Publication: How Long Will It Take to Lift One Billion People Out of Poverty?
Loading...
Files in English
2,788 downloads
Published
2013-08-01
ISSN
1564-6971
Date
2015-02-11
Author(s)
Editor(s)
Abstract
Alternative scenarios are considered for reducing by one billion the number of people surviving on less than $1.25 a day. The low-case, “pessimistic” path to that goal envisages the developing world outside China returning to the slower pace of economic growth and poverty reduction of the 1980s and 1990s, but with China maintaining its progress. This path would take 50 years or more to lift one billion people out of poverty. A more optimistic path is identified that would maintain the developing world's (impressive) progress against absolute poverty since the turn of the century. This path would lift one billion people out of poverty by 2025–30. The optimistic path is consistent with both linear projections of the time-series data and nonlinear simulations of inequality-neutral growth for the developing world as a whole.
Link to Data Set
Citation
“Ravallion, Martin. 2013. How Long Will It Take to Lift One Billion People Out of Poverty?. World Bank Research Observer. © http://hdl.handle.net/10986/21427 License: CC BY-NC-ND 3.0 IGO.”
Digital Object Identifier
Associated URLs
Associated content
Other publications in this report series
Journal
Journal Volume
Journal Issue
Collections
Related items
Showing items related by metadata.
No results found.
Users also downloaded
Showing related downloaded files
Publication The Container Port Performance Index 2023(Washington, DC: World Bank, 2024-07-18)The Container Port Performance Index (CPPI) measures the time container ships spend in port, making it an important point of reference for stakeholders in the global economy. These stakeholders include port authorities and operators, national governments, supranational organizations, development agencies, and other public and private players in trade and logistics. The index highlights where vessel time in container ports could be improved. Streamlining these processes would benefit all parties involved, including shipping lines, national governments, and consumers. This fourth edition of the CPPI relies on data from 405 container ports with at least 24 container ship port calls in the calendar year 2023. As in earlier editions of the CPPI, the ranking employs two different methodological approaches: an administrative (technical) approach and a statistical approach (using matrix factorization). Combining these two approaches ensures that the overall ranking of container ports reflects actual port performance as closely as possible while also being statistically robust. The CPPI methodology assesses the sequential steps of a container ship port call. ‘Total port hours’ refers to the total time elapsed from the moment a ship arrives at the port until the vessel leaves the berth after completing its cargo operations. The CPPI uses time as an indicator because time is very important to shipping lines, ports, and the entire logistics chain. However, time, as captured by the CPPI, is not the only way to measure port efficiency, so it does not tell the entire story of a port’s performance. Factors that can influence the time vessels spend in ports can be location-specific and under the port’s control (endogenous) or external and beyond the control of the port (exogenous). The CPPI measures time spent in container ports, strictly based on quantitative data only, which do not reveal the underlying factors or root causes of extended port times. A detailed port-specific diagnostic would be required to assess the contribution of underlying factors to the time a vessel spends in port. A very low ranking or a significant change in ranking may warrant special attention, for which the World Bank generally recommends a detailed diagnostic.Publication Predicting Income Distributions from Almost Nothing(Washington, DC: World Bank, 2025-01-13)This paper develops a method to predict comparable income and consumption distributions for all countries in the world from a simple regression with a handful of country-level variables. To fit the model, the analysis uses more than 2,000 distributions from household surveys covering 168 countries from the World Bank’s Poverty and Inequality Platform. More than 1,000 economic, demographic, and remote sensing predictors from multiple databases are used to test the models. A model is selected that balances out-of-sample accuracy, simplicity, and the share of countries for which the method can be applied. The paper finds that a simple model relying on gross domestic product per capita, under-5 mortality rate, life expectancy, and rural population share gives almost the same accuracy as a complex machine learning model using 1,000 indicators jointly. The method allows for easy distributional analysis in countries with extreme data deprivation where survey data are unavailable or severely outdated, several of which are likely among the poorest countries in the world.Publication Do Poverty Traps Exist? Assessing the Evidence(American Economic Association, 2014-07)A "poverty trap" can be understood as a set of self-reinforcing mechanisms whereby countries start poor and remain poor: poverty begets poverty, so that current poverty is itself a direct cause of poverty in the future. The idea of a poverty trap has this striking implication for policy: much poverty is needless, in the sense that a different equilibrium is possible and one-time policy efforts to break the poverty trap may have lasting effects. But what does the modern evidence suggest about the extent to which poverty traps exist in practice and the underlying mechanisms that may be involved? The main mechanisms we examine include S-shaped savings functions at the country level; "big-push" theories of development based on coordination failures; hunger-based traps which rely on physical work capacity rising nonlinearly with food intake at low levels; and occupational poverty traps whereby poor individuals who start businesses that are too small will be trapped earning subsistence returns. We conclude that these types of poverty traps are rare and largely limited to remote or otherwise disadvantaged areas. We discuss behavioral poverty traps as a recent area of research, and geographic poverty traps as the most likely form of a trap. The resulting policy prescriptions are quite different from the calls for a big push in aid or an expansion of microfinance. The more-likely poverty traps call for action in less-traditional policy areas such as promoting more migration.Publication Do Poverty Traps Exist?(World Bank, Washington, DC, 2014-04)This paper reviews the empirical evidence on the existence of poverty traps, understood as self-reinforcing mechanisms through which poor individuals or countries remain poor. Poverty traps have captured the interest of many development policy makers, because poverty traps provide a theoretically coherent explanation for persistent poverty. They also suggest that temporary policy interventions may have long-term effects on poverty. However, a review of the reduced-form empirical evidence suggests that truly stagnant incomes of the sort predicted by standard models of poverty traps are in fact quite rare. Moreover, the empirical evidence regarding several canonical mechanisms underlying models of poverty traps is mixed.Publication Settling in the Zone: Urbanization and Flood Exposure Trends since 1985, Europe and Central Asia(Washington, DC: World Bank, 2025-09-12)As countries rapidly urbanize, settlements are expanding into hazardous flood zones. This analysis considers spatial urbanization patterns and the evolution of flood exposure between 1985 and 2020 in 55 countries in the Europe and Central Asia region. The evidence in this report suggests that across Europe and Central Asia, urbanization in flood zones can accelerate even as urbanization overall is slowing down. The causes behind this trend are wide-ranging, including rational risk taking for economic opportunities (e.g. coastal developments for tourism), as well as rising scarcity of safe land, a lack of risk-informed planning, inadequate zoning and land use regulations, or weak enforcement. These findings suggest that local planners and authorities play a key role in managing and counteracting flood exposure. These findings also highlight how comprehensive hazard data and continuous monitoring of urbanization and flood exposure patterns can help adapt planning and infrastructure investments and guide timely interventions. While land scarcity and geographic constraints can mean that flood zones cannot always be avoided, careful planning of protection systems and disaster preparedness are key to balance flood risk with objectives of urban and economic development.