Developing a Methodological Model for Monitoring and Measuring Urban Poverty and Deprivation, and Its Spatial Distributions

The problem of urban poverty and deprivation (UPD) has become a growing global concern. In 1990, World Development Report - issued by World Bank - focused heavily on the issue of poverty due to severity increasing of the problem and its various socio-economic repercussions. In the same context, the United Nations was concerned with the same problem in 1996 by declaring it the Year for the Eradication of Poverty, and this goal has become at the heart of global development agenda, and it has been of particular importance since the Millennium Development Goals were announced in 2000, and a quantitative target was set to reduce poverty in the world by half by 2015 [1]. Finally, the United Nations emphasized For Sustainable Development goals (2015-2030) At the beginning of 2016, the importance of social protection for the poor and the social dimension strategy as a condition for sustainable development as an ambitious step aimed at eliminating poverty and deprivation and living in dignity by 2030. Since then, the Arab countries have begun to develop their own visions of integrating them into the national and regional plans necessary to achieve Goal (1) of SDG related to poverty and to eradicate it in its various dimensions in their plans for the year 2030 [2].

As a result of the global economic shocks in recent years, poverty is widespread in urban city where the limited resources and hazards of the COVID-19 At the global level, that become a real challenge to the United Nations Sustainable Development Goal (Goal 1) of ending poverty by 2030 because of the increase in the relative and absolute size of the number of poor. in addition, The effects of the Covid 19 epidemic on urban well-being through the serious impact of non-monetary dimensions and indicators on densely populated cities [3].

The study followed a set of scientific approaches during its stages to reach the results, (first: inductive approach, to examine the characteristics and dimensions of phenomenon and its historical and justifications, second: descriptive analytical approach, to review methods and tools for measuring phenomenon and its spatial dimensions and volunteer them in preparing urban development policies through case-experiments urban observatories and measurement initiatives for the phenomenon in the Arab world, third: comparative analysis approach, to contrast what was reached in the theoretical and applied framework to determine points of agreement and difference between them in order to reach a methodological model for measurement problem of urban poverty and deprivation).

The general framework of the study was based on the outputs of the successive topics, which included:

1. Reviewing previous studies and research in the field of study.

2. Reviewing the phenomenon of urban poverty and deprivation ... its origins, development and measurement tools.

3. Evaluate the monitoring and measurement of urban poverty and deprivation in the activities and processes of urban monitoring.

4. Analyzing and evaluating experiences of identifying and characterizing spatial scales of urban poverty and deprivation.

5. Building and testing a methodological model to raise the efficiency of monitoring methods and processes to support decision-making.

Despite a proliferation of academic contributions about urban poverty indexes, this concept raises some issues:

• Bridging the gap of previous studies in the multiplicity, overlapping, and intertwining of visions and its dimensions of the concept of poverty and deprivation, and reconsidering the concept of poverty and urban deprivation as a complex phenomenon.
• Bridging gap in the absence of a spatial dimension at the level of small units and hot spots in studies of poverty and deprivation.
• Determine the influencing factors (features of poverty and deprivation) and identify the factors that influence the phenomenon for policy making as an integral part of sustainable development and urban planning.

This study proposes a methodology to provide an evidence based index - the Multidimensional urban poverty and deprivation index- a new index consisting of various criteria that achieve the SDGs and intersect international programs and indicators for measuring poverty and urban deprivation. Even though the poverty dimensions are distinct, they are frequently combined to calculate the overall composite poverty of an urban cities and their spatial distribution.

The study highlights the development of methodological model for monitoring and measuring urban poverty and deprivation, and its spatial distributions that raise the efficiency of planning and making urban development policies for the urban regions to provide a more robust yet flexible tool that would have suitability for international. That would allow for the inclusion of broader criteria and require a more holistic approach that reflects current vulnerabilities and diverse challenges. It provides an evaluation system that is free from the prejudices of the decision maker and makes it simpler to determine management policies.

The study emphasizes Adjusting measurement and raising the efficiency of monitoring spatial distribution. To achieve better results for monitoring poverty and urban deprivation and decision-making for urban development policies. Additionally, linking planning and making sustainable urban development policies to the urban poverty and deprivation map in order to reach a distribution of development programs and projects.

