2011
DOI: 10.2139/ssrn.1960615
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Poverty Dynamics in Nairobi’s Slums: Testing for True State Dependence and Heterogeneity Effects

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
3
0

Year Published

2012
2012
2015
2015

Publication Types

Select...
2
1

Relationship

0
3

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 3 publications
(3 citation statements)
references
References 29 publications
0
3
0
Order By: Relevance
“…28 Our findings highlight the 27 Fusco and Islam (2011) obtain a value of 0.38 and 0.70 for GSD and ASD, respectively for the case of Luxembourg. And, Faye et al (2011) estimate GSD to be 90 % of ASD in Nairobi's slums. However, note that their data set consists of only two waves.…”
Section: Model Specificationmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…28 Our findings highlight the 27 Fusco and Islam (2011) obtain a value of 0.38 and 0.70 for GSD and ASD, respectively for the case of Luxembourg. And, Faye et al (2011) estimate GSD to be 90 % of ASD in Nairobi's slums. However, note that their data set consists of only two waves.…”
Section: Model Specificationmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…To our knowledge, the REDP model has only been applied by Alem (2011) and Islam and Shimless (2007) to study state dependency in poverty in Ethiopia. The ESPM is used by Faye et al (2011) and Ribas et al (2006) to study poverty in Nairobi slums and in Brazil respectively. They all find strong evidence of state dependence in their data.…”
Section: Evidence Of State Dependence In Poverty Dynamics In Rural Mamentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Azomahou and Yitbarek (2014), Bigsten and Shimeles (2004), Faye, Islam, and Zulu (2011), Islam and Shimeles (2006), Kedir and McKay (2005), and Mberu et al (2014) are among the relatively few studies that analyse poverty dynamics in urban Sub-Saharan Africa, but none of the above focus on South Africa, and none has made an attempt to differentiate between structural and stochastic mobility.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%