Poverty reduction, Poverty dynamics, Hunger, Trends in global hunger, MDGs, Development assistance,

Ahmed, Akhter

Hill, Ruth Vargas

Wiesmann, Doris

English

Research Papers in Economics

  1
2020 FOCUS BRIEF on the 
World’s Poor and Hungry People 
 
 
 
THE POOREST AND HUNGRY 
Looking Below the Line 
 
Akhter U. Ahmed, Ruth Vargas Hill, and Doris M. Wiesmann 
 
Today, there are about 1 billion extremely poor people 
in the developing world who subsist on less than $1 a 
day. Of those, half a billion live on less than 75 cents a 
day and 162 million live on less than 50 cents. The most 
unfortunate consequence of widespread poverty is that 
more than 800 million people cannot afford to meet 
their minimum calorie requirements. Chronically 
underfed and largely without assets other than their 
own labor power, they remain highly vulnerable to the 
crushing blows of illness and natural or human-made 
calamities. These extreme poor are a group that hovers 
on the outer limits of human survival. 
Substantial progress in reducing poverty has been 
made since 1990, suggesting that the first of the 
Millennium Development Goals (MDGs)—to halve the 
proportion of people living in extreme poverty and 
hunger—will be met at the global level. If it is, who will 
be likely to move out of poverty and hunger and who 
will remain left behind? This brief addresses this 
question by developing a better understanding of where 
the world’s poorest and hungry live and by examining 
whether business as usual will result in improvements in 
their welfare. The analysis suggests it will not. 
Looking Below the Dollar-a-Day Line: 
Subjacent, Medial, and Ultra Poverty 
While the MDGs characterize the extremely poor as 
those living on less than $1 a day, here they are 
disaggregated into three groups according to their 
location below the dollar-a-day poverty line:
 subjacent 
poor (living on between 75 cents and $1 a day), medial 
poor (living on between 50 cents and 75 cents a day), 
and ultra poor (living on less than 50 cents a day). Of 
the 969 million people living on less than $1 a day in 
2004, half were living in subjacent poverty, one-third in 
medial poverty, and about one-sixth (162 million) in 
ultra poverty. Disaggregating dollar-a-day poverty into 
these groups provides a simple way of looking below 
the dollar-a-day line to see where those in each group 
live and how each group has fared over time. 
Where Do the Subjacent, Medial, and  
Ultra Poor Live?  
While South Asia accounts for most of the developing 
world’s subjacent and medial poor, Sub-Saharan Africa 
is home to a staggering three-quarters of all ultra poor 
(Figure 1). The severity of poverty in Sub-Saharan Africa 
becomes clear by looking at rates of subjacent, medial, 
and ultra poverty (Figure 2). In the developing world as 
a whole, and in all regions excluding Sub-Saharan 
Africa, subjacent-poverty rates from 1990 to 2004 were 
higher than medial and ultra-poverty rates, but in Sub-
Saharan Africa, many more people were living in ultra 
poverty than in subjacent and medial poverty. 
Progress in Reducing Subjacent, Medial,  
and Ultra Poverty 
While remarkable progress against poverty and hunger 
has been achieved in some regions, progress has been 
slow in areas where poverty and hunger are severe. In 
1990, South Asia and East Asia and the Pacific were 
each home to about 40 percent of the world’s subjacent 
poor, 40 percent of the world’s medial poor, and a 
quarter of the world’s ultra poor. However, since then, 
East Asia and the Pacific experienced a substantial 
reduction in the proportion and number of people living 
in all three types of poverty. In contrast, South Asia 
experienced an increase in the number of people in 
subjacent poverty and a significant but smaller reduction 
in the number of medial and ultra poor (Figure 3). Since 
1990, the number of poor in each group in Sub-Saharan 
Africa has increased, particularly among the ultra poor. 
The limited progress in reducing poverty in this region 
indicates that business as usual will not lead to 
improvements in well-being in a timely manner for a 
large share of the world’s absolute poorest. Indeed, the 
continued prevalence and severity of poverty in Sub-
Saharan Africa is one of the major ethical challenges of 
today. 
  The severity of poverty and the limited progress in 
reducing it indicate that the poorest in Sub-Saharan 
Africa may be trapped in poverty; in fact, micro-level 
evidence of poverty traps has been found for a number 
of countries in the region (such as Kenya, Madagascar, 
South Africa, and Côte d’Ivoire). In addition to these 
regional differences, globally and within regions, 
progress against poverty has been slower for people 
living well below the dollar-a-day line. Figure 2 shows 
that the proportion of people living in ultra poverty has 
fallen more slowly than the proportion of those living in 
subjacent and medial poverty, and further analysis 
indicates that, indeed, the incidence of ultra poverty fell 
less than it would have had all incomes grown equally. 
  While panel data are needed to really determine 
whether those in ultra poverty have fared better or 
worse than those closer to the line, national poverty 
data can provide some indication. Calculations indicate 
the amount that subjacent, medial, and ultra poverty  
October 2007   2
 