The research problem is related to insufficiency relative of methodologies and processes for monitoring and measuring of urban poverty and deprivation phenomenon, basically about monitoring, and analyzing the spatial distributions and disparities of phenomenon, and the efficiency of its use in making development policies and urban planning.

In the same context, the critical vision of previous studies and current monitoring and measurement indicates that there is a great potential to raise efficiency of monitoring and measurement processes through developing a methodological model focuses on a deep understanding of spatial dimensions, which can contribute to achieving better interaction and intertwining with preparation of urban development decision-making processes concerned with reducing urban poverty based on multidimensional analysis of spatial characteristics of the phenomenon.

The problem of urban poverty and deprivation includes many sub-problems, as shown in Figure 2.

2.png

Figure 2. Research problem and its intertwined dimensions

Source: Researcher, 2021

This research is focused on "developing a methodology for monitoring and measuring the phenomenon of UPD, based on an integrated multi-dimensional vision, with the aim of raising the efficiency of process of analyzing and determining the spatial ranges of phenomenon within cities in a way that supports efficiency of the processes of making and implementing urban development policies."

Therefore, research followed four practical steps to achieve objectives, namely:

1. Monitoring correct and appropriate measurement serving the specified objectives.
2. Monitor spatial distribution and identify hot spots.
3. Correct and appropriate analysis serving the specified objectives.
4. Formulation of highly efficient and effective urban development plans and policies.

From the discussion of previous literature, the phenomenon of urban poverty and deprivation requires an appropriate methodology or framework to design a new model to reformulate the various components was designed through a set of steps to derive a result, as shown in Figure 3.

3.png

Figure 3. Framework of methodology research structure

Source: Researcher, 2021

3.1 Study area

Egypt is the third most populous country in Africa and the most inhabited in the Middle East. It also has a population of 114 million in 2022. Despite being classified as a middle-income country, The poverty rate has increased from 16.7% in 1999 / 2000 to 21.6% in 2008 / 2009 and 27.8% in 2015, reached its highest rate in 2017 / 2018 (32.5%), then fell by 2.8% during the fiscal year of 2019 / 2020, recording 29.7 percent. About a third of Egypt's population was considered poor [11], as shown in Figure 4.

Accordingly, the result of national poverty measurement estimates for Egypt also showed in urban governorates witnessed the highest increase in 2017 / 2018, and Egypt recorded for four decades (1980-2017) an increase in the urban poverty rate from (18.2%-24.5%), as Cairo governorate jumped from the sixth rank, with an increase of 13% in terms of urban poverty, to the thirteenth rank [12]. as shown in Figure 5.

4.png

Figure 4. Egypt poverty rate according national poverty line from (1999 / 2000-2019 / 2020)%

Source: CAPMAS, 2020

5.png

Figure 5. Egypt Urban poverty rate according to national poverty measurement (1981-2017)

The situation is obviously different for governorates. To overview the unified poverty rates and changes across regions, we compare their poverty incidence across governorates depending on the 2015 and 2017 / 2018. Figure 6 shows that about 15 out of 27 governorates have experienced an increase in poverty rates while poverty rates have decreased in the rest. Where urban governorates experienced a high rise in poverty rates between 2015 and 2018; for example, Cairo and Alexandria governorates [13].

6.png

Figure 6. Poverty evolution rate according to national poverty line in Egypt Governorates

Additionally, there is no spatial distribution of poverty at urban level sector (critical areas within cities) in Egypt, as the unit of measurement is usually urban / Rural agglomerations or governorates or administrative boundary, as shown in Figure 7 [14].

7.png

Figure 7. Poverty maps across of Egypt's governorates 2017

Source: Maps created using ArcMap based on Poverty Map data, CAPMAS (2018)

3.2 Different dimensions of the phenomenon

Urban poverty is characterized by cumulative deprivation - that is, one dimension of poverty is often the cause or contributor to another dimension, and on the other hand urban poverty and deprivation can be temporary or permanent as it is considered a dynamic situation and is not necessarily an indicator of economic failure, And the different dimensions of multidimensional poverty can be summarized through intertwining and interaction, as shown in Table 3 [15].

3.3 Data collection

There are many emerging best practices and methods for measuring urban poverty and deprivation designed in order to improve their policies and develop programs targeting this social group. So, the various practices and methods of these organizations have been reviewed, analyzed and evaluated to using the results and lessons learned in building and developing the proposed methodological model, as shown in Table 4 and Figure 8.

