Profiles

Shocks can pressure families into negative coping strategies with significant drawbacks for children’s lives and development, particularly for children living in disadvantaged households who are at greater risk of falling into a poverty trap. This paper investigates if unconditional cash transfers can be effective in protecting children against unexpected negative life events. Using two waves of data, we found that the Lesotho Child Grant Programme reduced the incidence and intensity of multidimensional deprivation for children living in labour-constrained female-headed households that experienced negative economic or demographic shocks. Programme design in shock-prone contexts should seek to reinforce and widen the protective effect of the cash transfer for the most vulnerable.

This paper provides a framework for analyzing constraints that apply specifically to women, which theory suggests may have negative impacts on child outcomes (as well as on women). We classify women’s constraints into four dimensions: (i) low influence on household decisions, (ii) restrictions on mobility, (iii) domestic physical and psychological abuse, and (iv) limited information access. Each of these constraints are in principle determined within households. We test the impact of women’s constraints on child outcomes using nationally representative household Demographic and Health Survey data from India, including 53,030 mothers and 113,708 children, collected in 2015-16. We examine outcomes including nutrition, health, education, water quality, and sanitation. In our primary specification, outcomes are measured as multidimensional deprivations incorporating indicators for each of these deficiencies, utilizing a version of UNICEF’s Multidimensional Overlapping Deprivation Analysis index. We identify causal impacts using a Lewbel specification and present an array of additional econometric strategies and robustness checks. We find that children of women who are subjected to domestic abuse, have low influence in decision making, and limited freedom of mobility are consistently more likely to be deprived, measured both multidimensionally and with separate indicators.

In this paper, we provide estimates and analysis of child multidimensional poverty in Mozambique. Drawing on data from the Mozambique Household Budget Survey of 2014/15 (IOF), we define child multidimensional poverty using the Multiple Overlapping Analysis (MODA). We define three age groups of children, and a total of seven dimensions of deprivation: Family, Nutrition, Education, Child labour, Health, WASH, Participation, and Housing. Results show that 81 per cent of children are deprived in at least two dimensions. Children are especially vulnerable in rural areas, where deprivation rates reach 95 per cent, and in the provinces of Niassa, Zambezia, and Cabo Delgado. The dimensions that more frequently overlap in Mozambique are Housing, Health, and WASH, with one third of children being deprived in these three dimensions at the same time. The data also allow the analysis of the interplay between monetary and multidimensional child poverty: 46 per cent of children suffer both forms of poverty. Children who are poor and deprived are children who live in rural areas, in more remote provinces; they live in households whose heads are less educated and whose main activity is agriculture. Finally, there is a direct correlation with shocks affecting the household and multidimensional poverty, with children of families who experienced weather shocks being more likely to be poor, deprived, or both.

Fiscal incidence analysis is the most widely used methodology to assess the distributional effects of fiscal policies. However, for 40 years, it has lacked a child lens. A child focus on the redistributive capacity of fiscal policy is increasingly important due to the disproportionate incidence of poverty among children globally. This paper provides a child-dedicated focus on fiscal incidence analysis by tracking child-relevant benefits, turning children the unit of analysis, and using multidimensional child poverty metrics. The analysis—Commitment to Equity for Children, or CEQ4C—integrates three analytical frameworks, namely, public finance, fiscal incidence analysis, and multidimensional child poverty analysis. The paper develops a proof of concept for Uganda that includes measurement, diagnostics, and a policy simulation package replicable across diverse contexts. The proof of concept confirms that CEQ4C provides a higher-resolution fiscal incidence analysis for children than the traditional fiscal incidence analysis.

The Sustainable Development Goal (SDG) target 1.2 implies that both monetary and non-monetary or multidimensional (MD) child poverty would be measured and monitored, and that the associated indicators would be defined nationally. However, very few countries routinely measure child MD poverty.

Based on nationally representative data from the Armenian Integrated Living Conditions Survey 2013/14, the study finds that 64 per cent of children under 18 are deprived in 2 or more dimensions, with a substantially higher rate in rural than in urban areas. The highest rates of deprivation are in access to utilities, quality housing and leisure activities. More than one in four children are both multidimensionally deprived and live in consumption-poor households, while more than one in three are deprived but do not live in poor households.

This study provides the first estimates of national multidimensional child deprivation rates in Bosnia and Herzegovina using the National Multiple Overlapping Deprivation Analysis (MODA) pioneered by UNICEF. Amongst the findings of the analysis, it is seen that a reduction in child poverty and deprivation may be achieved by improving both the spending power of households and the availability of services/infrastructure in local areas.

