Advertisement

A New Extension of Bourguignon and Chakravarty Index to Measure Educational Poverty and Its Application to the OECD Countries

  • Juan-Francisco Sánchez-García
  • María-del-Carmen Sánchez-Antón
  • Rosa Badillo-Amador
  • María-del-Carmen Marco-Gil
  • Juan-Vicente LLinares-CiscarEmail author
  • Susana Álvarez-Díez
Article
  • 22 Downloads

Abstract

The consequences that educational underperformance has on both individuals and society as a whole lead policy makers and planners to focus on how to measure it properly. The aim of this paper is to propose an index to measure educational poverty which, taking as a starting point the economic literature on multidimensional poverty measurement, turns out to be appropriate in the educational context. With this purpose, the following two features are demanded: (1) an individual should be identified as poor whenever they do not reach the basic level of knowledge in at least one of the relevant subjects; (2) the degree of poverty of individuals who present the same level of insufficiency in some subjects but have different scores in others should be different. Based on these premises, we introduce a multidimensional adjusted poverty index, called BCa index, which is an extension of Bourguignon and Chakravarty index, and we apply it to measure educational poverty in the OECD countries by using data from PISA 2012 and 2015 reports.

Keywords

Multidimensional adjusted poverty measurement Educational poverty PISA 2012 and 2015 

JEL Classification

I24 I32 D31 D63 

Notes

Acknowledgements

This work was supported by the Ministerio de Economía y Competitividad (Spain) under Grant Numbers: ECO2013-43119-P; ECO2016-77200-P.

References

  1. Alkire, S., Foster, J., Seth, S., Santos, M. E., Roche, J. M., & Ballón, P. (2015). Multidimensional poverty measurement and analysis. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Bourguignon, F., & Chakravarty, S. R. (2003). The measurement of multidimensional poverty. Journal of Economic Inequality, 1, 25–49.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Chakravarty, S. R. (2009). Inequality, polarization and poverty. Berlin: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Denny, K. (2002). New methods for comparing literacy across populations: insights from the measurement of poverty. Jouranl of the Royal Statistical Society A, 165(Part 3), 481–493.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Dutta, I., Pattanaik, P. K., & Xu, Y. (2003). On measuring deprivation and the standard of living in a multidimensional framework on the basis of aggregate data. Economica, 70, 197–221.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Foster, J. E., Greer, J., & Thorbecke, E. (1984). A class of decomposable poverty measures. Econometrica, 52, 761–766.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Kelly, D., Nord, C. W., Jenkins, F., Chan, J. Y., & Kastberg, D. (2013). Performance of US 15-year-old students in mathematics, science, and reading literacy in an international context. first look at PISA 2012. NCES 2014-024. National Center for Education Statistics.Google Scholar
  8. Lasso de la Vega, C., Urrutia, A., & Diez, H. (2009). The Bourguignon and Chakravarty multidimensional poverty family: A characterization. Working Papers No 109, ECINEQ, Society of the Study of Economic Inequality (109).Google Scholar
  9. Lohmann, H., & Ferger, F. (2014). Educational poverty in a comparative perspective: Theoretical and empirical implications. SFB 882 Working Paper Series, no 26, DFG Research Center (SFB) from Heterogeneities to Inequalities. http://www.sfb882.uni-bilefeld.de/. Accessed 21 Dec 2018.
  10. Minzyuk, L., & Russo, F. (2016). La misurazione multidimensionale della povertà in istruzione in Italia multidimensional measurement of educational poverty in Italy. Politica economica, 1, 65–122.Google Scholar
  11. OECD. (2014a). PISA 2012 results: What students know and can do—Student performance in mathematics, reading and science (Revised ed., Vol. I). Paris: PISA, OECD Publishing.  https://doi.org/10.1787/9789264208780-en.Google Scholar
  12. OECD. (2014b). PISA 2012 technical report. Paris: OECD Publishing.Google Scholar
  13. OECD. (2016a). PISA 2015 results: Excellence and equity in education. Paris: PISA, OECD Publishing.  https://doi.org/10.1787/9789264266490-en.Google Scholar
  14. OECD. (2016b). PISA 2015 results in focus. https://www.oecd.org/pisa/pisa-2015-results-in-focus.pdf. Accessed 21 Dec 2018.
  15. Permanyer, I. (2014). Assessing individuals’ deprivation in a multidimensional framework. Journal of Development Economics, 109, 1–16.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Sen, A. K. (1976). Poverty: an ordinal approach to measurement. Econometrica, 44, 219–231.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Thomas, V., Wang, Y., & Fan, X. (2000) Measuring educational inequality: Gini coefficients of education. Working Paper 2525. World Bank, Washington DC: World Bank.Google Scholar
  18. Villar, A. (2016). Educational poverty as a welfare loss: Low performance in the OECD according to PISA 2012. Modern Economy, 7, 441–449.  https://doi.org/10.4236/me.2016.74049.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature B.V. 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • Juan-Francisco Sánchez-García
    • 1
  • María-del-Carmen Sánchez-Antón
    • 2
  • Rosa Badillo-Amador
    • 3
  • María-del-Carmen Marco-Gil
    • 3
  • Juan-Vicente LLinares-Ciscar
    • 2
    Email author
  • Susana Álvarez-Díez
    • 4
  1. 1.Department of Quantitative Methods, Legal Sciences and Modern LanguagesTechnical University of CartagenaCartagena, MurciaSpain
  2. 2.Department of Economic AnalysisUniversity of MurciaMurciaSpain
  3. 3.Department of Economics, Accounting and FinanceTechnical University of CartagenaCartagena, MurciaSpain
  4. 4.Department of Quantitative Methods for Economics and BusinessUniversity of MurciaMurciaSpain

Personalised recommendations