Table 3. Dimensions of multidimensional poverty

Source: Deniz Baharoglu and Christine Kessides; urban poverty, chapter16

8.png

Figure 8. Global poverty monitoring and measurement methods

Source: Researcher, 2021

Table 4. Practice for measuring PUD components

Data source: The researcher (World Bank group, 2018) (UNDP&OPHI, 2019) (UNCHS-Habitat, 1996 (United Nations Development Program), 2018 (Economic and Social Commission for Western Asia 2017), (Heba El-Leithy, 2009))

The results of previous analysis and evaluation indicate that efficiency and effectiveness of monitoring and measurement processes of the phenomenon are mainly related to dealing with all the variables and the factors that make up them and their various overlaps and entanglements. In this context, the most important features can be observed as follows:

1- Absence of a governing monitoring system.

2- Multiplicity of global systems and initiatives to measure urban poverty and deprivation and link between indicators.

3- Multiplicity of concepts and the absence of a unified and precise concept.

4- Different methods of measurement from one society to another, and within the same society from time to time.

5- Adopting the concept of multi-dimensional poverty and deprivation to raise the efficiency of policymaking, development and urban planning.

6- Analyzing systems of variables, their interrelationships, and their relative weights in terms of their impact on the phenomenon.

3.4 Dimensions, indicators and methods of measurement

In this context, Study used activities and operations of urban monitoring in urban observatories and specialized studies of the phenomenon in some Arab countries to prove the validity of this model - (10) selected cities about 45% of the total countries of the Arab world distributed geographically, where five countries are located in the African continent and five countries in the Asian continent - as inference to selected experiments to extract dimensions, indicators, and measurement methods by imposing the employment of results and lessons learned in building and development of proposed methodological model, in steps as shown in Figure 9.

9.png

Figure 9. Criteria using in modle building

According to the case study and comparative analysis of the experiences of monitoring activities in local initiatives or urban observatories in the Arab world, it was found that there is a set of dimensions that amounted to (12 dimensions) and (73 indicators) related to indicators differ due to goals of their design, The dominant and most frequent dimensions reached (8 dimensions), while the frequency indicators reached (30 indicators), as shown in Table 5.

Table 5. Dimensions and indicators used

Source: Researcher, 2021

3.5 Lessons learned as guides for this model

A set of features and principles that contribute to development of a model for measuring urban poverty and deprivation can be identified as:

At Spatial Level:

- Accommodating a standardized monitoring system and measurement method that can be applied efficiently and valid for all countries in analyzing and determining spatial scopes of urban poverty and deprivation.

- Focusing monitoring of poverty spots at the urban level to increase the efficiency and effectiveness of the interventions.

- Relationship of influences to the methodological model with its efficiency in monitoring at the level of micro spatial units within cities.

Additionally, to identify prevalence in urban areas, and the degree of differences between urban neighborhoods, through:

1- Determining the scale of the phenomenon at the level of the city as a whole and its characteristics.

2- Determining the spatial scopes and accurate spatial distribution of the phenomenon.

3- Determining boundaries and characteristics of the regions and their variation and degrees of variation.

4- Determining the policies of the interventions according to the characteristics of the regions to raise the efficiency of decision-making in the face of the growing phenomenon of urban poverty and deprivation.

5- Raising the efficiency of directing and focusing programs related to urban poverty and deprivation from critical areas.

6- Building a proposed methodological model to raise the efficiency of measurement and spatial monitoring processes.

At Dimensions, Indicators, and methods of Measurement Level:

-Poverty cannot be measured using a one-dimensional context only in monetary terms. Poverty is a complex and multi-dimensional phenomenon that arises from the interaction of economic, political, and social processes.

-Absence of a unified monitoring system and a governing framework capable of measuring poverty and urban deprivation.

-Multiplicity of monitoring indicators used for measurement due to differences in its objectives to determining dimensions and indicators used and their relative weights.

-Different measuring methodology of urban poverty and deprivation based on the availability of data in monitoring and measurement process.

-Measures of urban poverty and deprivation resorted to personal control in their design and change of results.

-Designing a flexible model that needs to develop monetary and non-monetary dimensions and indicators related to the measurement of urban poverty and deprivation.

-Agreement of some indicators between different practice represents the basic building for the future standardized monitoring system.

