GLOSSARY ENTRY (DERIVED FROM QUESTION BELOW) | ||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
11:56 Oct 2, 2011 |
English language (monolingual) [PRO] Social Sciences - International Org/Dev/Coop | |||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
| ||||||
| Selected response from: Stephanie Ezrol United States Local time: 07:06 | ||||||
Grading comment
|
SUMMARY OF ALL EXPLANATIONS PROVIDED | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|
5 +1 | resulting poverty reduction |
| ||
4 | residual poverty reduction |
| ||
4 | the discrepancy between the sum of the urban and rural figures and the national figure |
|
Discussion entries: 2 | |
---|---|
residual poverty reduction Explanation: The reduction attributable (the result of) to rural-urban migration. -------------------------------------------------- Note added at 9 mins (2011-10-02 12:06:23 GMT) -------------------------------------------------- Sorry - the "to" should have gone before the part in parentheses. -------------------------------------------------- Note added at 29 mins (2011-10-02 12:25:37 GMT) -------------------------------------------------- I don't have the same reading as Martin. The references are all to poverty reduction (or the possibility that poverty could increase). Although Martin is right when he says "It is not possible to measure the reduction at just one point in time," I understand that the author is talking about specific studies, measurements, or surveys about the level of poverty that are later compared with others to determine the rise or reduction in poverty during a given period. My interpretation of "residual" would be a "residual effect" - a secondary effect caused by primary event. There is rural poverty and urban poverty. I understand the author to be saying that migration from rural areas to urban areas must be taken into account as it breaks the static paradigm of rural and urban population and poverty as two separate and unchanging categories. |
| ||
Notes to answerer
| |||
Login to enter a peer comment (or grade) |
resulting poverty reduction Explanation: I looked at the UNFPA document that includes your text. They are talking about a manner in which to calculate the reduction or increase in poverty at a national level that is caused by rural-urban migration since there is no direct census or such data on that. So the term residue is being used in the sense of remaining or surplus amount (or result) after comparing the urban and rural poverty figures at two points in time. |
| |
Grading comment
| ||
Login to enter a peer comment (or grade) |
the discrepancy between the sum of the urban and rural figures and the national figure Explanation: If you measure urban and rural poverty at one point in time, the sum of the two figures, weighted for the proportion of urban and rural dwellers, will give you the national poverty figure. If you then measure urban and rural poverty at a later point in time, the new numbers, weighted in the same way, will not match the new national figure because the weightings have changed in the meantime due to rural/urban migration. This discrepancy is what they call the "residue of poverty reduction," i.e. the amount of national poverty reduction that is not captured by simply adding up the rural and urban figures because of the shift in where the population lives. |
| |
Login to enter a peer comment (or grade) |
Login or register (free and only takes a few minutes) to participate in this question.
You will also have access to many other tools and opportunities designed for those who have language-related jobs (or are passionate about them). Participation is free and the site has a strict confidentiality policy.