Multidimensional Measurement of Poverty Among Employed Women in Antalya

Abstract

The aim of this study is to identify the poverty levels of “employed women” living in 5 central districts of Antalya and are among the disadvantaged groups with a measurement method that includes social dimensions. Poverty is measured by using the Alkire-Foster (multidimensional poverty index) method rather than monetary indicators such as incomeconsumption expenditure and by taking socioeconomic indicators such as education, health, and the physical structure of the household into account. To put it another way, the multidimensional poverty approach eliminates the deficiencies of monetary poverty measures in explaining welfare. For this purpose, a field study conducted through the face-toface survey method with 400 employed and married women living in Antalya in September 2020 forms the basis for the poverty analysis. 27 indicators representing the dimensions of the socioeconomic structure, employment, income, health, empowerment, social assistance, migration, physical security, and inclusion, without feeling embarrassed, are used in order to reveal the multidimensional poverty of working women. According to the findings of the study, income and employment are the dimensions in which women in Antalya experience the most deprivation. From this perspective, it is clear that income, particularly employment, should be prioritized in order to alleviate women’s poverty in this city. For example, policies aimed at increasing women’s educational attainment (positive discrimination) may make it easier for them to enter the labor market and, as a result, change their standing at work. Furthermore, expanding their economic liberties can help them enhance their socioeconomic level and gain access to better living conditions.

Keywords

• Employed women’s poverty
• multidimensional poverty index
• AF method
• Antalya

References

1. Açıkgöz, R. (2010). Kadın yoksulluğu üzerine bir inceleme. Yardım ve Dayanışma Dergisi, 1(2), 45-60. Retrieved from https://www.acarindex.com/dosyalar/makale/acarindex-1423938558.pdf
2. Alkire, S. (2007). The Missing Dimensions of Poverty Data: Introduction to the Special Issue, Oxford Development Studies, 35(4), 347-359. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/13600810701701863
3. Alkire, S., & Foster, J. (2011a). Counting and multidimensional poverty measurement, Journal of Public Economics, 95(7), 476-487. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jpubeco.2010.11.006
4. Alkire, S., & Foster, J. (2011b). Understandings and misunderstandings of multidimensional poverty measurement, The Journal Of Economic Inequality, 9(2), 289-314. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10888-011-9181-4
5. Alkire, S., & Santos, M. E. (2014). Measuring acute poverty in the developing world: Robustness and scope of the multidimensional poverty ındex. World Development, 59, 251-274. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.worlddev.2014.01.026
6. Alkire, S., & Seth, S. (2013). Selecting a targeting method to identify BPL Households in India, Social Indicators Research, 112(2), 417-446. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11205-013-0254-6
7. Arpacı, F. (2010). Yoksulluk ve kadın yoksulluğu [Poverty and woman poverty]., Üçüncü Sektör Kooperatifçilik, 45(4), 1-9. Retrieved from http://www.makalesistemi.com/panel/files/manuscript_files_publish/e61942b4897972dd6a60f8037db34c7c/3594bc96c1ff67859bcc16e16c51754b/1b67d842f870564.pdf
8. Bastos, A., Casaca, S.F, Nunes, F., & Pereirinha, J. (2009). Aomen and poverty: A gender sensitive approach, The Journal Of Socio-Economics, 38(5), 764-778. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.socec.2009.03.008

