One different tool, the so-called purchasing power parity (PPP), used for measuring the gross domestic product (GDP) has brought about a spectacular change in a few key national statistics concerning country's economy.
The GDP, according to estimates done on the basis of PPP, in the fiscal year 2012-13, was worth $ 419 billion. In nominal terms, it was worth around $ 150 billion in the same year. The difference in the case of per capita income is also wide in the case of estimates done on the basis two different methods.
The PPP of the currency of an economy is defined as the number of currency units required to purchase a basket of goods and services that can be purchased with one unit of currency of a reference or a base country. In the case of Asia and the Pacific the Hong Kong dollar remains the base economy currency.
The estimate done on the basis of PPP made the Bangladesh economy the 44th largest in the world with per capita income estimated at US$ 2000 in 2012. The latest estimate, done by the International Comparison Programme (ICP) of the World Bank (WB), put the size of the Bangladesh GDP at $419 billion in the fiscal year 2012-13.
The difference between two GDPs---one estimated in nominal terms and the other on the basis PPP--- is quite large.
The same is true in the case of per capita income, at least, on paper.
A report published in this paper Tuesday last speculated that the latest ICP estimate of the Bangladesh GDP, made in accordance with the PPP concept, could trigger a debate over the current poverty level. Some economists feel that the poverty rate would go down further if a fresh review on the basis of the new PPP-based estimate of the country's GDP is done.
But, no matter what all the estimates say, has the real income of the poor increased, really?
The price of one kilogramme (kg) of rice is now equivalent to that of 2008 -- the year that saw the prices of most essentials touching the roof. Why rice alone? The cost of living has been creeping up constantly for the last couple of years.
Some people, including a section of political leaders, tend to claim publicly that the income level of all people, including the poor, has gone up in recent years. And in support of their stance, they show the unending rows of shops---mostly small groceries or paan shops--- along the highways, availability of soft drinks and premium brand cigarettes at groceries in remote rural bazaars, sharp decline in the number of thatched houses in villages as examples of 'affluent' Bangladesh.
The shortage of farm labourers in rural areas or the non-availability of adequate number of female domestic help in urban centres is also cited as an example of the country's growing affluence.
Undeniably, there has been a transformation of rural Bangladesh with an urbanite culture setting in there gradually. The improvement in the transportation system, large-scale use of cell phones and rural girls taking up apparel sector jobs have much to do with it.
The poverty may not be as ugly as before. But the menace is very much there. Its intensity is now reduced. But none takes into cognizance the accumulation of resources in a few hands and the ever-widening income inequalities.
The policymakers are burning the midnight candles to make the country a 'middle-income' one within the shortest possible time. But they do not have the time to look into the problem of rising income inequalities. The problem escapes the notice of all concerned for it is an invisible one. But left unaddressed, the problem could emerge as a very ugly one day and mending it could prove a daunting task.
   zahidmar10@gmail.com
Poverty situation and bloated GDP
Shamsul Huq Zahid | Published: May 21, 2014 00:00:00 | Updated: November 30, 2024 06:01:00
Share if you like