The urgent need for efficient poverty assessment tools

Achieving sustainable development hinges on one critical goal: eradicating poverty. Around the world, governments recognise poverty as a fundamental challenge—and Jordan is no exception.

Poverty alleviation is not just a moral imperative; it is a keystone to broader societal progress. If a nation succeeds in reducing poverty, that success often reflects improvements in education, health, and overall well-being.

Jordan, with a population exceeding 11 million, continues to grapple with poverty despite ongoing efforts. The most recent official data from the Department of Statistics, published in 2010 and based on a 2008 household survey, reported a slight rise in poverty, from 13 per cent in 2006 to 13.3 per cent in 2008. Since then, no official reports have been released, though the government cited an updated poverty rate of 15.7 per cent in 2019. Unfortunately, this figure was never backed by a published report.

Several factors contribute to Jordan’s poverty trends. Chief among them are global economic instability, regional geopolitical tensions, inflation, and ineffective government intervention. But perhaps most concerning is the absence of robust, scientific tools to evaluate the impact of anti-poverty programmes.

Without clear data, it is nearly impossible to understand poverty’s root causes or to craft policies that work. What Jordan needs now are modern, objective survey tools capable of diagnosing poverty and guiding targeted interventions.

A few years ago, an analytical study conducted by the Institute for Sustainable Development Practices at the Columbia Global Centre in Amman, in collaboration with Columbia University’s Earth Institute, sought to classify poverty types in Jordan. The findings were revealing.

The study identified four major risk factors for poverty. First, family size: households with five or more children are 4.2 times more likely to be poor than those with fewer children. Second, education: families headed by someone with only a primary education are 4.8 times more likely to be poor compared to those led by individuals with post-secondary degrees. Even a secondary education still poses a 2.6 times higher risk.

Third, women’s participation in the workforce also plays a role. The employment rate for women in the wealthiest 20 per cent of households is more than double that of the poorest. Lastly, nationality matters, non-Jordanian families face a 1.8 times greater risk of poverty than Jordanian households.

Additional risk factors include geography and employment status. For instance, families in Mafraq are 1.5 times more likely to be poor than those elsewhere, while those in Amman face half the poverty risk. Unemployment of the household head also significantly increases the likelihood of poverty.

The study categorised poor households into four groups: those with no income, those with insufficient income, those with high family expenses, and those influenced by social or cultural norms. It also proposed tailored solutions for each category.

Despite various initiatives and investments in poverty reduction over the past decade, the impact remains unclear. What’s missing is a strategic, evidence-based framework built on credible data and rigorous evaluation.

The path forward demands that Jordan develop and deploy advanced poverty assessment tools, ones that not only measure current conditions but also evaluate the success of previous efforts. This approach would enable policymakers to implement informed, effective solutions and make necessary course corrections.

If Jordan is to overcome this persistent challenge, it must ground its efforts in data, not assumptions. Only then can meaningful progress toward a more equitable future be achieved.

The writer is International Development expert based in Amman. He contributed this article to The Jordan Times.