prosperity. Between 2009 and 2015,
incomes among the bottom 40 percent rose at an annualized rate of 5.9 percent, more rapid than the general population (5.5 percent). The higher
growth rates in incomes among the bottom 40 are due mostly to an increase in labor earnings and public transfers. Hourly wages increased more in the
past two decades among the bottom 40 than the overall population across all sectors. Moreover, Chile is at the forefront of social protection policy and
has consolidated since the early 2000s an array of cash subsidies, and ensured inclusion of isolated and disconnected households. Although Chile
progressed in inequality reduction, it remains high. Chile’s Gini index dropped from 0.51 in 2006 to 0.49 in 2015. Similarly, the income of the richest 10
percent of Chileans is 27 times greater than the income of the poorest 10 percent, which constitutes the greatest difference among OECD countries.
Colombia
70 14 60
55
60 12
50
50 10
45
40 8
40
30 6
35
20 4 30
10 2 25
0 0 20
2001 2003 2005 2007 2009 2011 2013 2015 2001 2003 2005 2007 2009 2011 2013 2015
rate (Thousand)

Relative Group (%)
Year

Males 29 71 41 59 2016
Females 28 72 39 61 2016
0 to 14 years old 42 58 56 44 2016
15 to 64 years old 24 76 35 65 2016
65 and older 21 79 30 70 2016
The main difference between the SEDLAC and the official welfare aggregate is that SEDLAC does not include domestic servants as members of the
household. The computation of the official extreme poverty line includes 39 food products for urban areas and 42 for rural areas, while the
consumption aggregate is adjusted by spatial differences. The National Income and Expenditures Survey (ENIG) conducted in 2006–2007 was used to
draw the official extreme poverty line, which reflects a minimum threshold of 2090 Kcal per person per day in urban areas and 2,049 Kcal per person
per day in rural areas. The moderate poverty line uses an exogenous Orshansky coefficient of 2.4 (LAC Orshansky coefficient mean) and 1.74 for urban
and rural areas, respectively. Poverty lines are updated across time using a CPI for low-income households by department. The official extreme and
moderate poverty lines in 2011 PPP are $2.50 and $5.40, respectively. Official poverty based on income has been reported since 2002 except for 2006
and 2007 transition years for moving between the two surveys used to compute income (the former Encuesta Continua de Hogares and the Gran
Encuesta Integrada de Hogares, used since 2008).
Costa Rica
35 18 55
16 50
30
14
25 45
12
20 40
10
15 8 35
6
10 30
4
5 25
2
0 0 20
2001 2003 2005 2007 2009 2011 2013 2015 2001 2003 2005 2007 2009 2011 2013 2015
rate (Thousand)

Relative Group (%)
Year

Males 11 89 40 60 2016
Females 11 89 40 60 2016
0 to 14 years old 19 81 59 41 2016
15 to 64 years old 9 91 36 64 2016
65 and older 5 95 27 73 2016
Official poverty estimates in Costa Rica are produced by the Instituto Nacional de Estadísticas y Censos (INEC) based on data from the Encuesta
Nacional de Hogares (ENAHO), which are available to the public. Costa Rica estimates poverty based on the Cost of Basic Needs method by determining
an absolute extreme and an overall poverty line per person per month. Poverty lines refer to the lack of per capita income required to access a basket of
goods and services needed to achieve adequate living conditions. The most recent monetary poverty numbers (percentage of households) in Costa Rica
correspond to 2017, and the extreme and overall official poverty rates at the national level were 5.7 and 20.0 percent, respectively. The latest
harmonized poverty numbers for 2016 are available at the LAC Equity Lab.
There are many differences between INEC’s official poverty numbers and the harmonized international poverty measures. INEC’s official methodology
uses current income per adult equivalent, which includes labor income, public and private transfers, and capital rents. The value of official poverty lines
is divided into urban and rural areas. Harmonized international poverty measures, on the other hand, use net income per household member, which
includes the value for housing and self-consumption, and are spatially adjusted at the urban/rural level (not included in official estimates).
Dominican Republic
60 16 55
14 50
50
12 45
40
10
40
30 8
35
6
20
30
4
10 25
2
0 0 20
2000 2002 2004 2006 2008 2010 2012 2014 2016 2000 2002 2004 2006 2008 2010 2012 2014 2016
rate (Thousand)