-Dependence of some experiments on complementary monitoring indicators, which differ from one study to another within each dimension, such as disappearance of indicators of standard of living in the European Union program to reach full coverage and its inability to find discrepancies.

3.6 Theoretical and analytical study overlaps and links

After what was presented and discussed on the methodological steps outlined in the previous section. Through of monitoring, analysis and evaluation of many lessons learned, and importance of integrating measurement of poverty and urban deprivation as an interconnected and integrated system to build and develop a methodological model for measuring and monitoring the phenomenon of poverty and urban deprivation in order to analysis of variances and determining spatial zones as a basic issue within the city.

10.png

Figure 10. Theoretical and analytical study overlaps and links

Source: Researcher, 2022

Figure 10 show the impact of theoretical and analytical study overlaps and links to extract the methodological model with high flexibility and applicable to measure and monitor the phenomenon of poverty and urban deprivation in various and multiple cases.

This study contributes to develop an integrated connected system to monitor and measure the urban poverty and deprivation and employ it in policy making and formulation of programs and projects that target effective dealing with the phenomenon (monitoring and measurement efficiency / spatial distribution/ decision support - to achieve its objectives), and the preparation was launched with two main pillars, first: study of the theoretical framework and case studies, and second is to build and validate the proposed methodological model (Model Building and testing) Through test on the case of the study in Madinah city to be used in decision-making support.

Therefore, the significance of this model comes in:

• Provide maps of urban poverty and deprivation and their role in pressure on decision-making.

• Providing ways and mechanisms to assist decision-makers in follow-up and evaluation processes.

• Improve the formulation of more effective urban policies in cities.

• Understand how social and economic system works in cities and use this knowledge to increase the effectiveness of national and local plans and strategies.

• Comparative analysis of information (indicators) over any spatial and temporal extent at any time.

The most important results can be formulated as follows:

First: The phenomenon of urban poverty and deprivation is characterized by its complexity as a result of the multiplicity of different variables that make up the phenomenon and affect it, which are linked to it sometimes as a cause and at other times as a result of it, which in turn are affected by the interaction of economic, social, developmental, interfacial and political factors in society as the basic foundation for sustainable development and the reflection of all of this in the end on Urban poverty and deprivation.

Second: Controlling the making of urban development and planning policies related to urban poverty and deprivation through disciplined building model that produces an objective picture of situation within cities and analysis of spatial disparities in them helps to raise efficiency of decision-making and policies and translating this spatial map into executive programs and projects related to policies, decisions, and executive tracks and update performance mechanisms through monitoring, verification, and evaluation cycles.

Third: The integrity, coherence and efficiency of the methodological model is based on accurate identification of the objectives, which are briefly represented in:

• Identifying and analyzing the spatial ranges of hot spots for urban poverty and deprivation and their qualitative characteristics within cities.

• Define/orientate controlling the efficiency and effectiveness of policy and program-making to deal with problems and challenges.

The proposed methodological model constitutes a flexible framework to a large extent in the selection and employment of indicators according to each case due to the variation of the desired goals and spatial analysis of the study on the following:

1- Covering many dimensions and developing a list of indicators used in monitoring and measurement by adding indicators that were absent in previous monitoring experiences.

2- Raising the efficiency of monitoring spatial distribution of urban poverty and deprivation.

3- Raising the efficiency of outputs to support decisions and formulate development policies and urban planning.

Despite the partial and macro findings of this study, the issue of poverty and urban deprivation remains a matter of controversy and debate in various academic and research bodies and international organizations...etc. This part is concerned with making recommendations on future research directions, as well as the possibilities of its development in terms of expansion in the context of application as follows:

1. Evaluation of the efficiency and effectiveness of the model, as the model is tested at the level of small spatial scales within cities in different situations and contexts by incorporating more future-related indicators to provide more accurate results when running the statistical analysis.

2. Measuring the efficiency and effectiveness of the model's outputs in developing specific and clear directions for preparing policies and plans for sustainable development and urban planning.

3. Developing the preparation of detailed maps (spatial distribution) of poverty and urban deprivation as inputs to urban planning processes that can be presented to planners and decision makers to help determine priorities for policy interventions by integrating the scale of poverty and urban deprivation with an assessment of the phenomenon of social vulnerability and resilience.