9. Batana, Y. M. (2013). Multidimensional measurement of poverty among women ın Sub-Saharan Africa”, Social Indicators Research, 111(2), 337-362. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11205-013-0251-9
10. Bayır, M. (2018). Kadın yoksulluğunun sosyo-ekonomik önemi: Türkiye-Avrupa Birliği karşılaştırması [Socio-economic impotance of the women poverty comparison between Turkey and European Union], (Master dissertation) Retrieved from: http://acikkaynak.bilecik.edu.tr/xmlui/handle/11552/483
11. Buvinic, M. (1997). Women in poverty: A new global underclass, Foreign Policy, 108, 38-53, http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/1149088
12. Büyükyörük, N. (2019). Kadınların yoksulluk deneyimlerinin temellendirilimiş kuram yaklaşımıyla analizi [An analysis of women’s poverty experiences with the grounded theory approach] (Doctoral dissertation). Retrieved from: http://tez.sdu.edu.tr/Tezler/TS02975.pdf
13. Duyan Çamur, G. (2010). Yoksulluğun kadınlaşması: Altındağ örneği [Feminisation of poverty: An example of Altindag region of Ankara]. Aile ve Toplum, 11(6), 19-29. http://dx.doi.org/10.21560/spcd.54833
14. Foster, J.E. (2007). A report on Mexican multidimensional poverty measurement, Oxford Poverty and Human Development Initiative Working Paper Series, 40, Retrieved from: https://ophi.org.uk/a-report-on-mexican-multidimensional-poverty-measurement/
15. Foster, J., Greer, J., & Thorbecke, E. (1984). A class of decomposable poverty measures, Econometrica, 52(3), 761-766. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/1913475
16. Gerşil, G., (2015). Küresel boyutta yoksulluk ve kadın yoksulluğu [Poverty on a global scale and women poverty]. Yönetim ve Ekonomi Dergisi, 22(1), 165-187.
17. Goldberg, G.S., & Kremen E. (1990). The feminization of poverty discovered in America. In G.S. Golberg & E. Kremen (Eds.), The feminization of poverty: Only in America? New York, Greenwood Press.
18. Kardam, F., & Yüksel, İ. (2004). Kadınların yoksulluğu yaşama biçimleri: Yapabilirlik ve yapabilirlikten yoksunluk [How women experience and cape with poverty: Capabilities and functionings], Nüfusbilim Dergisi, 26(1), 45-72. Retrieved from: https://dergipark.org.tr/tr/pub/nufusbilim/issue/22964/245731
19. Kartal, A., & Zanbak, M. (2020). Kadın yoksulluğunun çok boyutlu analizi: Antalya alt bölgesi örneği [Multidimensional analysis of women poverty: The case of Antalya subregion]. Pamukkale Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Dergisi, 41, 294-315. http://dx.doi.org/10.30794/pausbed.650746
20. Krueger A.B., & Schkade, D. A. (2008). The reliability of subjective well-being measures, Journal of Public Economy, 92(8-9), 1833-1845. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jpubeco.2007.12.015
21. Maduekwe, E. (2018). Women in agriculture: Application of Alkire–Foster method of counting multidimensional deprivation towards building a human recognition index for women in Malawi, 30th International Conference Of Agricultural Economists (pp. 1-39)., Vancouver, http://dx.doi.org/10.22004/ag.econ.276974
22. Moghadam, V. (2005), The feminization of poverty and women’s human rights, SHS Papers in Women’s Studies/Gender Research, 2(1), 28-36. Retrieved from: http://www.unesco.org/new/fileadmin/MULTIMEDIA/HQ/SHS/pdf/Feminization_of_Poverty.pdf
23. Pearce, D. (1978). The feminization of poverty: Woman, work and welfare, Urban and Social Change Review, 11(1), 28-36. Retrieved from: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/234759249_The_Feminization_of_Poverty_Women_Work_and_Welfare
