YOKSULLUĞUN BİRÇOK YÜZÜ: TÜRKİYE'DEKİ YOKSULLUĞUN ÖLÇÜMÜ ÜZERİNE KAPSAMLI BİR ANALİZ

Yıl 2025, Cilt: 25 Sayı: 2, 417 - 436, 08.05.2025

Gizem Acet Dönmez

https://doi.org/10.21121/eab.20250211

Öz

Yoksulluk istatistikleri en önemli ekonomik ve sosyal göstergelerdendir. Ancak yoksulluk ölçümleri yoksulluğun nasıl tanımlandığına bağlı olarak değişebilir. Bu çalışmada, Türkiye'de yoksulluk ölçümlerinin seçilen tanıma göre önemli ölçüde farklılık gösterip göstermediği ve hangi yoksulluk kavramının en uygun olduğu araştırılmaktadır. 2014-2021 yılları arasındaki SILC mikro veri setlerini kullanarak, iki mutlak yoksulluk ölçümü, bir öznel yoksulluk ölçümü ve bir çok boyutlu yoksulluk ölçümü yapılmıştır. Analiz sonuçları yoksulluk oranlarının kullanılan tanıma oldukça duyarlı olduğunu ortaya koymaktadır. Örneğin, TÜİK'in güncellenmiş mutlak yoksulluk sınırı kullanıldığında nüfusun %20'sinden azı yoksul olarak tanımlanırken, öznel yoksulluk sınırı ve TÜRK-İŞ'in yoksulluk sınırı kullanıldığında sırasıyla nüfusun yaklaşık %60'ı ve %70'i yoksul olarak tespit edilmektedir. Ayrıca, 2014 yılında nüfusun %43'ü çok boyutlu yoksul iken, bu oran 2021'de %31'e düşmüştür. Tüm ölçümler yoksulluğun Güneydoğu ve Doğu Anadolu bölgelerinde yoğunlaştığını göstermektedir. Son olarak, bu çalışma, yoksulluk oranlarındaki eğilimleri, yoksul hanelerin kesişimini, bölgesel sıralamaları, ikili korelasyonları ve yoksulluk içinde yaşayan bireylerin demografik profillerini inceleyerek farklı yoksulluk tanımlarının karşılaştırmalı bir analizini sunmaktadır.

Anahtar Kelimeler

Yoksulluk ölçümleri, mutlak yoksulluk, çok boyutlu yoksulluk, subjektif yoksulluk, bölgesel yoksulluk

THE MANY FACES OF POVERTY: A COMPREHENSIVE ANALYSIS ON MEASUREMENT OF POVERTY IN TÜRKİYE

Öz

Although poverty statistics serve as crucial economic and social indicators, their measurement varies depending on the chosen definition of poverty. This study examines whether poverty estimations in Türkiye significantly differ based on the definition used and explores which concept of poverty is most appropriate. Utilizing the SILC micro datasets from 2014 to 2021, the study estimates two absolute poverty measures, a subjective poverty measure, and a multidimensional poverty measure. The findings reveal that poverty rates are highly sensitive to the definition applied. For instance, while the updated absolute poverty line from TurkStat identifies less than 20% of the population as poor, the subjective poverty line and the absolute poverty line defined by TÜRK-İŞ classify approximately 60% and 70% of the population as poor, respectively. Furthermore, while 43% of the population was considered multidimensionally poor in 2014, this figure declined to 31% in 2021. A significant concentration of poverty is observed in the Southeastern and Eastern regions across all measurement approaches. Finally, the study conducts a comparative analysis of various poverty definitions by examining trends in poverty rates, the overlap of poor households, regional rankings, pairwise correlations, and the demographic profile of individuals living in poverty.

