Monga, CelestinFofack, HippolyteTuluy, Hasan2014-08-262014-08-262001-04https://hdl.handle.net/10986/19676The authors investigate the dynamics of poverty and income inequality in a cross-section of socio-economic groups and geographical regions over the five-year growth period following the 1994 devaluation of the CFA franc in Burkina Faso. Results show rapidly increasing urban poverty accompanied by rising income inequality, declining poverty -growth elasticities, and significant changes in the poverty map. In rural areas, the incidence of poverty remained the same and income inequality did not increase. In contrast, the distribution of welfare across socio-economic groups was more stable. The rank ordering of socioeconomic groups on the welfare scale did not change during the post-devaluation growth period. Poverty remains largely a rural phenomenon, whose inelastic nature may justify a shift toward growth-oriented policies that at least maintain the rural poor's share of income to reduce poverty in the medium term. Among factors that feed into income inequality: disparities in wages and in educational attainment and unequal access to productive assets (especially human capital).en-USCC BY 3.0 IGOABSOLUTE POVERTYABSOLUTE TERMSAGRICULTURAL OUTPUTAGRICULTURAL PRODUCTIONAVERAGE GROWTHAVERAGE GROWTH RATEAVERAGE INCOMEBASIC EDUCATIONCORRELATION ANALYSISDATA COLLECTIONDATA SETSDEVELOPING WORLDDIVIDENDSDROUGHTECONOMIC GROWTHECONOMIC MANAGEMENTECONOMIC OPPORTUNITIESEDUCATION LEVELEDUCATIONAL ATTAINMENTELASTICITIESEMPIRICAL EVIDENCEEMPIRICAL RESULTSEXPENDITURESFOOD CONSUMPTIONGINI COEFFICIENTGINI INDEXGROUP LEVELGROWTH ELASTICITYGROWTH PROCESSGROWTH RATESHEAD-COUNT RATIOHEADCOUNT POVERTYHIGH GROWTHHIGH POVERTYHOUSEHOLD COMPOSITIONHOUSEHOLD CONSUMPTIONHOUSEHOLD INCOMEHOUSEHOLD LEVELHOUSEHOLD SURVEYHOUSEHOLD SURVEYSHOUSEHOLD WELFAREHUMAN CAPITALINCOME DATAINCOME DISTRIBUTIONINCOME DISTRIBUTIONSINCOME INEQUALITYINCOME LEVELINCOME REDISTRIBUTIONINCOME SHAREINCOME SHORTFALLINEQUALITY ELASTICITYINFLATIONINFLATION RATEINFORMAL SECTORLANDLOCKED COUNTRYMACROECONOMICSMARKET PRICESMEAN INCOMEMEDIUM TERMNATIONAL AVERAGENATIONAL INCOMENATIONAL LEVELNATIONAL POVERTYNATURAL RESOURCESNEGATIVE EFFECTNEGATIVE SIGNNEW POORPER CAPITA EXPENDITUREPER CAPITA INCOMEPER CAPITA INCOMESPOLICY IMPLICATIONSPOLICY RESEARCHPOOR HOUSEHOLDSPOOR PEOPLEPOPULATION DYNAMICSPOPULATION GROWTHPOPULATION SHAREPOVERTY DYNAMICSPOVERTY GAPPOVERTY GAP INDEXPOVERTY INCREASEPOVERTY INDEXPOVERTY LINEPOVERTY MAPPOVERTY MEASUREPOVERTY MEASURESPOVERTY RATEPOVERTY RATESPOVERTY REDUCTIONPOVERTY REDUCTION STRATEGYPOVERTY TRENDSPRIVATE SECTORSPRODUCERSPRODUCTIVE ASSETSPUBLIC RESOURCESPUBLIC SPENDINGPUBLIC TRANSFERSPURCHASING POWERPURCHASING POWER PARITYRANDOM SAMPLINGREGIONAL PRICE DIFFERENCESRELATIVE CONTRIBUTIONRURAL AREASRURAL POORRURAL POPULATIONRURAL POVERTYSAMPLE SELECTIONSAMPLE SIZESAMPLING FRAMESOCIAL POLICYSPATIAL ANALYSISSPATIAL DIMENSIONSSPATIAL DISTRIBUTIONSTRUCTURAL REFORMSSUBSISTENCE FARMERSTARGETINGTERMS OF TRADEUNEQUAL DISTRIBUTIONURBAN AREASURBAN POVERTYWAGE INCOMEWAGES10.1596/1813-9450-2590