Poverty estimates are not frequently made, nor easy to access in the Arab States. Continued political instability combined with frequent humanitarian crises make it difficult to have timely and reliable estimates of poverty for many countries in the region, while others, such as the Gulf countries, simply do not measure child poverty at all.Even so, there are now several national estimates. In fact, around 10 countries in the region have produced estimates of child poverty; however, a comprehensive picture of the region has been lacking.  The first ever regional estimates of child poverty for Arab States have now been produced by the UNICEF Middle East and North Africa Regional Office (MENA) and UNICEF Innocenti, together with researchers at The New School and Equity for Children. The findings of this work now are part of the Arab Poverty  Report, conducted and published in partnership with ESCWA, OPHI, and the League of Arab States.The report analyzes data for 11 countries in the region, representing 78 per cent of the total population under 18 years old in the Arab States. It uses MODA to define multidimensional child poverty in a standardized way across countries, applying the innovation of using two definitions of poverty, one acute, and one moderate. In such a diverse region, it is crucial that we apply different ‘poverty lines’ to adequately capture poverty in different circumstances. One size does not fit all. The report also analyzes trends for a subset of countries, tracking the progress (or lack thereof) from the start of the millennium to the year closest to 2015, at the end of the MDG agenda.Acute and moderate depruvation by dimension (in %). Click table to enlarge.What do we now know about child poverty in the Arab States? Here are seven key facts from the report of the 11 countries studied:One in four children (24.7 per cent) is acutely poor, while nearly one in two (44 per cent) suffer from moderate poverty. This amounts to 29.3 and 52.5 million of children, respectively. Child poverty is lowest in Jordan and Egypt, and highest in Mauritania and Sudan. Children under 5 are generally more deprived than older children.Countries have varying combinations of moderate and severe child poverty. These can be grouped into clusters: Egypt, Algeria, Tunisia, Jordan, and Palestine are in the first cluster, with low level of both severe and moderate poverty. Morocco and Iraq are in the second cluster, with low levels of severe poverty but high levels of moderate one. Finally, Comoros, Sudan, Yemen, and Mauritania, have high levels of both types of poverty, and constitute the third cluster of countries.Nutrition remains a problem across all countries. Almost 43 per cent of children are suffering from nutrition deprivation, in the form of undernutrition or obesity, which is increasingly a problem to be dealt with. Acute deprivation in nutrition is still high in cluster 1 and 2, where about 1 in 4 children are deprived, while in cluster 3 acute nutrition deprivation affects almost 1 in 3 children (download the brief on nutrition). Nutrition also does not present strong differentials across child or family characteristics, making the case for broader interventions.Investment in education is crucial to break the cycle of poverty: the incidence of deprivation in Education is high in cluster 2 and 3, especially moderate deprivation, which includes primary completion and delay in school. At the same time, children of less educated parents are consistently at higher risk of poverty: there is a compelling case to invest more to assure children go through the full cycle of education, and that quality education is available for all children. (download the brief on education)Strong urban/rural differentials, especially in countries in the middle of the distribution: in cluster 2 child poverty is 5.7 per cent in urban areas compared to 36.5 per cent in rural areas, presenting a stark divide that needs to be addressed by policy.Trends in most countries where it was possible to analyze data were positive between 2000 and circa 2015. Egypt showed impressive progress reducing the level of acute child poverty by 80 per cent and moderate poverty by 68 per cent. However, countries such as Sudan present a stagnant poverty level: the change has been less than 2 per cent for acute poverty, and 3.4 per cent for moderate poverty. Conflicts and crises certainly play a role in this, putting development goals in jeopardy.Violence against children remains a big issue in the region: While not explicitly included in the multidimensional poverty measure, all countries for which there is data report high levels of violent child discipline, from almost 50 per cent in Sudan to 84 per cent in Yemen, with an average incidence of 70 per cent. Prevalence is not tied to level of development, and does not present strong differentials by family characteristics: it is indeed an issue that involves all countries, across regions and social divides.While this report has some limitations, not least lacking several key countries, and not having recent data in critical countries such as Yemen, thus not fully reflecting the escalation of the recent conflict, it is the first effort to provide reliable, consistent and standardized estimates of child poverty across the Arab Region.  The objective is to stimulate debate to improve data collection, and to provide a joint framework for policy to assure that no child is left behind.Acknowledgements: Thanks to Arthur van Diesen, UNICEF MENA Regional Social Policy Adviser; to Alberto Minujin and Beatrice Mauger at The New School and Equity for Children; to Bilal Kiswani and the team at ESCWA, and to Diletta Parisi, who helped me ‘crunch the numbers’.Lucia Ferrone is a research consultant on child poverty at UNICEF Innocenti. Explore the UNICEF Innocenti research catalogue for new publications. Follow UNICEF Innocenti on Twitter and sign up for e-newsletters on any page of the UNICEF Innocenti website.