Anahtar Kelimeler

poverty measures, absolute poverty, multidimensional poverty, subjective poverty, regional poverty

Kaynakça

• Acar, A. (2014). The dynamics of multidimensional poverty in Turkey (BETAM Working Paper Series No. 14).
• Alkire, S. & Foster, J. (2011). Counting and multidimensional poverty measurement. Journal of Public Economics, 95, 476-487.
• Alkire, S., Foster, J., Seth, S., Santos, M. E., Roche, J. M., & Ballon, P. (2015). Multidimensional poverty measurement and analysis. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
• Alkire, S., Roche, J. M., Santos, M. E., & Seth, S. (2011). Turkey country briefing. Oxford Poverty & Human Development Initiative (OPHI) Multidimensional Poverty Index Country Briefing Series. Retrieved October 30, 2022, from https://ophi.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/Turkey-OPHI-UNDP_2011.pdf
• Atkinson, A. B. (1987). On the measurement of poverty. Econometrica, 55(4), 749-764.
• Atkinson, A. B. (2019). Measuring poverty around the world. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
• Atwater, W. O. (1894). Foods: Nutritive value and cost. Washington DC: Government Printing Office.
• Banerjee, A. V. & Duflo, E. (2012). Poor economics: The surprising truth about life on less than $1 a day. London: Penguin Books.
• Berthoud, R. & Bryan, M. (2011). Income, deprivation and poverty: A longitudinal analysis. Journal of Social Policy, 40(1), 135-156. doi:10.1017/S0047279410000504
• Booth, C. (1895). Life and labour of the people in London (5th ed.). London: Macmillan and Co.
• Crettaz, E. (2011). Fighting working poverty in post-industrial economies: Causes, trade-offs and policy suggestions. Cheltenham, UK: Edward Elgar Publishing.
• Deaton, A. (2018). The analysis of household surveys: A microeconometric approach to development policy. Washington DC: World Bank.
• Deaton, A. & Dupriez, O. (2011). Spatial price differences within large countries (Princeton University Woodrow Wilson School of Public and International Affairs Working Papers No. 1321).
• Demir Şeker, S. & Jenkins, S. P. (2013). Poverty trends in Turkey (IZA Discussion Paper, No: 7823).
• Doğruel, F. & Doğruel, S. (2003). Türkiye’de bölgesel gelir farklılıkları ve büyüme. In Köse, A. H., Şenses, F. &Yeldan, E. (Eds.), İktisat üzerine yazılar I: Küresel düzen, birikim, devlet ve sınıflar-Korkut Boratav’a armağan (pp. 287-318). Istanbul: İletişim Yayınları.
• Foster, J., Greer, J., & Thorbecke, E. (1984). A class of decomposable poverty measures. Econometrica, 52(3), 761-766.
• Giovanis, E. & Özdamar, O. (2021). Regional employment support programs and multidimensional poverty of youth in Turkey. Eurasian Economic Review, 11, 583-609.
• Gordon, D., Adelman, L., Ashworth, K., Bradshaw, J., Levitas, R., Middleton, S., … , & Williams, J. (2000). Poverty and social exclusion in Britain. York: Joseph Rowntree Foundation.
• Hick, R. (2014). On “consistent” poverty. Social Indicators Research, 118(3), 1087–1102.
• Ilıman, T. & Tekeli, R. (2016). Political economy of poverty in Turkey. Sosyoekonomi, 24(29), 205-224.
• ILOSTAT (2019). Spotlight on work statistics. Retrieved May 2. 2023, from https://ilo.org/wcmsp5/groups/public/---dgreports/---stat/documents/publication/wcms_696387.pdf
• Jenkins, S. P. (1991). Poverty measurement and the within-household distribution: Agenda for action, Journal of Social Policy, 20(4), 457–483.
• Karadağ, M. A. (2015). Tek boyutlu ve çok boyutlu yoksulluk ölçümleri: Türkiye uygulaması [Unidimensional and multidimensional poverty measurement: an application to Turkey] (Doctoral Dissertation). Retrieved October 30, 2002, from https://tez.yok.gov.tr/UlusalTezMerkezi/tezDetay.jsp?id=N6Jat6aWCB6gFgv83dZiyQ&no=qfOntSe9WLS54Yq0ZA-x6Q
• Karadağ, M. A. & Saraçoğlu, B. (2015). Çok boyutlu yoksulluk analizi: Türkiye-AB karşılaştırması [Multidimensional poverty analysis: Comparison of Turkey and EU]. Amme İdaresi Dergisi, 48(4), 129-159.
• Karahasan, B. C. & Bilgel, F. (2021). The topography and sources of multidimensional poverty in Turkey. Social Indicators Research, 154, 413-445.
