Title: Economic Growth and Poverty Reduction in Nepal in last decade Dr Shiva Sharma General Secretary Nati
1Economic Growth and Poverty Reduction in Nepal
in last decadeDr Shiva SharmaGeneral
SecretaryNational Labour Academy
2Table 1 Trends in the Incidence of Poverty
- Source NESAC (1998). CBS
- Differences in Poverty line over surveys
- Comparable data in NLSS I and II
- Difficulty in disaggregated analysis of poverty
3Table 2 Contribution of Growth and
Redistribution of Income in Poverty
- Source Computed from the NLSS II poverty
results. - Decomposition
- economic growth and -24.1
- income distribution 13.2
- Had income distribution remained neutral, the
decline in poverty would have been more than 24
percentage points. - Had there been no growth and income distribution
only worsened as shown by the Gini coefficient,
absolute poverty would have gone up to 44 per
cent - Urban areas, inequality not a deterent
- Had income distribution not worsened in the rural
areas, the decline in poverty in rural areas
would have been at least 17 percentage points
4Table 3 Gini Coefficients of Income
Distribution Patterns
Income Distribution Pattern
Source NESAC 1998, NLSS II, CBS.
- inequality growing over the years
- rural inequality lower than urban
- but rural inequality growing faster
5Inequalityhousehold incomes
Inequalityhousehold incomes
Source NLSS I and NLSS II, CBS. Inequality
measured in terms of share of income of the
poorest and the richest households has worsened
in the NLSS II survey year 2004 compared to the
NLSS I survey year 1996. The Lorenz curve has
bulged to the right.
6Table 4 Share of Remittance in Household Income
by Consumption Quintile
- Source NLSS II, CBS (2004).
- Poorest 33
- Richest 40 of income
- Poorest might not be having access to external
market - Will be illuminating to learn
- who received and those households who did not
receive remittance, and - who received lower amount of remittance than
those who received higher amount.
7- On the whole, the following points reveal the
accentuation of inequality in 2004 as compared to
1996 info in tables below - contraction of the size of operational land
- increase in the share of rented-in land
- fall in the consumption share of the poorest 20
per cent - slower growth of income vis-a-vis consumption
- inequality in the receipt from remittances
- a sharper fall in employment share in agriculture
and a modest increase in non-agricultural
employment - fall in employment share of longer duration
8Table 5 Indicators of Economic Activities and
Inequality over Two NLSS
Cont
9Cont
10Cont
11Cont
12Cont
13Cont
14(No Transcript)
15Thank You