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Ultra Poor
Medial Poor
Subjacent Poor Sub-Saharan Africa
East Asia & Pacific
Europe & Central Asia
South Asia
Latin America & the Caribbean
Middle East & North Africa
would have been reduced (or increased in some cases) 
had poverty reduction come from everyone’s income 
growing by the same amount, with the underlying 
income distribution remaining unchanged. This “equal 
growth” poverty reduction scenario is then compared 
with the actual amount of poverty reduction (see Figure 
4, in which the “equal growth” poverty reduction 
scenario is shown as a white bar next to the actual 
change in each poverty rate). However, there are 
differences in the experiences of the ultra poor  
across regions, as Figure 4 indicates for East Asia 
and the Pacific and Sub-Saharan Africa. In East Asia 
and the Pacific, growth benefited all groups nearly 
equally, while in Sub-Saharan Africa, those in ultra 
poverty are being substantially left behind what little 
progress toward reducing poverty is occurring in the 
region. The slow contraction in ultra-poverty rates in 
Sub-Saharan Africa suggests the majority of those 
living in ultra poverty will continue to do so in this 
region into the future. 
Figure 1—Where the Poor Live in the Developing World, 2004 
 
 
  
 
 
 
 
Source: Devised by authors using data from the World Bank’s PovcalNet <http://iresearch.worldbank.org/PovcalNet/jsp/index.jsp>. 
 
 
Figure 2—Trends in Subjacent-, Medial-, and Ultra-Poverty Rates, 1990–2004 
a. Developing World     b. Sub-Saharan Africa 
% of Population     % of Population 
0
5
10
15
20
25
1990 1993 1996 1999 2002 2004
0
5
10
15
20
25
1990 1993 1996 1999 2002 2004  
Source: Devised by authors using data from the World Bank’s PovcalNet <http://iresearch.worldbank.org/PovcalNet/jsp/index.jsp>. 
 
Figure 3—Regional Changes in Number of 
Poor, 1990–2004 
 
Number of Poor 
East Asia 
and Pacific
South Asia
Latin 
America 
anad the 
Caribbean
Sub-
Saharan 
Africa
-200
-150
-100
-50
0
50
Subjacent povetry Medial poverty Ultra poverty
 
Source: Devised by authors using data from the World Bank’s 
PovcalNet <http://iresearch.worldbank.org/ 
PovcalNet/jsp/index.jsp>.  
According to mainstream theories of economic 
growth, the convergence hypothesis implies that gains 
should come most quickly to those living in ultra 
poverty. However, if poverty traps exist, those in ultra 
poverty may be so poor that optimal behavioral 
choices cause them to move out of poverty much 
more slowly than those who are less poor. Results 
indicate that the incidence of poverty among those 
living just below the dollar-a-day poverty line fell more 
than it would have had all incomes grown equally, 
whereas the incidence of ultra poverty fell less. This 
finding suggests the well-being of those just below 
US$1 a day improved more than the well-being of 
those well below the line in ultra poverty. It points to a 
theory of poverty traps holding true for those in ultra 
poverty. 
Location of Global Hunger 
Progress in meeting the hunger MDG is examined 
using the Global Hunger Index (GHI), designed to 
capture three dimensions of hunger: insufficient food 
availability, shortfalls in the nutritional status of  
485 million 
323 million 
  162 million 
Subjacent poverty
Medial poverty
Ultra poverty  3
children, and child mortality. Accordingly, the GHI 
includes the following three equally weighted 
indicators: the proportion of people who are food-
energy deficient as estimated by the Food and 
Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, the 
prevalence of underweight in children under the age 
of five as compiled by the World Health Organization, 
and the under-five mortality rate as reported by the 
United Nations Children’s Fund. The GHI ranks 
countries on a 100-point scale, with 0 being the 
best score (no hunger) and 100 being the worst, 
though neither of these extremes is found in 
practice. In general, a value greater than 10 
indicates a serious problem, a value greater than 
20 is alarming, and one exceeding 30 is extremely 
alarming. According to the GHI, the hot spots of 
hunger are in Sub-Saharan Africa and South Asia. 
Sub-Saharan Africa had a GHI score of about 25 in 
2003, closely followed by South Asia (see Figure 5), 
despite the fact that poverty is about 10 
percentage points lower in South Asia. 
 