Relative Group (%)
Year

Males 22 78 42 58 2016
Females 20 80 38 62 2016
0 to 14 years old 32 68 55 45 2016
15 to 64 years old 17 83 35 65 2016
65 and older 15 85 34 66 2016
Official poverty estimates in the Dominican Republic are produced jointly by the Ministerio de Economía, Planificación y Desarrollo (MEPyD) and the
Oficina Nacional de Estadística (ONE) based on data from the Encuesta Nacional de Fuerza de Trabajo (ENFT), collected biannually (April and October)
by the Banco Central de la República Dominicana and available upon written request. This survey was replaced in 2017 by the 'Continua (ENCFT)' with
year-round data collection. The poverty measurement methodology was discussed and approved by a Technical Poverty Committee in 2012 with
participation of high levels of government and the international community. Monetary poverty in the Dominican Republic is based on a per-capita
income-based measure using two different poverty lines in local currency units for urban and rural areas.
The numbers presented in this brief are based on a regional data harmonization effort known as Database for Latin America and the Caribbean
(SEDLAC), a joint effort of the World Bank and CEDLAS at the National University of La Plata (Argentina). Although it is based on official household
datasets, the SEDLAC methodology is intended to increase cross-country comparable statistics rather than collect or replicate official socioeconomic
indicators. The international poverty lines (USD 1.9, 3.2, and 5.5 a day, expressed in 2011 PPP) allow comparability across countries but differ from the
official poverty lines.
Despite differences in poverty levels resulting from the use of official or international poverty lines (USD 5.5 a day), the trends in poverty rates are very
Ecuador
80 12 60
70 55
10
60 50
8
50 45
40 6 40
30 35
4
20 30
2
10 25
0 0 20
2007 2009 2011 2013 2015 2007 2009 2011 2013 2015
rate (Thousand)

Relative Group (%)
Year

Males 24 76 40 60 2016
Females 23 77 39 61 2016
0 to 14 years old 33 67 52 48 2016
15 to 64 years old 20 80 36 64 2016
65 and older 16 84 27 73 2016
The main differences between the SEDLAC and the official welfare aggregate are: (1) SEDLAC does not include contributions to social security and taxes
for salaried workers; )2) SEDLAC includes other public transfers like Bono Emanuel Espejo, while the official aggregate includes only the Bono de
Desarrollo Humano; (3) SEDLAC includes imputed rent using hedonic model using the QR approach; (4) SEDLAC is adjusted by differences in urban/rural
prices, while the official aggregate does not correct by spatial differences; and (5) SEDLAC does not include domestic workers as members of the
household. Regarding the poverty line, the official methodology draws these thresholds from the consumption aggregate adjusted by spatial
differences. The fifth round of the Quality of Life Survey (ECV) conducted in 2006 was used to draw both the official extreme poverty line, which reflects
a minimum threshold of 2.144 Kcal per person per day, and the official moderate poverty line which uses an Engel coefficient of 56 percent. The poverty
lines are updated across time using the total CPI. Both official extreme and moderate poverty lines are equivalent to $2.50 and $4.40 per day 2011 PPP.
Official poverty numbers based on income are reported since 2007 because of consistency on both questionnaires of ENEMDU and the methodology of
poverty measurement. Official poverty numbers based on consumption are also available from 1998, but these are reported every eight years.
El Salvador
50 9 55
45 8 50
40 7
35 45
6
30 40
5
25
4 35
20
3
15 30
10 2
25
5 1
0 0 20
2007 2009 2011 2013 2015 2007 2009 2011 2013 2015
rate (Thousand)

