Sectoral Analysis

К оглавлению
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 
17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 
34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 
51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 
68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 
85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 
102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 
119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 132 133 134 135 
136 137 138 139 140 141 142 

The sectoral analysis of poverty is illustrated in Table 3.3 with the headcount

poverty fi gures disaggregated by sectoral sources of household income

between February 1996 and 1999, as calculated by Pradhan et al. (2000).8

During the Crisis, an increase in the incidence of poverty was evident in all

sectors. In absolute terms, the agriculture sector had the highest number of

the poor both before and after the Crisis. It also consistently has the highest

share of poor people within the total population. Pradhan et al. (2000: 20)

argued that people working in agriculture have always been the poorest,

relative to other sectors, and that poverty incidence in agriculture was still

high after the Crisis, despite it not being as hard hit as the modern sectors.

Since the agriculture sector is also the largest in terms of employment,

although the Crisis seemed to have the greatest impact on the modern

sectors of the economy, the numbers of those living in poverty in the

agriculture sector remained the highest. However, after the Crisis, there

was a decline in the agriculture sector’s share of those living in poverty.

On the other hand, the modern sectors’ shares of poverty – especially

manufacturing industry, trade, hotels and restaurants and fi nancial services

– all increased signifi cantly.