4. Algoritmos genéticos paralelos
4.2. Paralelización global
The monetary approach defines child poverty with respect to only financial matters, more
specifically, in the context of household income from a predefined line of poverty (Gillie, 1996;
Ravallion, 1998; Stigler, 1954). When estimating poverty by means of financial matters, the
indicators of child poverty measurements mainly use revenue and expenditure of households (for
detail, refer to Chapter 3.2.1.3). Despite its drawbacks and limitations, the monetary approach to
child poverty measurements was used for practicality and data availability reasons.
The poverty impact of each of these scenarios was measured using the P-alpha measure in the
Foster-Greer-Thorbecke (FGT) index of poverty measurement proposed by Foster et al. (1984).
These include poverty rate (P0) [headcount ratio], poverty gap (P1) [the depth of poverty], and
the severity of poverty (P2) [squared poverty gap].
154
5.7.2.1. Poverty rate (P0) [headcount ratio]
In this research, the poverty rate (P0) defines the proportion of poor in the population, whose
income or consumption fell below the absolute poverty line of R450 per capita per month. The
poverty rate (P0) is specified as α = 0, and the formula reduces to
N H
FGT =0 , which is the
headcount ratio (P0), or the fraction of the population which lives below the poverty line.
5.7.2.2. Poverty gap (P1) [the depth of poverty]
The poverty gap (P1) shows the average distance of the population from the absolute poverty
line of R450 per capita per month, with the non-poor given a distance of zero. It is a measure of
the poverty deficit of the entire population specified by α = 1, the formula
being
∑
= − = H i z y z N FGT 1 1 1 1. In general, it is the amount of income necessary to bring everyone
in poverty right up to the poverty line, divided by total population. This can be thought of as the
amount that an average person in the economy would have to contribute in order for poverty to
be eliminated.
5.7.2.3. The severity of poverty (P2) [squared poverty gap]
The P2 is a measure of poverty severity and takes into consideration distance separating the poor
from the poverty line. It takes into account the inequality among the poor. It is indicated by α =
2, and the formula is
2 1 1 2 1
∑
= − = H i z y z NFGT , which is the squared poverty gap (P2).
155
5.7.2.4. Gini co-efficient
The Gini co-efficient usually measures societal welfare inequalities t. Amiel and Cowell (1999)
stated that the Gini co-efficient measures the degree of inequality within a society. According to
them, if the Gini co-efficient is 0, it means there is absolute equality, and 1 indicates absolute
inequality/concentration.
5.7.2.5. Beneficiaries
Creedy et al. (2002), indicated that any kinds of government taxation system, (direct or indirect
tax), will have the potential to affect every citizens disposable income. Every tax policy change
involves the losers and gainers from the system. In accordance with the research question, this
indicator investigates and measures the number of beneficiaries of the Child Support Grant in
implementing various policy scenarios.
5.7.2.6. Budgetary implication
This indicator helps to measure the effect that specific policy scenarios have on the national
budget and the Treasury. If the funds show an excess of income over expenditure, this will
indicate that the programmes are having a favourable effect on the budget and vice versa if fund
expenditure exceeds income. The budgetary implication assessments are intended to convey the
adequacy of the financing arrangements established for the programmes.
156
Scenario-1(Indicators) 1. Poverty and inequality (P0, P1, P2 and GI) 2. No of beneficiaries (distributional effect) 3. Budgetary effect (Estimated annual expenditure)
Scenario-V (Indicators) 1. Poverty and inequality (P0, P1, P2 and GI) 2. No of beneficiaries (distributional effect) 3. Budgetary effect (Estimated annual expenditure)
Scenario- III (Indicators)
1. Poverty and inequality (P0, P1, P2 and GI) 2. No of beneficiaries (distributional effect) 3. Budgetary effect (Estimated annual expenditure)
Scenario-II (Indicators) 1. Poverty and inequality (P0, P1, P2 and GI) 2. No of beneficiaries (distributional effect) 3. Budgetary effect (Estimated annual expenditure)
Scenario-IV (Indicators)
1. Poverty and inequality (P0, P1, P2 and GI) 2. No of beneficiaries (distributional effect) 3. Budgetary effect (Estimated annual expenditure)
Scenario-V: Modelling of Child Support Grant through rolling-out for Universalizing Child Support Grant up to the age of 18 years old and policy rule that provides R210 per child per month
Scenario-IV: Modelling of poverty and inequalities profile of people living in households with/without children under the 2007 population baseline and 2008 government policy rules, but the Child Support Grant isgiven up to the age of 18 years old and the policy rule provides R210 per child per month;
Scenario-III: Modelling of poverty and inequalities of people living in households
with/without children under the 2007 population baseline and 2008 government policy rules, but the Child Support Grant given up to the age of 15 years old and policy rule that provides R210 per child per month
Scenario-II: Modelling of poverty and inequalities of people living in households with
children under the 2007 population baseline and 2008 government policy rules, i.e. Child Support Grant given up to the age of 13 years old and policy rule that provides R210 per child per month
Scenario-I : Modelling of poverty and inequalities of households for people living in households with/without children in the absences of Child Support Grant
Figure 5:1 Analysis framework used for assessing policy scenarios8 and indicators of measurements
Source: Own compilation
8
The calculations are done on the basis of the assumption of full-take up of the grant for each of the scenarios; in practice it is likely that 100% take up will not be achieved
157