The importance of combining various methods in assessing poverty level: The case of marine capture fishermen in Bengkulu Province, Indonesia

Information
Title: The importance of combining various methods in assessing poverty level: The case of marine capture fishermen in Bengkulu Province, Indonesia
Issue: Vol. 12, No 2, 2019
Published date: 05-2019 (print) / 05-2019 (online)
Journal: Journal of International Studies
ISSN: 2071-8330, eISSN: 2306-3483
Authors: Gita Mulyasari
Department of Agricultural Socio-Economics, Faculty of Agriculture, Universitas Bengkulu, Indonesia

Irham Irham
Faculty of Agriculture, Universitas Gadjah Mada (UGM), Indonesia

Lestari Rahayu Waluyati
Faculty of Agriculture, Universitas Gadjah Mada (UGM), Indonesia

Any Suryantini
Faculty of Agriculture, Universitas Gadjah Mada (UGM), Indonesia
Keywords: poverty line, multidimensional poverty, marine capture fishermen
DOI: 10.14254/2071-8330.2019/12-2/15
DOAJ: https://doaj.org/article/caf37a43ed2847babbd5bc6525af727a
Language: English
Pages: 241-257 (17)
JEL classification: A13, C40, D63, Q22
Website: https://www.jois.eu/?524,en_the-importance-of-combining-various-methods-in-assessing-poverty-level-the-case-of-marine-capture-fishermen-in-bengkulu-province-indonesia
File https://www.jois.eu/files/15_650_Mulyasari%20et%20al_002.pdf
Licenses:
This article was written as a part of dissertation research entitled “Poverty and Vulnerability of Marine Capture Fishermen to Climate Change and Its Adaptation Strategies in the Coastal Regions of Java and Sumatra”. The authors also gratefully acknowledge the financial support of the Ministry of Research, Technology and Higher Education (Kemristekdikti) together with the Education Fund Management Institute (LPDP) Indonesia. The views expressed in this paper are those of the authors and should not be attributed to the Indonesian Government.
Abstract

The measurement of poverty can be analyzed by various methods and each method has its own advantages and disadvantages. The single dimensional model has a weakness since it only measures poverty in its monetary aspect, as income, while multidimensional method measures poverty by considering various dimensions but excluding the income aspect. Furthermore, it is important to combine both models so that the measurement of poverty could be more comprehensive. The study describes the method of poverty measurement by using: 1) single dimension poverty measurement, promoted by the Asian Development Bank (ADB), the World Bank, Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO); 2) Multidimensional poverty measurement, promoted by the Central Bureau of Statistics (BPS), and Multidimensional Poverty Index (MPI) by Alkire and Foster. The study was conducted in Bengkulu Province, Indonesia, and the data was collected by means of interviewing 90 marine capture fishermen, randomly selected. The results of this study show that each poverty measurement gives a difference in the poverty level of fishermen because it is not able to describe the actual condition of fishermen's poverty. By combining both models, it is found that fishermen's poverty is affected by ship weight, fishing distance, and household size.

Bibliography

1. Acheson, J. M. (1981). Anthropology of fishing. Annual review of anthropology, 10(1), 275–316.

2. Agola, N. O., & Awange, J. L. (2014). Globalized poverty and environment: 21st Century Challenges and Innovative Solutions. Springer, Berlin Heidelberg. doi: 10.1007/978-3-642-39733-2.

3. Alamgir, M., & Ahmed, S. (1988). Poverty and income distribution in Bangladesh. Rural poverty in South Asia, 11–38.

4. Alkire, S., & Foster, J. (2011). Understandings and misunderstandings of multidimensional poverty measurement. The Journal of Economic Inequality, 9(2), 289–314.

5. Alkire, S., & Santos, M. E. (2010). Acute multidimensional poverty: A new index for developing countries. SSRN Electronic Journal. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.1815243.

6. Boedhisantoso, S. (1999). Komunitas lokal di kawasan pesisir dan pemberdayaannya. Makalah Lokakarya Pembangunan Pranata Sosial Komunitas Pesisir. Depok.

