The Experts below are selected from a list of 21111 Experts worldwide ranked by ideXlab platform
Florian Neumeier - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
The impact of US sanctions on Poverty
Journal of Development Economics, 2016Co-Authors: Matthias Neuenkirch, Florian NeumeierAbstract:Abstract In this paper, we analyze the effect of US economic sanctions on the target countries' Poverty Gap during the period 1982–2011. Econometrically, we employ a matching approach to account for differences in the countries' economic and political environment and the likelihood of being exposed to US sanctions. Our results indicate that US sanctions are adversely affecting those living in Poverty as we observe a 3.8 percentage point (pp) larger Poverty Gap in sanctioned countries compared to a control group that is as close as possible in terms of observable pretreatment characteristics. In addition, we show that the impact of sanctions on Poverty (i) increases with the severity of sanctions, (ii) is larger for multilateral sanctions than for unilateral sanctions imposed by only the United States, and (iii) is long-lasting as the Poverty Gap increases over the first 21 years of a sanction regime.
-
Always affecting the wrong people? The impact of US sanctions on Poverty
SSRN Electronic Journal, 2015Co-Authors: Matthias Neuenkirch, Florian NeumeierAbstract:In this paper, we analyze the effect of US economic sanctions on the target countries Poverty Gap during the period 19782011. Econometrically, we employ a nearest neighbor matching approach to account for differences in the countries economic and political environment and the likelihood of being exposed to US sanctions. Our results indicate that US sanctions are indeed affecting the wrong people as we observe a 2.35.1 percentage points (pp) larger Poverty Gap in sanctioned countries compared to their nearest neighbors. Severe sanctions, such as fuel embargoes, trade restrictions, the freezing of assets, or embargoes on most or all economic activity are particularly detrimental and lead to an increase in the Poverty Gap by 6.17.4 pp.
Peter J. Lambert - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
Sequential procedures for Poverty Gap dominance
Social Choice and Welfare, 2011Co-Authors: Claudio Zoli, Peter J. LambertAbstract:Poverty evaluations differ from welfare evaluations in one significant aspect, the existence of a threshold or reference point, the Poverty line. We build up normative evaluation models in which comparisons are made taking distances from this reference point rather than from the origin to be ethically relevant, by focussing upon Poverty Gaps and not incomes. When Poverty lines differ for different groups in a socially heterogeneous population, choosing Poverty Gaps instead of incomes as the relevant indicator brings in normatively appealing classes of Poverty indices not previously accommodated, for which Poverty comparisons are implemented through sequential Poverty Gap curves (or Poverty Gap distributions) dominance. These conditions are logically related to those suggested by Atkinson and Bourguignon (Arrow and the foundations of the theory of economic policy, Macmillan, London, 1987) and Bourguignon (J Econom 42:67–80, 1989) for welfare comparisons. However, the proportion of poor individuals in the society and their average Poverty Gap play a role in our comparisons, though they do not in the existing Poverty dominance criteria for heterogeneous populations.
-
Sequential procedures for Poverty Gap dominance
2005Co-Authors: Claudio Zoli, Peter J. LambertAbstract:Poverty evaluations differ from welfare evaluations in one significant aspect, the existence of a threshold or reference point, the Poverty line. It is therefore possible to build up normative evaluation models in which comparisons are made taking distances from this reference point and not only from the origin to be ethically relevant. This is the case in our model of Poverty comparisons over heterogeneous populations, which focuses upon Poverty Gaps and not incomes. When Poverty lines differ for the different groups in the population we show that choosing Poverty Gaps instead of incomes as the relevant indicator brings in normatively appealing classes of Poverty indices not previously accommodated. For these indices Poverty comparisons over heterogeneous populations are implemented through sequential Poverty Gap curves (or Poverty Gap distributions) dominance. These novel conditions are logically related to those suggested in Atkinson and Bourguignon (1987) for welfare comparisons, and can also be grounded firmly upon those of Bourguignon (1989). The proportion of poor individuals in the society or their average Poverty Gap play a role in our comparisons that was neglected in the existing Poverty dominance criteria for heterogeneous populations. Various intermediate Poverty dominance conditions and a generalization of the Poverty Gap approach are also investigated.
Matthias Neuenkirch - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
The impact of US sanctions on Poverty
Journal of Development Economics, 2016Co-Authors: Matthias Neuenkirch, Florian NeumeierAbstract:Abstract In this paper, we analyze the effect of US economic sanctions on the target countries' Poverty Gap during the period 1982–2011. Econometrically, we employ a matching approach to account for differences in the countries' economic and political environment and the likelihood of being exposed to US sanctions. Our results indicate that US sanctions are adversely affecting those living in Poverty as we observe a 3.8 percentage point (pp) larger Poverty Gap in sanctioned countries compared to a control group that is as close as possible in terms of observable pretreatment characteristics. In addition, we show that the impact of sanctions on Poverty (i) increases with the severity of sanctions, (ii) is larger for multilateral sanctions than for unilateral sanctions imposed by only the United States, and (iii) is long-lasting as the Poverty Gap increases over the first 21 years of a sanction regime.