The way countries define poverty is going to matter for their probability of achieving Sustainable Development Goal 1, Target 1.2. It calls for reducing at least by half the proportion of men, women and children of all ages living in poverty in all its dimensions according to national definitions by 2030. This means that national governments can establish the standards against which they will be measuring progress in just over a decade. For example, if we measure multidimensional poverty in a way that the starting rate is too high, we will struggle to halve it. Define it at too low a level, and further progress may be harder to achieve. Try to game Target 1.2 by fudging your dimensions and you betray the spirit of the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). So how can governments define multidimensional poverty in a way that halving the poverty rate will be realistic and amenable to policy intervention, while representing a true improvement in people’s well-being? In a recent paper we simulate different scenarios for lowering multidimensional child poverty in two small middle-income post-socialist European countries: Armenia and Bosnia and Herzegovina (BiH). Their UNICEF offices carried out child poverty studies using data from household budget surveys collected in 2011-2013. UNICEF chose the dimensions of child poverty in consultation with government and civil society counterparts to reflect national standards and priorities. Each study used seven dimensions of poverty from this list: clothing, education or educational resources, housing, information access, leisure, nutrition, social participation or social relations, and utilities. UNICEF had initiated these studies before the SDGs had been adopted, so no one worried about halving the resulting poverty rate by 2030 when they were coming up with a definition of poverty. The rate of multidimensional child poverty was twice as high in Armenia as in BiH: four in five (80%) versus two in five (40%) school-age children, respectively, were deprived in two or more out of seven dimensions. There were differences between the two countries in the intensity of multidimensional child poverty and way various dimensions interacted with each other. In BiH, one dimension influenced child poverty disproportionately (i.e. information access) and was not highly correlated with other dimensions. In contrast, no single dimension dominated in Armenia, and the majority of children deprived in two or more were deprived in four dimensions (i.e. leisure, housing, social relations, and utilities). ...if all school-age children in BiH had a networked computer at home (i.e. no deprivation in information access), the multidimensional poverty rate would go down by more than one-third (35%). This goes a long way towards halving poverty to reach the Target 1.2.To understand the mechanics of reducing multidimensional child poverty, we simulated several scenarios of lowering deprivation in different dimensions at a time. We played around with switching the deprivation status from 1 “deprived” to 0 “non-deprived” for a random selection of children in the dataset for different combinations of deprivations. For example, if all school-age children in BiH had a networked computer at home (i.e. no deprivation in information access), the multidimensional poverty rate would go down by more than one-third (35%). This goes a long way towards halving poverty to reach the Target 1.2. An alternative, but similarly effective strategy for BiH, would be to eliminate the correlation between the two dimensions that have the highest deprivation count (i.e. information access and leisure), while maintaining the proportion of children deprived in each of them. As long as it is no longer the same children who are deprived in both of these dimensions, but some deprived in one and others in the other, the overall multidimensional poverty headcount would also fall by over one-third (35%). However, these strategies would not work in Armenia, where the majority of school-age children are deprived in two out of four dimensions at once and no single dimension stands out. Of the four scenarios we considered, the best we could do would be to lower the poverty rate by just over one-quarter (28%) by halving the deprivation rates in three dimensions and reducing it by one-tenth in the other four. We also simulated the effects of giving different amounts cash to the households where multidimensionally poor children live. We did this by modelling the associations between household consumption and children’s deprivations in different dimensions. Cash transfers to the poor can be a powerful tool for improving children’s outcomes in nutrition, health and education, to name just a few (see https://transfer.cpc.unc.edu/). Some deprivations (e.g. nutrition and clothing) are more sensitive to household consumption, so cash transfers would be more effective in tackling them. Others (e.g. utilities) depend more on the local services infrastructure. Our simulations suggest that in a country like BiH, giving all consumption-poor households with children enough money to lift them out of monetary poverty would also eliminate multidimensional child poverty. In a country like Armenia, where children tend to be deprived in a greater number of dimensions simultaneously, even such an expensive strategy would not make a sizeable dent in multidimensional child poverty. We learned from our analysis that a country’s potential to halve multidimensional child poverty by 2030 hinges on the definition of the poverty measure they adopt in the first place. It influences both the “baseline” rate of poverty against which progress will be measured and the policy levers to achieve the goal. An effective strategy is likely to involve a multi-sectoral approach with cash transfers, information provision and investment in public services and infrastructure. Yekaterina Chzhen is a social and economic policy specialist at UNICEF Innocenti. Lucia Ferrone is a consultant with UNICEF Innocenti working on the Multiple Overlapping Deprivation Analysis (MODA) project, a tool which helps researchers and policy makers to better map and define the impact of poverty in children’s lives. Explore the UNICEF Innocenti research catalogue for new publications. Follow UNICEF Innocenti on Twitter and sign up for e-newsletters on any page of the UNICEF Innocenti website. This blog was first published on www.deliver2030.org 

