UN Department of Economic and Social Affairs (DESA) Working Papers

This paper describes a new model, Climate and Regional Economics of Development (CRED), which is designed to analyze the economics of climate and development choices. Its principal innovations are the treatment of global equity, calculation of the optimum interregional flows of resources, and use of McKinsey marginal abatement cost curves to project the cost of mitigation. The model shows more equitable scenarios have better climate outcomes; the challenge of climate policy is to persuade high-income countries to accept the need for both international equity and climate protection.

This paper presents a non-parametric microsimulation methodology for assessing the determinants of changes in income inequality and poverty. One great advantage of this method over alternatives is that it is not very demanding in terms of modelling labour supply and household behaviour while still providing a plausible link between changes in overall labour market conditions and the full household income distribution. The paper also shows how the method can be adapted to assess the poverty and inequality effects of changes in non-labour incomes (such as through a government transfer programme) and how it can be combined with economy-wide models.

This paper reviews the links between property rights and poverty reduction. Poor people not only lack current income, but also assets with which to generate incomes. Billions of poor people have access to land which may not be legally recognized. While legislation may provide more secure land tenure for the poor and thus reduce poverty, this outcome is not guaranteed. Policies that do not recognize the complexity of property rights have backfired, reducing poor people’s security of tenure. Finally, understanding legal pluralism can lead to more effective policies and interventions to strengthen poor people’s control over assets.

This paper attempts to provide a critical appraisal of the debate on the effectiveness of microfinance as a universal poverty reduction tool. It argues that while microfinance has developed some innovative management and business strategies, its impact on poverty reduction remains in doubt. Microfinance, however, certainly plays an important role in providing safety-net and consumption smoothening. The borrowers of microfinance possibly also benefit from learning-by-doing and from self-esteem. However, for any significant dent on poverty, the focus of public policy should be on growth-oriented and equity-enhancing programs, such as broad-based productive employment creation.

The recent revision of the World Bank’s global poverty estimates based on a new $1.25 (2005 PPP) poverty line underlines their unreliability and lack of meaningfulness. It is very difficult to justify various aspects of the Bank’s approach. In the short term, less weight should be given to the Bank’s poverty estimates in monitoring the first MDG. In the longer term, a solution to the observed problems requires adopting an altogether different method. Such an alternative exists but requires global institutional coordination. Until it is implemented, the crisis in the monitoring of global consumption poverty can be expected to intensify. Subsequent versions of this paper, correcting errors or extending the argument, will be made available on socialanalysis.org

This paper argues that developing countries have limited arsenal at the national level to manage financial instability. Th e solutions have to be sought mainly at the multilateral level and these include: provision of adequate international liquidity at appropriate terms for current account financing to countries facing foreign exchange shortages as a result of trade and financial shocks; and orderly debt workout procedures designed to stem attacks on currencies, check capital outflows and involve the private sector in the resolution of crises. Multilateral policy surveillance and advice should also be used to help countries to manage surges in capital inflows.

The paper reviews attempts to provide insurance against risks afflicting the poorest. It presents empirical evidence on the impact of different types of microinsurance, and recommends the idea of ‘quasi-insurance’—the provision of insurance functions through a non-insurance route—where institutional or regulatory constraints prevent insurance proper from being offered. The paper argues that microinsurance so far has been somewhat supply-driven rather than driven by effective demand, especially from the poorest, and thus the insurance products which would benefit the poorest are still at a limited stage of development. Institutional innovations and new insurance products therefore deserve promotion.

The paper suggests that, rather than through its narrow, direct financial impact, microfinance may prove to be more potent in reducing insecurity and poverty through its indirect, broader impact conducing to a more egalitarian initial endowment distribution that is necessary for the “take-off” of an equitable growth process. The paper begins by examining the distinctive roles of micro credit, micro savings, and micro insurance programs in dealing with poverty and insecurity, and highlights the complementariness that exists among these programs and how this complementariness can be used to overcome the weaknesses of the individual programs.

The movement emphasizing free markets to reduce poverty has found strong expression in the ‘bottom of the pyramid’ approach in recent years. It views the poor as “resilient and creative entrepreneurs and value-conscious consumers”. This romanticized view of the poor harms the poor in two ways. First, it results in too little emphasis on legal, regulatory and social mechanisms to protect the poor who are vulnerable consumers. Second, it overemphasizes microcredit and underemphasizes fostering modern enterprises that would provide employment opportunities for the poor. More importantly, it grossly underemphasizes the critical role and responsibility of the state in poverty reduction.

As the international financial crisis spreads, some governments are using “unconventional tools” of monetary and financial policy to protect themselves. Should policies to control international capital flows be part of the government “toolkit” in these difficult times? This essay answers: YES. It describes the economic arguments for and against using capital controls, prudential regulations and other “capital management techniques” to manage international financial flows, presents empirical evidence on their impacts, and describes the variety of policies that many countries have successfully applied to enhance macroeconomic and financial stability, create policy space, and achieve other national development goals.