Relative Group (%)
Year

Males 30 70 40 60 2016
Females 31 69 40 60 2016
0 to 14 years old 42 58 53 47 2016
15 to 64 years old 27 73 36 64 2016
65 and older 23 77 31 69 2016
Official poverty estimates in El Salvador are produced by the General Directorate of Statistics and Census based on data from the Household Survey of
Multiple Purposes. El Salvador uses an income-based monetary measure of poverty. This household measure includes household labor and non-labor
income. The national poverty lines reflect the costs of a minimum level of calories (extreme poverty line) and the cost of obtaining both food and other
basic necessities (overall poverty line).
The country estimates poverty based on the Cost of Basic Needs method by determining an absolute extreme poverty line (equivalent to the cost of the
basic basket) and an overall poverty line (equivalent to double the cost of the basic basket). This poverty line refers to the lack of household income
required to access a basket of goods and services needed to achieve adequate living conditions. The most recent monetary poverty numbers in El
Salvador correspond to 2016, and the extreme and overall official poverty rates at the national level were eight and 33 percent, respectively. Official
poverty rates reflect the proportion of households below each poverty line. The latest harmonized poverty numbers for 2015 are available at the LAC
Equity Lab.
Guatemala
70 8 60
7 55
60
6 50
50
5 45
40
4 40
30
3 35
20 30
2
10 1 25
0 0 20
2006 2008 2010 2012 2014 2006 2008 2010 2012 2014
rate (Thousand)

Relative Group (%)
Year

Males 49 51 40 60 2014
Females 49 51 40 60 2014
0 to 14 years old 60 40 50 50 2014
15 to 64 years old 43 57 35 65 2014
65 and older 40 60 33 67 2014
Guatemala’s national poverty line, calculated based on observed patterns of consumption, is substantially higher than the international poverty line and
more closely reflects the US$5.5 line. Thus, the official poverty rates are substantially higher than those reported under either the international poverty
line or the other line of US$3.2.
The data used to measure poverty in Guatemala come from the National Living Standards Measurement Study surveys (Encuesta Nacional de
Condiciones de Vida) for 2000, 2006, and 2014. There are also data for a 2011 round of the survey, but there are some methodological concerns about
these data in terms of comparability, and they are not used here. The 2014 dataset is the most recent available that can be used to measure poverty.
Guatemala uses a consumption-based monetary measure of poverty (in contrast, the international comparison is based on income). This per capita
measure includes the consumption of: (1) purchased and non-purchased food (own production, gifts, and donations); (2) transport and
communications; (3) consumer goods; (4) household services and legal costs; (5) utilities, education, and health; and (6) the annual use value of housing
and durable goods. The poverty lines used reflects the cost of a minimum level of calories (extreme poverty line) and the cost of obtaining both food
and other basic necessities (overall poverty line).
Haiti
90 1.8 45
80 1.75
40
70 1.7
60 1.65
35
50 1.6
40 1.55
30
30 1.5
20 1.45 25
10 1.4
0 1.35 20
2012 2012
rate (Thousand)
Year

Males 23 77 39 61 2012
Females 24 76 40 60 2012
0 to 14 years old 29 71 47 53 2012
15 to 64 years old 20 80 35 65 2012
65 and older 22 78 38 62 2012
Contrary to other countries in Latin America, poverty in Haiti is estimated with per capita expenditure as the welfare aggregate, while the SEDLAC
database reports estimates using per capita income. Per capita expenditure is estimated using the "cost of basic needs" methodology including both
food and non-food expenditures. The poverty line reflects a minimum threshold of 2,400 Kcal per person per day, including 26 food products. The
official poverty line is 12 percent higher than the $3.20 international poverty line while the national extreme poverty line is 3 percent lower than the
$1.90 PPP international poverty lines. Official poverty numbers are reported for 2012. Recent data on poverty are missing to estimate trends in poverty
and in inequality, and to measure shared prosperity.
Honduras
70 5 65
4.5 60
60
4 55
50 3.5 50
3
40 45
2.5
40
30
2
35
20 1.5
30
1
10 25
0.5
0 0 20
2001 2003 2005 2007 2009 2011 2013 2015 2001 2003 2005 2007 2009 2011 2013 2015
rate (Thousand)