When the winds of winter blow and the White Walkers arrive, it probably won’t matter if you are living in the Red Keep, or in a farm near Winterfell. End-of-times scenarios aside, context matters a great deal in how we define poverty and well-being. In the imaginary world of Westeros, created by G.R.R. Martin and made famous by the TV adaptation Game of Thrones, the seven kingdoms that constitute the fictional realm have quite distinctive features: though poverty seems widespread, we can imagine it is substantially different to be poor in the depths of the North, a harsher but seemingly more equal society, or scraping together a living in Flea Bottom, the dense, fetid slums of King’s Landing, the royal capital. Clean water may not be a prime issue for children in the North, while having wool clothes is a matter of survival, and the converse would be true for children living in the hot, sunny kingdom of Dorne.This is particularly true when we try to measure multidimensional poverty. While monetary poverty can be more easily conceptualized across different countries and contexts, whether we use dollars or gold coins, actual access to goods and services makes a substantial difference to the daily reality of the poor. Even if everyone would probably be better off with more dragon glass to fight the white walkers, when it comes to standards of living, who cares about ancient blades of obsidian? Clean water may not be a prime issue for children in the North, while having wool clothes is a matter of survival, and the converse would be true for children living in the hot, sunny kingdom of Dorne. In the seven kingdoms and on planet earth, it is crucial for countries to have their own measures of multidimensional poverty, alongside international comparable ones. In a recent paper, we examine the process and the results of the national definitions of multidimensional child poverty in three countries, not in Westeros but in the very real region of Sub-Saharan Africa: Mali, Malawi, and Tanzania. All countries decided to measure monetary child poverty alongside multidimensional child poverty, providing an eye-opening picture of how the two are interrelated. In all three countries rates of deprivation are generally high: 50% in Mali, 63% in Malawi, and 74% in Tanzania respectively, which reflects the general situation of the region. While monetary child poverty rates go from 29% in Tanzania to 45% in Mali; there is also a substantial mismatch between the two measures of poverty: respectively, 25%, 29%, and 48% of children don’t live in poor households, yet they are multidimensionally deprived. The three national measures conducted by UNICEF Innocenti are based on Multiple Overlapping Deprivation Analysis (MODA), an approach based on a child rights framework that aims to construct a truly child-centered way to measure child poverty. They share some similarities in the dimensions and indicators; however, the specifics of each national measure are different. Mali, for example, defined Child Labour as a separate dimension (29% deprived), reflecting a national priority, while Tanzania and Malawi opted to include it in a broader dimension of child protection  (10% and 66% deprived, respectively), which includes also early marriage (in both countries) and child registration (in Tanzania).  For the same reason Malawi included a separate dimension of food security for children from 5 to 13 years old. Involving national actors in this process is fundamental: you don’t want Cersei Lannister to decide what matters for children in Winterfell! And on the other hand, we can imagine that Daenerys Targaryen may take the issues of child protection to heart. Involving governments, and especially statistical offices in the construction of a multidimensional child poverty measure that could serve as a suitable national indicator for SDG 1.2 is crucial. This is why the process usually starts with a two or three-day discussion, often organized by the UNICEF country office, inviting government partners, other UN agencies and civil society representatives to air their views. Not nearly as difficult as Jon Snow’s efforts to unite the North against House Bolton, it is nevertheless essential for all stakeholders to arrive at a common definition of what should be captured by a national measure of child poverty. It was during these lively national conversations that I learned what country priorities and aspirations were: for example why birth registration was so important in Tanzania, or how using bed-nets as a health indicator was not going to be significant since mosquitoes are less of a problem in the mountainous regions of a country; or again, the clever way Mali included the dimension of information for small children, using the collected data on the mother’s knowledge of illnesses and hygiene practices. In all countries, actors were keen to contribute their experience and points of view toward construction of a better and more inclusive set of measures. Discussions of important issues such as gender, disability, and parental care, among others, were extensive and provided the necessary background for the results to be meaningful for each country. Tailoring a measure to the context is not fancy academic luxury, but it is vital to better measurement. And measurement is in turn is vital to improving policies. Because, at the end of the day, no dragon queen with magical powers is coming to save us. It’s on us to deliver a better future, for all the children. Lucia Ferrone is a consultant with UNICEF Innocenti working on the Multiple Overlapping Deprivation Analysis (MODA) project, a tool which helps researchers and policy makers to better map and define the impact of poverty in children’s lives. Explore the UNICEF Innocenti research catalogue for new publications. Follow UNICEF Innocenti on Twitter and sign up for e-newsletters on any page of the UNICEF Innocenti website.

