Análise multidimensional da pobreza rural no Brasil para os anos de 2004 e 2009

• Ano de defesa: 2012
• Autor(a) principal: Deus, Joseph David Barroso Vasconcelos de
• Tipo de documento: Dissertação
• Tipo de acesso: Acesso aberto
• Idioma: por
• Palavras-chave em Português: Pobreza multidimensional; Conjuntos fuzzy; Medida de pobreza; Área rural
• Link de acesso: http://www.repositorio.ufc.br/handle/riufc/6282

To deal with the poverty problem it is necessary to identify the cause, magnitude and location, in other words, its measurement is essential. The objective of this study is to map the Brazilian rural poverty in a multidimensional perspective for the years 2004 and 2009. Therefore, it has the purpose of providing a multidimensional measure to rank states according to degree of rural poverty among the states and comparing attributes that most contribute to the problem. Confronting the multidimensional poverty measure with the traditional one-dimensional indicators is relevant to provide robustness to results. The fuzzy set method and a relative weighing were used to construct the multidimensional index. The results confirm that: i-rural areas of the states belonging to the North and Northeast regions reach the highest level of poverty (Amazonas is the poorest in the years analyzed surrounded by states like Tocantins, Acre and Maranhão), while rural population of South, Southern regions and the Federal District are among the less poor, ii- in 2004, possession of stove and source water indicators were those which reach higher weights among the states in the North, Northeast and Southeast regions (this shows low relative deprivation in this items by households), while in the South and Midwest states the highest weights were given, respectively, to the possession of radio or TV and bathroom in the house; in 2009, the indicators with greater weight were the possession of stove and radio or TV for 25 of the 27 states; iii- condition of employment and knowledge demonstrated the attributes that have the most effect on the rural poverty multidimensional index. When comparing the multidimensional index and intensity of poverty (P1), the correlation was low, and when comparing the multidimensional index and proportion of poverty (P0) and severity of poverty (P2) the correlation was intermediate.