Quantifying the Qualitative: Eliciting Expert Input to Develop the Multidimensional Poverty Assessment Tool

References

• Agresti, A. (2007). Categorical data analysis (2nd ed.). Hoboken: Wiley.
   Google Scholar
• Alkire, S., & Foster, J. (2011a). Counting and multidimensional poverty measurement. Journal of Public Economics, 95, 476–487.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Alkire, S., & Foster, J. (2011b). Understandings and misunderstandings of multidimensional poverty measurement. Journal of Economic Inequality, 9, 289–314.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Alkire, S., & Santos, M. E. (2010). Acute multidimensional poverty: A new index for developing countries. In. Oxford: Oxford Poverty and Human Development Initiative. “Working Paper No. 38” Pages 1–133 (July, 2010)
   Google Scholar
• Alkire, S., Santos, M. E., Seth, S., & Yalonetzky, G. (2010). Is the Multidimensional Poverty Index robust to different weights? In Oxford Poverty and Human Development Initiative. University of Oxford. Retrieved from http://www.ophi.org.uk.
   Google Scholar
• Barahona, C., & Levy, S. (2003). How to generate statistics and influence policy using participatory methods in research: Reflections on work in Malawi, 1999–2002. Brighton: Institute of Development Studies.
   Google Scholar
• Boltvinik, J. (1998). Poverty measurement methods – an overview. In. New York: United Nations Development Program.
   Google Scholar
• Bossert, W., Chakravarty, S. R., & D’Ambrosio, C. (August 17, 2009, pages 1–21 2009). Multidimensional poverty and material deprivation. In. Montreal: University of Montreal. Available at: http://ftp://www.econ.bgu.ac.il/Courses/Labor_Marcet_Policy-_Selected_Issues/lectures/articles/boltvinik_measurement%201998.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Bourguignon, F., & Chakravarty, S. R. (2003). The measurement of multidimensional poverty. Journal of Economic Inequality, 1, 25–49.
   Google Scholar
• Chambers, R. (1995). Poverty and livelihoods: Whose reality counts? Environment and Urbanization, 7, 173–204.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chambers, R. (2008). Revolutions in development inquiry. London: Earthscan.
   Google Scholar
• Chowdhury, S., & Squire, L. (2006). Setting weights for aggregate indices: An application to the commitment to development index and human development index. Journal of Development Studies, 42, 761–771.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cleaver, F. (1999). Paradoxes of participation: Questioning participatory approaches to development. Journal of International Development, 11, 597–612.
   Google Scholar
• Cohen, A. (2009a). The Multidimensional Poverty Assessment Tool: Design, development and application of a new framework for measuring rural poverty. Rome: IFAD.
   Google Scholar
• Cohen, A. (2009b). The Multidimensional Poverty Assessment Tool: User’s guide (working paper). In. Rome: IFAD. (http://www.ifad.org/mpat/resources/user.pdf). 1–100.
   Google Scholar
• Cohen, A. (2010). The Multidimensional Poverty Assessment Tool: A new framework for measuring rural poverty. Development in Practice, 20, 887–897.
   Google Scholar
• Cooke, B., & Kothari, U. (2001). Participation: The new tyranny? New York and London: Zed Books.
   Google Scholar
• Cooke, R. (1991). Experts in uncertainty: Opinion and subjective probability in science. New York: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Dalkey, N., & Helmer, O. (1963). An experimental application of the Delphi method to the use of experts. Management Science, 9, 458–467.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Evans, M. (1991). The problem of analyzing multiplicative composites. The American Psychologist, 46, 6.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ferguson, J. (1994). The anti-politics machine: ‘Development’, depoliticization, and bureaucratic power in Lesotho. Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota Press.
   Google Scholar
• Ferreira, F. (2011). Poverty is multidimensional. But what are we going to do about it? Journal of Economic Inequality, 9, 493–495.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hargreaves, J. R., Morison, L. A., Gear, J. S. S., Makhubele, M. B., Porter, J. D. H., Busza, J., Watts, C., Kim, J. C., & Pronyk, P. M. (2007). Hearing the voices of the poor: Assigning poverty lines on the basis of local perceptions of poverty. A quantitative analysis of qualitative data from participatory wealth ranking in rural South Africa. World Development, 35, 212–229.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hart, G. (2001). Development critiques in the 1990s: Culs de sac and promising paths. Progress in Human Geography, 25, 649–658.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hickey, S., & Mohan, G. (2004). Participation: From tyranny to transformation? New York: Zed Books.
   Google Scholar
• IFAD. (in press). The Multidimensional Poverty Assessment Tool: User’s guide. Rome: The International Fund for Agricultural Development.
   Google Scholar
• Kadane, J., & Wolfson, L. J. (1998). Experiences in elicitation. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society: Series D (The Statistician), 47, 3–19.