Relative Group (%)
Year

Males 50 50 39 61 2016
Females 51 49 41 59 2016
0 to 14 years old 61 39 50 50 2016
15 to 64 years old 45 55 35 65 2016
65 and older 44 56 34 66 2016
National poverty estimates in Honduras are produced by the Instituto Nacional de Estadística (INE) based on data from the Encuesta Permanente de
Hogares de Propósitos Múltiples (EPHPM). This survey is not publicly available, but is shared by INE with the World Bank. Honduras uses a monetary
poverty line to measure extreme and total poverty using per capita income as the welfare measure. These lines, available for rural and urban areas
(including separate poverty baskets for each of the two largest cities), are estimated using baskets of goods and services based on an expenditure
survey from 1998. The national poverty series is reported as the percent of households living in poverty, while the headcount estimates based on
international poverty lines are based on the share of individuals living in poverty.
While the national poverty headcount is used in Honduras for program and policy targeting, international poverty estimates allow for comparisons
between countries. To facilitate comparisons with its neighbors in Latin America and the Caribbean, the international poverty line of $5.50 per person
per day is preferred. This line is also closer to the value of Honduras' official poverty basket. Unlike in many LAC countries, the International Dollar a Day
line of $1.90 in 2011 PPP remains an important indicator in Honduras as a sizeable share of the population continues to live in extreme poverty.
Mexico
50 17.5 55
45 17 50
40 16.5
35 45
16
30 40
15.5
25
15 35
20
14.5
15 30
10 14
25
5 13.5
0 13 20
2000 2002 2004 2006 2008 2010 2012 2014 2016 2000 2002 2004 2006 2008 2010 2012 2014 2016
Poverty International Poverty Line GDP per capita
rate International Poverty Line (Consumption) (Thousand)
(%) Upper Middle IC Line
National Poverty Line

Relative Group (%)
Year

Males 26 74 41 59 2016
Females 25 75 39 61 2016
0 to 14 years old 37 63 54 46 2016
15 to 64 years old 22 78 35 65 2016
65 and older 19 81 32 68 2016
Official poverty estimates in Mexico are released to the public every two years based on data from the household survey. In 2008, Mexico adopted an
official multidimensional poverty measurement that combines income-based monetary poverty with non-monetary dimensions of wellbeing, called
social deprivations. Based on social rights defined in the Constitution Law, these are: education, health, food, social security, quality and space of the
dwelling, and basic services in the dwelling. According to Mexico’s methodology, an individual is considered poor if living below the wellbeing line and
with at least one social deprivation. An individual is considered extremely poor if living below the minimum wellbeing line and with three or more social
deprivations. The monetary component of poverty uses current income per adult equivalent, which includes labor income, public and private transfers,
and capital rents. It excludes dwelling imputed rent, self-consumption, and temporal transfers. The wellbeing line is different in urban and rural areas,
defined as localities with a population above/below 2,500 inhabitants. Values of income and expenditures produced in 2016 from a new version of the
household survey are not directly comparable with the historical series, and therefore WB monetary poverty rates using international lines derived from
these data should not be compared with pre-2016 numbers. The WB uses consumption-based welfare measures (when available) rather than income
for the purpose of global and regional poverty monitoring. In the case of Mexico, official poverty uses an income-based welfare measure instead of a
consumption-based welfare aggregate. For more detail on the 2016 data, visit INEGI and/or CONEVAL webpages.
Nicaragua
60 6 55
50
50 5
45
40 4
40
30 3
35
20 2
30
10 1 25
0 0 20
2005 2007 2009 2011 2013 2015 2005 2007 2009 2011 2013
rate (Thousand)

Relative Group (%)
Year

Males 34 66 40 60 2014
Females 35 65 40 60 2014
0 to 14 years old 43 57 49 51 2014
15 to 64 years old 31 69 36 64 2014
65 and older 32 68 37 63 2014
Official poverty estimates in Nicaragua are produced by the Instituto Nacional de Información de Desarrollo (INIDE) based on data from the Encuesta
Nacional de Hogares sobre Medición de Nivel de Vida (EMNV) and are available to the public. Nicaragua uses a consumption-based monetary measure
of poverty while the international comparison is based on income. This per capita measure includes the consumption of purchased and non-purchased
food, transport, household services, education, health, and household consumption value and durables, among others. The poverty lines used reflect
the costs of a minimum level of calories (extreme poverty line) and the cost of obtaining both food and other basic necessities (overall poverty line). The
country estimates poverty based on the Cost of Basic Needs method by determining an absolute extreme poverty line of C$11,259 and an overall
poverty line of C$18,311 per person per year in 2016 (equivalent to 997 and 1,623 in 2011 PPP dollars, respectively). This poverty line refers to the lack
of per capita consumption required to access a basket of goods and services needed to achieve adequate living conditions. The most recent monetary
poverty numbers in Nicaragua correspond to 2016, and the extreme and overall official poverty rates at the national level were seven and 25 percent,
respectively. The latest harmonized poverty numbers for 2014 are available at the LAC Equity Lab.
Panama
45 25 60
40 55
35 20
50
30
45
15
25
40
20
10 35
15
30
10 5
5 25
0 0 20
2000 2002 2004 2006 2008 2010 2012 2014 2016 2000 2002 2004 2006 2008 2010 2012 2014 2016
rate (Thousand)

