@article{oai:nagoya.repo.nii.ac.jp:00007988,
 author = {大坪, 滋 and Otsubo, Shigeru},
 journal = {国際開発研究フォーラム, Forum of International Development Studies},
 month = {Mar},
 note = {This paper surveys on the findings on the traditional and still controversial relationships among economic growth, inequality, and poverty reduction, the so-called Poverty-Growth-Inequality Triangle. There is no doubt that growth and income distribution should be considered simultaneously for poverty reduction. However, this dose not necessarily mean that growth in average income and income distribution are endogenously related to each other in a predictable and regular pattern. The Kuzent's inverted-U curve, a growth-inequality trade-off found in many cross-country analyses in the 1970s, lost significance in panel analyses from the 1990s that utilized household surveys over time periods. When country-level fixed effects were taken away, any regularity in impacts of growth on inequality disappeared. Similarly, once-believed positive (or negative) regular impacts of income/expenditure (flow) inequality on growth performance seem to have disappeared once county-specific factors were taken into consideration. Inequality in asset (stock) distribution, however, was found and is still considered to have significant negative impacts on growth performance. Therefore, on average, as long as an overly skewed distribution, of assets can be modified early on, we can then focus on accelerating growth, believing in 'growth is good for the poor'. In terms of the elasticity of poverty reduction with respect to growth and distribution,, the latter was found to be twice as large. The impact of growth on poverty reduction would be much larger in countries where inequality in income/expenditure distribution is smaller. Growth-oriented policies can generally be executed in independently from (endogenous)\<br/>distributional concerns. Nonetheless, distributional policies (social development initiatives) should be considered simultaneously if are aim for greater impacts on poverty reduction. Finally, country-specific factors dominate the relationships among growth, inequality, and poverty reduction. Thus, success/failure in the pro-poor growth in a certain country is largely decided by these country-specific factors (such as institutions, governance, social development initiatives, openness, etc.) on the ground, not be the average 'growth is good for the poor' relationship found in cross-county studies.},
 pages = {21--44},
 title = {経済成長―不平等―貧困削減の三角関係に関する一考察},
 volume = {36},
 year = {2008}
}