send mail to support@abhimanu.com mentioning your email id and mobileno registered with us! if details not recieved
Resend Opt after 60 Sec.
By Loging in you agree to Terms of Services and Privacy Policy
Please specify
Please verify your mobile number
Login not allowed, Please logout from existing browser
Please update your name
Subscribe to Notifications
Stay updated with the latest Current affairs and other important updates regarding video Lectures, Test Schedules, live sessions etc..
Your Free user account at abhipedia has been created.
Remember, success is a journey, not a destination. Stay motivated and keep moving forward!
Refer & Earn
Enquire Now
My Abhipedia Earning
Kindly Login to view your earning
Support
There is no universal interpretation of poverty in general, or of child poverty more specifically. While it may seem like a simple concept, poverty is not always easy to quantify. Some may understand poverty as the lack of adequate income to meet basic human needs. Others define it as the inability to keep up with the average standard of living in a given society. Still others take a wider view, interpreting poverty as a lack of access to basic services such as education, primary health care or safe drinking water.
Effect of Poverty on child Viewed from the perspective of a child, the exact definition of Poverty which define normally becomes immaterial. Being deprived, by any measure, is damaging to a child’s development, particularly when deprivations are experienced in early childhood. A child rarely has a second chance at a good start in life. Deprivations of health, nutrition or stimulation in the earliest months and years of life when the brain is developing at a rapid pace, can lead to damage that is difficult or even impossible to overcome later. Under nutrition in early childhood, for instance, can result in stunting. Left unaddressed at that point, it can affect cognitive development, leading to learning difficulties and poor health in adolescence and adulthood. Poor health, beyond the physical and emotional consequences, also denies children the chance to play and learn. Missing out on education in early childhood or living in an environment that provides little stimulation or emotional support can severely restrict a person’s productivity as an adult. In these and many other ways, poverty, in the form of deprivations that begin in childhood, can be felt throughout a lifetime. Children who grow up deprived not only have limited opportunities to fulfil their potential; they often have no option but to raise their own children in poverty. To break this vicious cycle, poverty reduction must begin with a focus on children.
Children living in extreme poverty The measure most commonly used to calculate monetary poverty is the international poverty line developed by the World Bank and set at US $1.90 per day since October 2015. By this measure, in 2012, almost 900 million people struggling to survive below that line, were living in extreme poverty. Because poorer families tend to be larger, children are disproportionately represented among the extreme poor. While children aged 17 and under account for about one third (34 per cent) of the total population in low- and middle-income countries, they make up nearly half (46 per cent) of the population living on less than US $1.90 per day Nevertheless, the last three decades have seen unprecedented progress in reducing extreme poverty. The overall proportion of people living in extreme poverty has fallen, and that trend is projected to continue. In 2012, the number of people living in extreme poverty worldwide was almost half of what it had been at the end of the 1990s. But particular attention to the pace of progress is warranted in some regions. In the Middle East and North Africa, for example, after years of progress, the rates of monetary poverty appear to be stagnant or, by some estimates, even on the rise This concentration is especially alarming given that sub-Saharan Africa is the world’s youngest region, with children under age 18 accounting for around half the population. Over the next 15 years, the region will account for almost the entire increase in the world’s population of children. If current trends persist, 156 million children in sub-Saharan Africa will be struggling to survive on less than US $1.90 a day in 2030; as a group, they will comprise nearly half of the world’s extreme poor. Poverty is not just more pervasive but also more intense in sub-Saharan Africa than in other regions. On average, poor people there are starting the journey towards the US $1.90 extreme poverty threshold from a lower base than their counterparts in other parts of the world. Some 89 million people in the region, or around 10 per cent of the population, lived on less than 80 cents a day in 2012. In sub-Saharan Africa, people who are below the extreme poverty threshold live on an average of US $1.20 a day, compared to US$1.50 for the extreme poor in South Asia.230
Indicator to measure child poverty :
The international extreme poverty line The World Bank’s ‘extreme poverty’ line identifies people living in households that have less than US$ 1.90 per person per day. It is calculated by converting the national poverty lines from a selection of the poorest countries in the world to a common currency – using purchasing power parity (PPP) exchange rates to adjust for the difference in cost of living across countries – and then taking an average of those lines. This measure reflects a very low absolute poverty standard based on basic needs for survival. It was used to set targets for poverty reduction under the Millennium Development Goals and is now part of the Sustainable Development Goals, which aim to eradicate extreme poverty by 2030. The World Bank also calculates higher international poverty thresholds, such as US$3.10 per person per day, using the same per capita approach. These measures represent levels of poverty above extreme poverty. National poverty lines Governments use national poverty lines to monitor monetary poverty within their own countries. According to these measures, a person is considered poor if he or she lives in a household with a consumption or income level below a nationally established threshold. National poverty lines are estimated in local currencies and reflect national standards. While absolute poverty lines reflect the minimum level of income or consumption needed to fulfil basic requirements, some governments opt to use ‘relative poverty’ lines. These thresholds still allow for participation in the normal consumption and living standards of the country but measure poverty in relation to the national average income levels. (The European Union and Organisation of Economic Co-operation and Development also use relative poverty lines to compare levels of poverty among their members and with other countries.) The great advantage of national poverty lines is that they are specific to the country, reflecting its specific characteristics and level of development. However, the methodology used varies greatly across countries and, therefore, doesn’t allow for comparisons between them.