Relative Group (%)
Year

Males 15 85 41 59 2016
Females 14 86 39 61 2016
0 to 14 years old 25 75 57 43 2016
15 to 64 years old 11 89 34 66 2016
65 and older 6 94 31 69 2016
As an upper middle-income country, the international poverty line is of less relevance in Panama than the income class lines. For both income class lines
(ICLs) and the official measures of poverty in Panama, the trends in poverty reduction are similar although the levels are not: the value of the official
poverty line in Panama is above the ICLs. The data for the poverty measures come from the Household Survey (Encuesta de hogares, or EH, carried out
in August) until 2010 and, since 2011, from either the Encuesta del mercado laboral (August) or the Encuesta de hogares de propósitos multiples
(March).
Panama estimates poverty using an absolute monetary measure based on income. The extreme poverty line corresponds to the per capita value of a
food basket of goods while the general poverty line incorporates non-food items. The value of the two lines are defined separately for the urban area of
the district of Panama and San Miguelito and the rest of the country. Household total income includes labor and non-labor income (pensions, private
and public transfers, capital income, and others). The national methodology for constructing total household income does not include a use value for
housing and includes domestic workers living in the household while the internationally comparable aggregate done by SEDLAC and the World Bank
includes the former and excludes the latter.
Paraguay
70 10 60
9 55
60
8
50
50 7
45
6
40
5 40
30
4 35
20 3
30
2
10 25
1
0 0 20
2001 2003 2005 2007 2009 2011 2013 2015 2001 2003 2005 2007 2009 2011 2013 2015
rate (Thousand)
Year

Males 2 98 40 60 2016
Females 2 98 40 60 2016
0 to 14 years old 3 97 53 47 2016
15 to 64 years old 1 99 34 66 2016
65 and older 1 99 33 67 2016
World Bank poverty estimates rely on a harmonized version of the household survey data from the Encuesta Permanente de Hogares (EPH), as part of
the SEDLAC project (CEDLAS and World Bank). All monetary measures are expressed in 2011 PPP, and poverty is reported using international poverty
lines. The harmonized income aggregate undergoes specific imputations to make it comparable across countries. In the case of Paraguay, the main
difference relates to the special deflation factors. Official poverty estimates are produced by the Direccion General de Estadisticas, Encuestas y Censos
(DGEEC) and use income as the welfare aggregate. In June 2016 the DGEEC released a new poverty series following the adoption of new population
weights and new poverty lines.
The difference in poverty lines and income aggregates keeps poverty estimates based on harmonized data from being strictly comparable to official
poverty rates. While International dollar a day methodology should be used for cross-country comparisons, national official methodology is used for
country-specific analyses. Nevertheless, both official poverty and poverty at $3.20 and $5.50 2011 PPP follow similar trends.
Peru
70 14 60
55
60 12
50
50 10
45
40 8
40
30 6
35
20 4 30
10 2 25
0 0 20
2004 2006 2008 2010 2012 2014 2016 2004 2006 2008 2010 2012 2014 2016
rate (Thousand)
Year