 
Figure 4—Percentage Point Change in Poverty, 1990–2004 
a. Developing World   b. Sub-Saharan Africa 
% %   
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
c. East Asia and the Pacific 
% 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Sources: Devised by authors using data from the World Bank’s PovcalNet <http://iresearch.worldbank.org/PovcalNet/jsp/index.jsp>; Gini 
coefficients for the developing world are from B. Milanovic, “True World Income Distribution, 1988 and 1993: First Calculations Based on 
Household Surveys Alone,” Economic Journal (Vol. 122, January 2002); Gini coefficients for Sub-Saharan Africa and East Asia and the 
Pacific are from T. Besley and R. Burgess, “Halving Global Poverty,” Journal of Economic Perspectives  (Vol. 17, No. 3, 2003). 
 
 
Trends in Global Hunger 
Ideally, an index should be used to summarize, not 
replace, its component measures, so both the GHI 
and its components are examined to determine 
how the prevalence of hunger has changed over 
time. In Sub-Saharan Africa, overall progress from 
1992 to 2003 was relatively small compared with 
other regions (Figure 5). The proportion of people 
who were food-energy deficient fell by about four 
percentage points, but underweight in children and 
in the under-five mortality rate improved very little. 
  The high proportion of ultra-poor people in 
Sub-Saharan Africa, in addition to the high burden 
of diseases such as malaria and AIDS in Sub-
Saharan Africa, most likely contributes to the 
comparatively high child mortality rates found in 
this region. Food shortages, the high extent of ultra 
poverty, and a high prevalence of life-threatening 
 
 
infectious diseases are major problems that have to 
be tackled in Sub-Saharan Africa. South Asia made 
large strides in combating hunger in the 1990s. 
  In 1992, South Asia’s GHI score was five points 
higher than Sub-Saharan Africa’s, but by 2003, 
South Asia’s regional score had caught up with 
Sub-Saharan Africa’s. Despite the remarkable 
improvement in child nutritional status in South 
Asia, however, the region still has the highest 
prevalence of underweight in children in the world. 
  Starting from a much lower GHI score of about 
15, East Asia and the Pacific experienced a 
reduction of only four points in the GHI from 1992 
to 2003. However, the lower level of the GHI at the 
outset suggests that in the early 1990s, the share 
of the population already able to meet the most 
basic food and nutritional needs was larger in this 
region than in Sub-Saharan Africa and South Asia. 
Subjacent 
poverty
Ultra 
poverty Medial 
poverty
-10
-8
-6
-4
-2
0
Subjacent 
poverty
Ultra 
poverty
Medial 
poverty
-10
-8
-6
-4
-2
0
Medial 
poverty Ultra 
poverty
Subjacent 
poverty
-10
-8
-6
-4
-2
0
Actual change
Change that would have
resulted from equal
growth in all incomes  4
  In Latin America and the Caribbean, there was 
sustained progress up to 2003, though not at a 
great pace: the GHI declined by about three points. 
A look at the composition of the GHI reveals that 
the proportion of people who were food-energy 
deficient exceeded the prevalence of underweight 
in children and the under-five mortality rate. 
Figure 5—Regional Trends in the Global Hunger Index and Its Components, 1992 and 2003  
0
10
20
30
40
1992
2003
1992
2003
1992
2003
1992
2003
Proportion of undernourished
Prevalence of underweight in children
Under-five mortality rate
Sub-
Saharan 
Africa
South Asia
East 
Asia 
and the 
Pacif ic
Latin 
America 
and the 
Caribbean
 