Children living in ‘moderate’ poverty
It is worth noting that the extreme poverty line of US$1.90 a day is not a hard-and-fast border dividing the poor from the non-poor. Millions of children living above this line still live in poverty, are vulnerable to it or experience deprivations in other dimensions of their lives. In 2012, more than 2 billion people in low- and middle-income countries lived on less than US $3.10 a day, which is considered ‘moderate’ poverty. This total includes almost 900 million people in South Asia, some 500 million in East Asia and the Pacific, and about 72 million in Latin America and the Caribbean. About 50 million people in the Middle East and North Africa lived on less than US$3.10 a day in 2008, the latest year for which reliable surveys are available. Worldwide, more than 3 billion people remained vulnerable to poverty in 2012, subsisting on less than US$5 a day. In many cases, these people – who represent more than half the population in low- and middle-income countries – are already subject to some dimensions of deprivation and remain well within the gravitational pull of extreme poverty. A drought, an illness, the outbreak of conflict or an economic downturn is all it might take to put them back under the US$1.90 a day level. The experience of Latin America illustrates the need to look beyond poverty thresholds. Between the mid-1990s and 2011, extreme poverty in the region fell by half, thanks to rising incomes as well as pensions and other social transfers. In 2012, there were more people in Latin America’s middle class than in the ranks of the extreme poor. However, 38 per cent of the population lived on a daily income of between US$4 and US$10 a day in 2013, at risk of slipping back into extreme poverty
Poor children living in rich countries Relative poverty, which is of particular relevance in richer countries, can also affect the lives of children. Having fewer opportunities to be educated, healthy or nourished compared to their peers puts children at a disadvantage and limits their life chances. Eight years after the onset of the 2008 financial crisis, the slow pace of economic recovery, high levels of unemployment, financial pressure and rising inequality are jeopardizing the hopes of a generation of children in high-income countries belonging to the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD). At the same time, children and poor families are feeling the effects of deficit reduction programmes initiated by governments in response to the crisis.236 In the 41 most affluent countries, nearly 77 million children lived in monetary poverty in 2014. Taking pre-crisis levels as an anchor point, child poverty rates increase in 23 OECD countries after 2008. In five countries, child poverty rates increased by more than 50 per cent. In most countries in the European Union, the proportion of children in poverty is higher than the rate for adult
The role of cash transfers in reducing poverty and inequality
Reducing child poverty in all its dimensions is one of the world’s most important and urgent tasks, requiring concerted and sustained efforts to put children first and give them what they need to have a fair chance to survive and thrive. Because children experience poverty in multifaceted ways, it is critical not only to provide equitable services – including essential health care and quality The role of cash transfers in reducing poverty and inequality Reducing child poverty in all its dimensions is one of the world’s most important and urgent tasks, requiring concerted and sustained efforts to put children first and give them what they need to have a fair chance to survive and thrive. Because children experience poverty in multifaceted ways, it is critical not only to provide equitable services – including essential health care and quality education – but also to make sure the most disadvantaged children have access to those services. Social protection mechanisms such as pensions, fee waivers, child support grants and cash transfers are an effective approach that can reduce vulnerability to poverty and deprivation, strengthen families’ capacity to care for their children and overcome barriers to accessing essential services. Cash transfers can work as a ‘safety net’ to keep the poorest, most vulnerable households out of destitution in all settings, including humanitarian emergencies. At the same time, they offer families a ladder out of poverty by boosting incomes, increasing school attendance, improving nutrition, encouraging the use of health services and providing job opportunities. By one estimate, social protection initiatives keep some 150 million people out of poverty,and they make a positive impact on children’s lives across a range of indicators. Results from many regions demonstrate direct impacts such as increased income and consumption, increased access to goods and services, greater social inclusion and reduced household stress. Because of their usually modest size, cash transfer programmes alone cannot directly lift most households above the monetary poverty threshold. But they can make a real difference in reducing the effects of poverty and bolstering families and economies. Cash transfers work by putting more money into the hands of the poor, strengthening local markets and creating a stream of social benefits that come with poverty reduction. As households spend the transfers they receive, their impact is multiplied in the local economy and the benefits transmitted to others in society
