A Comparative Perspective on Poverty Reduction in Brazil, China, and India

By M. Ravallion. 2009

228 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Brazil, China and India have seen falling poverty in their reform periods, but to varying degrees and for different reasons. History left China with favorable initial conditions for rapid poverty reduction through market-led economic growth; at the outset of the reform process there were ample distortions to remove and relatively low inequality in access to the opportunities so created, though inequality has risen markedly since. By concentrating such opportunities in the hands of the better off, prior inequalities in various dimensions handicapped poverty reduction in both Brazil and India. Brazil's recent success in complementing market-oriented reforms with progressive social policies has helped it achieve more rapid poverty reduction than India, although Brazil has been less successful in terms of economic growth. In the wake of its steep rise in inequality, China might learn from Brazil's success with such policies. India needs to do more to assure that poor people are able to participate in both the country's growth process and its social policies; here there are lessons from both China and Brazil. All three countries have learned how important macroeconomic stability is to poverty reduction.

Subfields: Safety Research, Sociology and Political Science, Soil Science

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/9d45428879b3e2b0f26faa2d218528e5ebe27b9b

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Safety Research

In Sociology and Political Science

In Soil Science

Citations in the corpus

Rural development through the construction of new, nested, markets: comparative perspectives from China, Brazil and the European Union (2012, result): “China’s overall record in terms of poverty alleviation, sustained agricultural growth and quality of life in the countryside is impressive (Gulati and Fan 2007) – it represents a considerable contrast with neighbouring India (Ravallion 2009) and with Africa (Li et al.”
Enhancing the Impact of Cross-Sector Partnerships (2015, methodology): “While such a choice potentially facilitates impact analysis by making comparison easier, it also limits research to a relatively small subsample of the observed phenomenon.”
The Future of Food and Farming: Challenges and Choices for Global Sustainability (2011, background): “331 Meenakshi et al. (2010) 332 LeRoy et al. (2009) 333 Ravallion (2010) The Future of Food and Farming: Challenges and choices for global sustainability 124 significant.”
Economic Liberalization and Indian Economic Growth: What's the Evidence? (2011, background): “Ravallion (2009) points out that educational inequalities in India are much worse than in comparable large countries such as Brazil and China.”
Brazil's liberal neo-developmentalism: New paradigm or edited orthodoxy? (2013, background): “During the 2000s IFIs showcased Brazil as a model for this version of this version of the anti-poverty agenda (Hall, 2007; Ravaillon, 2011).26 Initiated under Cardoso and continued by Lula, these programs began to target the most vulnerable citizens and were conditional on undertaking health checks…”
Moving off the farm: Land institutions to facilitate structural transformation and agricultural productivity growth in China (2012, unknown): “…in the primary sector, i.e., mainly in agriculture was four times more effective in reducing poverty than growth in secondary or tertiary sectors (Ravallion & Chen, 2007); it helped to reduce the poverty headcount to 16% by 2005, well below the developing world average of 26% (Ravallion, 2011).”
Have Economic Growth And Institutional Quality Contributed To Poverty And Inequality Reduction In Asia (2013, methodology): “Therefore, the $1.25 per day international poverty line was selected, which was also used in the study of Ravallion [12].”
China’s Regional Disparities: Experience and Policy (2011, unknown): “Such an experimental approach, and learning from the lessons of the Chinese experience, appears to us a more fruitful route in this area than looking to other countries for experiences with governance.”
Enhancing the Impact of Cross-Sector Partnerships (2016, methodology): “For example, the experimental method has difficulty in taking into account spill-over effects from pilot-intervention areas to other areas, which makes the distinction between ‘‘treated’’ and ‘‘control’’ groups difficult (Ravallion 2010).”