• Karahasan B.C., Doğruel A. S., & Doğruel F. (2016). Can market potential explain the regional disparities in developing countries? Evidence from Turkey. The Developing Economies, 53(4), 162-197.
• Kwadzo, M. (2015). Choosing concepts and measurements of poverty: A comparison of three major poverty approaches. Journal of Poverty, 19(4), 409–423. https://doi.org/10.1080/10875549.2015.1015067
• Laderchi, C., Saith, R., & Stewart, F. (2003). Does it matter that we do not agree on the definition of poverty: A comparison of four approaches. Oxford Development Studies, 31(3), 233–274.
• Limanlı, Ö. (2016, October). Multidimensional poverty in Turkey. Proceedings of the Turkish Economic Association International Conference on Economics (pp. 110-132). Bodrum: ICETEA2016.
• Meyer, B. D. & Sullivan, J X. (2012). Identifying the disadvantaged: Official poverty, consumption poverty, and the new supplemental poverty measure. Journal of Economic Perspectives, 26(3), 111-136.
• Minsky, H. P. (2013). Ending poverty: Jobs, not welfare. Levy Economics Institute of Bard College, New York.
• Nolan, B. & Whelan, C. T. (2014). Multidimensional poverty measurement in Europe: An application of the adjusted headcount approach. Journal of European Social Policy, 24(2), 183–197.
• O’Connor, A. (2016). Poverty knowledge and the history of poverty research. In D. Brady & L. M. Burton (Eds.), The Oxford Handbook of The Social Science of Poverty (pp. 169-192). New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
• OECD (2008). Growing unequal? Income distribution and poverty in OECD countries, Paris: OECD.
• Orshansky, M. (1965). Counting the poor: Another look at the poverty profile. Social Security Bulletin, 28, 3–29.
• Özar, Ş., Kutlu, Y. & Mülayim, G. (2022). Türkiye’de toplumsal cinsiyet eşitsizliği bağlamında kadın yoksulluğu. Cogito, 105-106, 87-112.
• Ravallion, M. (1992). Poverty comparisons: A guide to concepts and methods (Living Standards Measurement Study Working Paper No. 88).
• Ravallion, M. (2011). On multidimensional indices of poverty (The World Bank Policy Research Working Paper Series No. 5580).
• Ravallion, M. (2012). Poor, or just feeling poor? On using subjective data in measuring poverty (The World Bank Policy Research Working Paper Series No. 5968).
• Rodrik, D. (2017). Straight talk on trade: ideas for a sane world economy. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
• Rowntree, B. S. (1901). Poverty: A study of town life. London: Macmillan & Co.
• Sen, A. (1983). Poor, relatively speaking. Oxford Economic Papers, 35, 153-169.
• Sen, A. (1985). Commodities and capabilities. Amsterdam: North-Holland.
• Sen, A. (1993). Capability and well-being. In M. C. Nussbaum and A. Sen (Eds.), The Quality of Life (pp. 30-53), Oxford: Clarendon Press.
• Smeeding, T. M. (2016). Poverty measurement. In D. Brady & L. M. Burton (Eds.), The Oxford Handbook of The Social Science of Poverty (pp. 21-46). New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
• Şengül, S. (2003). Türkiye'de yoksulluk ve yoksulluk profili. İktisat İşletme Finans, 18, 71-93.
• Şenses, F. (1999). Yoksullukla mücadele ve sosyal yardımlaşma ve dayanışmayı teşvik fonu. ODTÜ Gelişme Dergisi, 26(2-4), 427-451.
• Şenses, F. (2002). Poverty alleviation: Too much optimism, too little attention. Journal of Economic Cooperation, 23(1), 1-16.
• Şenses, F. (2008). Missing links in poverty analysis in the age of neoliberal globalization: Some lessons from Turkey. New Perspectives on Turkey, 38, 61-81.
• Şenses, F. (2019). Küreselleşmenin öteki yüzü: Yoksulluk (9th ed.). Istanbul: İletişim Yayınları.
• Townsend, P. (1979). Poverty in the United Kingdom: A survey of household resources and standard of living. Berkley, California: University of California Press.
• Turkish Statistical Institute. Survey of Income and Living Conditions (SILC) 2014-2021, Micro Datasets. Walker, A. & Walker, C. (1997). Britain divided: the growth of social exclusion in the 1980s and 1990s. London: Child Poverty Action Group.
• World Bank (2022). Poverty & Equity Brief Turkey, Europe & Central Asia, April 2022.