Cash transfers and access to essential services
As some of these examples show, cash transfers address multiple deprivations and help children gain access to services that are critical to their well-being. For example, cash transfers for the most vulnerable households and children can be used to trigger eligibility for health coverage – an approach adopted by Ghana with its Livelihood Empowerment Against Poverty (LEAP) programme. A unique feature of LEAP is that, in addition to small, bimonthly cash payments, it provides beneficiaries with free health care coverage through the National Health Insurance Scheme. Cash transfers can also address some of the determinants of educational disadvantage, helping to break the link between poverty and school drop-out rates. In Morocco, a cash transfer programme led to a significant improvement in school participation. Evidence shows that cash transfers have increased demand for education and improved school enrolment and attendance. In addition, cash transfers have been shown to help children stay in school longer and advance to higher levels of education. In Cambodia, an initiative providing scholarships to at-risk pupils from low-income households increased the average time they remained in school by more than half a grade. In Colombia, Ghana and Pakistan, cash transfers programmes have helped improve rates of transition to higher levels of education. In some cases, cash transfers and other social protection measures have had an impact on learning as well. For example, cash transfer programmes led to improved test scores for children in Burkina Faso and modest improvements in Morocco Meanwhile, school feeding programmes have been linked to increased learning and cognitive development. In Bangladesh, primary school students in a school meal programme showed a 15.7 per cent improvement in learning metrics, mostly in mathematics, compared with children who did not participate in the programme. Cash transfers have also proven to have some impact on child marriage and child labour and on the educational disadvantages these practices entail. While addressing these child rights violations is a complex challenge that demands action in multiple sectors, cash transfers can play a role in alleviating some of the financial pressures that force children into work or marriage and out of school A cash transfer programme in Panama, for example, led to a nearly 16 per cent reduction in child labour among indigenous children aged 12 to 15 and to a nearly 8 per cent increase in elementary school enrolment in indigenous areas. Pakistan’s Female School Stipend Programme reduced girls’ labourforce participation by as much as 5 per cent.275 In Bangladesh, a cash transfer programme was successful in encouraging girls to enrol, particularly in secondary school, and in delaying marriage.
Expanding social protection – and looking ahead Every country in the world has at least one social safety net programme in place, and specific child and family benefit programmes rooted in legislation exist in 108 countries. Yet these often cover only small groups of the population, and in 75 countries no such targeted programmes are available at all. Expanding social protection is critical to achieving the 2030 goals. In fact, the goals include a specific target on implementing nationally appropriate social protection systems and measures to achieve substantial coverage of the poor and vulnerable by 2030. A universal approach to expanding social protection would not only increase coverage but would also reduce the chances of mistakenly excluding eligible households, create social solidarity and reduce the stigma that is sometimes associated with targeting. However, countries can realize social protection by taking incremental approaches that work within their resource and capacity constraints – as well as their social and economic policy frameworks – towards the ultimate goal of universal coverage. For rich countries, the immediate challenge is to repair and strengthen the safety nets and benefits that were eroded in the wake of the global financial crisis. For many middle-income countries, the architecture of existing cash transfer programmes provides a basis for further expansion. Governments in low-income countries face starker choices. With limited budgets and high levels of child poverty, there are tensions between targeted transfer approaches and universal approaches. These tensions have to be addressed on a case-by-case basis. In the end, however, social protection programmes are just one tool in the wider effort to address the underlying issue of child poverty. In adopting the SDGs, world leaders recognized the central importance of that issue. Goal 1 aims to effectively end extreme poverty by 2030 and to reduce by at least half the proportion of men, women and children living in poverty in all its dimensions under national definitions The goals also emphasize that no country is immune to the impact of poverty, underscoring the fact that ending child poverty is a universal challenge. Working towards the 2030 goals, governments will have to recognize and respond to the distinctive challenges of child poverty in all its dimensions and make explicit commitments to end it. Failing to do so in this generation will transmit the human, social and economic costs to future generations
By: Vishal ProfileResourcesReport error
Access to prime resources