Table 1 Potential impacts of natural resource decentralization on inequality, through its potentially heterogeneous impacts on poverty

Effect on inequality	Effect on poverty among the advantaged groups	Effect on poverty among the marginalized groups
+	(+)	(++)	Programme harms all, but harms marginalized the most
	−	+	Programme harms marginalized while benefiting advantaged
	Negligible	+	Programme harms marginalized without benefiting advantaged
	(−−)	(−)	Programme benefits marginalized less than advantaged*
	−	Negligible	Programme benefits advantaged only*
Negligible	+	+	Programme harms all equally
	Negligible	Negligible	No effect for any group
	−	−	Programme benefits all equally*
−	Negligible	−	Programme benefits marginalized only*
	(−)	(−−)	Programme benefits marginalized more than advantaged*
	+	Negligible	Programme harms advantaged without benefiting marginalized
	+	−	Programme harms advantaged while benefiting marginalized
	(++)	(+)	Programme harms all, but harms advantaged the most

‘+’ indicates an increase in poverty or inequality in comparison with outcomes in the absence of decentralization, while ‘−’ indicates a decrease. ‘(+)’ and ‘(++)’ refer to increases in poverty that are weaker or stronger in comparison with those of the other sub-population, respectively. ‘(−)’ and ‘(−−)’ refer to decreases in poverty that are weaker or stronger in comparison with those of the other sub-population, respectively. Pareto-improving impacts, denoted by an asterisk (*), decrease poverty among one sub-population (marginalized or advantaged) without increasing poverty among the other.

Quick links

Search