Growth, Inequality, and Poverty: An Analysis of Pro-Poor Growth in Indonesia

In the concept of pro-poor growth, economic growth accompanied by fair income distribution will accelerate the rate of poverty reduction. By employing extensive data of household expenditures and other economic indicators, the study will examine the performance of economic growth in Indonesia whethe...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Author: Yudistira Andi Permadi
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: Universitas Udayana 2018-08-01
Series:Jurnal Ekonomi Kuantitatif Terapan
Online Access:https://ojs.unud.ac.id/index.php/jekt/article/view/35124
id doaj-be502158fa554350a10992b536ef8fa6
record_format Article
spelling doaj-be502158fa554350a10992b536ef8fa62020-11-25T03:35:01ZengUniversitas UdayanaJurnal Ekonomi Kuantitatif Terapan2303-01862018-08-0121623310.24843/JEKT.2018.v11.i02.p0835124Growth, Inequality, and Poverty: An Analysis of Pro-Poor Growth in IndonesiaYudistira Andi Permadi0Universitas IndonesiaIn the concept of pro-poor growth, economic growth accompanied by fair income distribution will accelerate the rate of poverty reduction. By employing extensive data of household expenditures and other economic indicators, the study will examine the performance of economic growth in Indonesia whether it has been pro-poor over the period 2005-2013. We employ two methods in this article, Growth Incidence Curve (GIC) method, and Pro-Poor Growth Index (PPGI) method. By applying the GIC method, our empirical results indicate that economic growth in Indonesia has not been pro-poor during the observed period. The curve shows that the highest income population enjoys increased consumption more than the poorest population. Furthermore, PPGI method has revealed that economic growth, inequality, and an interaction term between economic growth and inequality have been significant to influence poverty incidence in Indonesia. Our empirical result also reveals that among manufacturing, agriculture, and services sector; it was manufacturing that has successfully reduced the number of the poor, while agriculture unexpectedly had a devastating impact on the number of poor people. The services sector, meanwhile, had not contributed to poverty alleviation. Furthermore, none of the government spending in education and health that significantly contributes to poverty alleviation.https://ojs.unud.ac.id/index.php/jekt/article/view/35124
collection DOAJ
language English
format Article
sources DOAJ
author Yudistira Andi Permadi
spellingShingle Yudistira Andi Permadi
Growth, Inequality, and Poverty: An Analysis of Pro-Poor Growth in Indonesia
Jurnal Ekonomi Kuantitatif Terapan
author_facet Yudistira Andi Permadi
author_sort Yudistira Andi Permadi
title Growth, Inequality, and Poverty: An Analysis of Pro-Poor Growth in Indonesia
title_short Growth, Inequality, and Poverty: An Analysis of Pro-Poor Growth in Indonesia
title_full Growth, Inequality, and Poverty: An Analysis of Pro-Poor Growth in Indonesia
title_fullStr Growth, Inequality, and Poverty: An Analysis of Pro-Poor Growth in Indonesia
title_full_unstemmed Growth, Inequality, and Poverty: An Analysis of Pro-Poor Growth in Indonesia
title_sort growth, inequality, and poverty: an analysis of pro-poor growth in indonesia
publisher Universitas Udayana
series Jurnal Ekonomi Kuantitatif Terapan
issn 2303-0186
publishDate 2018-08-01
description In the concept of pro-poor growth, economic growth accompanied by fair income distribution will accelerate the rate of poverty reduction. By employing extensive data of household expenditures and other economic indicators, the study will examine the performance of economic growth in Indonesia whether it has been pro-poor over the period 2005-2013. We employ two methods in this article, Growth Incidence Curve (GIC) method, and Pro-Poor Growth Index (PPGI) method. By applying the GIC method, our empirical results indicate that economic growth in Indonesia has not been pro-poor during the observed period. The curve shows that the highest income population enjoys increased consumption more than the poorest population. Furthermore, PPGI method has revealed that economic growth, inequality, and an interaction term between economic growth and inequality have been significant to influence poverty incidence in Indonesia. Our empirical result also reveals that among manufacturing, agriculture, and services sector; it was manufacturing that has successfully reduced the number of the poor, while agriculture unexpectedly had a devastating impact on the number of poor people. The services sector, meanwhile, had not contributed to poverty alleviation. Furthermore, none of the government spending in education and health that significantly contributes to poverty alleviation.
url https://ojs.unud.ac.id/index.php/jekt/article/view/35124
work_keys_str_mv AT yudistiraandipermadi growthinequalityandpovertyananalysisofpropoorgrowthinindonesia
_version_ 1715173784013504512