Theory of solvation and its application to the supercritical fluid extraction/supercritical fluid chromatographic analysis of pharmaceuticals

Available from British Library Document Supply Centre-DSC:DXN019076 / BLDSC - British Library Document Supply CentreSIGLEGBUnited Kingdo

Microdeterminants of consumption, poverty, growth, and inequality in Bangladesh

Using in a consistent way the household level data of five successive national surveys, this paper analyses at once the microdeterminants (and changes thereof) of consumption, poverty, growth, and inequality in Bangladesh from 1983 to 1996. Education, demographics, land ownership, occupation, and geographic location all affect consumption and poverty. The gains in per capita consumption associated with many of these household characteristics tend to be stable over time. Demographics have had the largest impact on growth. Education (in urban areas) and land (in rural areas) contribute the most to measures of conditional between group inequality, a new concept introduced in the paper to avoid the pitfalls of traditional group decompositions of the Gini index, followed by location in both sectors.

The 'feminisation of poverty' and the 'feminisation' of anti-poverty programmes: room for revision?

The construct of the 'feminisation of poverty' has helped to give gender an increasingly prominent place within international discourses on poverty and poverty reduction. Yet the way in which gender has been incorporated pragmatically�-�predominantly through the 'feminisation' of anti-poverty programmes�-�has rarely relieved women of the onus of coping with poverty in their households, and has sometimes exacerbated their burdens. In order to explore how and why this is the case, as well as to sharpen the methodological and conceptual parameters of the 'feminisation of poverty' thesis, this paper examines four main questions. First, what are the common understandings of the 'feminisation of poverty'? Second, what purposes have been served by the popularisation and adoption of this term? Third, what problems are there with the 'feminisation of poverty' analytically, and in respect of how the construct has been taken up and responded to in policy circles? Fourth, how do we make the 'feminisation of poverty' more relevant to women's lives�-�and empowerment�-�at the grassroots? Foremost among my conclusions is that since the main indications of feminisation relate to women's mounting responsibilities and obligations in household survival we need to re-orient the 'feminisation of poverty' thesis so that it better reflects inputs as well as incomes, and emphasises not only women's level or share of poverty but the burden of dealing with it. Another, related, conclusion is that just as much as women are often recruited into rank-and-file labour in anti-poverty programmes, 'co-responsibility' should not be a one-way process. This requires, inter alia, the more active support of men, employers and public institutions in domestic labour and unpaid care work.