24. Peterson, J. (1987). The feminization of poverty, Journal Of Economic Issues, 21(1), 329-337. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/00213624.1987.11504613
25. Sen, A. (1999). Development as freedom. New York, NY: Knopf Publishers.
26. Sen, A. (1976). Poverty: An ordinal approach to measurement, Econometrica, 44(2), 219-231. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/1912718
27. Seth, S., & McGillivay, M. (2018). Composite indices, alternative weights and comparison robustness, Social Choice And Welfare, 51, 657-679. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00355-018-1132-6
28. Şahin, E., & Şahin, N.H. (2018). Kadın yoksulluğu ile mücadele yöntemleri [Women struggling with poverty methods]. Journal Of Current Researches On Health Sector, 8(2), 209-220. http://dx.doi.org/10.26579/jocrehes_8.2.19
29. Şener, Ü. (2012). Kadın yoksulluğu [Women poverty]. Mülkiye Dergisi, 36(4), 51-67. Retrieved from: https://dergipark.org.tr/tr/pub/mulkiye/issue/1/7
30. TEPAV, (2009). Kadın yoksulluğu [Women poverty]. Türkiye Ekonomi Politikaları Araştırma Vakfı. Retrieved from: https://www.tepav.org.tr/upload/files/1271312994r5658.Kadin_Yoksullugu.pdf
31. Topgül, S. (2013). Türkiye’de yoksulluk ve yoksulluğun kadınlaşması [Poverty in Turkey and the feminization of poverty], Cumhuriyet Üniversitesi İktisadi ve İdari Bilimler Dergisi, 14(1), 277-296. Retrieved from: https://kutuphane.dogus.edu.tr/mvt/pdf.php
32. Townsend, P. (1979). Poverty in UK: A survey of household resources and standarts of living, London, Penguin Books,
33. TurkStat, (2019, March 10). Adrese Dayalı Nüfus Kayıt Sitemi, Retrieved from https://biruni.tuik.gov.tr/bolgeselistatistik/degiskenlerUzerindenSorgula.do?durum=acKapa&menuNo=249&altMenuGoster=1&secilenDegiskenListesi=
34. TÜAD, (2012). Sosyoekonomik statü ölçeği, [Socio economic status of turkey] Türkiye Araştırmacılar Derneği Sosyoekonomik Statü Revize Projesi Yayını, İstanbul. Retrieved from https://tuad.org.tr/upload/dosyalar/SES_Projesi.pdf
35. UNDP, (1995). Human development report, New York, Oxford University Press, Retrieved from http://hdr.undp.org/sites/default/files/reports/256/hdr_1995_en_complete_nostats.pd
36. Wilson, J.B. (1987). Women and poverty: A demographic overview, Women and Health, 12(3), 21-40. http://dx.doi.org/10.1300/J013v12n03_02
37. World Bank, (2000). World development report 2000/2001: Attacking poverty, New York. Oxford University Press. Retrieved from https://openknowledge.worldbank.org/handle/10986/11856
38. Wu, Y. & Qi, Di. (2017). “A gender – based analysis of multidimensional poverty ın China”. Asian Journal Of Women’s Studies, 23(1), 66-88. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/12259276.2017.1279886
39. Yalçın, Z. (2018). Kadın yoksulluğu [Women poverty]. (Master dissertation). Retrieved from: https://www.academia.edu/38553032/Kad%C4%B1n_Yoksullu%C4%9Fu_Zeki_Yal%C3%A7%C4%B1n_docx
40. Zanbak, M. (2014), Yetenekler yaklaşımı perspektifi ile yoksulluğun ölçülmesi: Yoksulluğun kayıp boyutları üzerine ampirik bir uygulama [Measuring poverty from the perspective of capabilities approach: an empirical analysis on missing dimensions of poverty] (Doctoral dissertation). Retrieved from: https://tez.yok.gov.tr/UlusalTezMerkezi/tezSorguSonucYeni.jsp 399540
41. Zanbak, M., & Çağatay, S. (2013). “Yetenek” yaklaşımı temelinde yoksulluğun ölçülmesi: Mersin ve Erzurum illerinde yoksulluğun kayıp boyutları [Measurement of poverty on the basis of the “capability” approach: missing dimensions of poverty in the cities of Mersin and Erzurum]. İktisat İşletme ve Finans, 28(327), 67-104. http://dx.doi.org/10.3848/iif.2013.327.3662