Household welfare measurement and the pricing of basic services

Abstract

Employing total consumption as a household-level welfare indicator with which to measure poverty has often been criticized because it is felt that such an indicator does not account for diering access to, and cost of, publicly provided services. This paper discusses when and how adjustments can be made to expenditures derived from household surveys so as to re¯ect the consumption of basic services. Markets which are subsidized, rationed and subject to increasing marginal tari pricing are examined and simple adjustment methods are discussed. Using Ecuador to illustrate the methods, the paper shows that incorporating adjustments in markets for basic services can signi®cantly alter poverty estimates. Including such adjustments into a comprehensive measure of welfare can therefore be important and can also contribute to the wider acceptance and use of consumption as a welfare indicator guiding public policy development.

Water Demand and the Urban Poor: A Study of the Factors Influencing Water Consumption Among Households in Cape Town, South Africa

“…In a South African study conducted in Alberton and Thokoza, Veck and Bill (2000) also report higher price sensitivity for the upper income groups (especially for outdoor use) than the lower income groups. Hentschel and Janlouw (1998:14) also state that “ . .…”

The Nexus of Regional Integration and Household Welfare: A Case Study of the Yangtze Delta Area

“…Household welfare denotes the overall well-being and standard of living of a household and includes various factors such as income, employment status, access to basic needs like food, shelter, healthcare, education, and public transport (Hentschel & Lanjouw, 2000). Since the concept of household welfare consists of numerous aspects and dimensions of household socioeconomic benefits, there are various indicators and measurements to quantify household…”

Early Adoption of Modern Grocery Retail in an Emerging Market: Evidence from India

“…This process is modeled as a probit model. This decision 7 As Kamakura and Mazzon (2013) discuss, (a) stated income measures are prone to large reporting errors (Hentschel and Lanjow 2000), (b) current income might be a poor indication of consumption potential for retired individuals, and (c) consumption correlates poorly with income since people smooth their consumption over time by borrowing or drawing on savings during times of low income and investing/saving in times of high income. 8 We provide additional details of the SEC classification system for urban India in Online Appendix 1 (available as supplemental material at http://dx.doi.org/10.1287/mksc.2015.0940).…”