Source: Devised by authors based on D. Wiesmann, A Global Hunger Index: Measurement Concept, Ranking of Countries, and Trends, 
Food Consumption and Nutrition Division Discussion Paper No. 212 (Washington, DC: International Food Policy Research Institute, 2006). 
 
 
Conclusion  
The persistence of severe deprivation suggests that 
business as usual will take too long to improve the 
welfare of the world’s most deprived. This finding 
motivates a focus on policies and programs that are 
particularly effective at improving the welfare of the 
world’s poorest and hungry. The nature of these 
interventions is taken up by other briefs in this series. 
For Further Reading: C. Barrett, M. Carter, and P.  
Little, “Understanding and Reducing Persistent Poverty  
in Africa: Introduction to a Special Issue,” Journal of 
Development Studies (Vol. 42, No. 2, 2006); S. Chen  
and M. Ravallion, Absolute Poverty Measures for the  
Developing World, 1981–2004, Policy Research  
Working Paper 4211 (Washington, DC: World Bank,  
2007); M. Ravallion, “Growth, Inequality and Poverty: 
Looking Beyond Averages,” World Development  
(Vol. 29, No. 11, 2001). 
 
 
 
Akhter U. Ahmed (a.ahmed@cgiar.org) is a senior research fellow in the Food Consumption and Nutrition Division of the International 
Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI); Ruth Vargas Hill (r.v.hill@cgiar.org) and Doris M. Wiesmann (d.wiesmann@cgiar.org) are 
postdoctoral fellows in IFPRI’s Director General’s Office and Food Consumption and Nutrition Division, respectively. This brief was drawn 
from Akhter U. Ahmed, Ruth Vargas Hill, Lisa C. Smith, Doris M. Wiesmann, and Tim Frankenberger, The World's Most Deprived: 
Characteristics and Causes of Extreme Poverty and Hunger (Washington, DC: International Food Policy Research Institute, 2007). 
 
Suggested citation: Akhter U. Ahmed, Ruth Vargas Hill, and Tim Doris M. Wiesmann. 2007. The Poorest and Hungry: Looking Below the 
Line. 2020 Focus Brief on the World’s Poor and Hungry People. Washington, DC: IFPRI. 
 
The views expressed in this brief are those of the author(s) and are not necessarily endorsed by or representative of IFPRI, or of the 
cosponsoring or supporting organizations. 
 
This brief was prepared for a policy consultation process coordinated by IFPRI and focused on the World’s Poor and Hungry People. IFPRI 
gratefully acknowledges the contributions of: Asian Development Bank (ADB), Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, Canadian International 
Development Agency (CIDA), Deutsche Welthungerhilfe (German Agro Action), European Commission, German Federal Ministry for 
Economic Co-operation and Development, with Deutsche Gesellschaft für Technische Zusammenarbeit (BMZ/GTZ), International 
Development Research Center (IDRC) Canada, and Irish Aid. 
 
INTERNATIONAL FOOD POLICY RESEARCH INSTITUTE 
2033 K Street, NW, Washington, DC 20006-1002 USA 
T: +1 202 862 5600 • F: +1 202 467 4439  
ifpri@cgiar.org • www.ifpri.org 
 
 
 FOR FOOD, AGRICULTURE, AND THE ENVIRONMENT 
 
Copyright © 2007 International Food Policy Research Institute. All rights reserved. Sections of this material may be reproduced for 
nonprofit use without written permission but with acknowledgment to IFPRI. For further information: ifpri-copyright@cgiar.org. 

The poorest and hungry: Looking below the line

http://www.ifpri.org/sites/default/files/publications/beijingbrief_ahmed.pdf

The poorest and hungry: Looking below the line

Abstract

Similar works

Full text

Available Versions

Research Papers in Economics