Is there a tradeoff between raising growth and reducing inequality and poverty? This paper reviews the theoretical and empirical literature on the complex links between growth, inequality, and poverty, with causation going in both directions. The evidence suggests that growth can be effective in reducing poverty, but its impact on inequality is ambiguous and depends on the underlying sources of growth. The impact of poverty and inequality on growth is likewise ambiguous, as several channels mediate the relationship. But most plausible mechanisms suggest that poverty and inequality reduce growth, at least in the long run. Policies play a role in shaping these relationships and those designed to improve equality of opportunity can simultaneously improve inclusiveness and growth.

Adams uses new data from 50 developing countries and 101 intervals to examine the impact of economic growth on poverty and inequality. He finds that growth represents an important means for reducing poverty in the developing world. When economic growth is measured by survey mean income (consumption), there is a strong, statistical link between growth and poverty reduction. When economic growth is measured by GDP per capita, the statistical relationship between growth and poverty reduction is still present, albeit not quite as strong.Economic growth reduces poverty because growth has little impact on income inequality. In the data set income inequality rises on average less than 1.0 percent a year. Since income distributions are relatively stable over time, economic growth tends to raise incomes for all members of society, including the poor. When growth is measured by survey mean income (consumption), the elasticity of poverty with respect to growth is -2.59. In other words, on average, a 10 percentage point increase in economic growth (measured by survey mean income) will produce a 25.9 percent decrease in the proportion of people living in poverty ($1 a person a day).This paper - a product of the Poverty Reduction Group, Poverty Reduction and Economic Management Network - is part of a larger effort in the network to better inform policy debates about economic growth, poverty, and inequality.

One side in the current debate about who benefits from growth has focused solely on average impacts on poverty and inequality, while the other side has focused on the diverse welfare impacts found beneath the averages. Both sides have a point.

Adams uses new data from 50 developing countries and 101 intervals to examine the impact of economic growth on poverty and inequality. He finds that growth represents an important means for reducing poverty in the developing world. When economic growth is measured by survey mean income (consumption), there is a strong, statistical link between growth and poverty reduction. When economic growth is measured by GDP per capita, the statistical relationship between growth and poverty reduction is still present, albeit not quite as strong. Economic growth reduces poverty because growth has little impact on income inequality. In the data set income inequality rises on average less than 1.0 percent a year. Since income distributions are relatively stable over time, economic growth tends to raise incomes for all members of society, including the poor. When growth is measured by survey mean income (consumption), the elasticity of poverty with respect to growth is -2.59. In other words, on average, a 10 percentage point increase in economic growth (measured by survey mean income) will produce a 25.9 percent decrease in the proportion of people living in poverty ($1 a person a day). This paper--a product of the Poverty Reduction Group, Poverty Reduction and Economic Management Network--is part of a larger effort in the network to better inform policy debates about economic growth, poverty, and inequality.

The relationship between growth, inequality, and poverty lies at the heart of development economics. This volume draws together many of the most important recent contributions to the controversies surrounding this topic. Some of the chapters help explain why there is profound disagreement on crucial issues of growth, poverty and inequality within academic circles, and among organizations and various groups active in the development field. Another central theme is the cross-country evidence on the relationship between growth and poverty, and the extent to which it is valid to draw policy conclusions from this empirical evidence. The volume also shows how new microeconomic techniques such as poverty maps and microsimulation models can be used to improve poverty analysis and the design of pro-poor policies. The overall conclusion points to the need for diverse strategies towards growth and poverty, rather than simple blanket policy rules. Initial conditions, specific country structures, and time horizons all play a significant role. Initial conditions affect the speed with which growth reduces poverty and can also determine whether policies such as trade liberalization have a pro-poor or an anti-poor outcome. Improved education is valuable in itself, and also contributes to poverty reduction; but its effect on inequality depends on supply and demand factors, which differ significantly across countries. Likewise, the quantitative impact on poverty of redistribution from the rich to the poor vis-à-vis an increase in total national income can vary greatly across countries. Hence the need for creative approaches to poverty which take full account of the specific circumstances of individual nations and which assign a central role to inequality analysis in the discussion of poverty-alleviation policies.

This paper examines the empirical relationship between inequality and growth, and analyzes the impacts of growth, inequality, and government spending on poverty reduction. A new panel dataset has been assembled on inequality and poverty that reduces measurement error and ensures comparability across countries and over time. The empirical results in this paper challenge the belief that income inequality has a negative effect on growth and confirm the validity of the Kuznets curve. Credit market imperfections in low- and medium-income countries are identified as the likely reason for the positive link between inequality and growth over the short-to-medium term. In the long term, inequality may have an adverse impact on growth.