7. BPS (Central Bureau of Statistics). (2017). Bengkulu Province in Figures.

8. Chernichovsky, D., & Meesook, O. A. (1981). Poverty in Indonesia: A profile. World Bank Staff Working Paper, 671, Washington DC.

9. Emmerson, D. K. (1980). Rethinking artisanal fisheries development: Western concepts, Asian experiences. World Bank Staff Working Paper No. 423.

10. Faturochman, F., & Molo, M. (1994). Karakteristik rumah tangga miskin di Daerah Istimewa Yogyakarta. Jurnal Populasi 5(1).

11. Firdausy, C., & Tisdell, C. A. (1992). Determinants of rural income and poverty at the village level in Bali, Indonesia. Malaysian Journal of Economic Studies, 29(1), 19–34.

12. Gaiha, R. (1987). Inequality, earning and participation among the poor in rural India. The Journal of Development Studies, 23(4), 491–508

13. Harahap, S. S. (2006). Analisis kritis atas laporan keuangan. Jakarta: PT. Raja Grafindo Persada.

14. Hermanto, S., (1995). Kemiskinan di pedesaan: Masalah dan alternatif penanggulangannya. Pusat Penelitian Sosial Ekonomi Pertanian. Badan Penelitian dan Pengembangan Pertanian. Bogor: IPB

15. Kuncoro, M., (2006). Ekonomika Pembangunan: Teori, Masalah, dan Kebijakan. Yogyakarta: UPP STIM YKPN.

16. Kusnadi. (2002). Konflik Sosial Nelayan Kemiskinan dan Perebutan Sumberdaya Perikanan. Yogyakarta: LKiS Pelangi Aksara.

17. Kuznet, S., (2002). Economic development, the family, and income distribution. Selected essays. Cambridge University Press

18. Lanjouw, P., & Ravallion, M. (1995). Poverty and household size. The Economic Journal, 105(433),1415–1434.

19. Narayan, D., & Petesch, P. (2007). Agency, opportunity structures, and poverty escapes. Moving out of poverty: Cross-disciplinary perspectives on mobility, 1(1). Palgrave Macmillan for the World Bank. Basingstoke.

20. Nasir, M., & Maulizar, S. D. (2008). Analisis faktor-faktor yang mempengaruhi kemiskinan rumah tangga di Kabupaten Purworejo. Jurnal Eksekutif, 5(4).

21. Panayotou, T. (1982). Management concepts for small-scale fisheries, economic, and social aspect. FAO fisheries technical paper, 228. Rome. Italy.

22. Prayitno, H., & Aryad, L. (1987). Petani dan kemiskinan. Yogyakarta: BPFE.

23. Rahimi, F. A. F. (2015). The impact of security and regional integration on poverty reduction in Afghanistan. Journal of International Studies, 8(1), 183–195. https://doi.org/10.14254/2071-8330.2015/8-1/16

24. Siregar, H., & Wahyuniarti, D. (2008). Dampak pertumbuhan ekonomi terhadap penurunan jumlah penduduk miskin. Retrieved from http://pse.litbang.deptan.go.id/ind/pdffiles/PROS_2008_MAK3.pdf

25. Setiadi. (2006). Mengungkap pengentasan kemiskinan secara partisipatoris. Retrieved from http://www.ugm.ac.id/index.php?page=rilis&artikel=307

26. Subade, R.F., & Abdullah, N.M.R. (1993). Are fishers profit maximizers? The case of gillnetters in Negros Occidental and Iloilo, Philippines. Asian Fisheries Science, 6, 39–49.

27. Suryawati, C. (2005). Memahami kemiskinan secara multidimensional. Jurnal Manajemen Pelayanan Kesehatan, 8(3), 121–129.

28. Viet-Wilson, J. H. (1986). Paradigm of poverty: A rehabilitation of BS Rowntree. Journal of Social Policy, 15(1), 69–99.