   Google Scholar
• Kapiriri, L., Norheim, O. F., & Heggenhougen, K. (2003). Public participation in health planning and priority setting at the district level in Uganda. Health Policy and Planning, 18, 205–213.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Klugman, J., Rodríguez, F., & Choi, H.-J. (2011). The HDI 2010: New controversies, old critiques. Journal of Economic Inequality, 9, 249–288.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Landeta, J. (2006). Current validity of the Delphi method in social sciences. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 73, 467–482.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Leal, J., Wordsworth, S., Legood, R., and Blair, E. (2007). Eliciting expert opinion for economic models: An applied example. Value in Health, 10, 195–203.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Li, T. (2007). The will to improve: Governmentality, development, and the practice of politics. Durham, NC and London: Duke University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Mitchell, T. (2002). Rule of experts: Egypt, techno-politics, modernity. Berkeley, CA, and Los Angeles, CA: University of California Press.
   Google Scholar
• Mohan, G., & Stokke, K. (2000). Participatory development and empowerment: The dangers of localism. Third World Quarterly, 21, 247–268.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Narayan, D., Pritchett, L., & Kapoor, S. (2009). Moving out of poverty: Success from the bottom up. Washington, DC: World Bank.
   Google Scholar
• Noble, M. W. J., Wright, G. C., Magasela, W. K., & Ratcliffe, A. (2008). Developing a democratic definition of poverty in South Africa. Journal of Poverty, 11, 117–141.
   Google Scholar
• O’Hagan, A. (1998). Eliciting expert beliefs in substantial practical applications. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society: Series D (The Statistician), 47, 21–35.
   Google Scholar
• OECD. (2008). Handbook on constructing composite indicators: Methodology and user guide. In: OECD and European Commission Joint Research Centre. Printed in (Paris) France by “OECD Publications”. Pages 1–158
   Google Scholar
• Ravallion, M. (2010). Mashup indices of development. In. “Policy Research Working Paper 5432” (September 2010), available on the WB website. Pages 1–37. Washington, DC: The World Bank.
   Google Scholar
• Ravallion, M. (2011). On multidimensional indices of poverty. In. “Policy Research Working Paper 5580” (February 2011). Pages 1–20. Washington, DC: The World Bank.
   Google Scholar
• Roe, E. (1998). Taking complexity seriously: Policy Analysis, triangulation, and sustainable development. Boston, MA: Kluwer Academic.
   Google Scholar
• Saisana, M., & Saltelli, A. (2010). The Multidimensional Poverty Assessment Tool (MPAT): Robustness issues and critical assessment. In EUR Report 24310 EN. Luxenbourg: European Commission, JRC-IPSC, Italy.
   Google Scholar
• Saisana, M., & Tarantola, S. (2002). State-of-the-art report on current methodologies and practices for composite indicator development. In: European Commission, Joint Research Centre, Institute for the Protection and the Security of the Citizen, Technological and Economic Risk Management Unit. EUR Report 20408 EN. Luxembourg: European Commission, JRC-IPSC, Italy.
   Google Scholar
• Salty, T. (1980). The analytic hierarchy process: Planning, priority setting, resource allocation. New York: McGraw-Hill.
   Google Scholar
• Schmidt, F. L. (1973). Implications of a measurement problem for expectancy theory research. Organizational Behavior and Human Performance, 10, 243–251.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Schwarz, N., & Sudman, S. (1996). Answering questions: Methodology for determining cognitive and communicative processes in survey research. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
   Google Scholar
• Scott, J. C. (1998). Seeing like a state: How certain schemes to improve the human condition have failed. New Haven, CT, and London: Yale University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Sen, A. (1976). Poverty: An ordinal approach to measurement. Econometrica, 44, 219–231.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sen, A. (2000). Development as freedom. New York: Anchor.
   Google Scholar
• Srinivasan, T. N. (1994). Human development: A new paradigm or reinvention of the wheel? The American Economic Review, 84, 238–243.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Streeten, P., & Burki, S. J. (1978). Basic needs: Some issues. World Development, 6, 411–421.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sullivan, C. (2006). Do investments and policy interventions reach the poorest of the poor? In P. Rogers (Ed.), Water crisis: Myth or reality? (vol. 1, pp. 221–231). London: Taylor and Francis.
   Google Scholar
• Szal, R. (1979). Popular participation, employment and the fulfilment of basic needs. International Labour Review, 118, 27–38.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Trauer, T., & Mackinnon, A. (2001). Why are we weighting? The role of importance ratings in quality of life measurement. Quality of Life Research, 10, 579–585.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Welsch, H. (2002). Preferences over prosperity and pollution: Environmental valuation based on happiness surveys. Kyklos, 55, 473–494.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Winkler, R. L., & Clemen, R. T. (2004). Multiple experts vs multiple methods: Combining correlation assessments. Decision Analysis, 1, 167–176.
   Google Scholar
• Wright, G., Noble, M., & Magasela, W. (2007). Towards a democratic definition of poverty: Socially perceived necessities in South Africa. Cape Town: HSRC Press.
   Google Scholar