What does it mean for a child to be poor? At first glance the question seems trivial, but when you ponder it for a moment, the answer is not so easily formulated. Does it mean being hungry, not having clean clothes? Is it connected with having to earn a living or being left alone? In a recent podcast, I talked about the importance of measuring child poverty, and the importance of going beyond the measurement of family income in order to accurately define it. I used one of the most beloved children's book characters in a generation to explain my point. At the beginning of the popular Harry Potter series, Harry is living with his aunt and uncle, in a family which is, in all respects, wealthy. They own a detached house in Surrey and Vernon Dursley, Harry's uncle, is a businessman who comfortably supports his wife and Dudley, their son. Dudley has everything: a vast amount of toys and video games, two bedrooms (one just for the toys). He also enjoys his parents' seemingly endless tolerance for his terrible behaviour. Should the UK census arrive to assess their poverty status, this household would certainly be defined as rich. Yet Harry, who lives in the same house, is a deprived child. He sleeps under the stairs, is forced to do a lot of chores and his aunt and uncle mistreat him. Not only is his status different from that of the two adults in the family, but also from that of his cousin, a child of similar age. In the same books, we encounter the Weasley family. It is frequently observed that they are poor, according to the wizarding world, in monetary standards. Yet all their seven children have food, clothing (if not always fashionable or new), school books, and all are well cared for and loved. Clearly, they are not suffering from deprivation. In the story, Harry discovers that he's a Wizard, and that his parents left him a considerable amount of money. In the wizarding world Harry then becomes somewhat affluent. He can treat his friends to butterbeer and chocolate frogs, and fancy Christmas presents. However, when he returns home for the holidays, very little has changed in his house: he returns to a life of great discomfort and little agency. And this situation continues each summer until he turns seventeen. This detail of the Potter series is crucial, because it highlights another fundamental element of child poverty: children's agency is often limited.This detail of the Potter series is crucial, because it highlights another fundamental element of child poverty: children's agency is often limited. Children are dependent on their guardians and are bound by their legal status in relation to them. Poverty, especially for children, can have much to do with situation and relations, with possibility and agency, as much as it is about means. The reality of poverty is far from magical for the 385 million children living in extreme poverty, or the 247 million African children who are multidimensionally poor. Or all the other millions of children for whom we have very little information. At the UNICEF Office of Research, we work to assess child poverty using the Multiple Overlapping Deprivation Analysis (MODA): a methodology we developed to measure multidimensional child poverty that aims at keeping the child at the centre of the analysis. A 14 year old girl stands outside her house where she lives with her husband and her mother-in-law in the Mara region in Tanzania. She was married when she was a little over 13 years old and managed to finish grade 7.Working with local UNICEF Offices and their partners, we define specific measures for the particular national context. For example, what it means to be a deprived child in Tanzania, or Armenia, or Bosnia-Herzegovina? In Tanzania, 78 percent of children are deprived. In Armenia it is 64 percent. The context changes, but we can find some common traits. We know that these children live primarily in rural areas, in families that work in agriculture and with less educated parents: this is true wherever we looked, in the Caucasus as well as in eastern Africa. Believe it or not many of these children live in Harry Potter-style poverty. Their homes do not lack monetary means, but they often lack access to infrastructure, space and time to play, and adequate care. This share of children is 48% in Tanzania, 36% in Armenia. It can vary across countries, but it is never irrelevant. For these reasons, it is vital that we step up our efforts to look beyond income to measure the multiple deprivations of child poverty in a comprehensive, child-centric way. Not every child can inherit a magical fortune, but we can make sure every child has the same chance at becoming a wizard. Lucia Ferrone is a consultant with UNICEF Innocenti working on the Multiple Overlapping Deprivation Analysis (MODA) project, a tool which helps researchers and policy makers to better map and define the impact of poverty in children's lives. Explore the  UNICEF Innocenti research catalogue  for new publications. Follow UNICEF  Innocenti on Twitter  and sign up for e-newsletters on any page of the UNICEF  Innocenti website.