-
Always affecting the wrong people? The impact of US sanctions on Poverty
SSRN Electronic Journal, 2015Co-Authors: Matthias Neuenkirch, Florian NeumeierAbstract:In this paper, we analyze the effect of US economic sanctions on the target countries Poverty Gap during the period 19782011. Econometrically, we employ a nearest neighbor matching approach to account for differences in the countries economic and political environment and the likelihood of being exposed to US sanctions. Our results indicate that US sanctions are indeed affecting the wrong people as we observe a 2.35.1 percentage points (pp) larger Poverty Gap in sanctioned countries compared to their nearest neighbors. Severe sanctions, such as fuel embargoes, trade restrictions, the freezing of assets, or embargoes on most or all economic activity are particularly detrimental and lead to an increase in the Poverty Gap by 6.17.4 pp.
Claudio Zoli - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
Sequential procedures for Poverty Gap dominance
Social Choice and Welfare, 2011Co-Authors: Claudio Zoli, Peter J. LambertAbstract:Poverty evaluations differ from welfare evaluations in one significant aspect, the existence of a threshold or reference point, the Poverty line. We build up normative evaluation models in which comparisons are made taking distances from this reference point rather than from the origin to be ethically relevant, by focussing upon Poverty Gaps and not incomes. When Poverty lines differ for different groups in a socially heterogeneous population, choosing Poverty Gaps instead of incomes as the relevant indicator brings in normatively appealing classes of Poverty indices not previously accommodated, for which Poverty comparisons are implemented through sequential Poverty Gap curves (or Poverty Gap distributions) dominance. These conditions are logically related to those suggested by Atkinson and Bourguignon (Arrow and the foundations of the theory of economic policy, Macmillan, London, 1987) and Bourguignon (J Econom 42:67–80, 1989) for welfare comparisons. However, the proportion of poor individuals in the society and their average Poverty Gap play a role in our comparisons, though they do not in the existing Poverty dominance criteria for heterogeneous populations.
-
Sequential procedures for Poverty Gap dominance
2005Co-Authors: Claudio Zoli, Peter J. LambertAbstract:Poverty evaluations differ from welfare evaluations in one significant aspect, the existence of a threshold or reference point, the Poverty line. It is therefore possible to build up normative evaluation models in which comparisons are made taking distances from this reference point and not only from the origin to be ethically relevant. This is the case in our model of Poverty comparisons over heterogeneous populations, which focuses upon Poverty Gaps and not incomes. When Poverty lines differ for the different groups in the population we show that choosing Poverty Gaps instead of incomes as the relevant indicator brings in normatively appealing classes of Poverty indices not previously accommodated. For these indices Poverty comparisons over heterogeneous populations are implemented through sequential Poverty Gap curves (or Poverty Gap distributions) dominance. These novel conditions are logically related to those suggested in Atkinson and Bourguignon (1987) for welfare comparisons, and can also be grounded firmly upon those of Bourguignon (1989). The proportion of poor individuals in the society or their average Poverty Gap play a role in our comparisons that was neglected in the existing Poverty dominance criteria for heterogeneous populations. Various intermediate Poverty dominance conditions and a generalization of the Poverty Gap approach are also investigated.
Gui Jin - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
is there a decoupling relationship between co2 emission reduction and Poverty alleviation in china
Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 2020Co-Authors: Gui Jin, Baishu Guo, Xiangzheng DengAbstract:Abstract Whether CO2 emission reduction will inhibit Poverty alleviation in a short time still remains unclear. In this paper, the extended linear expenditure system model and the CO2 emission accounting method were applied to measure the values of the Poverty alleviation as well as CO2 emission reduction, and then decoupling analysis model was introduced to identify the relationship between CO2 emissions and Poverty alleviation within Hubei Province, a Poverty-stricken area in China. The results show that the Poverty indices all remain small although Poverty line within Hubei Province is much higher than two dollars per day. Maximum values for head count, Poverty Gap, and squared Poverty Gap indices are all lower than 0.25, 0.10, and 0.05 respectively, implying that there are good realistic bases for Poverty alleviation. At the same time, CO2 emission and energy intensities within this region are characterized by inverted U-shaped curves and are currently in a declining phase, but CO2 emissions have significantly increased. Results derived from multi-period data analysis show that the decoupling relationship have switched from ‘expansive negative decoupling’ to ‘weak decoupling’, indicating that there is a decoupling relationship between CO2 emission reduction and Poverty alleviation. The data and results can be used to provide further references for clarifying the relationship between the two and arranging the plan of policy implementation.