1. An Empirical Analysis of Poverty and its Determinants in Trinidad and Tobago
Ms. Raynata Wiggins and Dr. Sandra Sookram
Sir Arthur Lewis Institute of Social and Economic Studies
The University of the West Indies,
St. Augustine Campus

2. OUTLINE OF PRESENTATION
Introduction
Background
Objectives of the Study
Data
Methodology
Results
Findings
Conclusion

3. INTRODUCTION
Poverty is one of the most serious and persistent problems facing the world
Poverty eradication is the first goal of the Millennium Development Goals
Poverty Eradication and Social Justice is Pillar 2 in the Seven Interconnected Pillars for Sustainable Development in Trinidad and Tobago

4. BACKGROUND
Trinidad and Tobago has one of the highest per capita incomes in the LAC region
The 2014 Human Development Report classifies T&T as having High Human Development
The country has experienced positive economic growth due in large part to vast oil and gas reserves.

5. BACKGROUND (continued)
Poverty reduction still remains a challenge
16.7%
(2005 SLC)
14.8%
(2008/2009 HBS)
&
of the population lived below the poverty line

6. OBJECTIVES OF THE STUDY
Identify the determinants of poverty
Examine the socioeconomic and demographic characteristics that significantly influence the probability of being poor

7. DATA The realised sample was 7,090 households
Data is drawn from the 2008/2009 Household Budgetary Survey (HBS)
The HBS provides detailed information on the expenditure patterns of households
The realised sample was 7,090 households

8. METHODOLGY
Welfare measure
Consumption expenditure is used as a proxy for income
Welfare for each household is calculated using consumption-expenditure
We employ a probit model fitted by maximum likelihood
Value of 1 denotes if a household is poor and a value of 0 if otherwise
Model

9. RESULTS EXPLANATORY VARIABLES POOR Household size 0.267 (5.54)**
Number of children
0.247 (3.28)**
Age of head
0.003 (0.65)
Sex of head (female)
0.161 (1.43)
Single parent
0.376 (2.99)**
Area of dwelling (base category: Urban)
Rural
0.086 (0.59)
Ethnicity of head (base category: African)
Indian
0.183 (1.49)
Mixed
(1.15)
Marital status of head (base category: Single)
Separated
(2.42)*
Living together (married or common-low)
0.166 (0.89)
Highest education of head (base category: University)
No education
0.822 (1.25)
Pre-school
1.561 (3.39)**
Primary school
1.520 (5.88)**
Secondary school
0.969 (3.92)**
Other
0.791 (2.66)**
Main employment status of head (base category: Permanent )
Temporary
0.577 (4.95)**
Contract
0.256 (1.58)
Seasonal
(0.18)
Occasional / Odd Jobs
0.503 (1.73)

10. RESULTS (continued) EXPLANATORY VARIABLES POOR
Tenancy of household (base category: Owner occupied)
Unfurnished rented / leased
0.529 (4.31)**
Furnished rented / leased
0.678 (2.60)**
Rent free
0.846 (6.41)**
Squatted
0.388 (0.90)
Other
(0.99)
Area of residence (base category: Port Of Spain)
San Fernando
(0.84)
Arima
0.004 (0.01)
Chaguanas
(1.45)
Point Fortin
(0.51)
Diego Martin
(1.91)
San Juan / Laventille
(2.88)**
Tunapuna / Piarco
(3.19)**
Couva / Tabaquite / Talparo
(2.16)*
Mayaro / Rio Claro
(0.37)
Sangre Grande
(1.36)
Princes Town
(3.63)**
Penal / Debe
(1.54)
Siparia
(1.06)
Tobago
(2.42)*
Constant
(7.17)**
Observations
1,170
Robust standard errors are reported in parentheses.
*Significant at 10%; **significant at 5%

11. FINDINGS
Household size and number of children per household significantly influences poverty
Single parent-headed households are more likely to live below the poverty line
When compared to single persons, legally separated couples are significantly less likely to be poor

12. FINDINGS (continued) Education has an important influence on poverty
The main employment of the head significantly influenced the probability of being poor

13. FINDINGS (continued)
Households that rented were significantly more likely than their counterparts to be poor
Area of residence is a major determinant of poverty

14. RECOMMENDATIONS & CONCLUSION
Greater emphasis should be placed on poverty correlates such as household size and composition
More attention should be placed on investing in tertiary level education that directly targets low income families
Social protection coverage as it relates to periodically unemployed workers should be made a priority policy area

15. THANK YOU
FOR YOUR
ATTENTION