Males 3 97 41 59 2016
Females 3 97 39 61 2016
0 to 14 years old 6 94 53 47 2016
15 to 64 years old 3 97 35 65 2016
65 and older 2 98 38 62 2016
Peru uses monetary poverty lines to measure extreme and total poverty using consumption per capita as the welfare measure. The total poverty line
represents the minimum cost of acquiring a basket of goods and services necessary to achieve adequate living conditions, and this basket varies by
natural region as well as by rural and urban situations. The most recent official poverty numbers in Peru correspond to 2016, and indicate that the
national poverty rate was 20.7 percent while extreme poverty was 3.8 percent. The national poverty line in local currency was 328 soles per capita per
month and the national extreme poverty line was 176 soles per capita per month. The international dollar a day methodology is based on the $ 1.90
(2011 PPP), using income per capita as the welfare aggregate measure. However, by this definition, most Latin American countries (including Peru) have
very low extreme poverty rates. For this reason, higher poverty lines that are more in line with the region’s reality are used: $3.20 (2011 PPP) and $5.50
(2011 PPP). The latest harmonized poverty numbers for 2015 are available at the LAC Equity Lab. Both poverty definitions show similar trends, but
differ on the welfare aggregate measure used. While the international poverty measures use income per capita, the national methodology is based on
per capita consumption.
Uruguay
35 25 50
30 45
20
25
40
15
20
35
15
10
30
10
5 25
5
0 0 20
2000 2002 2004 2006 2008 2010 2012 2014 2016 2000 2002 2004 2006 2008 2010 2012 2014 2016
rate (Thousand)
Year

Males 0 100 40 60 2016
Females 0 100 40 60 2016
0 to 14 years old 0 100 63 37 2016
15 to 64 years old 0 100 38 62 2016
65 and older 0 100 17 83 2016
The latest official national estimate of the poverty rate in Uruguay is 9.4 percent of the population. This measure is estimated based on data from the
2016 edition of the Encuesta Continua de Hogares (ECH). The poverty line used for this estimate corresponds to the updated value of the basic food and
non-food baskets considering economies of scale for the non-food expenditures introduced by geographical area. The World Bank poverty estimates
rely on a harmonized version of the household survey data from the ECH; the latest harmonization available corresponds to data from 2016. All
monetary measures are adjusted to USD in 2011 PPP. Thus, poverty is estimated using international poverty lines based on the “dollar a day”
methodology that allow comparability across countries and years. The harmonized microdata for Uruguay is part of the SEDLAC project (CEDLAS and
World Bank). Official microdata are available through Uruguay’s national statistical office. Because of the methodological differences in the estimation
process, the levels and trends of the national and international poverty rates can differ.

Analisis de La Capacidad de Proceso

Cargado por

Información del documento

Derechos de autor

Formatos disponibles

Compartir este documento

Compartir o incrustar documentos

Opciones para compartir

¿Le pareció útil este documento?

¿Este contenido es inapropiado?

Copyright:

Formatos disponibles

Analisis de La Capacidad de Proceso

Cargado por

Copyright:

Formatos disponibles

Argentina

GDP per capita (US$2011 PPP)

Upper Middle Income Class Poverty

Urban population 8 92 40 60 2016

GDP per capita (US$2011 PPP)

Urban population 2 98 29 71 2016

GDP per capita (US$2011 PPP)

Urban population 2 98 36 64 2015

GDP per capita (US$2011 PPP)

Urban population 1 99 39 61 2015

GDP per capita (US$2011 PPP)

Upper Middle Income Class Poverty

Urban population 22 78 33 67 2016

GDP per capita (US$2011 PPP)

Upper Middle Income Class Poverty

Urban population 8 92 34 66 2016

GDP per capita (US$2011 PPP)

Upper Middle Income Class Poverty

Urban population 19 81 37 63 2016

GDP per capita (US$2011 PPP)

Upper Middle Income Class Poverty

Urban population 18 82 33 67 2016

GDP per capita (US$2011 PPP)

Upper Middle Income Class Poverty

Urban population 21 79 29 71 2016

GDP per capita (US$2011 PPP)

Upper Middle Income Class Poverty

Urban population 34 66 26 74 2014

GDP per capita (US$2011 PPP)

Urban population 8 92 20 80 2012

GDP per capita (US$2011 PPP)

Upper Middle Income Class Poverty

Urban population 37 63 26 74 2016

Upper Middle Income Class Poverty

Urban population 20 80 34 66 2016

GDP per capita (US$2011 PPP)

Upper Middle Income Class Poverty

Urban population 23 77 29 71 2014

GDP per capita (US$2011 PPP)

Upper Middle Income Class Poverty

Urban population 4 96 27 73 2016

GDP per capita (US$2011 PPP)

Urban population 0 100 29 71 2016

GDP per capita (US$2011 PPP)

Urban population 1 99 28 72 2016

GDP per capita (US$2011 PPP)

Urban population 0 100 39 61 2016

También podría gustarte